Work overview
Author

Homily XV.

[1] [In Recognitions, x. 1, after the father becomes known, the Apostle is represented as proposing delay in the attempt to convert him.—R.]

[2] Lit., “there.”

[3] We have inserted a δεῖ, probably omitted on account of the previous δέ.

[4] The words are peculiar. Lit., “eternal punishment awaits you thinking other things, through denial of the fixed dogma” (ῥητοῦ δόγματος). The Latin translator gives: “ob veri dogmatis negationem.”

[5] μῦθόν τινα ψευδῆ.

[6] Properly, self-action.

[7] [The recapitulation of Peter in Recognitions, ix. 26, is in explanation to the sons, and not for a doctrinal purpose.—R.]

[8] We have adopted a reading suggested by the second Epitome.

[9] The word ἀπρασίαι is corrupt. We have adopted the emendation πρᾶσις. The word is not given in the ms. O, nor in the Epitomes.

[10] ὑπὸ θεραπείας, which Cotelerius translates recuperata sanitate.

[11] Lit., “convinced of the Godhead.” “Godhead” is omitted in the Epitomes.

[12] [Compare the fuller statement in Recognitions, viii. 61; also Recognitions, x. 48–51.—R.]

[13] Or “love of man” in all its phases—kindliness, gentleness, humanity, etc.

[14] Hom. XII. 25 ff.

[15] Matt. v. 39–41; Luke vi. 29. The writer of the Homilies changes the word χιτῶνα, “tunic,” of the New Testament into μαφόριον, which Suicer describes “a covering for the head, neck, and shoulders, used by women.” Wieseler is in doubt whether the writer of the Homilies uses μαφόριον as equivalent to χιτῶνα, or whether he intentionally changed the word, for the person who lost both cloak and tunic would be naked altogether; and this, the writer may have imagined, Christ would not have commanded.

[16] [The larger part of the discussion in chaps. 5–11 is peculiar to the Homilies. There is little matter in it found in the longer arguments of Recognitions.—R.]

[17] Lit., “to flatter.”

[18] The following words would be more appropriately put in the mouth of the father, as is done in fact by the Epitomes. Peter’s address would commence, “And the parable is.” The Epitomes differ much from each other and the text, and there seems to be confusion in the text.

[19] This sentence would be more appropriate in the explanation of the parable.

[20] The Greek leaves it uncertain whether it is two persons or two things,—whether it is a good being and an evil being, or good and evil. Afterwards, a good being and an evil are distinctly introduced.

[21] The word ἀΐδιος, properly and strictly “eternal,” is used.

[22] Lit., “to die willingly.”

[23] We have adopted an obvious emendation, πάντα for παντός.

[24] We have translated Schwegler’s emendation. He inserted ἐν.

[25] Plato, Rep., x. 617 E.

[26] One ms. inserts before the sentence: “For if in all of us possessions are wont to occasion sins in those who have them.”

[27] We have adopted Wieseler’s emendation of τὰ into καί.

[28] We have changed εἰ into ἤ.

[29] Matt. v. 3. The Epitomes run thus: “Our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the living God, said.” And then they quote the words of our Gospel.

Connections

Select a sentence to see related works.

Previous Chapter XII.—Clement Undertakes the Discussion Next Chapter I.—Peter Wishes to Convert Faustus

Royal Archives Beta

A modern reader for Scripture and the Patristic Corpus

Library Encyclopedia Graph My notes Progress About