Lamy on the Complutensian Polyglot and the Rhodian Codex

The American Ecclesiastical Review, Vol. XVII (Vol. VII of new series) (1897) included an article, "The Decision of the Holy Office on the Comma Joanneum," by "The Right Rev." Thomas Jos. Lamy, D.D., University of Louvain, Belgium, which runs for over 30 pages starting from p. 449.  

The subject of the Complutensian and its alleged sources comes up a few times:

"Within a few years, the Polyglotta Complutensis, the publication of which had been retarded a long time, finally appeared. It contained a Greek text of the New Testament printed before that followed by Erasmus, and there was the celebrated verse.¹

FN1 Most likely after the Codex Rhodiensis of which Stunica speaks."  (p. 452)

"And previous to that, Lopez Stunica had called Erasmus' attention to the Codex Rhodiensis, which likewise had the verse." (p. 477)

"But two other codices are cited for it : the Codex Rhodiensis of Stunica, and the Codex Britannicus of Erasmus, which by some is held to be the Codex Monfortianus of Dublin." (p. 480)

As we have seen, however, Stunica does not say that the Rhodian codex has the reading of the CP, but instead says that the Greek is corrupt (which is not how he describes the Greek when citing the Rhodian codex). Of course, Lamy himself could not tell anyone where the Rhodian codex was, much less could he produce any collation of its various readings.

To try to buttress the Complutensian text, he states:

The Codex Ravianus which is in the Library of Berlin, has the verse in the same terms as the Editio Complutensis. Tischendorf claims that it belongs to the seventeenth century and Martin declares it to be only a copy of the Editio Complutensis; but the matter remains doubtful despite the assertions of Wetstein, of Griesbach, of Tapelbaum and of Martin." (p. 476)

The Codex Ravianus has indeed been demonstrated to be a copy of the Complutensian Polyglot (see the discussion of manuscript 110 here, for example).  It is not included in the GA list of NT manuscripts for that reason.

As for the Rhodian Codex, its identity remains a mystery, despite the efforts of some great scholars to track it down (see the discussion in Bentley, J. H. (1980). NEW LIGHT ON THE EDITING OF THE COMPLUTENSIAN NEW TESTAMENT. Bibliothèque d’Humanisme et Renaissance, 42(1), 145–156.)

Of particular interest to my ongoing discussion with some pro-CJ folks, Bentley's article notes that the then-recently analyzed annotations did not cover 1 John 5:7-8, alone among the four major notes in the Complutensian Polyglot.  

The Johannine Comma in the Complutensian Polyglot

There are extremely few marginal notes regarding the reading of the text in the Complutensian Polyglot.  One of those very few notes is found at 1 John 5:7, as shown in the following screenshot:

(source)

The note reads:

Sanctus thomas in expositione secunde decretalis de suma trinitate et fide catholica tractans istum passum contra Abbatem Joachim ut tres sunt qui testimonium dant in celo. pater: verbum: et spiritus sanctus: dicit ad litteram verba sequentia. Et ad insinuandam unitatem trium personarum subditur et hii tres unum sunt. Quodquidem dicitur propter essentie unitatem. Sed hoc Joachim perverse trahere volens ad unitatem charitatis et consensus inducebat consequeintem auctoritatem. Nam subditur ibidem: et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra. s. spiritus: aqua: et sanguis. Et in quibusdam libris additur: et hii tres unum sunt. Sed hoc in veris exemplaribus non habetur: sed dicitur esse appositum ab hereticis arrianis ad pervertendum intellectum sanum auctoritatis premisse de unitate essentie trium personaruim. Hec beatus Thomas ubi supra.

My translation:

Saint Thomas, in the exposition of the second decretal On the Most High Trinity and the Catholic Faith, treating that passage against Abbot Joachim, “For there are three who give testimony in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit”, says the following words literally:

“And to indicate the unity of the three persons it is added: ‘And these three are one.’ This indeed is said because of the unity of essence.”

But Joachim, wishing perversely to twist this to the unity of charity and agreement, brought in the following authority:

“For it is added in the same place: ‘And there are three who give testimony on earth: the Spirit, the water, and the blood.’ And in certain books it is added: ‘And these three are one.’”

But this is not found in the true copies, but is said to have been inserted by Arian heretics to corrupt the sound understanding of the preceding authority concerning the unity of essence of the three persons.

These things are from blessed Thomas, as cited above.

Please note that the text of 1 John 5:7-8 in "the TR" is this:

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ὁ πατὴρ ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οὗτοι οἱ τρεῖς ἕν εἰσιν καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῇ γῇ τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ, καὶ τὸ αἷμα καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν

By contrast, the text of 1 John 5:7-8 in the Complutensian Polyglot is this:

ὅτι τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ὁ πατὴρ καὶ ὁ λόγος, καὶ τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσι καὶ τρεῖς εἰσιν οἱ μαρτυροῦντες ἐπὶ τῆς γης τὸ πνεῦμα καὶ τὸ ὕδωρ, καὶ τὸ αἷμα 

Notice the differences:

1. The "TR" inserts οὗτοι (these)  
2. The "TR" adds a movable nu to the end of εἰσι ("there are"); no apparent difference in meaning.
3. The "TR" omits the καὶ (and) between Father and Word.
4. The "TR" omits the εἰς τὸ ("to the") in the first statement of unity. 
5. The "TR" includes the phrase "καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν" after the three earthly witnesses, whereas the CP marginal note refers to this phrase as an Arian insertion, citing Thomas Aquinas.
6. The "TR" substitutes "ἐν τῇ γῇ" (in the earth) in place of "ἐπὶ τῆς γης" (on the earth).

The reason for treating the CP as the primary text, and the "TR" as a departure from it, is that the reading in the CP was printed first. 

Appendix:

Here's a translation apparently by Ezra Abbot (in 1872) in a memoir by by Rev. William Orme (1787-1830)(pp. 80-81):

"Saint Thomas, in his exposition of the second Decretal concerning the Most High Trinity and the Catholic faith, treating of this passage, 'There are three that bear witness in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit,' in opposition to the Abbot Joachim, uses precisely the following language: —' And to teach the unity of the three persons it is subjoined, And these three are one; which is said on account of their unity of essence. But Joachim, wishing perversely to refer this to a unity of affection and agreement, alleged the text that follows it. For it is immediately subjoined, And there are three that bear witness on earth, namely, the Spirit, the water, and the blood. And in some books it is added, And these three are one. But this is not contained in the true copies, but is said to have been added by the Arian heretics to prevent the text that precedes from being correctly understood as relating to the unity of essence of the three persons.'- Thus the blessed Thomas, as above referred to."

Postscript:

For the record, I am not posting the Complutensian's note because of any agreement with it, but instead because (1) sometimes it is claimed that although Erasmus did not have a manuscript with Johannine Comma, the Complutensian editors must have had one, and (2) it seems impossible (or at least highly unlikely) that the Complutensian editors had a Greek text that includes the Johannine Comma.  They seem to have created it to match the Latin and in the process moved the genuine phrase "καὶ οἱ τρεῖς εἰς τὸ ἕν εἰσιν" from its proper place after the Spirit, Water, and Blood to before those three witnesses are mentioned.  In short, like the other Greek testimonies to the Comma, the Complutensian is a testimony to reverse engineering from the Latin.

From the Complutensian Polyglot