1715 Clement edition

[Secret Alias]

Kallistos had to have believed it was a pseudepigraphon in 1976 and 1983. Something written in the 18th century written by heretics at Mar Saba or a copy of something written from an earlier period of heretical presence in the monastery. The only thing that makes sense. He tells Quesnell he read something about this presumably from an academic journal perhaps Nea Sion. Have to go through all the issues before 1976.

[Secret Alias]

I try to be fair.

[StephenGoranson]

Here is the relevant comment by A. Tselikas, from his report, published in 2009, Textological observations section:

"12. Interesting is the case of the existence of old printed books in the Library
of St. Sabba. According the catalogue of 263 old printed books that
patriarch Nicodemus sent to the monastery of St. Sabba in 1887 and
derived from the multiple ones of the Central Library, the edition of the
works of Ignatius is not included. Nor in the record of the books of the
monastery dating from 1923. In oposite, between these books is the edition
of Clement’s works of Oxford in the year 1715. Therefore the edition of
Ignatius entered into the library of the monastery after the year 1923."

Recall that the 1715 edition of Clement works is a large--folio--two-volume set; plenty of room to annotate.

[Secret Alias]

None of these statements prove anything. First of all, during the time Kallistos was librarian Kallistos admits the library was chaotic. I've heard this from other monasteries. Morton Smith cataloged I think 500 books or so. The idea all the new books came into the library between 1925 and 1958 is unlikely. There is no reason to believe this. More importantly I think I have demonstrated that Kallistos came to the conclusion that the letter was a pseudepigraphon in 1976 a mere three years after Morton Smith published Clement of Alexandria and a Secret Gospel of Mark. In 1983 Kallistos stated that his position was based on something that was written about the text that he read. I assume that was Nea Sion. I have gone through the records of Nea Sion from 1904 - 1939 and come up with some possibilities. I don't have access to the articles from 1939 until 1976. If you were serious about trying to get to the bottom of this we could work together to find an answer to what written article caused Kallistos to think it was a pseudepigraphon in 1976. If you were interested in the truth you would help investigate this lead rather than continuing to recycle outdated rot.

Voss developed his collection of only seven letters of this Church Father against a backdrop of many letters of Ignatius being deemed spurious. Hence the word "genuine" appears in the title. Scholars who only regard about seven letters of Ignatius as real, are called Vossian. This expression refers to the Dutch scholar Isaac Vossius, who published his first edition of the letter of Ignatius in 1646. This scholar was prepared to only recognise five letters as more or less genuine. A sixth, the letter to Polycarp, he accepted with great difficulty. The idea that "the only place a letter of Clement belongs is in a collection of Clement of Alexandria" ignores the possibility that the transcriber might not have accepted the letter as genuinely Clementine. He might have preferred a collection of letters which sifted through genuine and spurious letters. By doing so he might have felt that he wasn't sure that the letter was genuine or that he was sure that it wasn't.

More importantly, I doubt very much that with the other works that Morton Smith found transcribed in the backs of blank pages of books that there was any correlation between the new material and the book chosen to transcribe the material into. Maybe the books which were in better more pristine condition weren't chosen because the writing compromised the value of the book. A broken book was deemed as suitable for writing new material as opposed to a pristine book. We don't know what went through the mind of the scribe. For that matter, why didn't Morton Smith choose to purchase an old copy of Clement or the Clement in the library? These questions are silly and don't prove anything either way. They just satisfy your silly resentment.

[Secret Alias]

Again the Vossian book might have been deemed appropriate because the same standard for authenticity was applied to both the letters of Ignatius and the new letter of Clement - i.e. the "authentic letters of a given Church Father" were so deemed if mentioned by Eusebius:

Because of the Eusebian standard or prejudice, depending on one‘s point of view, four letters that had been commonly accepted as genuine until Vossius, were now excluded.

Eusebius in his Historia Ecclesiastica 3.36.

1. At that time Polycarp, a disciple of the apostles, was a man of eminence in Asia, having been entrusted with the episcopate of the church of Smyrna by those who had seen and heard the Lord.

2. And at the same time Papias, bishop of the parish of Hierapolis, became well known, as did also Ignatius, who was chosen bishop of Antioch, second in succession to Peter, and whose fame is still celebrated by a great many.

3. Report says that he was sent from Syria to Rome, and became food for wild beasts on account of his testimony to Christ.

4. And as he made the journey through Asia under the strictest military surveillance, he fortified the parishes in the various cities where he stopped by oral homilies and exhortations, and warned them above all to be especially on their guard against the heresies that were then beginning to prevail, and exhorted them to hold fast to the tradition of the apostles. Moreover, he thought it necessary to attest that tradition in writing, and to give it a fixed form for the sake of greater security.

5. So when he came to Smyrna, where Polycarp was, he wrote an epistle to the church of Ephesus, in which he mentions Onesimus, its pastor; and another to the church of Magnesia, situated upon the Mæander, in which he makes mention again of a bishop Damas; and finally one to the church of Tralles, whose bishop, he states, was at that time Polybius.

6. In addition to these he wrote also to the church of Rome, entreating them not to secure his release from martyrdom, and thus rob him of his earnest hope. In confirmation of what has been said it is proper to quote briefly from this epistle.

7. He writes as follows: From Syria even unto Rome I fight with wild beasts, by land and by sea, by night and by day, being bound amidst ten leopards that is, a company of soldiers who only become worse when they are well treated. In the midst of their wrongdoings, however, I am more fully learning discipleship, but I am not thereby justified.

8. May I have joy of the beasts that are prepared for me; and I pray that I may find them ready; I will even coax them to devour me quickly that they may not treat me as they have some whom they have refused to touch through fear. And if they are unwilling, I will compel them. Forgive me.

9. I know what is expedient for me. Now do I begin to be a disciple. May nothing of things visible and things invisible envy me; that I may attain unto Jesus Christ. Let fire and cross and attacks of wild beasts, let wrenching of bones, cutting of limbs, crushing of the whole body, tortures of the devil — let all these come upon me if only I may attain unto Jesus Christ.

10. These things he wrote from the above-mentioned city to the churches referred to. And when he had left Smyrna he wrote again from Troas to the Philadelphians and to the church of Smyrna; and particularly to Polycarp, who presided over the latter church. And since he knew him well as an apostolic man, he commended to him, like a true and good shepherd, the flock at Antioch, and besought him to care diligently for it.

11. And the same man, writing to the Smyrnæans, used the following words concerning Christ, taken I know not whence: But I know and believe that he was in the flesh after the resurrection. And when he came to Peter and his companions he said to them, Take, handle me, and see that I am not an incorporeal spirit. And immediately they touched him and believed.

12. Irenæus also knew of his martyrdom and mentions his epistles in the following words: As one of our people said, when he was condemned to the beasts on account of his testimony unto God, I am God's wheat, and by the teeth of wild beasts am I ground, that I may be found pure bread.

13. Polycarp also mentions these letters in the epistle to the Philippians which is ascribed to him. His words are as follows: I exhort all of you, therefore, to be obedient and to practice all patience such as you saw with your own eyes not only in the blessed Ignatius and Rufus and Zosimus, but also in others from among yourselves as well as in Paul himself and the rest of the apostles; being persuaded that all these ran not in vain, but in faith and righteousness, and that they are gone to their rightful place beside the Lord, with whom also they suffered. For they loved not the present world, but him that died for our sakes and was raised by God for us.

14. And afterwards he adds: You have written to me, both you and Ignatius, that if any one go to Syria he may carry with him the letters from you. And this I will do if I have a suitable opportunity, either I myself or one whom I send to be an ambassador for you also.

15. The epistles of Ignatius which were sent to us by him and the others which we had with us we sent to you as you gave charge. They are appended to this epistle, and from them you will be able to derive great advantage. For they comprise faith and patience, and every kind of edification that pertains to our Lord. So much concerning Ignatius. But he was succeeded by Heros in the episcopate of the church of Antioch.

Perhaps the decision to write the Letter to Theodore in Voss's book of letters of Ignatius is because the decision to view the Letter to Theodore as an pseudepigraphon was based on the standard set by Voss. Voss's book and it's "Eusebian standard" became the inspiration to view the text as a spurious letter.

[StephenGoranson]

Whenever the Voss book entered Mar Saba, it is certified that the two-volume folio edition of Clement was indeed there, so that was certainly available to annotate.

[Secret Alias]

Certified. Come on. This is a joke right? If you were really interested in getting at the truth you'd be interested in going through the Nea Sion volumes to look for Kallistos's reference to it as a pseudepigraphon written at the time there were many heretics at the monastery. But you're not interested in tracking down new avenues.

[Secret Alias]

I'm literally going to have to fly to California and spend days going through a century of Greek papers.

[Secret Alias]

And unlike you I demonstrated my faithfulness to the truth by discarding Smith and Landau's apparent mistranslation of the certificate Tselikas produced. I am committed to the truth.

[Secret Alias]

I would be very surprised if you could even one example of a text of one author being written into the blank pages of a book written by the same author. There are examples of a work being written into the blank pages of a book. Many perhaps. I bet not a single one has a scribe searching out for a copy of a book written by the same author as the new material. These are arguments that sound good for a second and then a few seconds later reasonable people say to themselves "meh."