But does CEPHAS mean to say that ἐν πᾶσι is always to be thus rendered, when found without a substantive? Here are five passages from St. Paul's Epistles, in which, with one possible exception, it evidently means "persons," not "things."
1. ὁ δὲ αὐτός ἐστι Θεὸς, ὁ ἐνεργῶν τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν.—1 Cor. xii. 6.
2. ἵνα ᾖ ὁ Θεὸς τὰ πάντα ἐν πᾶσιν.—1 Cor. xv. 28.
3. βάρβαρος, Σκύθης, δοῦλος, ἐλεύθερος, ἀλλὰ τὰ πάντα καὶ ἐν πᾶσι Χριστός.—Col. iii. 11.
4. ταῦτα μελέτα, ἐν τούτοις ἴσθι· ἵνα σοῦ ἡ προκοπὴ φανερὰ ᾖ ἐν πᾶσιν.—1 Tim. iv. 15.
5. ἀλλ' οὐκ ἐν πᾶσιν ἡ γνῶσις.—1 Cor. viii. 7.
Upon the whole, then, I imagine that if any one will take the trouble to compare the passages above cited, and others in which the phrase ἐν πᾶσι is used, he will find that generally it refers to "persons," and requires to be limited by the context before it bears the sense of "things:"—in other words, that the former meaning is to be considered the rule, the latter the exception.
E. A. D.
Is not this somewhat dangerous ground for "NOTES AND QUERIES" to venture upon, bearing in mind "the depths profound" of disputatious polemics by which it is bounded? As, however, A. B. C. has, to a certain extent, led you forward, it were well for you to offer a more sufficient direction to the intricacies of the way, than can be found in the only half-informed "Replies" which have hitherto been given to his inquiry. This is the more necessary, as we now are accustomed to turn to you for the resolution of many of our doubts; and, under these circumstances, it were better that you spake not at all, than that your language be incomplete or uncertain. But the present question, from the very nature of the case, is involved in some difficulty; and, to set about the proof of individual instances of the non-celibate as a rule of the bishops of the primitive Church, or to discuss probabilities, which have already formed the subject of much παραδιατριβή, would fill more of your pages than you would be ready to devote to such a purpose. It would best then subserve the intentions of your publication, upon such a matter as the present, to direct the attention of your correspondents to accredited sources of information, and leave them to work out the results for themselves. Voluminous are these authorities, but it will be found that the following contain the entire subject in dispute, as presented by the combatants on both sides; namely, The Defense of the Apologie, edit. fol. 1571, pp. 194-231, 540-545.; Wharton's Treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy, in Gibson's Preservative against Popery, fol. 1738, vol. i. pp. 278-339.; and Preby. Payne's Texts Examin'd, &c., in the same, pp. 340-359. Previously, however, to commencing the study of these authorities, I would recommend a perusal of the statement made by Messrs. Berington and Kirk, on the celibacy of the clergy, in The Faith of Catholics, &c., edit. 1830, p. 384.
COWGILL.