Clement Recognitions Book 3 Chapters 2 - 12

[Secret Alias]

I wasn't aware of this before but all of the published editions of this pseudepigrapha omit a large portion of the beginning of the third book. In the Schaff edition there is a footnote which merely says " Chaps ii.–xii. are wanting in the mss. of best authority; and it seems to us indisputable that they form no part of the original work. For this reason, and because we have found them utterly untranslatable, we have omitted them." But when I finally found a Latin edition in Google books I learned that the editorial staff (as with other notable examples viz. sections of Clement of Alexandria's works such as Book 3 of Stromata and sections of the Instructor) the decision was made because of heretical content in the work. We read "iuta quae sequuntur usque ad finem cap. 12. in codd. mss. plerisque iisdem optimae notae desunt et tantum habent vel obscuritatis vel erroris ut spuria ea esse et a haeretico quodam recentioris aetatis intrusa non dubitemus." It would be interesting to commission a translation from the Latin.

[Secret Alias]

Here is the material - https://books.google.com/books?id=VOJkx ... s.&f=false

[DCHindley]

Here is the material - https://books.google.com/books?id=VOJkx ... s.&f=false

In 2002 Jay Raskin had scanned an ET of chapter 3, which is left in Latin in the ANF volume, from John Ernest Leonard Oulton, Library of Christian Classics, Vol II, 1954, pp. 40-92, which I think was uploaded to the Crosstalk2 Yahoo page.

Jay's scan had a fair number of typos and strange symbols that probably originated from a non-Microsoft word processor and/or Operating System, so I stepped in to format the resulting text, so it will not be exactly as in the original publication, which I have not laid my beady eyes upon, nor touched with my long spindly finger.

(Clement of Alexandria) Stromata Book III in English (J E L Oulton, Lib of Chr Classics, Vol II, 1954, reformatted by DCH, 2016).docx

(77.13 KiB) Downloaded 112 times

DCH

[Secret Alias]

Thanks for that but I am interesting in translating Clementine Recognitions Book 3 chapters 2 - 12 . As I remember trying to read the Greek of the Instructor it was mostly about the manner in which hyenas were supposed to have anal sex to make babies or something crazy like that. It's been a while. Clement chapter 3 is available on line at a site pointed out to us by Criddle.

[Secret Alias]

Actually as I remember it now Clement said that hyenas were androgynous because each hyena possessed both male and female sex organs so they were sex crazed making babies all the time and this disproved those who argued in favor of divine androgyny or something like that. And then he connects the Biblical prohibition on eating the hyena with having sex with boys. Deep stuff.

[DCHindley]

Actually as I remember it now Clement said that hyenas were androgynous because each hyena possessed both male and female sex organs so they were sex crazed making babies all the time and this disproved those who argued in favor of divine androgyny or something like that. And then he connects the Biblical prohibition on eating the hyena with having sex with boys. Deep stuff.

Isn't there also something like that in the Epistle of Barnabas? Wiki page says:

The Epistle explains many Torah laws as having a spiritual lesson as their main purpose. For example, the prohibition against eating pork is intended to forbid the people to live like swine, who supposedly grunt when hungry but are silent when full: likewise, the people are not to pray to God when they are in need but ignore Him when they are satisfied. Similarly, the prohibition against eating rabbit means that the people are not to behave in a promiscuous manner, and the prohibition against eating weasel is also to be interpreted as a prohibition of oral sex, based on the mistaken belief that weasels copulate via the mouth.

You can translate it anew if you like. Is this then to make it more "Marcionite friendly"? The ANF editors decided to not translate it into English, providing instead a Latin translation of the Greek text, to avoid offending woman readers, who they were sure would faint away to read about such things. I doubt translators in the 1950s would be so prudish, even if the text supposedly contained heresy, to not translate it as it was, or need to paraphrase it to be orthodox, sort of what 4th century pundits did to Origen. I don't recall Clement of Alexandria being accused of heresy, or needing to be carefully redacted so as to not infect the minds of men or the tender frail innocent baby-bearing weaker sex.

DCH

[Secret Alias]

What's the matter with your reading skills? I don't want to translate Clement of Alexandria but a portion of the Clementine Recognitions that hasn't been translated before because it's heretical nature.

[DCHindley]

What's the matter with your reading skills? I don't want to translate Clement of Alexandria but a portion of the Clementine Recognitions that hasn't been translated before because it's heretical nature.

Ohhhh ... THAT Book 3?



But I'll bet buttons to matches that it relates to Marcionites and two powers.

Al Zeimers

[Secret Alias]

Actually from what I can read in Latin (very poorly) it seems to be overtly monarchian

[DCHindley]

I guess that Thomas Smith, the translator of the Recognitions & Homilies in vol 3 of the Scottish ANCF series volume (vol 8 in the American ANF series), found these passages too difficult to attempt translation.

Chaps ii.–xii. are wanting in the mss. of best authority; and it seems to us indisputable that they form no
part of the original work. For this reason, and because we have found them utterly untranslatable, we have
omitted them. (Vol 8, p. 288)

The original Greek has not survived, only a Latin translation of Recognitions by Rufinus. Smith noted that "Rufinus states that he omitted some portions difficult of comprehension" (ANF 8, p. 136).

Most of book 3 has no direct parallel in the Homilies, so there was no alternate version to consult. Book 3 chapters 2-11, is also said to be lacking in the "best" manuscripts, but this could mean the Homilies mss, not mss of the Latin translation.

Hort, though, was able to make enough sense of it to offer a summary of the the text left untranslated by Smith.*

Hort on Recognitions.jpg (19.85 KiB) Viewed 4553 times

Heck, Secret, you should be able to find whever you want in that soup.

DCH

*(Hort, Fenton John Anthony) Notes Introductory to the Study of the Clementine Recognitions (1901) Check it out at www. archive.org.