After blessing, the bishop breaks the loaf, eats a portion himself, and distributes the remainder to all the baptized members of the company: a procedure exactly like that of the eucharist. In the earlier combined service, in fact, this bread would have been actually eucharistic, for which after the separation “blessed” bread was substituted to enable the traditional agape ceremonial to continue with a minimum of external change. The final separation must have been comparatively recent, for Hippolytus feels obliged to emphasize the difference between the two rites; in later times there was no danger of confusion, and his translators consequently do not seem to have grasped his point. 2. The breaking of each one’s bread would be accompanied by a proper benediction. 3. Roughly parallel is Berakhoth vi. 6: “If wine is brought during a meal, each one must pronounce the blessing for himself”. 4. For the distinction between “blessing” and “exorcism” of objects, compare 21. 6-7. The Arabic and Ethiopic substitute “blessed bread”, even for the catechumens. Whether the catechumens also broke their “own” bread is left uncertain. “Offer” is here a mere synonym for “give thanks”, a usage not found in the other versions. 5. Perhaps the catechumens stood during the agape; perhaps they ate at a separate table. 6. Each blessing at an agape must include a prayer for the host, who is thus repaid for his bounty. For “offer” the other versions substitute “eat”, spoiling the force. 7. From 1 Corinthians 11. 21 to the final abolition of the agapes in Christianity (in the eighth century?) there were constant complaints of disorderly conduct at these meals; Clement of Alexandria (_l.c._) for this reason objects to their name. Hippolytus cites Matthew 5. 13. 8. ἀποφόρητον is simply “that which is carried away” and is used in its etymological sense; other meanings, such as the associated “a gift given to dinner guests”, are immaterial here. The “apoforetum” began like the regular agape with the distribution of the blessed bread and (presumably) with public benedictions over bread and wine, but the rest of the meal was eaten at each one’s home. 9. The Gospel accounts of the miraculous feedings lay similar stress on gathering up the fragments. 10. The complete dominance of the meal by the bishop would seem to make the above warnings against disorder needless; as Hippolytus pictures it an agape would have been the reverse of hilarious.