Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:21:52.177Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cramer's Catena on Galatians and Origen

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

Margaret A. Schatkin
Margaret A. Schatkin*
Affiliation:
Princeton Theological Seminary
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

From 1838 to 1844 John Anthony Cramer, Regius Professor of Modern History in Oxford University and Dean of Carlisle, published eight volumes of Catenae on the New Testament. Using different manuscript sources for the different books, he is characterized by Heinrici as an ‘opportunist,’ who utilized available manuscript evidence without regard for its quality. Volumes six and seven (1842–1843) contain a Catena on Galatians through Hebrews inclusive, drawn from MS Paris Coislinianus graecus 204, concerning which J. A. F. Gregg has written: ‘Cramer is entitled to very real gratitude for bringing the Catena to public notice: but his edition is extraordinarily inaccurate—how inaccurate only those can fully realise who have compared it with the original.’ For the book of Galatians this Catena is of special importance, because scholars have repeatedly suggested that it may contain portions of Origen's lost exegetical work on Galatians. This paper represents an analysis of the Catena, and an evaluation of possible Origenic material therein.

Type
Miscellany
Information
Traditio , Volume 26 , 1970 , pp. 303 - 308
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Heinrici, G., ‘Catenen,’ Realencyclopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche 3 (1897) 763f. — On Cramer see the brief biography in the Dictionary of National Biography (5.4–5); also Sandys, J. E., History of Classical Scholarship III 443.Google Scholar

2 This manuscript is mentioned by Karo, G. and Lietzmann, H., ‘Catenarum graecarum catalogus,’ Nachr. Gesellsch. Göttingen (1902) 602.Google Scholar

3 Gregg, J. A. F., ‘The Commentary of Origen upon the Epistle to the Ephesians,’ Journal of Theological Studies 3 (1902) 233. The present study is based upon Cramer's edition and not the original manuscript.Google Scholar

4 Turner, C. H., ‘Greek Patristic Commentaries on the Pauline Epistles,’ in Hastings, J. (ed.), Dictionary of the Bible 5 (1904) 493. Cf. Westcott, B. F. in Dictionary of Christian Biography 4 (1887) 118, Zahn, T., Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons II 2 (Erlangen 1892) 427 n. 2 ad fin., and Souter, A., The Earliest Latin Commentaries on the Epistles of St. Paul (Oxford 1927) 108, 111.Google Scholar

5 Origen's work on Galatians includes five volumes of commentaries, a number of homilies and notes, plus the tenth book of his Stromateis (Turner, , op. cit. 493).Google Scholar

6 de Montfaucon, Bernard, Catalogus Bibliothecae Coislinianae … (Paris 1715) 264.Google Scholar

7 Cramer, J. A., ed., Catenae in sancti Pauli epistolas ad Galatas, Ephesios, Philippenses, Colossenses, Thessalonicenses … (Oxford 1842) v; reprinted (as Cramer, J. A., ed., Catenae graecorum patrum in Noveum Testamentum VI) Hildesheim: G. Olms 1967.Google Scholar

8 Turner, , op. cit. 488.Google Scholar

9 Swete, H. B., ed., Theodori episcopi Mopsuesteni in epistolas B. Pauli commentarii: The Latin Version with the Greek Fragments (Cambridge 1880) xvii, xviii.Google Scholar

10 Turner, , ibid. Google Scholar

11 Lampros, S. P., Catalogue of the Greek Manuscripts on Mount Athos I (Cambridge 1895) 95, no. 1062 offers this description of the codex: πεγ. ϕύλ. IX: π αξαπόστολος (ἀϰέϕαλος ϰαὶ ϰολοβός) Ὁ ϰδιξ τς μιϰ ς γαϕς (minusc). Tὸ ϰείμενον γεγαμμένον ἐν τ μέσῳ ϰατέχει 12 στίχους ἑϰάστβς σελίδος, πεὶ δ' αὐτὸ διὰ γαϕς λεπτς ϰλινούσβς π ὸς τ44ὸ ϰεϕαλαιδες σειὰ ἐμβνευμάτων διαϕόων πατέων, συνθέστεον Ἰσιδώου το πβλουσιώτου, Ἰωάννου το Xυσοστόμου σεββιανο, Διοδώου Tασο, Θεοδώου Mοψουεστίας, Ἀϰαϰίου, Ἀπολλιναίου.Google Scholar

12 Staab, K., Pauluskommentare aus der griechischen Kirche (Münster i. W., 1933) xxvii.Google Scholar

13 Swete, , op. cit. 5–110, passim. He did not utilize Pantokrator 28 (Staab, , op. cit. xxvii).Google Scholar

14 Staab, , op. cit. xxxiii, xxxiv.Google Scholar

15 Ibid. xxii.Google Scholar

16 Buytaert, E. M., L'Héritage littéraire d'Eusèbe d'Emèse: Étude critique et historique, textes (Louvain 1949) 144–151.Google Scholar

17 Cf. PG 3.373CD, 981A, 1033A.Google Scholar

18 The prologue is mentioned in the Euthalian chapters (PG 85.760): Κεϕάαια τς π ὸς Γαλάτας ἐπιστολς παύλου ιβ: Μετὰ τὸ π οοίμιον, διήγβσις τς ἑαυτο μεταστάσεως ἀπὸ Ἰουδαισμο ϰατὰ ἀποϰάλυψιν ϰτλ.Google Scholar

19 Staab, , op. cit. 298.Google Scholar

20 Cf. footnotes 13–16.Google Scholar

21 The reason for Swete's omission of this text is probably because it is not found in the Latin version of the Commentary. In Cramer's Catena, however, the quotation is given as a σχόλιον Θεοδώου, which may indicate that originally it was not part of the continuous commentary, but a separate gloss.Google Scholar

22 Eusebius is also designated ‘of Emesa’ at Gal. 4.14 = Cramer, p. 65.13 by Coislinianus 204; see Staab, , op. cit. xxii, and footnote 12.Google Scholar

23 Bardenhewer, O., Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur 2 (Freiburg i. B. 1923) III 364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

24 Turner, , op. cit. 493.Google Scholar

25 These fragments may be found in Lommatzsch, C. H. E., ed., Origenis opera omnia 5 (Berlin 1835) 261–270 (= PG 14.1293–1298); on Pamphilus' Apologia, see Quasten, J., Patrology II (Utrecht etc. 1953) 145–46.Google Scholar

26 von der Goltz, E., Eine textkritische Arbeit des zehnten bezw. sechsten Jahrhunderts … (TU N.F. 2.4; Leipzig 1899) 72–74.Google Scholar

27 Turner, Thus, op. cit. 493, writes: ‘… it is certain, both from Jerome's own words in the preface to his commentary and from the parallel case of the Epistle to the Ephesians … that a very large proportion of the exhaustive commentary of Jerome is drawn directly from Origen.’ Further, Souter, op. cit. 111, states: ‘There is no doubt that a very large part of Jerome's commentary on Galatians is taken direct from Origen, though he is sometimes abridged in the process.’ In an article in Vigiliae Christianae 24 (1970) the present writer analyzes the influence of Origen upon Jerome's commentary.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 On the other hand, the unpublished Catena on 1 and 2 Cor., Gal., and Eph. in Vaticanus graecus 692, s. XII (Karo-Lietzmann, , op. cit. III 692) cites Origen along with a large array of other writers. It would bear investigation whether or not Origen is cited for Galatians.Google Scholar