Hence he is spoken of with respect in the Clementines; while Paul, as a radical in relation to the Law, is discountenanced.
The earliest probable reference to our Homilies occurs in a work of doubtful date, the pseudoAthanasian Synopsis, which mentions "Clementines, whence came by selection and rewriting the true and inspired form."
If we assume, then, that the common source of our extant Clementines arose in Syria, perhaps c. 265, 1 had it also a written source or sources which we can trace?
As for the allusions, more or less indirect, to St Paul behind the figure of Simon, as the arch-enemy of the truth - allusions which first directed attention to the Clementines in the last century - there can be no doubt as to their presence, but only as to their origin and the degree to which they are so meant in Homilies and Recognitions.
See Iightfoot's essay for Cyprian's contribution, as also for that of the Clementines, which fix on the twofold position of James at Jerusalem, as apostle and bishop, as bearing on apostolic succession in the episcopate.
The mention of Helen in the Clementines stamps them as later than the Great Declaration, in which, to all appearance, her story originates.
The Clementines leave room for this development.
With Schmiedel's contention that there are passages in the Clementines which are aimed at Paul, we entirely agree.
In the Clementines Simon by his magic imposes his own personal appearance upon Faustus, the father of Clement.
But to push the equation of St Paul with Simon Magus further than we are forced to by the facts of the case is to lose sight of the real character of the Clementines as the counterblast of Jewish to Samaritan Gnosticism and to obscure the greatness of Simon of Gitta, who was really the father of all heresy, a character which has been erroneously attributed to Simon Magus.