Homilies on the Gospel of St. John and the Epistle to the Hebrews

NPNF (V1-14)St. Chrysostom342The history of the matter is very curious. At the close of the second century Tertullian speakspositively and unhesitatingly of the Epistle to the Hebrews as written by Barnabas, the early andlong-continued companion of St. Paul. 2649 But there happened to be current in the ancient Churchanother epistle ascribed to Barnabas, and then commonly received as his, though generally consideredspurious. The two epistles were so entirely unlike that no one could well receive them both as fromthe same author. The result was different in different parts of the Church. In the West, although theEpistle to the Hebrews had been used very largely by Clement of Rome, it came to be discreditedaltogether, and did not secure general recognition until the fourth century; it was then graduallyacknowledged and attributed, at first doubtfully, but afterwards by common consent, to St. Paul.In the East, on the other hand, the Epistle itself was firmly accepted from the first, but with nocertain tradition and much questioning in regard to its author. The suggestion of its Pauline authorshipseems to have been made by Pantænus, the teacher of Clement of Alexandria, and a contemporaryof Tertullian. We have his opinion, however, only at third hand, in a quotation preserved by Eusebius2650from a lost work of Clement, and it is impossible to tell on what grounds he rested his opinion,or whether it was a mere personal speculation, like the reason he gives for the omission of the nameof St. Paul in connection with the Epistle.His disciple Clement adopted the suggestion not without hesitation. No one familiar with Greek,which was still the current language of the East, and especially of Alexandria, could fail to be struckby the extreme difference of style between this Epistle and those of St. Paul. Clement, therefore,conjectured that it might have been originally written by St. Paul in Hebrew and translated intoGreek by St. Luke. This again is second-hand opinion preserved to us by Eusebius. 2651 Nevertheless,in other works, which are still extant, he frequently cites the Epistle as St. Paul’s.Clement was succeeded in his catechetical office at Alexandria by Origen, a profound thinkerand scholar. He was strongly impressed with the difference between the Greek of this and of thePauline Epistles, and speaks of the matter in different parts of his voluminous works, sometimessuggesting the Clementine hypothesis, sometimes speaking of the variety of opinions and traditionson the subject, sometimes speaking of St. Luke or of Clement of Rome as the probable author, butsumming up his perplexity (in language, quoted fully by Eusebius), by saying that who really wasthe author, God only knows. 26522649Tertull. De Pud . c. 20, Ed. Migne, 1021. Exstat enim et Barnabae titulus ad Hebraeos, adeo satis auctoritatis viro [ viri], ut quem Paulus juxta se constituerit in abstinentiae tenore :…[1 Cor. ix. 6]…. Et utique receptior apud Ecclesias EpistolaBarnabae illo apocrypho Pastore moechorum. Monens itaque discipulos, omissis omnibus initiis, ad perfectionem magistendere ,…[After quoting Heb. vi. 4–8, he goes on] Hoc qui ab Apostolis didicit et cum Apostolis docuit , etc.2650Eusebius’ Eccl. Hist . vi. 14 (Crusé’s translation, p. 213). “But now, as the blessed presbyter used to say, ‘since the Lordwho was the Apostle of the Almighty, was sent to the Hebrews, Paul by reason of his inferiority, as if sent to the Gentiles, didnot subscribe himself an apostle of the Hebrews; both out of reverence for the Lord, and because he wrote of his abundanceto the Hebrews, as a herald and apostle of the Gentiles.’”2651Ibid . The Epistle to the Hebrews he asserts was written by Paul to the Hebrews in the Hebrew tongue, but that it wascarefully translated by Luke and published among the Greeks. Therefore one finds the same character of style and of phraseologyin the Epistle as in the Acts. “But it is probable that the title, Paul the Apostle, was not prefixed to it. For as he wrote to theHebrews, who had imbibed prejudices against him and suspected him, he wisely guards against diverting them from theperusal by giving his name.”2652Eusebius’ Eccl. Hist . vi. 25. Extended quotations from the various writers above referred to, and from many others,may be found in almost any of the innumerable treatises on the subject, and are given with especial fullness and clearness inAlford’s Prolegomena .505