” a Pp , \] p hd Lae) [ή εσται του ᾿σωματος και αιμµατος του Κυριου.
ς - , ‘ [ή , ~ A , ἑαυτῷ ἐσθίει καὶ πίνει, μὴ "διακρίνων τὸ " σῶμα τοῦ” Κυρίου.
28. 1 δοκιµαζέτω
Lr” 9 9 x ‘ ~ δὲ ” ἄνθρωπος ” ἑαυτὸν," καὶ ' οὕτως ἐκ τοῦ ἄρτου ἐσθιέτω καὶ ἐκ τοῦ
: st , ῃ sense, χἰν.ποτηρίου πινέτω" 29. 6 γὰρ ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων ἀναξίως, "κρίμα
4
t 8 times besides in P.; x Pet. iv. 17; 2 Pet. ii.3; Jude 4; Acts xxiv. 25; thrice u Acts xv. 9; Jas. ii. 43 Job. xii. 11.
Ch.iv. 7. %
1πον αιµατος: all uncc., above 40 minn., and many Ff. 2 eavtov ανθρωπος (in this order): CDGP.
30m. αναξιως N*ABC’, 17, sah..—a Western popular gloss ; current in Ff. *Om. του Κνριου S*ABC*, 17, 67**, am.” fu.*,
Ver. 27 draws the practical consequence of vv. 20-26, stating the judgement upon Cor. behaviour at the Supper that a right estimate of the covenant-cup and bread demands: ‘‘So then, whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily, will be held guilty (ἔνοχος ἔσται; veus tenetur, Bz.; rather, tene- bitur) of the body and blood of the Lord”’; it is this that he ignores or in- sults; cf. ver. 20. On ὥστε with ind., see note to iii. 7. What “unworthily”’ means is patent from vv. 20 ff.—The or, for and, between ἐσθίῃ and πίνῃ supplies the single text adducible for the R.C. practice of lay communion in one kind: “non leve argumentum,”’ says Est., “non enim sic loqueretur Ap., si non sentiret unam speciem sine altera sumi posse”’. But and appeared in just the same con- nexion in ver. 26, and reappears in wv. 28 f.; ος’ replaces ‘‘and” when one is thinking of the parl. acts distinctly, and the same communicant might behave unworthily in either act, esp. as the breaking of the bread and taking of the cup at this time came in probably at the beginning and end respectively of the Church Supper, and were separated by an interval of time; see notes on εὖχα- ριστήσας and peta t. δειπν.(241.). ἔνοχος (from ἐν-έχω, to hold in some liability) acquires in late Gr., like αἴτιος, a gen. of person against whom offence is com- mitted; see Ed. in loc. To outrage the emblem is to outrage its original—as if one should mock at the Queen’s picture or at his country’s flag. Except ἔλθῃ, the vbs. throughout this passage are pr. in tense, relating to habit.
Ver. 28. ‘But (in contrast with the guilt described, and in order to escape it) let a man put himself to proof, and so from the bread let him eat and from the cup let him drink.” ἄνθρωπος, replacing ὃς ἄν (27), is qualitative, ‘‘ containing the
ideas of infirmity and responsibility ”” (Gd.); cf. iii. 4, x. 13. On δοκιµάζω, see iii. 13, and parls. ; it signifies not judicial examination (ἀνακρίνω, iv. 3, etc.), nor discriminative estimate (διακρίνω, 31), but self-probing (probet se ipsum, Vg.; not exploret se, Bz.) with a view to fit partaking; any serious attempt at this would make the scene of vv. 20 ff. im- possible: the impv. is p7., enjoining a practice; the communicant must test himself habitually by the great realities with which he is confronted, asking him- self, ¢.g., whether he ‘‘ discerns the Lord’s body” (29).- καὶ οὕτως: scarcely sic demum (Bg.), but hoc cum animo; cf. Phil. iv. I. ἐκ. . . ἐσθιέω, ἐκ... πινέτω---α solemn fulness of expression, in keeping with the temper of mind re- quired; the prp. implies participation with others (cf. ix. 7, 13, Χ. 17).
Ver. 29. Participation in the bread and cup is itself a δοκιµασία: “For he that eats and drinks, a judgment for him- self (sentence on himself) he eats and drinks’”’. The single art. of 6 ἐσθίων καὶ πίνων, combining the acts, negatives the Κ.Ο. inference from the ἢ of ver. 27 (see note). Contact with Christ in this ordin- ance probes each man to the depths (cf. John iii. 18 f., ix. 39); it is true of the Lord’s verbum visibile, as of His verbum audibile, that he who receives it ἔχει τὸν κρίνοντα αὐτόν (John xii. 48). His attitude toward the Lord at. His table revealed with shocking evidence the spiritual condition of many a Cor. Chris- tian—his carnality and blindness as one “ not distinguishing the body ’”.—The two senses given by interpreters to διακρίνω are, as Hn. says, somewhat blended here (‘‘ Beruht jedes Urtheilen auf Entscheiden und Unterscheiden”), as in dijudicans (Vg.): one ‘discerns (judges clearly and tightly of) the (Lord’s) body” in the sacrament. and therein ‘discriminates ”’