Catalogue Entry: THEM00264
Two Notable Corruptions of Scripture (part 5: ff. 85-101)
[1]
Various readings
(1) Arians.
[2] (2) Arians
[3] (d) Quòd siquis de Latinorum codicum varietate contendit, quorum aliquos perfidi falsaverunt, Græcos inspiciat codices, et advertat quia scriptum est, οἱ πνεύματι Θεω πατρεύοντες, quod interpretatur, qui Spiritui Deo servimus. Ergo cùm serviendum dicat spiritui &c. Ambros. l. 2 De Spirit. Sanct: c. 6.
[4]
Various readings
(1) But
[5] (e) Nos enim sumus circumcisio, qui spiritu Deo servimus, vel sicut nonnulli codices habent, qui spiritui Deo, vel, spiritui Dei servimus. Augustin. l. 3 ad Bonifac. c. 7.
[6] (f) Plures enim codices etiam Latini sic habent, qui spiritui Dei servimus; Græci autem omnes, aut pene omnes. In nonnullis autem exemplaribus Latinis invenimus non spiritui Dei servimus, sed, spiritu Deo servimus. Augustin. l. 1 de Trin. c. 6.
[7] (2) all or almost all
[8] (g) Scio plerosque codices habere, Qui Spiritu Deo servimus. Quantum autem inspicere potuimus, plures Græci hoc habent, Qui Spiritui Dei servimus. D. Aug. de Verb. Apost. serm. 15
[9]
Various readings
(1) rejoice in Christ Iesus &
[10] (2) Arian
[11] (h) Ait enim idem, Quia scimus quòd filius Dei venit, et concarnatus est propter nos, et passus est, et resurgens à mortuis assumpsit nos, et dedit nobis intellectum optimum ut intelligamus Verum, & simus in vero filio Iesu Christo. Hic est verus Deus, et vita æterna, et resurrectio nostra. Hilar. de Trin. l. 6.
[12] (i) Accipe tamen quid etiam scripserit Evangelista Ioannes in Epistolâ, dicens: Scimus quòd Filius Dei apparuit, et dedit nobis sensum, ut cognoscamus Patrem, & simus in vero Filio ejus Iesu Christo. Hic est verus Deus et vita æterna. Verum Ioannes filium Dei, et verum Deum dicit. Ambros. l. 1 de Fide. c. 7.
[13]
Various readings
(l) Arian.
[14] Αλλὰ καὶ ἔκλαυσε κειται ἐν τω κατὰ Λουκαν Ευαγγελίω ἐν τοις ἀδιορθώτοις άντιγράφοις. καὶ κέχρηται τη μαρτυρία ὁ ἅγιος Ειρηναιος ἐν τω κατὰ Αιρέσεων, πρὸς τοὺς δοκήσει, τὸν Χριστὸν πεφηνέναι λέγοντας. Ορθόδοξοι δὲ ἀφέιλοντο τὸ ᾽ρητὸν, φοβηθέντες καὶ μὴ νοήσαντες ἀυτου το τέλος καὶ τὸ ἰσχυρότατον. Epiphan. in Anachorato c. 31.
[15] (l) Nec sane ignorandum nobis est et in Græcis et Latinis codicibus complurimus vel de adveniente Angelo, vel de sudore sanguineo, nihil scriptum referiri. Hilar. l. 10 de Trin.
[16] (m) In quibusdam Exemplaribus, tam Græcis quàm Latinis, invenitur scribente Lucâ: Apparuit illi Angelus de cælo confortans eum. Hieron: l. 2 adv. Lucif.
[17]
Various readings
(l) Eusebian.
[18] (2) I am not able to determine
[19] (n) Origen. in h. l. Chrysostom in h. l. Cyril. Thesaur. Assert. 10. Hilar in h. l. can 19. et de Trin. l. 9, pag. 196. Hieron. in h. l. ut ex ejus commentario patet. Nam textus ab eo citatus jam corruptus est.
[20]
Various readings
(1) foolish
[21] Augustin. l. 2. de consensu Evangel. c. 3
[22] (2) Eusebian
[23] (p) Scriptum est, inquiunt, "De Die autem illo et horâ nemo scit, neque Angeli cælorum, nec filius, nisi solus Pater". Primum veteres non habent Codices Græci, "quod nec filius scit." Sed non mirum si et hoc falsârunt, qui scripturas interpolavere divinas. Quâ ratione autem videatur adjectum proditur, dum ad interpretationem tanti sacrilegii derivatur. Pone tamen ab Evangelistis scriptum Ambros. l. 5 De ffide c 7
[24] (q) In quibusdam Latinis codicibus additum est, "neque Filius", cùm in Græcis, & maximè Adamantii & Pierii exemplaribus hoc non habetur asscriptum. Sed quia in nonnullis legitur, disserendum videtur. Gaudet Arius et Eunomius, quasi Ignorantia Magistri gloria Discipulorum sit, et dicunt: Non potest æqualis esse qui novit & qui ignorat. Hieron: com. in Matth. 24.
[25] (r) Si enim Latinis exemplaribus fides est adhibenda, respondeant quibus. Tot enim sunt exemplaria pene quot codices Hieron. Præf. ad Damasum in Com. Matth.
[26]
Various readings
(1) Arian
[27] (s) In Marco additum est, μηδὲ ὁ υἱὸς, id est, "neque filius". Et fatetur Divus Hieronymus hoc adscriptum fuisse etiam apud Matthæum in nonnullis Latinis codicibus, in Græcis non haberi præsertim in exemplaribus Adamantii et Pierii. Atqui ex Homiliis Origenis quas scripsit in Matthæum, apparet illum addidisse Filium, cujus hæc sunt verba. Qui non cognoverunt de die illo et horâ, neque Angeli cælorum, neque Filius. Præparat enim Filius scientiam diei illius et horæ cohæredibus promissionis illius, ex quo seipsum exinanirit. Ac paulo pòst: Et præparans omnem quem vult scire illum diem et horam cum sanctis Angelis & cum ipso Domino nostro Iesu Christo. Ad eundem modum legit Augustinus in Homiliis quas edidit in Matthæum, sermone vigesimo primo; nec legit solùm, verùm etiam interpretatur: cumque hoc Hilarius, cùm ait in expositione Canonis, dicens diem illum omnibus esse incognitum, & non solum Angelis, sed etiam sibi ignoratum. Legit et interpretatur eodem modo Chrysostomus. Denique et Hieronymus ipse in progressu enarrationis sequitur hanc lectionem. Et cùm Marcus ἐπιτομὴν scripserit Matthæi, consentaneum est, illum non hoc addidisse de suo. Proinde suspicor hoc à nonnullis subtractum ne Arrianis esset ansa confirmandi filium esse patre minorem, qui nobiscum aliquid ignoraret. Verùm erat igitur in Marco item eradendum, ubi plane legitur. Neque convenit hâc viâ tollere occasiones hæreticorum, alioqui bona pars Evangeliorum foret eradenda. Et imprimis illud, "Pater major me est." Interpretatione medendum erat huic malo, non rasurâ; calamo, non scalpello. Erasm. Annot. in h. l. Beza in his annotations uses to be sharp upon Erasmus for such Annotations as this, but is silent here. For he knew that his own MS, that very old one which he presented to the University of Cambridge, read here in Matthew both in Greek & Latin, "nor the Son," & it seems chose rather to say nothing then to acknowledge this reading.
[28] (t) Hieron. in. h. l.
[29]
Various readings
(1) Instead of the sentence "Yet the addition was very ancient –––––––––––––––– Father of all" the other Copy has what follows. "The addition obscures the Sense & seems to have been made in the times of the Arian Controversy for transferring the name of the whole family in Heaven & Earth from God to Christ.
[30] (2) Arian
[31] (u) Epiphan. Heres. 42. p. 358. Edit. Petau.
[32]
Various readings
(1) & insisted –––––––––––––––––––– spread the corrupt reading.
Instead of this the other MS has what follows.
By these instances it is manifest that the scriptures have been very much corrupted in the first ages, & chiefly in the 4th century in the time of the Arian controversy. And to the shame of Christians be it spoken, the Catholics are here found much more guilty of these corruptions than the Heretics. In the earliest ages, the Gnostics were much accused of this crime, & seem to have been guilty, & yet the Catholics were not then wholly innocent. But in the 4th. 5th. & 6th. centuries, when the Arians, Macedonians, Nestorians & Eutychians were much exclaimed against for this crime, I can not find any one instance in which they were justly accused. The Catholics ever made the corruptions, so far as I can yet find; & then to justify & propagate them, exclaimed against the Heretics & old interpreters: as if the antient genuine readings & translations had been corrupted. Whoever was the author of the Latin version, which did insert the testimony of the three in heaven, he charges the authors of the ancient Latin versions with infidelity for leaving it out. If Macedonius be condemned & banished for corrupting the Scriptures, the Catholics clamour against the council which condemned him, as if they had corrupted them. If the Catholics foist into the public books of the Churches "Quia Deus Spiritus est", the Catholics also rail at the Arians, as if they had corrupted the scriptures by blotting it out. If the Catholics strike out ούδὲ ὁ υἱὸς, they clamour at the Arians for inserting it. If the Catholics instead of "Every spirit which confesseth not that Iesus Christ is come in the flesh" write corruptly "Every Spirit which dissolves Iesus"; they pretend that the Gnostics had done the contrary. And if they have taken this Liberty with the Scriptures, it is to be feared they have not spared other authors. So Ruffin (if we may beleive Ierome) corrupted Origens works, & pretended that he only purged them from the corruptions of the Arians. And such was the liberty of that age, that learned men blushed not in translating authors to correct them at their pleasure, & confess openly that they did so; as if it were a crime to translate them faithfully. All which I mention out of the great hatred I have to pious frauds, & to shame Christians out of these practices.
Besides the corruptions of the scriptures mentioned above there are divers others so very ancient that they may seem to have been made about the same time. So.
[33] (2) Others by an easy change of Κου into Χου read "the Church of Christ" as the Syriac version & Theodoret Com: in. Phil. 1.
[34] (3) These words not in the other MS
[35]
Various readings
(1) The other MS has it thus. By this & other Instances it appears that the Spanish Divines in their edition of the Bible at Complutum have corrected the Greek testament by the Vulgar Latin as they have done other books by their Indices expurgatorii. Two instances of this I find in the first Letter, a third I now send you, & a fourth may be added concerning 1 Iohn 2.14.
[36] like the former
[37] (3) these words not in the other MS one or (3) two at Oxford, & (4)
[38] (4) two of Dr Covils
[39] The contents of this note are only visible in the diplomatic transcript because they were deleted on the original manuscript
[40] (6) our only Master & Lord Iesus Christ
[41] Butt this making the Sense ambiguous, the Complutensian Edition to make sure work reads τὸν μόνὸν &c
[42]
Various readings
1. What follows of this paragraph is not in the other MS[43] (x) Ego sum Alpha & ω, dicit Dominus Iesus, qui est, et qui erat. & qui venturus est, Omnipotens. Ambros. l. 2 de fide c. 3.
