Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

63. Let us now see Grotius's note, and then we shall have had before us a tolerably compleat view of all that has ever been said in favour of that interpretation. Suc ceeding commentators have faithfully trodden in the steps of those writers.

« Κατά την επιφανειαν Illa apparitio dicitur non Christi tantum futura, sed et Dei; quia Deus majestatem illam Christo tribuit, ideo dicitur Christus venturus εv τη dožα Toυ Пlagos (Mat. xvi. 27. Marc. viii. 38.). Ita hunc locum recte accepit Ambrosius. Qui putant TOU OWτngos dici debuisse, si hæc distinxisset Apostolus, του σωτηρος Apostolus, norint in his libris va agAga sæpe poni, ubi opus non est, et sæpe omitti ubi ex usu ponerentur. εδωκεν ἑαυτον, &c.

[ocr errors]

Now, Sir, as to what is said here about the Article, I believe, that, exclusively of the few passages where you wish to reform the common version;-I am willing to exclude them, as yet in debate-but I say, exclusively of them, I fully believe, that there is no one exception to your first rule in the whole New Testament: and the assertion might be extended infinitely further. But, in all the other places, (whatever it may be in those concerning which we are particularly interested) having, under your guidance, examined them, I am persuaded that the idiom is not 66 anceps," not "ambiguum." Nay, I not venture to add, that the Greek must be a strange language, if such a thing were possible?

may

With

With respect to the other part of this argument, that of authority, I have already said, I fear, more than enough.

I am, Sir, &c.

LETTER

LETTER VI.

SIR,

IN our last example we abounded in authorities I fear,

even to weariness. In what follows, our complaint must be changed. My materials become very scanty.

The mere Commentators on St. Paul are numerous: and therefore, he who should seek for the opinion of antiquity respecting any passage of that writer, would seldom be entirely disappointed, even though he were not to extend his researches beyond the Commentators. But, besides them, all the remains of Ecclesiastical antiquity abound in quotations from St. Paul's writings.

Not so with respect to the Catholic Epistles. Of them manuscripts were comparatively never numerous. Accordingly quotations also are rare. Chrysostom, for instance, in all his writings, has not a word either from the second Epistle of St. Peter, or that of St. Jude. And the following Commentators, who have written on St. Paul, all desert us here, viz. Chrysostom, Theodoret, Damascenus, Theophylact; besides the different Latin

[blocks in formation]

writers, as Jerome, Pseudo-Ambrose, Sedulius, Remigius, Primasius, &c. &c. *

It was not, therefore, to be expected, that my collections on your two remaining examples could be very extensive.

However, my part is not so much to bewail any deficiency, as honestly to produce what I have gathered, be it much, or little.

1. Here then, Sir, is the whole of my Greek on St. Peter, even one reference.

-It is from the Scholia under the name of Oecumenius, the only (Greek) Commentary on this part of the Epistle which has yet been published; for the Latin tranşla

How small the number was of Greek and Latin writers who, through all antient times, commented on these Epistles, the reader may see, by consulting Scipio Maffei on Cassiodorus's Complexiones, p. 245 249.

Besides what Maffei mentions, it would have been well if we could have had an opportunity of examining the Scholia of Victor Antiochenus which are probably still extant, (See Cave's Hist. Literaria, vol. i p. 373.) Also the Commentary of Euthymius Zigabenus (Cave vol. ii, p. 199.) and a Catena mentioned by Matthæi (Gr. Test. vol. ix. p. 23, preface) of which he promises an edition. The MSS. in the library of New College, Oxford, (Nos. 13 and 14. Mill's Prolegom. sect 1389 and 1394) as I learn by the kindness of a friend, supply nothing for our purpose. Another (Latin) exposition, not mentioned by Maffei, is that of Fab. Mar. ctorinus (Cave vol. i. p. 229.)

tion

tion of Didymus Alexandrinus does not contain a word on any part of the first chapter.

αντικα δε εκ προ

Σίμων] γράφεται και Συμεων οιμιων ανίστησι τα φρονήματα των πιστευσάντων, και τας ψυχας, εις την ίσην αυτους διεγείρων περι το κήρυγμα σπουδήν τοις Αποστολοις. οἱ γαρ ισοτιμον χαρισμα λαχαν τες, ουκ αν δικαιοι ὑστερειν τινος τούτων, ὧν ισοι πεφηνασι Χαρις ὑμῖν και ειρηνη] Το ἕξης οὕτως. χαρις ύμιν και ειρη νη, ως παντα τα προς ζωην και ευσέβειαν, εν τη επιγνώσει του Θεού, και Ιησου του κυρίου, δια της θειας αυτου δυνα μεως της χάριτος ταυτης ύμιν δωρησαμένης, αυτού την επι γωσιν, την δόξαν, την αρετην. δι' ὧν τα μέγιστα επαγγελματα εδωρήθη· ἵνα αποφυγοντες την κοσμικήν φθοραν, την δι' επιθυμίας εγγινομένην, γένησθε κοινωνοι της θείας φυ σεως. Εν επιγνώσει του θεου]. Το έξης. ὑμιν τοις εν επιγε νώσει του θεου, και Ιησου του κυρίου ἡμων ισότιμον ἡμιν πιστιν λαχουσι, δια της δικαιοσυνης του θεου ήμων, χαρις και ειρηνη πληθυνθείη. Η το ἕξης οὕτως. εν επιγνώσει του θεου και Ιησου του κυρίου ἡμων· ήτις επιγνωσις δια της θειας αυτού δυναμεως, παντα τα προς ζωήν και ευσέβειαν εδωρήσατο, αυτην την επιγωσιν του καλέσαντος ήμας δια δόξης και αρετής, δι' ἧς δόξης και αρείης τα τιμία και μέγισία επαγγελματα εδοθη. ἵνα γένησθε θειας κοινωνοι φυσεως, εν τῷ αποφύγειν της κοσμικής επιθυμίας την φθοραν (V.ii. p. 623.)

[ocr errors]

In the above extract is comprised the whole of that part of the comment from which the interpretation of the words του θεου ήμων και σωτηρος Ιησου Χριστού can be looked for. I wish that it had afforded us something more determinate.

[blocks in formation]
« ZurückWeiter »