(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 38
Let be preserved, therefore, our whole body[[53]][[A]] en Christ Jesus, and {let} be subject[[54]] each to his neighbor, just {as} also he was placed in his grace[[55]]. Let the strong not tmcare[[56]][[B]] the weak, and let the weak revere the strong; let the rich provide for the poor, and let the poor thank God, that he gave to him <someone> through whom his need was filled; {let} the wise[[57]] display his wisdom, not in words, but in good deeds; {let} the humble witness not to himself, but let <him> allow[[58]] himself to be w{it}nessed to by another[[59]]; the chaste in flesh[[60]] also let not[[61]] boast, kno{wing that ano}ther is the <one> supplying[[62]] {to him} the continence. {Let u}s reckon up, therefore, brothers, from what sort of {matter} <we were brought into being>[[63]], <as> what sort and w{who e}ntered we into the world, {as out of t}he grave and darkness[[64]]; The <one who made> us and <who created> {l}ed <us> into his world, {prep}aring {hi}s beneficences, before we were born. Having all <th>ese things, therefore, from him, we {o}ught in everything to give thanks to {h}im; to whom <be> the glory in the ages of the ages. Amen.
Notes
53[[A]]. "whole body": Thus <reads> Wotton from the manuscript. Thus also the Basel and London editions. Others omit <these words>. Clearly, which words here are required <is> sufficiently <clear> from the beginning of the following chapter[[A]], "Let be preserved, therefore, our whole body".--The same <sc. Gallandi>
54. "let be subject, etc.": <This> is an imitation of Paul, Ephesians 5:31 : "Being subject to each other in fear of Christ". Thus <writes> Leclerc, in whose <writings>, however, "of God" has crept in for "of Christ".--The same <sc. Gallandi>
55. "just as also he was placed in his grace": Bois thought should be read, "just as is proper", evidently "to him" or "to each": "just as is proper <to each> by <his> gift". But Wotton does not withdraw from the manuscript. So also Leclerc thus translated these words: "Let each one be subject to his neighbor, according to the place in which his neighbor is located, as a gift accepted by Christ".--The same <sc. Gallandi>
56. "Let <...> not tmcare": Thus <reads> the manuscript, whose error some thus correct, "let not offend". Others <emend>, "let not neglect"[[C]]. More pleases Mill the reading, "nor let neglect".--The same <sc. Gallandi>
57. "the wise, etc.": These <words> Clement of Alexandria copied out <in> "Miscellanies", book 4, chapter 16, page 613, slightly altered according to his custom.--The same <sc. Gallandi>
58. "let <...> allow": Potter bids that this correct reading be restored also to Clement of Alexandrea, <in whose writings> <he reads> "in the" corruptly: since "let allow" easily shifts into "in the", <with> the <alpha> changed into a <nu>. The same <argument> later was approved also by Coustant. However, who would believe<it>? <Richard> Russell, in his newest London edition, the best manuscript reading, "let allow", <having been rejected>, which <reading> the preceding editions exhibit, preferred to follow the faulty <reading> of <Clement> the Alexandrian, "in the". Otherwise, the holy Father speaks on the same opinion earlier <in> chapter 30: "Let the witness of our good work be given by others".The same <sc. Gallandi>
59. "by another": Thus <reads> the manuscript as in <the writings of> Clement of Alexandria. But the imperial codices, except the London, <read>, "py another"[[D]].--The same <sc. Gallandi>
55. "just as also he was placed in his grace": Bois thought should be read, "just as is proper", evidently "to him" or "to each": "just as is proper <to each> by <his> gift". But Wotton does not withdraw from the manuscript. So also Leclerc thus translated these words: "Let each one be subject to his neighbor, according to the place in which his neighbor is located, as a gift accepted by Christ".--The same <sc. Gallandi>
56. "Let <...> not tmcare": Thus <reads> the manuscript, whose error some thus correct, "let not offend". Others <emend>, "let not neglect"[[C]]. More pleases Mill the reading, "nor let neglect".--The same <sc. Gallandi>
57. "the wise, etc.": These <words> Clement of Alexandria copied out <in> "Miscellanies", book 4, chapter 16, page 613, slightly altered according to his custom.--The same <sc. Gallandi>
58. "let <...> allow": Potter bids that this correct reading be restored also to Clement of Alexandrea, <in whose writings> <he reads> "in the" corruptly: since "let allow" easily shifts into "in the", <with> the <alpha> changed into a <nu>. The same <argument> later was approved also by Coustant. However, who would believe<it>? <Richard> Russell, in his newest London edition, the best manuscript reading, "let allow", <having been rejected>, which <reading> the preceding editions exhibit, preferred to follow the faulty <reading> of <Clement> the Alexandrian, "in the". Otherwise, the holy Father speaks on the same opinion earlier <in> chapter 30: "Let the witness of our good work be given by others".The same <sc. Gallandi>
59. "by another": Thus <reads> the manuscript as in <the writings of> Clement of Alexandria. But the imperial codices, except the London, <read>, "py another"[[D]].--The same <sc. Gallandi>
60. "the chaste in flesh": This is one of those places in which Clement, according to the account both of Epiphanius, <in> heresy 30, chapter 15, and of Jerome, <in> book 1 "against Jovinianus", chapter 7, had spoken through his epistles on behalf of virginity. He himself <was> a virgin; if trust <is to be given> to the author of the "Recognitions", to the interpolator of the epistles of St. Ignatius, and to Althelm or Adelm[[E]]. And why not trust <be given>?--Cotelier
61. "also let not": Clement of Alexandria does not acknowledge that "also", and <Richard>> Russell expunged <it> in the London edition. Clearly <it is> to be deleted with <the opinion of> learned men, as arisen from a wrongly repeated syllable of the preceeding small word.--Gallandi
62. "another is the one supplying": Cyprian to Donatus on the efficacy of divine grace elegantly <writes>: "God's is, I say, God's <is> all which we are able <to do>, whence we live, whence we are able," etc., where he seems to allude to the words of the divine Paul <in> Acts 17:28 : "For in him we live, and we move, and we are".--Young
63. "we were brought into being": Thus <read> the manuscript as Young translates: "from which matter we were made", although his edition with all others bears before itself, "we were engendered". <Wotton's note>.--Gallandi
64. "into the world, as out of the grave and darkness": Potter in the notes to Clement of Alexandria <in the cited passage> judges that those <words> are thus rather to be <punctuated>: "Let us reckon up--<As> of what sort and <as> who entered we into the world; as though out of the grave and darkness the <one who made> us and <who created> <us> led <us> into his world." [[Lat. Trans. Om.]] Otherwise <thinks> Davies[[F]], whose <is> this opinion : "<With> the punctuation after "world" deleted, <it> should be translated as though it were read, "because out of the grave and darkness": for sometimes this is the force and power of that particle. Which if we should translate, 'just as from the grave', or <if> we should preserve the received punctuation, or if we should change it as the distinguished Potter wanted, the phrasing does not rightly cohere, and it becomes mere 'sand without mortar'[[G]]." Otherwise Bois translates these words, "out of the grave and darkness", <as>, "out of the shadowy grave", through the <rhetorical figure> which is called "one through two" <i.e., hendiadys>: he says, "Now, the holy Father seems to call the maternal uterus a shadowy grave, thence just as from some shadowy grave men come forth into this light".--The same<sc. Gallandi>
My Notes
A. This note appears to have been misplaced, since it seems to refer to the beginning of this chapter, #38, as the "beginning of the next chapter". Moreover, since the phrase "whole body" appears as the final words of the previous chapter, and since the final sentence containing those words is suspect, it seems more likely that note #53 actually refers to the phrase "whole body" at the end of chapter 37.
B. There's an obvious corruption in the manuscript here, since Greek words cannot begin with the letter sequence, T-M-M. As such, I've rendered the English with a meaningless prefix.
C. This reading is supported by the Constantinople manuscript.
D. This is an attempt to render a difference in aspiration.
C. This reading is supported by the Constantinople manuscript.
D. This is an attempt to render a difference in aspiration.
E. These are variants of the name of St. Aldhelm, who wrote a poem on the praise of virgins.
F. There are several early modern scholars who go by the name Davisius (Davies). I'm not quite sure which one this is.
G. Suetonius says that this phrase was used by Caligula to describe the writing of Seneca.
