HIPPOLYTUS On 7he ~postolic Tradition an English Version with Introduction and Commentary by ALISTAIR STEWART-SYKES ST VLADIMIR'S SEMINARY PRESS CRESTWOOD, NEW YORK 10707 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Hippolytus, Antipope, ca. 170-235 or 6. [Traditio apostolica. English J On the apostolic tradition I Hippolytus ; an English version with introduction and commentary by Alistair Stewart-Sykes. p. COl. - (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press "popular patristics" series) "Apostolic tradition was written in Greek, but only a few fragments are still extant in that language. Apostolic tradition is, however, extant in a number of translations and versions. The translation in this book is therefore a translation of translations"-Introd. Includes bibliographical references (p. ) and indexes. ISBN 0-88141-233-3 1. Christian life-Early works to 1800. 2. Church history-Primitive and early church, ca. 30-600-Sources. 3. Church orders, Ancient. I. Title: Apostolic tradition. II. Stewart-Sykes, Alistair. Ill. Title. IV. Series. BR65.H84 T7313 2001 270.1-dc21 COPYRIGHT ALISTAIR STEWART-SYKES © 2001 ST VLADIMIR'S SEMINARY PRESS 575 Scarsdale Rd., Crestwood, NY 10707 1-800-204-2665 www.svspress.com ISBN 0-88141-233-3 ISBN 978-0-88141-233-8 ISSN 1555-5755 All Rights Reserved First printed in 2001 PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Contents Preface 9 Introduction I. Apostolic Tradition 11 II The establishment of a monepiscopate at Rome 12 III The discovery and identification of Apostolic Tradition 16 IV The title of Apostolic Tradition 20 V The "authorship" of Apostolic Tradition 22 VI The conclusions to Apostolic Tradition 32 VII The contents and arrangement of Apostolic Tradition 36 VIII The scholastic church of the Hippolytean community and its church order 38 IX The text of Apostolic Tradition 45 X A summary of conclusions 49 English version of Apostolic Tradition and commentary 53 Appendix: The Hippolytean Homily on the Psalms 175 Notes 183 Bibliography 207 Indices Ancient texts 215 II Modern authors 218 III Subjects 220 To John with love I Preface To do justice to this text, the translator and commentator should be an expert not in liturgiology alone, but should have expertise in tex tual criticism and in the social and legal history of third century Rome, together with facility in six ancient languages. The intense specialization of the modern academy prevents the raising up of the needed polymath, and so a generalist and country parson has fool ishly stepped into a breach, the existence of which he had not rec ognized when he agreed to undertake a simple translation. However, the need to justify the translation gave rise to the procedure of com menting on the text, and as it rapidly became clear that the solutions to the quandaries raised by the versions were not to be found in the sciences of textual criticism or philology alone, a separate commen tary became necessary, which in time took on a life of its own. I am unsure of my qualifications in having undertaken such a task, hav ing never claimed to be an orientalist or a classicist, but my convic tion that the analysis of the Hippolytean school offered by Brent is the key to unlocking the mysteries of this text has illuminated my way at every turn. I have sought to make the commentary accessible to those with out the command of ancient languages, having in mind the needs of students and working clergy, and yet useful to the scholarly com munity. The translation may be read without reference to the com mentary, and the comments on the text and the translation, and those on the content, may be read independently of one another. Although the procedure has proved at times to be clumsy and repet itive, it prevents the necessity of a multiplicity of brackets and fonts and the provision of an impenetrable apparatus. By no means is 9 10 ON THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION every textual variant noted, and many obvious interpolations are simply ignored; for the full details of variants among the versions the reader is referred to the works of Dix and Botte, and to the appara tus of the published versions themselves. The aim of this work is to present in an accessible yet responsible manner an English version of what, in the author's opinion, was the text which emerged from the Hippolytean school in the first half of the third century together with the tools to make that text comprehensible. Every author hopes for a good librarian and a good editor. In producing this version and commentary I have been assisted by the best of both, namely Ms Laura Moore, of St Mark's library in New York and Dr John Behr the editor of this series. Both have been invaluable at every stage of the development of the work. Thanks are also due to the Revd Gloria Bowden, of the Diocese of Atlanta, who assisted me in the early stages of the project and kept me sane and confident enough to begin it, to Professor Deirdre Good of New York, who generously shared her expertise in Coptic, to Professor Judith Newman, also of New York, without whom the appendix might never have been written, and to Professor Arthur Pomeroy of Wellington, New Zealand, who provided the last piece of the patron age jigsaw in response to an emailed request. The greatest debt, however, is to the dedicatee, who has been a constant source of joy. The Vicarage, Sturminster Marshall On the feast of St Polycarp 2001 Introduction I ApOSTOLIC TRADITION Apostolic Tradition is an example of the genre known as "Church order literature." It contains instructions and regulations for the life of the church dealing with ordinations, the offering of the eucharist and other community meals, the catechumenate and baptism, and the offering of prayer and individual study. No church-order deals with precisely the same material, some being more concerned with the conduct of individual Christians as a result of the expansion of catechetical material, but this is the typical ground covered by the genre. Conventionally, Apostolic Tradition has been attributed to a third century figure called Hippolytus of Rome. However, the tradi tional attribution is now subject to widespread doubt, and the evi dence supplied by Apostolic Tradition for the liturgy and practice of the Roman church is therefore viewed with suspicion.l The com mentary below attempts to preserve the traditional view, though in a somewhat different form from that in which it has been held in the past. It continues to hold that Apostolic Tradition is Roman, and broadly that it is third century in date but, rather than seeing it as the work of one person, Hippolytus, it suggests that Hippolytus is only the last in a series of figures who "wrote" Apostolic Tradition, which is the product of a community produced over a number of years. Whereas this situation is perhaps confusing, it is that which, we hope to show, makes best sense of all the evidence and allows us to use Apostolic Tradition to understand the liturgy of the Roman church in the third century, and indeed, since traditional material was used in its construction, for a period before that date. This text 11 12 ON THE APOSTOLIC TRADITION has, since the time of its identification with the work of Hippolytus, been recognized as one of the earliest liturgical manuals in existence. The commentary will show that, in part at least, it is even earlier than has hitherto been suspected, though in its current form it dates from the third century at a time around 235.2 However, before this argu ment can be presented, a step back needs to be taken. The evidence for the dating and redactional history proposed here for Apostolic Tradition derives from an understanding of the manner in which the church in Rome developed from its beginnings until 235, the date at which we have suggested that Apostolic Tradition was completed. We must therefore turn to that subject before going on to discuss Hip polytus and the church order associated with his name. II THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MONEPISCOPATE AT ROME The reconstruction of the growth of a monepiscopate at Rome has recently been undertaken by Brent and Lampe;3 both chart a path within Roman Christianity which originates with a series of diverse Christian communities and ends with the unification of the Roman church under a single bishop, although they differ with regard to the date which is to be assigned to the final establishment of a mon episcopate. The reconstruction of Brent is of particular interest as he correlates his reconstruction to the ordination rites to be found in Apostolic Tradition, which is for him a "crown witness" in recon structing the social setting and the history of the Hippolytean com munity.4 The understanding of Apostolic Tradition presented in this translation and commentary is dependent upon following Brent's reconstruction, and therefore his arguments must be followed in detail before anything further is said about Apostolic Tradition or about its author. That the origin of Christianity at Rome lay in a series of entirely independent communities is clear from the various greetings to dif-