The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus: Translated into English with Introduction and NotesHippolytus, Antipope
Religion
The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus: Translated into English with Introduction and Notes
Hippolytus, Antipope
Canon law -- Early church, ca. 30-600; Church orders, Ancient
32. ¹But let each of the faithful be zealous, before he eats
anything else, to receive the eucharist; for if anyone
receives it with faith, after such a reception he cannot be
harmed even if a deadly poison should be given him. ²But let
each one take care that no unbeliever taste the eucharist, nor
a mouse nor any other animal, and that nothing of it fall or
be lost; for the body of Christ is to be eaten by believers
and must not be despised. ³The cup, when thou hast given
thanks in the name of the Lord, thou hast accepted as the
image of the blood of Christ. ⁴Therefore let none of it be
spilled, so that no alien spirit may lick it up, as if thou
didst despise it; thou shalt be guilty of the blood, as if
thou didst scorn the price with which thou hast been
bought.[155]
In the Oriental versions the position of chapters 31-32
between chapters 30 and 33 is impossible. Chapter 30 addresses
the church’s officers, chapters 31-32 individuals, chapters
33-34 the officers, and chapter 35 individuals again; chapter
31, in addition, is only a condensation of 35. 1-3. But the
Hauler manuscript clears up the difficulty. In it chapter 32
is followed immediately by the Latin A form of 37. 1-38. 2a,
breaking off at the end of a leaf with “apo” (for
“apostolic”). The next leaf begins with “God” in the middle of
36. 5, and the text continues through 36, gives the Latin B
form of 37. 1-38. 2a and breaks off this time with “tra” for
“tradition”. So two versions of the work were current with
different endings; in one chapter 30 was followed by 31-32 and
the A conclusion, in the other it was followed by 33-35 and
the B conclusion. In the Hauler manuscript both endings were
reproduced, although the leaves containing the last two
sentences of the first and a considerable part of the second
have been lost. In the Oriental versions—or the Greek codex
underlying them—the glaring duplication caused by the ending
after 32 was suppressed, although the doubling of 35. 1-3 in
31 remained.
Since chapter 34 is unmistakably Roman and consequently
Hippolytean, the longer ending is original; chapter 33,
moreover, is perfectly in place after chapter 30. So
Schwartz[156] and Jungklaus are correct in holding[157] that
chapter 32 is not by Hippolytus; the only alternative would be
to assume that he issued two versions of his book with
different endings—a difficult supposition that would leave
unexplained why the very important practice stressed in
chapter 32 is omitted in the longer version.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account