what measure ye not, and ye shall mete it shall be not be judged.  For measured unto you. with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured unto you again.

The English, as here given, represents as closely as possible both the resemblances and the differences of the Greek text.  What reader, in reading this, can believe that Clement picked out a bit here and a bit there from the Canonical Gospels, and then wove them into one connected whole, which he forthwith represented as said thus by Christ?  To the unprejudiced student the hypothesis will, at once, suggest itself—­there must have been some other document current in Clement’s time, which contained the sayings of Christ, from which this quotation was made.  Only the exigencies of Christian apologetic work forbid the general adoption of so simple and so natural a solution of the question.  Mr. Sanday says:  “Doubtless light would be thrown upon the question if we only knew what was the common original of the two Synoptic texts ...  The differences in these extra-Canonical quotations do not exceed the differences between the Synoptic Gospels themselves; yet by far the larger proportion of critics regard the resemblances in the Synoptics as due to a common written source used either by all three or by two of them” ("Gospels in the Second Century,” p. 65).  It is clear that Jesus could not have said these passages in the words given by Matthew, Clement, and Luke, repeating himself in three different forms, now connectedly, now in fragments; two, at least, out of the three must give an imperfect report.  Mr. Sanday, by speaking of “the common original of the two Synoptic texts,” clearly shows that he does not regard the Synoptic version as original, and thereby helps to buttress our contention, that the Gospels we have now are not the only ones that were current in the early Church, and that they had no exclusive authority—­in fact, that they were not “Canonical.”  Further on, Mr. Sanday, referring to Polycarp, says:  “I cannot but think that there has been somewhere a written version different from our Gospels to which he and Clement have had access ...  It will be observed that all the quotations refer either to the double or treble Synoptics, where we have already proof of the existence of the saying in question in more than a single form, and not to those portions that are peculiar to the individual Evangelists.  The author of ‘Supernatural Religion’ is, therefore, not without reason when he says that they may be derived from other collections than our actual Gospels.  The possibility cannot be excluded” ("Gospels in the Second Century,” pp. 86, 87).  The other passage from Clement is yet more unlike anything in the Canonical Gospels:  in chap. xlvi. we read:—­