But it is surely no argument to say that because a certain number of extravagant and spurious writings are attributed to Clement, therefore one so sober and consistent with his position, and one so well attested as this, is not likely to have been written by him.

The contrary inference would be the more reasonable, for if Clement had not been an important person, and if he had left no known and acknowledged writings, divergent parties in the Church would have had no reason for making use of his name.

But arguments of this kind cannot have much weight.

Probably not one half of the writings attributed to Justin Martyr are genuine; but no one on that account doubts the Apologies and the Dialogue with Tryphon.
Schwegler [Endnote 59:3], as is his wont, has developed the opinion of Baur, adding some reasons of his own.

Such as, that the letter shows Pauline tendencies, while 'according to the most certain traditions' Clement was a follower of St.Peter; but the evidence for the Epistle (Polycarp, Dionysius of Corinth, A.D.