of the Romans, wrote the Epistle, others that Luke wrote it, who wrote the Gospel and the Acts. But on this I will say no more.
This testimony is of the highest value as supplementary to and in part explaining that of Clement. Origen does not refer to any Hebrew original. It is not possible then that this hypothesis formed part of the ancient tradition. It was a suggestion which Origen did not think it worth while to discuss. He was aware that some Churches did not receive the Epistle as St Paul's. In the strictest sense of authorship he agreed with them. At the same time he held that in a true sense it could be regarded as St Paul's, as embodying thoughts in every way worthy of him.
Thus Clement and Origen, both familiar with the details of the tradition of the men of old time to whom they refer, agree in regarding the Greek Epistle as St Paul's only in a secondary sense. Clement regards it as a free translation of a Hebrew original, so made by St Luke as to shew the characteristics of his style: Origen regards it as a scholar's reproduction of his master's teaching. Each view must have been consistent with what was generally received; and this can only have been that the Epistle rightly had a place among the apostolic letters though its immediate authorship was uncertain. The practice of Clement and Origen is an application of this judgment. Both use the Epistle as St Paul's without any qualification because it was naturally connected with the collection of his letters; and Origen goes so far as to say that he was prepared to shew that the Epistle was Paul's in reply to those who rejected it as not written by Paul (
Ep. ad Afric.
9); and in another passage, preserved indeed only in a Latin translation, he speaks of fourteen Epistles of St Paul (
Hom. in Jos.
vii.).
The judgment of Origen must be given in the original (Euseb.
H. E.
6.25).
o{ti oJ carakth;r th'" levxew" th'" pro;" JEbraivou" ejpistolh'" oujk e{cei to; ejn lovgw/ ijdiwtiko;n tou' ajpostovlou, oJmologhvsanto" eJauto;n ijdiwvthn ei\nai tw'/ lovgw/, toutevsti th'/ fravsei, ajllj e[stin hJ ejpistolh; sunqevsei th'" levxew" eJllhnikwtevra, pa'" oJ ejpistavmeno" krivnein fravsewn
(al.
fravsew"
)
diafora;" oJmologhvsai a[n
.
pavlin te au\ o{ti ta; nohvmata th'" ejpistolh'" qaumavsiav ejsti kai; ouj deuvtera tw'n ajpostolikw'n grammavtwn, kai; tou'to a]n sumfhvsai ei\nai ajlhqe;" pa'" oJ prosevcwn th'/ ajnagnwvsei th'/ ajpostolikh'/
.
touvtoi" meqj e{tera ejpifevrei levgwn ejgw; de; ajpofainovmeno" ei[poimj a]n o{ti ta; me;n nohvmata tou' ajpostovlou ejsti;n hJ de; fravsi" kai; hJ suvnqesi" ajpomnhmoneuvsantov" tino"
[
ta; ajpostolika; kai; wJsperei; scoliografhvsantov" tino"
]
ta; eijrhmevna uJpo; tou' didaskavlou
.
ei[ ti" ou\n ejkklhsiva e[cei tauvthn th;n ejpistolh;n wJ" Pauvlou, au{th eujdokimeivtw kai; ejpi; touvtw/
.
ouj ga;r eijkh'/ oiJ ajrcai'oi a[ndre" wJ" Pauvlou aujth;n paradedwvkasi
.
tiv" de; oJ gravya" th;n ejpistolhvn, to; me;n ajlhqe;" qeo;" oi\den, hJ de; eij" hJma'" fqavsasa iJstoriva uJpov tinwn me;n legovntwn o{ti Klhvmh" oJ genovmeno" ejpivskopo" JRwmaivwn e[graye th;n ejpistolhvn, uJpov tinwn de; o{ti Louka'" oJ gravya" to; eujaggevlion kai; ta;" Pravxei"
.
ajlla; tau'ta me;n w|de ejcevtw
.