[3772] [Dionysius omits aut diaconus.--R.]
[3773] Comp. Apostolic Constitutions, ii. 6.--R.]
[3774] This points to a discussion in the third century.--R.]
[3775] [Canons 9-16 agree with those of the Council of Antioch, a.d. 341; but there is a difference of opinion on the question of priority.]
[3776] Dionysius Exiguus translates "communicans," in which case the Greek reading must be dektos, or, "who can be received."
[3777] [Canons 17, 18, 20, agree with Apostolic Constitutions, vi.. 17, ii. 6.--R.]
[3778] [After Origen. Comp. Melito, [296]vol. viii., this series.]
[3779] [Canons 21-24 agree with the first of the Nicene Council (Hefele, Christian Councils, i. pp. 375, 376). Some hold that canon to refer to these, others find in the enlarged application of Canon 24 a proof of the later date of this collection.--R.]
[3780] Nah. i. 9. [Canons 25, 26, are referred to by Basil the Great (Ad Amphilochium, iii.). In the Greek collection 26 is joined with 25.--R.]
[3781] [Apostolic Constitutions, vi. 17.--R.]
[3782] 1 Pet. ii. 23. [This canon seems of late origin, probably from Synod of Constantinople, a.d. 394.--R.]
[3783] [The closing clause points to a comparatively late date, as do the contents of Canon 31.--R.]
[3784] [Canons 32-41 also agree with those of Antioch; see note on Canon 9. Some of the regulations have, however, an earlier date: whether they existed in this form before that time, is open to discussion.--R .]
[3785] [This canon is divided by most editors of the Greek text; forming, in their enumeration, Canons 38 and 39.--R.]
[3786] [Hefele and others regard Canons 42-44 as among the most ancient of this collection, and of unknown origin.--R.]
[3787] [The substance of this canon is very ancient, Hefele thinks; but Drey derives it from Canons 9, 33, 34, of the Synod of Laodicea, about a.d. 363.--R.]
[3788] 2 Cor. vi. 5. [Drey regards this as very ancient; but Hefele derives it and the following one from the Apostolic Constitutions, vi. 15.--R.]
[3789] [Very ancient, of unknown origin; repeated in canons of Elvira and Arles.--R.]
[3790] From Apostolic Constitutions, vi. 11, 26.--R]
[3791] [This canon, the last of those in the collection of Dionysius, is regarded as among the most recent. Of unknown origin.--R.] At the end of this canon, in the collection of John of Antioch, the following words are added: "Let him that is baptized be taught that the Father was not crucified, nor endured to be born of man, nor indeed that the Holy Spirit became man, or even endured suffering, for He was not made flesh; but the only begotten Son ransomed the world from the wrath which lay upon it: for He became man through His love of man, having fashioned a body for Himself from a virgin. For Wisdom built a house for herself as a Creator; but He willingly endured the cross, and rescued the world from the wrath that lies on it, namely, those who are baptized into the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit. But let those who do not thus baptize be suspended, as being ignorant of the mystery of piety." The same collection gives the following as Canon 51: "He who says that the Father suffered is more impious than the Jews, nailing along with Christ the Father also. He who denies that the only begotten Son was made flesh for us, and endured the cross, fights with God, and is an enemy of the saints. He that names the Holy Spirit Father or Son, is ignorant and foolish; for the Son is Creator along with the Father, and has the same throne, and is Lawgiver along with Him, and Judge, and the cause of the resurrection; and the Holy Spirit is the same in substance: for the Godhead has three Persons, the same in substance. For in our day Simon the magician gave forth his doctrines, drawing the speechless, delusive, unstable, and wicked spirit to himself, and babbling that there is one God with three names, and sometimes erasing the passion and birth of Christ. Do you, then, most beloved ones, baptize into one Father, and Son, and the Holy Spirit as third, according to the will of the Lord, and our constitution made in the spirit."
[3792] Gen. i. 31.
[3793] Gen. i. 26.
[3794] [Canons 51-53 are from the Apostolic Constitutions: the first from vi. 8, 10, 26; the second from ii. 12, 13; the third from v. 20.--R.]
[3795] Luke xv. 7.
[3796] 1 Tim. iv. 2.
[3797] [Canons 54-57 are of unknown origin; the first is deemed ancient, while the conduct forbidden in the others points to a more recent date. Drey thinks the distinctions of the clergy also point to a later date.--R.]
[3798] Ex. xxii. 28.
[3799] [Canon 58 is supposed to refer to the absence of bishops at the imperial city, which prevailed in the middle of the fourth century.--R.]
[3800] [Canon 59 resembles the twenty-fifth canon of Synod of Antioch; see on Canon 9.--R.]
[3801] [Of doubtful origin, but resembling Apostolic Constitutions vi. 16, though probably of later date.--R.]
[3802] [Canons 61, 62, are of unknown origin.--R.]
[3803] Gen. ix.; Lev. xvii.
[3804] [Canon 63 is regarded as very ancient.--R.]
[3805] [Canon 64 is numbered as 66 In Hefele's edition, being preceded by Canons 65 and 66 as given above. It is from Apostolic Constitutions, v. 20.--R.]
[3806] [Canon 65 is from Apostolic Constitutions, ii. 61.--R.]
[3807] [Of unknown but probably late origin.--R.]
[3808] [Drey makes this one of the most recent canons of the collection.--R.]
[3809] [Of unknown origin, probably recent.--R.]
[3810] [Drey considers Canon 69 to be very ancient, but also intimates that it and Canon 70 were taken from the pseudo-Ignatian Epistle to the Philippians; see the same, chap. xiii., latter half, vol. i. [297]p. 119, of this series.--R.]
[3811] [With Canons 70, 71, compare Synod of Elvira (a.d. 305 or 306), Canons 49, 50, in Hefele, vol. i. pp. 158, 159. Drey, however, derives them from Canons 37-39 of Laodicea (a.d. 363).--R.]
[3812] Lev. v. 16. [It is argued from the theft forbidden that this canon is more recent; its origin is unknown.--R.]
[3813] [The wealth here implied points to a comparatively late origin; Hefele assigns it to the second half of the third century, but Drey gives a later date.--R.]
[3814] [Hefele thinks both this and the following canon to be later than the Nicæan Council. Drey, however, derives Canon 74 from the council at Chalcedon (a.d. 451), a view opposed by both Bickell and Hefele.--R.]
[3815] Deut xix. 15. [According to Drey this canon is from the Council of Constantinople (sixth canon), in a.d. 381.--R.]
[3816] [Drey derives this from Canon 23, Synod of Antioch, a.d. 341.--R.]
[3817] [Hefele: "The Canons 77-79, inclusive, belong to the first three centuries of the Church; their origin is unknown."--R.]
[3818] [Comp. Apostolic Constitutions, viii. 32, p. 495, from which this may have been taken.--R.]
[3819] [Drey regards Canon 80 as an imitation of the second canon of Nicæa, which is, however, much fuller; comp. Hefele, i. p. 377. On the principle, comp. 1 Tim. iii. 6 and similar passages.--R.]
[3820] Can. iv. prius.
[3821] Matt. vi. 24.
[3822] [The contents of this canon point to a late date. Drey regards it as an abridgment of the third canon of Chalcedon (a.d. 451).--R.]
[3823] [Of unknown origin and date.--R.]
[3824] Matt. xxii. 21. [This also Drey traces to the Council of Chalcedon, a.d. 451 (Canon 7); but Hefele opposes this view here, as in the case of the other canons (30, 67, 74, 81) which Drey derives from that source.--R.]
[3825] [Or rather, "the emperor" (basilea having that sense). Hefele refers this to the time of the Arian struggle, when the emperors were involved in ecclesiastical controversies.--R.]
[3826] [Hefele: "This is probably the least ancient canon in the whole collection." With this opinion there is general concurrence, since the mention of the Constitutions among the canonical books indicates the hand of the last compiler of that collection of writings. Whoever he was, he was not Clement of Rome.--R.]
Elucidations.
I.
(The Bidding Prayer, etc., [298]p. 485.)
The Pauline Norm. [3827]
1. Supplications.
2. Prayers, Psalms, Hymns, and Spiritual Songs.
3. Intercessions.
4. General Thanksgiving. The Kiss of Peace.
5. Anaphora. [3828]
The Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed took bread:
And when He had given thanks, He brake it,
And said, Take, eat: this is my Body, which is broken for you:
This do in remembrance of Me.
After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped,
Saying, This cup is the New Testament in my Blood:
This do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me.
For as often as ye eat this Bread, and drink this Cup, ye do show the Lord's death till He come.
6. Our Father, etc. [3829]
7. Communion.
Let us note also that the Apostle had "delivered" unto the Corinthians (1 Cor. xi. 23), as doubtless to others (1 Cor. vii. 17), certain institutions which he ordained in all the churches, and for departing from which he censures the Corinthians in this place (ver. 17 compared with ver. 2) in certain particulars. In chap. xiv. at ver. 40, he refers to these ordinances as a ta'xis, in the performance of which they were to proceed (kosmi'os) with due order, becomingly; not with mere decency, but with a beautiful decorum of service.
Finally, let me suggest that there are fragments of the Apostle's (para'doseis) instructions everywhere scattered through his Epistles, such as the minute canon [3830] concerning the veiling of women in acts of worship, insisting upon it with a length of argument which in one of the Apostolic Fathers would be considered childish. He also insisted that his ta'xis is from the Lord.
Fragments of the primitive hymns are also scattered through the Apostles' writings, as, e.g.,--
'Egeirai ho katheu'don,
kai` ana'sta ek ton nekron
kai` epiphau'sei soi o Christo's. [3831]
Of such passages the formula (dio` le'gei) "It saith" seems to be a frequent index.
May we not conclude also that the sublime prayer and doxology of Eph. iii. 14-21 is a quotation from the Apostle's own eucharistic ta'xis for the whole state of Christ's Church militant?
Might not the same be more constantly used in our days as an intercession for the whole flock of the one Shepherd?
II.
(Fulfil His constitution, [299]p. 489.)
The Pauline Norm being borne in mind, we shall best comprehend this Clementine liturgy, as to its primitive claims, by taking the testimony of Justin, writing in Rome to the Antonines a. d.160. Referring to the Apology in our first volume, we observe that the order kept up in his day was this:--
1. Prayers for all estates of men.
2. The kiss of peace.
3. Oblation of bread and wine.
4. Thanksgiving.
5. Words of institution.
6. The prayer ending with Amen.
7. Communion.
Now, a century later, we may suppose the original of this Clementine to have taken a fuller shape; of which still later this Clementine is the product. [3832]
Bear in mind that the early Roman use was (Greek) borrowed wholly from the East; [3833] and, comparing the testimony of Justin with the Pauline Norm, may we not suppose that this norm in Rome was augmented by the Eastern uses, and so preserves a true name in that of the first Bishop of Rome, who accepted it from Jerusalem or Antioch?
III.
(That He may show this bread, etc., [300]p. 489.)
From a recent essay by Dr. Williams, the erudite bishop of Connecticut, I am permitted to cite, as follows:--
Compare the original texts thus:--
Clementine. [3834]
Irenæus. [3835]
opos apophene toon arton touton soma tou Christou sou kai` to` pote'rion touton aima tou Christou sou ina hoi metalabontes, k.t.l.
hopos apophene te`n thusi'an tau'ten, kai` to`n a'rton soma tou Christou, kai` to` pote'rion to` aima tou Christou ina hoi metalabo'ntes, k.t.l.
Bishop Williams then proceeds to inquire:--
"How is this striking agreement to be explained? Does Irenæus quote from the Clementine, or the Clementine from him? Or is it not much more likely that they are independent witnesses to primitive uses, going back to the period of the persecutions, and extending far beyond the limits of Syria or Palestine'?" [3836]
I shall recur to these passages in the elucidations to Early Liturgies (infra): but here I beg the reader to consult Pfaff, to whom we owe the discovery of the fragment cited from Irenæus; also Grabe, in the same volume of Pfaff, whom I have already introduced to the reader. [3837]
Postscript.
The American editor had been promised the aid of his beloved friend the Rev. Dr. Hobart in the elucidation of the liturgies; but a sudden and almost fatal prostration of his health has deprived the reader of the admirable comments with which he would have enriched these pages, had Providence permitted.
[3827] 1 Tim. II. 1. Compare (poieisthai) the Greek here with that of the LXX. in Ex. xxix. 36, 38, 39, 41; also Ex. x. 25, and so throughout the Old Testament. Note also Eph. v. 19 and Col. iii. 16; and the kiss, 1 Cor. xvi. 20.