of the Apostles and tradition of the fathers, being confirmed both by the New Testament and the Old. For the Prophets say: ‘Send out Thy Word and Thy Truth®,’ and ‘ Behold the Virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call His name Emmanuel, which is being interpreted God with us7.’ But what does that mean, if not that God has come in the Flesh? While the Apostolic tradition teaches in the words of blessed Peter, ‘ Forasmuch then as Christsuffered for us in the Flesh;’ and in what Paul writes, ‘Looking for the blessed hope and appearing of our great God and Saviour Jesus Christ, Who gave Himself for us that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a people for His own possession, and zealous of good works®.’ How then has He given Himself, if He had not worn flesh? For flesh He offered, and gave Himself for us, in order that undergoing death in it, ‘He might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil9.’ Hence also we always give thanks in the name of Jesus Christ, and we do not set at nought the grace which came to us through Him. For the coming of the Saviour in the flesh has been the ransom and salvation of all creation. So then, beloved and most longedfor, let what I have said put in mind those who love the Lord, while as to those who have imitated the behaviour of Judas, and deserted the Lord to join Caiaphas, let them by these things be taught better, if maybe they are willing, if maybe they are ashamed. And let them know that in worshipping the Lord in the flesh we do not worship a creature, but, as we said above, the Creator Who has put on the created body.
7. But we should like your piety to ask them this. When Israel was ordered to go up to Jerusalem to worship at the temple of the Lord, where was the ark, ‘and above it the Cherubim of glory overshadowing the Mercy-seat,’ did they do well or the opposite? If they did ill, how came it that they who despised this law were liable to punishment? for it is written that if a man make light of it and go not up, he shall perish from among the people?. But if they did well, and in this proved well-pleasing to God, are not the Arians, abominable and most shameful of any heresy, many times worthy of destruction, in that while they approve the former, People for the honour paid by them to the Temple, they will not worship the Lord Who is in the flesh as in a temple? And yet the former temple was constructed of stones and VOL. IV. P gold, as a shadow. But when the reality came, the type ceased from thenceforth, and there did not remain, according to the Lord’s utterance, one stone upon another that was not broken down3. And they did not, when they saw the temple of stones, suppose that the Lord who spoke in the temple was a creature; nor did they set the Temple at nought and retire far off to worship. But they came to it according to the Law, and worshipped the God who uttered His oracles from the Temple. Since then this was so, how can it be other than right to worship the Body of the Lord, all-holy and all-reverend as it is, announced as it was by the archangel Gabriel, formed by the Holy Spirit, and made the Vesture of the Word? It was at any rate a bodily hand that the Word stretched out to raise her that was sick of a fever+: a human voice that He uttered to raise Lazarus from the deads; and, once again, stretching out His hands upon the Cross, He overthrew the prince of the power of the air, that now works® in the sons of disobedience, and made the way clear for us into the heavens.
8. Therefore he that dishonours the Temple dishonours the Lord in the Temple; and he that separates the Word from the Body sets at nought the grace given to us in Him. And let not the most impious Arian madmen suppose that, since the Body is created, the Word also is a creature, nor let them, because the Word is not a creature, disparage His Body. For their error is matter for wonder, in that they at once confuse and disturb everything, and devise pretexts only in order to number the Creator among the creatures.
But let them listen. If the Word were a creature, He would not assume the created body to quicken it. For what help can creatures derive from a creature that itself needs salvation? But since the Word being Creator has Himself made the creatures, therefore also at the consummation of the ages? He put on the creature, that He as creator might once more consecrate it, and be able to recover it. Buta creature could never be saved by a creature, any more than the creatures were created by a creature, if the Word was not creator. Accordingly let them not lie against the divine Scriptures nor give offence to simple brethren; but if they are willing let them change their mind in their turn, and no longer worship the creature instead of God, Who made all things. But it they wish to abide by their impieties, let them alone take their fill of them, and let them gnash their teeth like their 3 Matt. xxiv. 2. 4 Mark i. 31. 5 Joh. xi. 43. 6 Eph. ii. 2. Athan. here omits the rod mve¥maros, thus in-| creasing the difficulty of the gen. particp. 7 Heb. ix. 26.
p father the devil, because the Faith of the Catholic Church knows that the Word of God is creator and maker of all things; and we know that while ‘in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God 8 now that He has become also man for our salvation we worship Him, not as though He had come in the body equalising Himself with it, but as Master, assuming the form of the servant, and Maker and Creator coming in a creature in order that, in it delivering all things, He might bring the world nigh to the Father, and make all things to be at peace, things in heaven and things on the earth. For thus also we recognise His Godhead, even the Father’s, and worship His Incarnate Presence, even if the Arian madmen burst themselves in sunder.
Greet all that love the Lord Jesus Christ. We pray that you may be well, and remember us to the Lord, beloved and truly most longedfor. If need be this is to be read to Hieracas9 the presbyter.
LETTER) LAL: Letter to Maximus. . (Written about 371 A.D.)
To our beloved and most truly longed-for son, Maximus’, philosopher, Athanasius greeting in the Lord.
Having read the letter now come from you, I approve your piety: but, marvelling at the rashness of those ‘who understand neither what they say nor whereof they confidently affirm 2,’ I had really decided to say nothing. For to reply upon matters which are so plain and which are clearer than light, is simply to give an excuse for shamelessness to such lawless men. And this we have learned from the Saviour. For when Pilate had washed his hands, and acquiesced in the false accusation of the Jews of that day, the Lord answered him no more, but rather warned his wife in a dream, so that He that was being judged might be believed to be God not in word, but in power. While after. vouchsafing Caiaphas no reply to his folly, He Himself by his promise3 brought all over to knowledge. Accordingly for some time I delayed, and have reluctantly 8 Johni. x. above. _ 1 Maximus, probably the Cynic philosopher who plays so Strange and grotesque a part in the history of S. Gregory Nazianzen's tenure of the see of Constantinople (the identification is questioned by Bright, p. 72, but without very cogent reasons), was the son of Alexandrian parents, persons of high social standing, who had suffered much for the Faith. He himself was an ardent opponent of Arianism and heathenism, and was banished under Valens (further particulars in Dict. Gr. and Rom. Biogr. s.v. Maximus Alexandrinus). ‘he present letter compliments him on his success in refuting heretics, some of whom advocated the Arian Christology, others the doctrine of Paul of Samosata and Photinus. The Epistle has much in common with those to Epictetus and Adelphius; Montfaucon’s date for it is adopted. (See Migne xxvi, 1085; Bright, Laz. Ty., p. 72.)
2br biiatte 70 3 Mark xv. 5; Matt. xxvi. 64; xxvii. 19.
yielded to your zeal for the truth, in view of the argumentativeness of men without shame. And I have dictated nothing beyond what your letter contains, in order that the adversary may from henceforth be convinced on the points to which he has objected, and may ‘keep his tongue from evil and his lips that they speak no guile 3%’ And would that they would no longer join the Jews who passed by of old in reproaching Him that hung upon the Tree: ‘If thou be the Son of God save Thyself4.’ But if even after this they will not give in, yet do you remember the apostolic injunction, and ‘a man that is heretical after a first and second admonition refuse, knowing that such an one is perverted and sinneth being self-condemned 5.’ For if they are Gentiles, or of the Judaisers. who are thus. daring, let them, as Jews, think the Cross of Christ a stumbling-block, or as Gentiles, foolishness é. But if they pretend to be Christians let them learn that the crucified Christ is at once Lord of Glory, and ‘the Power of God and Wisdom of God 7,’ 2. But if they are in doubt whether He 1s God at all, let them reverence Thomas, who handled the Crucified and pronounced Him Lord and God®. Or let them fear the Lord Himself, who said, after washing the feet of the disciples: ‘Ye call Me Lord and Master 9, and ye say well, for so I am.’ But in the same Body in which He was when He washed their feet, He also carried up our sins to the Tree". And He was witnessed to as Master of Creation, in that the Sun withdrew his beams and the earth trembled and the rocks were rent, and the executioners recognised that the Crucified was truly Son of God. For the Body they beheld was not that of some man, but of God, being in which, even when being crucified, He raised the dead. Accordingly it is no good venture of theirs to say that the Word of God came into a certain holy man; for this was true of each of the prophets and of the other saints, and on that assumption He would clearly be born and die in the case of each one of them. But this is not. so, far be the thought. But once for all ‘at the consummation of the ages?, to put away sin’ ‘the Word was made flesh3’ and proceeded forth from Mary the Virgin, Man after our likeness, as also He said to the Jews, ‘Wherefore seek ye to kill Me, a man that hath told you the truth+?’ And we are deified not by partaking of the body of some 9 Ath. quotes John xiii. 13 in this, the order of several MSS and later fathers, both here and elsewhere. Tz Pet. it. 24.
2 Heb. ix. 26, 3 John i. rq. 4 Tb. vill. 40, LXI. LEXI. AD MAXIMUM: AD JOANN. ET ANTIOCHUM.
man, but by receiving the Body of the Word Himself.
3. And at this also I am much surprised, how they have ventured to entertain such an idea as that the Word became man in consequence of His Nature. For if this were so, the commemoration of Mary would be superfluous5. For neither does Nature know of a Virgin bearing apart from a man. Whence by the good pleasure of the Father, being true God, and Word and Wisdom of the Father by nature, He became man in the nought the hand-made objects of its idolatry’: and, crucified in the flesh, He raised the dead long since turned to corruption, And it has been made plain to all that not for His own sake but for ours He underwent all things, that we by His sufferings might put on freedom from suffering, and incorruption?, and abide unto life eternal.
5. This then I have concisely dictated, following, as I said above, the lines of your own letter, without working out any point any further but only mentioning what relates body for our salvation, in order that having/to the Holy Cross, in order that the despisers somewhat to offer © for us He might save us all, ‘as many as through fear of death were all their life-time subject to bondage’.’ For it was not some man that gave Himself up for us; since every man is under sentence of death, according to what was said to all in Adam, ‘Earth thou art and unto earth thou shalt return’.’ Nor yet was it any other of the creatures, since every creature is liable to change. But the Word Himself offered His own Body on our behalf that our faith and hope might not be in man, but that we might have our faith in God the Word Himself. Why, even now that He is become man we behold His Glory, ‘glory as of one onlybegotten of His Father—full of grace and truth9.’ For what He endured by means of the Body, He magnified as God. And while He hungered in the flesh, as God He fed the hungry. And if any one is offended by reason of the bodily conditions, let him believe by reason of what God works. For humanly He enquires where Lazarus is laid, but raises him up divinely. Let none then laugh, calling Him a child, and citing His age, His growth, His eating, drinking and suffering, lest while denying what is proper to the body, he deny utterly also His sojourn among us. And just as He has not become Man in consequence of His nature, in like manner it was consistent that when He had taken a body He should exhibit what was proper to it, lest the imaginary theory of Manichzus should prevail. Again it was consistent that when He went about in the body, He should not hide what belonged to the Godhead, lest he of Samosata should find an excuse to call Him man, as distinct in person from God the Word.
4. Let then the unbelievers perceive this, and learn that while as a Babe He lay in a manger, He subjected the Magi and was worshipped by them; and while as a child He came down to Egypt, He brought to 6 Cf. Heb. viii. 3.
may be taught better upon the points where they were offended, and may worship the Crucified. But do you thoroughly persuade the unbelievers; perhaps somehow they may come from ignorance to knowledge, and believe aright. And even though what your own letter contains is sufficient, yet it is as well to have added what I have for the sake of reminder in view of contentious persons; not so much in order that being refuted in their venturesome statements they may be put to shame, as that being reminded they may not forget the truth. For let what was confessed by the Fathers at Nicza prevail. For it is correct, and enough to overthrow every heresy however impious, and especially that of the Arians which speaks against the Word of God, and as a logical consequence profanes His Holy Spirit. Greet all who hold aright. All that are with us greet you.
LETTERS LAT: To John and Antiochus *.
Athanasius to John and Antiochus, our beloved sons and fellow-presbyters in the Lord, greeting.
I was glad to receive your letter just now, the more so as you wrote from Jerusalem. I thank you for informing me about the brethren that there assemble, and about those who wish, on account of disputed points, to disturb the simple. But about these things let the Apostle charge them not to give heed to those who contend about words, and seek nothing else than to tell and hear some new thing?. But do you, having your foundation sure, even t Cf. de Incarn. 36. 4. 2 Cf. 1 Cor. xv. 530 x Of Jobn and Antiochus nothing is known, unless the latter is the Jater bishop of Ptolemais and enemy of Chrysostom. Both men seem to belong to the class of well-meaning mischief-makers, given to retailing invidious stories. Hence the polite reserve of our little note (Migne xxvi. 1165), and its laconic dismissal of the gossip about Basil, the new bishop of the Cappadocian Ceesarea (supr. p- 449). The main interest of this and the following letter, which seem to date from the winter 371—372, consists in their testimony of the high esteem of Athanasius for Basil, as well as his indifference to words where no essential principle was involved. he two recipients of this letter either lived or were visitors at Jerusalem. On Basil’s difficulties at this time, see D.C.B. i. 288 a, 293, and on his relations with Athan., cf. Prolegg. ch. ii. § 10.
Pp2 Jesus Christ our Lord, and the confession of the fathers concerning the faith, avoid those who wish to say anything more or less than that, and rather aim at the profit of the brethren, that they may fear God and keep His commandments, in order that both by the teaching of the fathers, and by the keeping of the commandments, they may be able to appear well-pleasing to the Lord in the day of judgment. But I have been utterly astonished at the boldness of those who venture to speak against our beloved Basil the bishop, a true servant of God. For from such vain talk they can be convicted of not loving even the confession of the fathers.
Greet the brethren. They that are with me greet you. I pray that ye may be well in the Lord, beloved and much-desired sons.
LETTER LXIII. Letter to the Presbyter Palladius*.
To our beloved son Palladius, presbyter, Athanasius the Bishop greeting in the Lord.
I was glad to receive also the letter written by you alone, the more so that you breathe orthodoxy in it, as is your wont. And having learnt not for the first time, but long ago, the reason of your staying at present with our beloved Innocent?, I am pleased with your piety. Since then you are acting as you are, write and let me know how are the brethren there, and what the enemies of the truth think about us. But whereas you have also told me of the monks at Cesarea, and I have learned from our beloved Dianius 3 that they are vexed, and are opposing our beloved bishop Basil, Iam glad you have informed me, and I have pointed out4 to them what is fitting, namely that as children they should obey their father, and not oppose what he approves. For if he were suspected as touching the truth, they would do well to combat him. But if they are confident, as we all are, that he is a glory to the Church, contending rather on behalf of the truth and teaching those who require it, it is not right to combat such an one, but rather to accept with thanks his good conscience. For X On the general subject and date of this letter see note 1 to Letter 62. Of Palladius, who is clearly a resident at Czesarea, nothing further is known. The tone of this letter is more confiding than that of the previous one. (Migne 7d. 1167.)
2 Perhaps a bishop in the neighbourhood of Cesarea. D.C.B. s.v. Innocentius (4).
3 Namesake of a predecessor of Basil, otherwise unknown.
4 The letter here referred to is lost. The monks in question had raised a cry against Basil on account of the reserve with which he spoke of the Divine Personality of the Holy Spirit. (See supr. p. 481.)
See from what the beloved Dianius has related, they appear to be vexed without cause. For he, as I am confident, to the weak becomes weak to gain the weak5. But let our beloved friends look at the scope of his truth, and at his special purpose ®, and glorify the Lord Who has given such a bishop to Cappadocia as any district must pray to have. And do you, beloved, be good enough to point out to them the duty of obeying, as I write. For this is at once calculated to render them well disposed toward their father, and will preserve peace to the churches. I pray that you may be well in the Lord, beloved son.
LETTER LXV. To Diodorus (fragment).
To my lord, son, and most beloved fellow- ‘minister Diodorus [bishop of Zyre]*, Athanasius greeting in the Lord.
I thank my Lord, Who is everywhere establishing His doctrine, and chiefly so by means of His own sons, such as actual fact shews you to be. For before your Reverence wrote, we knew how great grace has been brought to pass in Tyre by means of your perseverance. And we rejoice with you that by your means Tyre also has learned the right word of piety. And I indeed took an opportunity of writing to you, longed-for and beloved: but I marvel at your not having replied to my letter. Be not then slow to write at once, knowing that you give me refreshment, as a son to his father, and make me exceeding glad, as a herald of truth. And enter upon no controversy with the heretics, but overcome their argumentativeness with silence, their ill-will with courtesy. For thus your speech shall be ‘with grace, seasoned with salt,’ while they [will be judged] by the conscience ofall...5 x Cor. ix, 22. © oixovopiay.
t This fragment (Migne xxvi. 1261) is given by Facundus, Dey. Tr. Cap. iv. 2, who claims it as addressed to Diodorus of Tarsus, the famous Antiochene confessor and master of Chrysostom and Theodore. Unfortunately this is impossible, as Diodore became bishop of Tarsus not before 378, i.e. after Athan. was dead. The letter itself decides for Diodorus of Zyve, whom Paulinus of Antioch had quite unwarrantably ordained to this see (cf. Rufin, H.Z. ii. 21). Whether (as has been held on the authority of Rufinus) Diodorus, or (as Le Quien, Ov. Chr. ii. 865 sg. holds) Zeno, the nominee of Meletius, was first in the field in the unseemly scramble is doubtful. Zeno is already bishop in 365 (Soz. vi. 12); the date of the appointment of Diodorus, whose claim is at any rate no better than that of Paulinus himself, is quite uncertain (see also Prolegg. ch. ii. §§9, 10). Diodorus was the friend and correspondent of Epiphanius, and of Timothy, bishop of Alexandria second from Athanasius. Facundus confuses him in these particulars also with his namesake of Tarsus, but the mistake is thoroughly sifted by Tillemont, J7Zemz. viii. pp. 238, 712. The letter is important, along with Letter 56, and the correspondence of S. Basil, as illustrating the attitude of Athanasius with regard to the unhappy schism of Antisch, 2 Col. iv. 6, hm CEUDED SLE TEKS. 5381 MEMORANDUM On other Letters ascribed to Athanasius.
The above Collection of Letters is complete upon the principle stated in the Introduction (supr., p. 495). But one or two fragments have been excluded which may be specified here.
(1.) Fragment of a letter ‘to Eupsychius;’ probably the Nicene Father referred to Ep. Ag. 8, (cf. D.C.B. ii. 299 (4) ). The Greek is given by Montf. in Ath. Off. 1. p. 1293 (Latin, 2. p. 1287). It was cited in Conc. Wic. II. Act vi., but although it has affinities with Ora. ii. 8 (‘high-priestly dress’), it has the appearance of a polemical argument against Monophysitism. (Migne xxvi. 1245.)
(2.) ‘To Epiphanius’ (Migne xxvi. 1257). Against certain, who contentiously follow the Jews in celebrating Easter. (From ‘ Chron. Pasch. pag. 4 postreme editionis.’)
(3.) Fragments of an ‘Epistola ad Antiochénos’ (not our ‘Tomus,’ sugr., p. 483): also a polemic against Monophysitism, and almost Nestorian in doctrine: ‘Jesus Christus...non est Ipse’ [i.e. ante szecula et in seecula, Heb. xiii. 8], and again ‘duas personas’ asserted of Christ. From Facundus, who says the letter was written against the Apollinarians, and who gives it on the authority of Peter, Ath.’s successor (Migne xxvi. 1259).; (4.) ‘Ad Eusebium, Lucinianum, et socios.’ (In Migne xxvi. 1325 sg., from Mai, Serspt. Vet. 11. 583 sg.) A minute fragment. Cf. supr., Letter 55, notes 1, 7.
(5.) Spurious letters (in Migne xxviii.) to Jovian, to Castor (2), to a ‘bishop of the Persians,’ and to and from popes Liberius, Marcus, Julius and Felix (made up out of late and spurious decretals, &c., &c.).
i Gee ial Angi Sfp a;; 17) vy: i i i% vil rere; Mie Sie ko ON). Babine b Dols nee; ade” cir eant 6} oe Obie SS ee:: oa est “we i DN a => — — ea a I. INDEX OF SCRIPTURES CITED.
N.B.—The classification and order of the books follows,strictly that of Athanasius himself (supr. p. 552). The chapters and verses are those of the English versions of the Bible. The thick figures refer to passages where a text is specially explained, or where some point of text or ' PAGE | A. Op Testament | GEN: xlviii. 5...350 PAGE xix: TO. 57 GEN. i. I 37, 158, 379, 469 xlix. 14 sq. 540 i. 3 88, 365, 410, 427| EXOD. iii. 2-6. 401 bells oS re Flere o ether th Gye Oe RBS aslo ys 6 OO a oO Cis AicOM Me Mel ten eso SBC) GG 5 mes aT cles 39 XAT Lele 520 ill. 9 «tie 421 Alpe aoa TRS 5) Gil SERAS oe 6 ) XA ees LOS, 4 OF iv. 9 ee reib AOR Ao 548 RV U2 es 2AL 272 ape OG 535 Nan O) rs ie 529 ee MS 550 WeiZAy a fo Mis Mom 421 xv. I a) i505, 510 Vilsilav Metron 410 mabe AG 542 TX okie 438 Belk Or tae ats 529 xv. I ue 423 rari) ol 507 XVEOM Lens th 305, soley Ay Boe 28 LiKe 2 0s 2OT XT Se eee 5 Kt wn 44.3 peel iy Re HIG xxv. 8. 7 260 re.atli Bey 260 KRW A oo 423 Raclscoy 3 252 XXVil. 2 e200) SRKT TsO) 360 anil 28) 5 4 5 syle bay o 445 Boxev lle) em eS 57) xa 0302 524 MK VI) SecA pe AOL xvi. 9. ree 577. XXVIIT-) 15) as 401 Xxili. 26, 27, 29. 508 XXXL. 2 0 0 Ee SOV loka Mee 403 rea 5 6 401 Geyser og A 577 KOMIig Lee oe SOL Xnl'si 2 anaes 507 ean A 5 ehOR) <n OMe moMECL. GOO xlii. 21 eae RIV 55 Ole 208 exegesis requires attention.
NvuM. xxiv. 5-17. 54 EKO rs oA CS 1Vec 10) eo 7 or ie cts mere aes Vic) Jae see ee 535 Vis DSi 3 28 1S GoM LA: athe oo 6 ame, fo Oo. Ke) VATU S ees 3050543 regrets Soot ade s 5 eh) <ocvil i OOn, mee OC E A sen eco) xxxil. 4 351 XXXII) ON ass xxxii. 8 eed 33 Rd / gel oes 380 Se thy Bel A Sn XK A Os sun 2OL nl Slows SEZOS vii. 20 sgg. ez5 ‘Ke U2 aie tists 550 ll Ameo SAMs O28} 4 of HO UDG xeAn 477 Zallile HOP" oo 3 BIO ibe, PAB Cele 92 RuTH 552 ris Bye 442 v. 6 Zou Xili Ot nm OS xv. 10 59g. a BAS "8 PRs 6 on 6 SKOR XV 1st 2 om 214 XKVio 2 1 OD BU SaneexvaeL a 397 XV a2 4 cOS Mi MGaeoG Tite « 6 Stsy/ iLO 2On OOO) vill. 27 so Bey Ku 2A te 6 0 eye Sil 2) OL Xxl. IO ec 40 Bab Fe) 5 fH 6 POS v. 8, 15 Sema oS Vane eeZOS Vi LO Or Mbit} 9 4 5 AOR XVil. Olio om S35) SSH G G & oO AE) Kee LO en emens 50 CHRON. i of vo 552 INebenavillie ss nne45 li; Te en lop Aes) 9 eS G7) ii. See TVs: Eo) seem 5 OZ ix. 14. ye Ze Av aele 586 | I. INDEX OF TEXTS.
ia eee Coclehs inary Rede caSl ees ry ohate tay 372, 373: 375» ae SOXVId eres 265 xii.. | Hs oe et Me ee es er ae sw in ry 3 aetcce XO OMMENEE sites 5 20 Ibe so a HOD) Cah 5 ox 197 ixe Se eg ts 25 TOs B65 oO 6 By Ixix. 26 oe 258 CN ip ae 199 xg oe « 525 XXX 75S ie 205 Ixxi. 3 32) parrrerbeisuy oe 528 Xap 2OMrem ne lemon 295 xxx 1§...260 ee ee ee ee 538 %. 27 4 ot oe e260 SOCK 2A aE O2 Ixxii. 5,17 «©. 330} Po eres se ” 28 476 x1. 204 1c omen SES xxii. 7 5 4. $42) — Ixxilil, 20...510 Ca eee 383 xii. 5,6.. 227,420 XXXIl. 9. e 404, 510 Ixxiil. 235 24 & 429 oe 2: ‘ j 5 9 Xi. 7 e e °. 184 SIPS Go og ea Pett 2a ee oT cue Be 43) 44 - oe SATO ame zoe SOK ee 3 7 Ixxiv. @) ae ge gh ASN ws 2 oa 4 xi are g hgh 63H <xxhi, Ob- Ste 28, Ixxiv. II...443 ee ee 55? a oe xii. 20° ¢ 6 + 163 230, 365, 429, 442| Ixxiv.t4...508] oxix. 2 OF 281Ome. cL ig eee Xxxill. 9. Ixxvi. I oe 5 FO nee aa 2s 92 435 SHB TRY og Oo (See exlviii. 5) Ixxvii. 10...444 | CKIX: QE. = 392; 43 cvincic (oo RIS tly Dee coe ce oe ein ae 148 ee <1Vorl OMe een SOL XXXIV. 135 7. 57 XXX. oan. ath 2 5 xv8i) ees XXXIV. al s 0 6 524) DOCH Sa asco > ol oak aes or aon on Ture ly, Se xxxv. 8 oS 5 tt oo ae ats 532 XV si Ou 1G eae ge So ge TS er S75 ae ee ee 331] xv. 28. 2297, $24 xxxv. 16. 4 « 210 peed Oe SS “1 210, 534, $3 Xvi. 13 242, 248, 253 S288 Fis Op oh 512 Ixxxil. 6, Ter 38 ee r » 534; Te xviii r* 2) 151, 314 xxxvi. De ee ee Gah: t65| UM avik 5 eee: Ly, 313,365 426 bey ne 3 fe age ae Sk 2: af 525 XIX) 55 MMe ETON 30 XXXVil. I care 4 om] ieee X11.: ae XXXVii. me oe oo Ixxxiv. 10.. 338 ae A nee ae 483 er wi oe ae KEKVi 12 et 534 Ixxxv. 8...304 oe - 4 ee x17 aa XXXVili, 14. 203, 206 cae ay Sdoeic: ae 16 SSS Bo oo 0 Sho SPOR On te ig AOR) 339, 399) 492 peer sk ae 2 xx. 28 © 0 242 eto eee 263 Ixxxvi. 16. 375 CON Sean a sec. 41,6. PLD MLO 5 b 5 of Gee I Sexxev lee SS 7 meee ae a ane: er oe oe ees yo ate. lie bie xxii, 28. | - + 489 lila emer S 2 XXXix: ius a oy a vas Ri ae 2 rditly in Go SK) ee 339, 375, 399 exliii. ae 387, 535 on; ie ag i113 eee STi Ixxxix. 17, 18 Te B eee Ss a xii, 35 Ge eta nae ahi 4 e820 sc. 2 eae ire Hee Mei lis Be 6 5 <4 LOS MANS GS fo oo ewe 8 oe 43% a; or a BUve 17. 1.515, 537 XC Ed ee, Cee ey exlvii, 7-9. ive 14 a xlivs 20 1. 301 Oy ml Byte) exlvili. 5. es Meee V2 Mee (523 MT gg 442 3 28, ee 295; oe ae; me ae plitlene AA2, XCHVe LL Fete eee cl.. oe af Tey on oa OL Van] mee ds - oe 5 cate a ate i ame 139 a 185, 262, 379, XCV.1...521, 53 15 97 Oo re;. ae “430 442 be) 41 Os Gr pie) Lf eee ae ee ne xiv. 0,07 C3 + + «155, 376 rege sere i, oe <ioii, 20M mE coy 333) 335) Beige A) fo) Omar Bie xxix: 7) Ee Ror PROVERBS xxix. 12. 296 SXKO. 246 ECCLES. iii. 2 ZOO iv. 8 omen Cl. 200 Veon9 208 Wiis OMe 391 Vitw20) eee SS Witla as 26 391 bo ThIG 6 5 6 Bee Rago OM ae ceuemae mee 30) ilps meee sot CANTICLEV.2.. 281 Ville Dem e ) 506 LeZoer ie #0" M359) 5 LE2T eames) v. 26 os fem Serr oe 260 vi. I oss 539 DS) Tes 7a eas 202 Sty) 5 ewe terse 224 DODECAPROPHETON. Elaseauts wi ne 28 452 AVSEZ st ooo" 107 Vier s 15) eee 310 ie Lis hie ene 54 Teel yes we 507 Micah iv. 2. cf. 570 Nahumi. 15.. that Oe » 509 Habakkuk ii. 5 487 Zechariah i. 3,12. 365 i kOls 337 Malachi i. 2, 3 337 itn LON Mts) Meee 2 SO Sito} emne cf. 540 IV. 2 en » ae ay ISAIAH i. I i. 6 ae Ih, he, ab | eN 370 14 ee VEER 5 5 v.7 te Velly - 549 vi. 8 vi. 9 i es ma GH 5 a teh Ziel Xi Ogee Ween e ee 224: <1; Ou meses) TOT; 6 34 E Xi TOV 55 Save pees 99: Sv. esa Xxili. 2 510 SQ ey Hye te BIND Vig OMe sien 549 REVIg LON. ie 524 XVI 13's ete 355 Seg phwiOun oan xXxxviii, 18 524 XXxVili. 19 350 XXxvili. 20 528 XL Shes 334 XUETO se 511 alae 2 es 25 xliivSoee 477 Von 5/77 mre nee nD elivee 23s 522 Kiva lq ees 361 xlvii. 6 258 xlvili. 13. peLOL MV 22 SEL, 51S xlix. 8 es OO Miksa es 522 eLOw Meee es LOL lil. 5 mast Wh Tibo a cABRy Stout Lise ES 7A. Lie yes77 em 54: hii.
INDEXCOBR “TEXTS: INDEXCOBR “TEXTS: PAGE | IsAIAH liii. 8. 84, 466 | lviii. 5 508 lviii. 9 343 lviii. 11 Bu lx. 8. oo CoH Ixiii. 1 88 lxiii. 9 58 Ixvand 2 56 Lxviiws) ee = 545 JEREMIAH i, 2. 452 dig De an 305 iv. 3 SS vil. 28 SS 1X. Bete (ee 353 Pe Ia OG py Chefs Xi EOP ermine ee e55 XV 5s sso XVILIO = «539 xVil. II 281 XVIael oy Lies eS 7, Xx Ie e580 XA ey 2 oie 490 SKU lees 435 Baruch, 12% 7, LiLo ois eee 3S AUS 7s Ci 337, Lamentations iv. 6 Epistle of Jeremiah, (Baruch vi.) 552 EZEKIEL ix. 4 224 XA LS 287 Vie 2 5 5. aly KVie A OMe eels 500 ov eno sa 514 SVlTe2 Oe 201 Shits BPI eG 514 Xe se 2 eee A OO KX RLS e240, 8 5o DANIEL Susanna 42.
a es DANIEL Song of 3 Children Thieme) 50s 442 vane sure 476 Vd eens cf, 245 Beland Drag on 1S. 410 B. NEw TESTAMENT BOOKS, MATTHEWi.17.. 441 is Br 201 11h 17) LS el ape ke, LVsn7 one eos: LV. [0s AO he HO) 560 v. 6 ee 2S v.38 eS tO fee Niel of 9 igo HDB Var Dsal2ie 537 Vee Ste 232 Vil Zo Qos 535 VensOs 7 200 vii6. reo Vile BO 0 6 87. Vite o eee EOS Vlg BY 196 Vii. 22 5 cs CAOK8) viii. 2. SES viii. 26 SO Vill. 31 2 Os. xen Ses e540 LANs 569 Ome 218 PAS OY Ge satel Aste) I. INDEX OF TEXTS.