(From the 1765 Venice
edition of André Galland's "Library
of the Ancient Fathers", Tome 1, folio-size,
p. 9)
Author: André Galland
Googlebooks PDF: PG001
Chapter 8
The <public ministers> of the grace of God through the holy Spirit spoke about repentance, and even himself the Master of all spoke with an oath about repentance: For <as> I live, says <the> Lord, I do not wish the death of the sinner, as the repentance[[63b]]; adding[[56]] also a good thought; Repent, House of Israel[[57]], from your lawlessness[[64b]]. Say to my people: If even your sins are from the earth to the sky, and if <they> are redder than scarlet dye and blacker than sackcloth, both turn towards me from <your> whole heart[[65b]], and say, <'>Father <'>, I will heed you as <to a holy people>[[58]][[66b]]. And in another passage he speaks thus: Be cleansed and become pure, remove the evils from your souls, from before my eyes: cease from your evils, learn to do <what is> beautiful, seek out judgment, rescue the violated, judge <preference for> the orphan, and vindicate the widow, and <come here> and let us dispute[[59]], he says[[60]]: Even if your sins are as crimson, as snow I will whiten <them>; and if <they> are as scarlet, as wool I will whiten <them>. And if you <thus> will and heed me, you will eat the good things of the earth; but if you do not <thus> will nor heed me, a knife will devour you; for the mouth of the Lord has spoken these things[67b]][. Therefore, wishing that all <those who love him> partake of repentance, he confirmed <them> with his all-powerful will.
Citations
63b. Ezekiel 33:11 [[A]]
64b. Ezekiel 18:30
65b. Isaiah 1:18
66b. Jeremiah 3:19, 22
67b. Isaiah 1:16, 20
66b. Jeremiah 3:19, 22
67b. Isaiah 1:16, 20
Notes
56. The final words of this sentence Clement of Alexandria in book 1 <of> "Pedagogy", chapter 10, under the name of Ezekiel thus cites: "For he says through Ezekiel: If you will have been converted from the whole heart and will have said, Father, I will hear you as a holy people".--Coustant
57. "Repent, House of Israel": The <actual> <word order>[[B]] <is> otherwise; however regarding this passage and other testimonies of Sacred Scripture, which frequently are cited in this letter, it should be observed <both> that many passages are sometimes joined into one (which also not rarely is done by other Fathers, nor do the apostles themselves lack examples), and that several times the sense and not the <exact> words are expressed, both <of> which <things> in this passage are <available> to detect. But indeed among the words themselves not a small difference often occurs; however, it would be tedious to note the individual variations, and <it> is obvious to anyone from comparison with the publication <of the Septuagint>, which <is available> and is rubbed by the hands of all. For which reason, we leave this task to others, and the damage, if any thence arises, we will with more benefit later weigh out, when a new edition of the <Greek bible> from the manuscript copy of Thecla, which of all <manuscripts>, however many today are in Europe, is by the best and oldest, by the auspices of divine authority and by the grace and favor of my lord the most serene king, it is given to put forth into light.--Young
58. "To a holy people": Clement of Alexandria <in> "Pedagogy", book 1, chapter 10, has, "of a holy people"[[C]], where he praises these words under the name of Ezekiel, whose the earlier <words> also appear to be. And so hence is supported the conjecture of Cotelier[[D]]. Furthermore, that <notable> passage of Ezekiel either is absent from our books, or it was taken from another volume of Ezekiel which he, <as> Josephus <witnesses>, had written, and which the Athanasian, or rather Eusebian, Synopsis[[E]] reckons among the apocryphal works. Thus Justin Martyr in <his> "Dialogue with Trypho" praises the passage of Ezra , translated into Latin <in the writings of> Lactantius, book 4, chapter 18 <of the "Divine Institutes">, which <passage> you may seek for in vain in our codices. Clement of Alexandria <in> "Miscellanies", book 5, cites another <passage> from Zephaniah, which does not appear in his vaticination. I suspect this passage was taken from the prophecy of Zephaniah or <from> the Apocalypse mentioned among the apocryphal books in the canon of the Scriptures attributed to Nicephorus the patriarch of Constantinople[[F]], and in the manuscript of the Barrocian library.--Colomiès
59. "Let us dispute": Mill thus reads in the manuscript congruently to the Hebrew truth, <at> Isaiah 1:18. The editions <print> "Let us converse"[[G]]. Others along with the codices Alexandrinus and Vaticanus <print> "Let us disfute"[[H]].--Gallandi
"And come here, and let us dispute": Thus <has> the Aldine edition. But in others <is printed> either, "And come here, let us dispute", or, "And come here, and let us converse", as Procopius[[I]] <has>, or, "And come here, let us converse". Of course, by the Hebrew verb each is signified[[J]], chiding and dispute; which to <meanings> are indeed related. The codices of Hesychius appear to lie in error <since they have>, "Let us disfute: Let us come to the refutation of one another", instead of, "Let us dispute"[[H]]. Now, <in the writings of> Basil and Chrysostom the <reading> "Let us converse" in the text is suspect[[G]], since the commentators <on these texts> suppose "Let us dispute" <is written>. Already Hilary indeed at Psalm 2:5 <writes>: "And come, let us reprove". But in the preface to Psalm 119: "And come, let us dispute". And the not dissimilar variation in Micah, chapter 6, verse 2, "He will dispute". A third reading is exhibited by Tertullian, and it is corrupt. For he correctly had translated in the final chapter of book 1 to <his> wife: "And come, let us dispute"; in book 4 against Marcion, chapter 14, supported by defective books he translates: "And come, <let us be united in council>", which is, "Let us interchange"[[K]]: and <that word> perhaps should be restored to Chrysostom in that <passage>: "Let a woman of no less than sixty years be chosen," etc.[[L]], where he brings forth the passage of the prophet and expounds through <the word> "to be reconciled" and "to have been reconciled". Furthermore, when I seek the testimony of Isaiah <in the writings of> the holy Fathers, I have found two distorted passages, about which it will not be superfluous to bring to mind, namely, <passage> of Irenaeus and of Lucifer. <The former> in book 4 <of> "Against Heresies", chapter 32, says: "Be cleansed," etc.[[M]]. "For not like a mute man, as many dare to say, <does he deviate>" (that is, turn away from himself) "their sacrifice; but pitying their blindness," etc. What <does he mean>, "a mute man"? I <was thinking to conjecture>, "angered man", having as the basis of conjecture the preceding and following things. <The statement> precedes: "Then, lest anyone think that, on account of that he is angered, he refuses these things, he brings counsel, giving <it> to him." <The statement> follows: "For if being angered he rejected these their sacrifices". <In the writings of> Lucifer, book 1, to the emperor Constantius, on behalf of St. Athanasius, the prophetic words should be: "Be cleansed, be pure, remove malices from your souls," not "from your enemies".--Cotelier
60. "Says": Add <after this the word> "Lord", from the Septuagint.--Gallandi
57. "Repent, House of Israel": The <actual> <word order>[[B]] <is> otherwise; however regarding this passage and other testimonies of Sacred Scripture, which frequently are cited in this letter, it should be observed <both> that many passages are sometimes joined into one (which also not rarely is done by other Fathers, nor do the apostles themselves lack examples), and that several times the sense and not the <exact> words are expressed, both <of> which <things> in this passage are <available> to detect. But indeed among the words themselves not a small difference often occurs; however, it would be tedious to note the individual variations, and <it> is obvious to anyone from comparison with the publication <of the Septuagint>, which <is available> and is rubbed by the hands of all. For which reason, we leave this task to others, and the damage, if any thence arises, we will with more benefit later weigh out, when a new edition of the <Greek bible> from the manuscript copy of Thecla, which of all <manuscripts>, however many today are in Europe, is by the best and oldest, by the auspices of divine authority and by the grace and favor of my lord the most serene king, it is given to put forth into light.--Young
58. "To a holy people": Clement of Alexandria <in> "Pedagogy", book 1, chapter 10, has, "of a holy people"[[C]], where he praises these words under the name of Ezekiel, whose the earlier <words> also appear to be. And so hence is supported the conjecture of Cotelier[[D]]. Furthermore, that <notable> passage of Ezekiel either is absent from our books, or it was taken from another volume of Ezekiel which he, <as> Josephus <witnesses>, had written, and which the Athanasian, or rather Eusebian, Synopsis[[E]] reckons among the apocryphal works. Thus Justin Martyr in <his> "Dialogue with Trypho" praises the passage of Ezra , translated into Latin <in the writings of> Lactantius, book 4, chapter 18 <of the "Divine Institutes">, which <passage> you may seek for in vain in our codices. Clement of Alexandria <in> "Miscellanies", book 5, cites another <passage> from Zephaniah, which does not appear in his vaticination. I suspect this passage was taken from the prophecy of Zephaniah or <from> the Apocalypse mentioned among the apocryphal books in the canon of the Scriptures attributed to Nicephorus the patriarch of Constantinople[[F]], and in the manuscript of the Barrocian library.--Colomiès
59. "Let us dispute": Mill thus reads in the manuscript congruently to the Hebrew truth, <at> Isaiah 1:18. The editions <print> "Let us converse"[[G]]. Others along with the codices Alexandrinus and Vaticanus <print> "Let us disfute"[[H]].--Gallandi
"And come here, and let us dispute": Thus <has> the Aldine edition. But in others <is printed> either, "And come here, let us dispute", or, "And come here, and let us converse", as Procopius[[I]] <has>, or, "And come here, let us converse". Of course, by the Hebrew verb each is signified[[J]], chiding and dispute; which to <meanings> are indeed related. The codices of Hesychius appear to lie in error <since they have>, "Let us disfute: Let us come to the refutation of one another", instead of, "Let us dispute"[[H]]. Now, <in the writings of> Basil and Chrysostom the <reading> "Let us converse" in the text is suspect[[G]], since the commentators <on these texts> suppose "Let us dispute" <is written>. Already Hilary indeed at Psalm 2:5 <writes>: "And come, let us reprove". But in the preface to Psalm 119: "And come, let us dispute". And the not dissimilar variation in Micah, chapter 6, verse 2, "He will dispute". A third reading is exhibited by Tertullian, and it is corrupt. For he correctly had translated in the final chapter of book 1 to <his> wife: "And come, let us dispute"; in book 4 against Marcion, chapter 14, supported by defective books he translates: "And come, <let us be united in council>", which is, "Let us interchange"[[K]]: and <that word> perhaps should be restored to Chrysostom in that <passage>: "Let a woman of no less than sixty years be chosen," etc.[[L]], where he brings forth the passage of the prophet and expounds through <the word> "to be reconciled" and "to have been reconciled". Furthermore, when I seek the testimony of Isaiah <in the writings of> the holy Fathers, I have found two distorted passages, about which it will not be superfluous to bring to mind, namely, <passage> of Irenaeus and of Lucifer. <The former> in book 4 <of> "Against Heresies", chapter 32, says: "Be cleansed," etc.[[M]]. "For not like a mute man, as many dare to say, <does he deviate>" (that is, turn away from himself) "their sacrifice; but pitying their blindness," etc. What <does he mean>, "a mute man"? I <was thinking to conjecture>, "angered man", having as the basis of conjecture the preceding and following things. <The statement> precedes: "Then, lest anyone think that, on account of that he is angered, he refuses these things, he brings counsel, giving <it> to him." <The statement> follows: "For if being angered he rejected these their sacrifices". <In the writings of> Lucifer, book 1, to the emperor Constantius, on behalf of St. Athanasius, the prophetic words should be: "Be cleansed, be pure, remove malices from your souls," not "from your enemies".--Cotelier
60. "Says": Add <after this the word> "Lord", from the Septuagint.--Gallandi
My Notes
A. This appears not to be the Septuagint text. Clement's citations substitute the Greek "metanoein" for the Septuagint's "apostrephein". The former seems to emphasize an internal change of mind/heart, whereas the latter evokes the physical metaphor of turning back/returning. Significance is subject to debate.
B. The Latin phrase, "verba contextus", literally means, "words of the connected weave".
C. The issue here is that the text has this phrase in dative, whereas Clement of Alexandria has it in the genitive. The genitive is normally the case for direct objects of verbs of hearing, so the dative, if it is not an error, may reflect an attempt to render literally the underlying Hebrew idiom.
D. I don't know what this conjecture is.
E. The Athanasian Synopsis is a description of the canonical books of the Bible as purportedly written by St. Athanasius. There seems to be general agreement that it is not his work, and although I don't see the point made in Migne's preface to it in his 4th volume on St. Athanasius, some people believe it to actually be the work of Eusebius.
F. I gather this is the Stichometry of Nicephorus.
G. The words for "dispute" and "converse" are similarly spelled, so the issue here is about sorting out potential confusion in the manuscripts.
H. "Dispute" vs. "Disfute". This last reading is a different spelling of the note's headword. The issue, explained further in the following note, is whether or not the proper form of this word contains the letter theta or not. The current consensus seems to be that the form without theta is incorrect, so I've rendered it "disfute" with an F.
I. There are a few people named Procopius who this could be. The one mentioned here is probably Procopius of Gaza, but I haven't verified.
J. While the Hebrew root for the word in question does have both of these meanings, the Niphal stem apparently carries only the meaning "dispute", as in "dispute/discuss". Cf. BDB lexicon.
K. This is yet a third word with similar spelling as "dispute" and "converse".
L. 1 Tim 5:9-10
M. Isaiah 1:16
B. The Latin phrase, "verba contextus", literally means, "words of the connected weave".
C. The issue here is that the text has this phrase in dative, whereas Clement of Alexandria has it in the genitive. The genitive is normally the case for direct objects of verbs of hearing, so the dative, if it is not an error, may reflect an attempt to render literally the underlying Hebrew idiom.
D. I don't know what this conjecture is.
E. The Athanasian Synopsis is a description of the canonical books of the Bible as purportedly written by St. Athanasius. There seems to be general agreement that it is not his work, and although I don't see the point made in Migne's preface to it in his 4th volume on St. Athanasius, some people believe it to actually be the work of Eusebius.
F. I gather this is the Stichometry of Nicephorus.
G. The words for "dispute" and "converse" are similarly spelled, so the issue here is about sorting out potential confusion in the manuscripts.
H. "Dispute" vs. "Disfute". This last reading is a different spelling of the note's headword. The issue, explained further in the following note, is whether or not the proper form of this word contains the letter theta or not. The current consensus seems to be that the form without theta is incorrect, so I've rendered it "disfute" with an F.
I. There are a few people named Procopius who this could be. The one mentioned here is probably Procopius of Gaza, but I haven't verified.
J. While the Hebrew root for the word in question does have both of these meanings, the Niphal stem apparently carries only the meaning "dispute", as in "dispute/discuss". Cf. BDB lexicon.
K. This is yet a third word with similar spelling as "dispute" and "converse".
L. 1 Tim 5:9-10
M. Isaiah 1:16
No comments:
Post a Comment