in which they deviate from the literal sense of the original Scriptures. It is not always easy to determine how closely a writer intended to quote a passage; and in many cases, such references may be regarded as a kind of comment upon the text to which allusion is made.

EPISTLE OF CLEMENT.

IT is a happy circumstance, that of the very few remains of the writings of the first Century, except the books of the New Testament, we should possess the truly Apostolical Epistle of Clement of Rome.

Clement is believed, upon the general testimony of Ecclesiastical historians", to have been the same whom St. Paul mentions among "his fellow labourers, whose names are written in the book of life." Of his early years little is certainly known. It is believed, however, that he was born of a noble family at Rome, and sent to Athens for the purpose of education: that his conversion to Christianity arose from unsuccessful

It is perhaps the only remaining writing of the first century. The Epistle, ascribed to Barnabas, and the Shepherd of Hermas, existed in the second century: but probably were written after the Apostolic age. e Phil. iv. 3.

Euseb. H. E. iii. 12.

enquiries into which he had been led respecting the immortality of the soul; that he was instructed and baptized by St. Peter, and for some time continued to be his disciple.

That Clement was Bishop of Rome is a fact which is not disputed: but the time of his accession to that See is variously computed. Irenæus and Eusebius mention Clement to have been the third in succession from the Apostles: and Eusebius expressly states the twelfth year of Domitian's reign, A.D. 92, as the year in which Clement succeeded Anencletus. Tertullian' says that he was ordained Bishop by St. Peter; whence it has been supposed that Linus was ordained Bishop of the Gentile Church of Rome by St. Paul, and Clement, Bishop of the Church of Jewish converts by St. Peter; that Linus was succeeded by Anencletus or Anacletus, and at his death, about A.D. 91. the two churches were united, and the Episcopacy of Clement over them both began. This is by many considered the most probable way of reconciling the difficulties which exist in

d Irenæus Hæres. iii. 3. Euseb. H. E. V. 6.

e Eusebius H. E. iii. 13-15. See Lardner, Credibility, Part II. c. 2.

Tertullian De Prescriptione Hæreticorum, c. 32.

determining the succession of the first Bishops of Rome"; and was the opinion of Cave, when he wrote the Life of Clement". But at a subsequent period', he adopted the conclusion of Dodwell*, that Linus and Anencletus lived as Bishops of Rome but a very short time, and that Clement succeeded them about A. D. 64 or 65, and continued to the year 81. Bishop Pearson' concludes that Clement was Bishop of Rome from A.D. 69 to 83.

The date of the Epistle of Clement to the Corinthians is involved in equal uncertainty. Archbishop WakeTM supposes it to have been written soon after the termination of the persecution under Nero, between the years 64 and 70. Lardner" refers it to the year 96. There are but few internal marks of time in the Epistle itself, and none which can be regarded as decisive. It is plain that it was written at the close of some persecution; for, at the beginning of it, the Church of Rome refers to "the sudden and repeated dangers

Disputatio de Successione primâ Romanorum Pontificum. m See also Dodwell Addit. ad Pearson. Dissert. ii. c. 24. Cave Hist. Literar. 65.

and calamities which had befallen them." Persecution however, for the sake of the Christian faith was already so common, that it cannot be certainly said whether these words are an allusion to some local distress, or to a general persecution. But they might refer either to A. D. 64, at the end of the persecution under Nero, or to A. D. 94, after that under Domitian.

In favour of the earlier of these dates, Clement in c. 5. seems to speak of the Apostles, Peter and Paul, as having been recently put to death. The expressions in c. 41. respecting the Temple at Jerusalem, seem to countenance the opinion, that the Temple was still standing, and that the Jewish war, which began A.D. 67, had not yet broken out. The Fortunatus also, whose name is found in c. 59, is conceived to have come from Corinth, and to have been the same, who is mentioned by St. Paul together with Stephanus, whose house was the first fruits of Achaia. If this supposition be correct, it is a presumption in favour of the earlier date: since at the later date, Fortunatus, if alive, could hardly have been capable of undergoing so long a journey.

1 Cor. xvi. 15-17.

On the other hand, in c. 44, Clement seems to speak as if there had been a succession of intermediate persons in the Church, between himself and the Apostles.

The phrase "in the beginning of the Gospel," and the appellation of "Ancient Church", applied to the Corinthians", have also been adduced as favouring a later date.

The high value which the ancient Christian Church set upon this Epistle of Clement is ascertained by the commendations which they bestow upon it. Irenæus' describes this Epistle as having been written by the Church of Rome under Clement, to the Corinthians, and speaks of it as a most powerful Epistle. Eusebius' denominates it "a great and admirable Epistle." Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, about the year 170 testifies to the fact that this Epistle was read in the Church of Corinth from ancient times': and other writers' shew that it was publickly read in other Christian Churches. Eusebius observes also that there is a great similarity in the style of this Epistle and that of the Epistle to the Hebrews: and that

P c. 47.

H. E. iii. 16.

Hæres. iii. 3. Euseb. H. E. v. 6. • Eusebius H. E. iv. 23.

Eusebius H. E. iii. 16. Jerome de Viris Illustribus, c. 15. Epiphanius Hæres. xxx. Num. 15. Photius Biblioth. Cod. 123.