chapter 37

.

12. This quaint doctrine—which the other versions omit or alter—came from the authorities who gave Hippolytus the rest of his “tradition”. He mentions them here only, but in Irenaeus similar appeals to “the presbyters” are numerous.

13. Matthew 25. 6, 13 in an unusual text form.

14. Peter’s denial (Matthew 26. 74) is synchronized with the condemnation of Christ by the Sanhedrin.

37

The sign of the cross is performed after first breathing on the hand, so that it is wet with saliva. Belief in the power of spittle to repel evil spirits is widespread[227] and, despite Hippolytus’s disclaimer, lies behind the practice he advocates. His own interpretation of the ceremony is none the less ingenious; the mixture of moisture and breath[228] corresponds to the water and the Spirit in baptism and so makes the sign of the cross the “image” of baptism, accomplishing a sort of rebaptism[229] (36. 11). Only Latin A has the original; Latin B and the other versions do not understand the custom and replace “baptism” by “the Word”.

The interpretation of Exodus 12. 22 is in the style of Barnabas.

38 CONCLUSION

Hippolytus closes with a final adjuration to avoid all novelties; the way of peace consists solely in strict adherence to the past.

FOOTNOTES

[1]Luke 12. 13-16.

[2]For exceptions see, e.g., Romans 14. 14 (= Matthew 15. 11), 1 Corinthians 7. 10 (= Matthew 19. 9), 1 Clement 46. 8 (= Matthew 18. 6, in substance), 2 Clement 12. 2 (apocryphal).

[3]Especially in 2 Clement.

[4]Acts 15. 28-29.

[5]Romans 14, in particular.

[6]1 Corinthians 8. 8; 10. 25-26.

[7]Compare Revelation 2. 14, 20.

[8]Didache 13. 7, etc.

[9]Didache 13. 3, etc.

[10]So very emphatically in 1 Clement 40-41. But Clement does not argue for a detailed parallelism between the two ministries.

[11]Didache 3. 1-6 is an instance.

[12]The reason for this appears to be that at this period the Fourth Commandment was conceived to be wholly “ceremonial”, and to “keep the Sabbath” was regarded as Judaizing (Ignatius, _Magnesians_ 9. 1, etc.). The belief that in Christianity the Sabbath laws have been transferred to Sunday is of medieval origin.

[13]On these methods compare especially K. E. Kirk, _The Vision of God_ (London, 1931), pp. 119-124.

[14]As in Wisdom 14. 25-26.

[15]Romans 1. 29-31 is largely of Greek origin; 1 Timothy 3. 2-3 and Titus 3. 1-2 are wholly so.

[16]In 1 Clement 47. 6 the forty-five year old Corinthian church is called “ancient”.

[17]Jude 17, Revelation 21. 14, etc. The meaning in Ephesians 2. 20 is probably a little different.

[18]1 Clement 42. 4; 44. 1-2, etc.

[19]Even in the third century liturgical prayers were still normally extempore, and use of a fixed form was regarded as a weakness on the part of the officiant.

[20]Eusebius, _HE_, v, 24.

[21]See especially James Muilenburg, _The Literary Relations of the Epistle of Barnabas and the Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_, Marburg, 1929.

[22]39th Festal Letter (367), 7.

[23]The details of the Patristic testimony are best seen in J. R. Harris, _The Teaching of the Apostles_, Baltimore and London, 1887.

[24]_Die Didache_, Bonn; many editions.

[25]_Didascalia Apostolorum_, Oxford, 1929.

[26]Also known as Third Clement. Occasionally—and unfortunately—called the Apostolic Canons or the Roman Church Order.

[27]Paderborn, 1914. Dr Schermann’s theory of a very early date for the document is individualistic.

[28]Pp. 127-138, 233-244, 295-306.

[29]Often reprinted separately.

[30]But incorrectly.

[31]Pp. 34, 78, 40.

[32]Cooper and Maclean, p. 18.

[33]_HE_, VI, 20.

[34]_Vir. ill._ 61.

[35]His festival is on August 13.

[36]Not completely legible; reproductions are not always to be trusted.

[37]_Origenis Philosophumena_, Oxford. Books II-III are presumably still missing, although it has been argued that what is ordinarily called Book IV may contain them; Wendland, however, rejects this theory (p. xvi).

[38]Especially in his _Hippolytus and Callistus_, 1853.

[39]_St Clement of Rome_, II, pp. 317-477. First published in 1869; in the later editions the argument is slightly expanded but is otherwise unchanged.

[40]Jerome, _Vir. ill._ 61.

[41]Legge (II, p. 127) unfortunately revives Döllinger’s remarkable explanation of this occurrence: Callistus had lent the bank’s funds to the Jews and went to the synagogue to recover his depositors’ money. As if anyone would expect Jews to transact business on the Sabbath and at a synagogue service!

[42]Victor’s accession occurred about 189, and Commodus died in 192.

[43]The distinction between “martyr” and “confessor” was not yet developed.

[44]Or perhaps restored the privileges of the office to him; when and where Callistus was ordained is uncertain. Possibly he had the confessor’s ordination (p. 39).

[45]Hippolytus’s account of his controversy with Callistus is, in fact, so bitter that modern historians feel obliged to interpret it in the sense that will make the greatest allowance for the latter. Hence less than full justice is perhaps done nowadays to Hippolytus.

[46]The antithesis “In time or in eternity?” seems hardly to have been stated squarely until the beginnings of the Arian controversy.

[47]And Zephyrinus?

[48]Less probably after Zephyrinus’s death.

[49]Hebrews 6. 4-8, 10. 26-31, 12. 17.

[50]Except, perhaps, through martyrdom.

[51]Matthew 13. 30.

[52]Romans 14. 4.

[53]His most violent treatise—the Philosophumena—was perhaps omitted, but time has so defaced the list that we cannot be certain. The Apostolic Tradition, however, was duly listed, and it certainly contains polemic enough.

[54]_Theologische Literaturzeitung_, 1920, col. 225.

[55]Compare the Epitomist’s “The Constitutions of the Holy Apostles through Hippolytus”.

[56]London.

[57]Leipzig (_Texte und Untersuchungen_, VI, 4).

[58]Hippolytus’s work is printed on pp. 101-121; reprinted in Connolly (pp. 175 ff.), and in part in the fifth edition of Duchesne’s _Christian Worship_, London, 1919.

[59]II, pp. 97-119.

[60]The notes are systematized and amplified in the latter’s _Ancient Church Orders_.

[61]_Unbekannte Fragmente altchristlichen Gemeindeordnungen_, Berlin Academy.

[62]_Über die pseudoapostolischen Kirchenordnungen_, Strassburg.

[63]Facsimiles in Hauler.

[64]Compare p. 60.

[65]The oldest (Sahidic) is dated _ca._ 1005.

[66]Details in Horner.

[67]More logical and so secondary.

[68]This seems easier than Schwartz’s theory (p. 7) of a _later_ Sahidic text enlarged from the original Greek.

[69]The former cautiously.

[70]It lacks