Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 4.djvu/63

 CLEMENTINES

41

CLEMENTINES

genesis or fate. Peter replies (H. xiv, 1-5— in R. Nicetas); Aquila and Clement try also to refute htm (viii. 5— ix, 33; cf. H. xv, 1-5), but without success, for the old man had traced the horoscope of himself and his wife, and it came true. He teUs his story. Clement, Nicetas, and Aquila guess that this is their father. Peter asks his name and those of his chil- dren. The mother ruslies in, and all embrace in floods of tears. Faustus is then converted by a long series of discourses on evil and on mythology (R. x, 1-51, to which correspond H. xx, 1-10 and iv, 7 — vi, 25 — the discussion between Clement and Appion at Tyre. The long discussions with Simon before Faustus in H. xvi, xvii, xviii were in their riglit place in R. as part of the debate at Cssarea). Simon is driven away by the threats of Cornelius the Cen- turion, but first he changes the face of Faustus into his own likeness by smearing it with a magic juice, in hopes that Faushis will be put to death instead of himself. Peter frightens away Simon's disciples by what are simply lies, and lie sends Faustus to Antioch to unsay in the person of Simon all the abuse Simon has been pouring on the Apostle there. The people of Antioch in consequence long for Peter's coming, and nearly put the false Simon to death. Peter restores him to his proper form, and thenceforth they all live liappily.

A letter from Clement to James forms an epilogue to H. In it Clement relates how Peter before his death gave his last instructions and set Clement in his own chair as his successor in the See of Rome. James is addressed as ''Bishop of bishops, who rules Jerusalem, the lioly Church of the Hebrews, and the Churches everywhere". To him Clement sends a book, "Clement's Epitome of the Preachings of Peter from place to place". Another letter, that of Peter to James, forms an introduction. The Apostle urges that the book of his teachings is not to be com- mitted to anyone before initiation and probation. A note follows the letter, relating that James on receipt of the letter called the elders and read it to tliem. The book is to be given only to one who is pious, and a teacher, and circumcised, and even then only a part at a time. A form of promise (not an oath, which is unlawful) is prescribed for the reader, by heaven, earth, water, and air, that he will take extraordinary care of the writings and communicate them to no one; he invokes upon himself terrible curses in case he should be unfaithful to this covenant. The most curious passage is: "Even if I should come to acknowledge another God, I now swear by him, whether he exist or not." After the adjuration he shall partake of bread and salt. The elders, on hearing of this solemnity, are terrified, but James pacifies them. The whole of this elaborate mystifica- tion is obviously intended to explain ho%v the Clementine writings came to be unknown from Clement's time until the date of their imknown author. Many parallels can be found in modern times; Sir Walter Scott's prefaces — the imaginary Mr. Oldbuck and his friends — will occur to everyone. Nevertheless a good many modern critics accept the "adjuration " with the utmost gravity as the secret rite of an obscure and very early sect of Judaizers.

Doctrine. — The central and all-important doc- trine of the Clementines is the Unity of God. Though transcendent and unknowable. He is the Creator of the World. Though infinite. He has (according to the Homilies) shape and body, for He is the Arche- type of all beauty, and in particular the exemplar after which man was fashioned. He, therefore, even has members, in some eminent way. He is the self- begotten or unbegotton. from whom proceeds His Wisdom like a hand. To His Wisdom He said: " Let MS make man", and He is the " Parents" (i.e., Father and Mother) of men.

The Homilies also explain that the elements pro-

ceed from God as His Child. From them the E\'il One proceeded by an accidental mingling. He is therefore not the Son, nor even to be called brother of the Son. God is infinitely changeable, and can assume all forms at will. The Son proceeds from the most perfect of these modifications of the Divine nature and is consubstantial with that modification, but not with the Divine nature itself. The Son is not God, therefore, in the full sense, nor has He all the power of God. He cannot change Himself, though He can be changed at will by God. Of the Holy Ghost we learn nothing definite. The wiiole of this extraordinary teacliing is omitted in R., except the accidental generation of the devil. Instead we find a long passage, R. iii, 2-11, in corrupt and unintelli- gible Latin, preserved also in the early Syriac MSS. Rufinus in his preface tells us that he omitted it, and in his work on the adulteration of the books of Origen he declares that it is so Eimomian in doctrine that one seems to hear Eunoraius himself speaking. It is naturally not found in the best MSS. of R., but as preserved in many MSS. it is an interpolation by some Arian editor, who seems to have translated it from the original Greek without always understanding the meaning. The doctrine is, as Rufinus says, the Arianism of the second half of the fourth century. The Son is a creature; the Holy Ghost the creature of the Son.

Of demons much is said. They have great power over the self-indulgent, and are swallowed with food by those who eat too much. Magic is constantly mentioned, and its use reprobated. Idolatry is argued against at length. The immorality of the Greek stories of the gods is ridiculed, and attempts at mystical explanation are refuted. Various virtues are praised: temperance, kindness or philanthropy, chastity iii the married state; asceticism of a most rigorous kind is practised by St. Peter. The intro- duction after the Deluge of eating meat, according to the Book of (Jenesis, is violently denounced, as having naturally led to cannibalism. The use of meat is, however, not forbidden as a sin, and is probably per- mitted as a bad, but ineradicable, custom. There is no trace of any Judaistic observance, for though the letter of Peter and the speech of James allow the books to be given to none who is not "a circumcised believer", this is only a part of the mystification, by which the number of adepts is limited as far as pos- sible.

It is now becoming recognized by all critics that the original writings were not intended for the use of baptized Christians of any sect. Most of the latest critics say they are meant for catechumens, and in- deed the office of a teacher is highly commended; but it would be more exact to say that the arguments are adapted to the needs of inquiring heathens. Of baptism much is said, but of repentance little. There is little characteristically Christian doctrine to be found; atonement and the sacrifice of the Cross, sin and its penalty, forgiveness, grace, are far to seek. Once the Eucharist is mentioned by name: "Peter broke the Eucharist" (H. xi, .36, R.'vi, 15). Christ LS always spoken of as "the true Prophet", as the revealer to men of God, of truth, of the answers to the riddle of life. The writer knows a complete system of ecclesiastical organization. Peter sets a bishop over each city, with priest and deacons under hini; the office of bishop is well defined. It was princi- pally this fact which prevented critics of the Tubingen School from dating H. and R. earlier than the middle of the second century. The writer was not an Ebionite, since he believes in the pre-existence of the Son, His Incarnation and miraculous conception, while he enjoins no Jewish observances.

Antagonism to St. Paul is commonly a.ssertod to be a characteri.stic of the Clementines. He is never mentioned, for the supposed date of the dialogues is