STUDIES ON THE
APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF THE APOSTLES
In recent years the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles have increasingly drawn the attention of scholars interested in early Christianity andlor the history of the ancient novel. New editions of the most important Acts have appeared or are being prepared. We are therefore pleased to announce a new series, Studies on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (edited by Jan N. Bremmer), which will contain studies of individual aspects of the main Acts: those of John, Paul, Peter, Andrew, and Thomas. Initially, four volumes are scheduled. Editors: T. Adarnik, J. Bolyki, J. N. Bremmer (editor-in-chien, P. Herceg, A. Hilhorst, G. Luttikhuizen en J. Roldanus. 1. The Apocryphal Acts of John, J.N. Bremmer (ed.), Kampen 1995 2. The Apocrypal Acts of Paul, J.N. Bremmer (ed.), Kampen 1996 (in preparation)
1995,Kok Pharos Publishing House P.O. Box 5016,8260 GA Kampen, the Netherlands Cover by Geert de Koning, Kampen ISBN 90 390 0141 3 1 CIP NUGI 63 1 All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Contents
Preface Notes on contributors List of abbreviations I.
A. Hilhorst, The Apocryphal Acts as Martyrdom Texts: the case of the Acts of Andrew
11.
J. Bolyki, Miracle Stories in the Acts of John
111.
J. Bremrner, Women in the Apocryphal Acts of John
IV.
I. Karasszon, Old Testament Quotations in the Apocryphal Acts
V.
J. Roldanus, Die Eucharistic in den Johannesakten
VI.
P.J. Lalleman, Polymorphy of Christ
VII. G. Luttikhuizen, A Gnostic Reading of the Acts of John VIII. P. Herceg, Sermons in the Acts of John IX.
T. Adamik, The Influence of the Apocryphal Acts on Jerome's Lives of Saints
171
CONTENTS
X.
R.H. Bremmer, Jr, The Reception of the Acts of John in Anglo-Saxon England
183
XI.
G. Jenkins, Papyrus Ifiom Kellis. A Greek Text with Afinities to the Acts of John
197
XII. P.J. Lalleman, Bibliography of Acts of John
23 1
Index of names, subjects and passages
236
Plates
Preface
After the fall of the Berlin Wall the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen decided to intensify contacts with universities in Eastern Europe. In 1991 the Head of the Departmment of Church History, Professor Hans Roldanus, took this opportunity to forge links with the KBroli GBspBr University of Budapest. In the search for a common research project, which would also prove to be attractive to classicists of the Lorint-Eotvos University of Budapest, it was decided to focus on the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles. This particular choice hardly needs to be defended. The world of early Christianity is currently the recipient of an ever increasing attention from New Testament and patristic scholars as well as from ancient historians. Various Apocryphal Acts have recently been re-edited or are in process of being re-edited, but the contents of these Acts are still very much under-researched. It is the object of the Dutch-Hungarian cooperation to study the major Apocryphal Acts in a series of yearly conferences. The proceedings thereof will be published in the new series, Studies in the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles. The editors envisage in principle to publish four volumes, but they are open to hrther suggestions. The present study centres mainly on the Acts of John. The first chapter analyses the differences between the Apocryphal Acts and the Acts of the Martyrs. Then follows a series of studies on various aspects of the Acts of John: miracles, women, Old Testament quotations, the eucharist, polymorphy, Gnostic elements and speeches. The last part of the volume presents studies of the still largely unexplored reception of the Acts: its use by Jerome, its appearance in Anglo-Saxon England and, finally, the rather sensational publication of a new papyrus which demonstrates the early use of the Acts by the Manichaeans in Egypt; this poses new questions regarding the transmission and origin of the text. Problems of
.. II
PREFACE
time and distance have made it unavoidable that this chapter here appears in a format slightly different from that used in the rest of the book. The volume is rounded off by a bibliography of the Acts, and an index. I am most grateful to the Faculty of Theology and Science of Religion of the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen for its financial support of the original conference. Tjalling de Vries of the Computer Department of .the Faculty of Arts readily and speedily prepared the camera-ready copy of this book. Jeroen Geurts, Geoff Jenkins, Pieter Lalleman, Alasdair MacDonald and Cor de Vos also assisted in various ways. Annemiek Boonstra was most helpful, especially in the final days of preparation, which were overshadowed by the sudden loss of my father.
Jan N. Bremmer
Groningen, 19 September 1995
Notes on Contributors
Tamais Adamik b. 1937, is Professor of Latin at the LorhntEotvos University of Budapest. He is the author of the following studies in Hungarian: A Commentary to Catullus (1971), Martial and His Poetry (1979), Aristotle's Rhetoric (1982) and A History of Roman Literature 1-111 (1993-94). JBnos Bolyki b. 1931, is Professor of New Testament Studies at the KBroli GBspar University-Theological Faculty of Budapest. He is the author of the following studies in Hungarian: The Questions of the Sciences in the History of Theology in the 20th Century (1970), Faith and Science (1989), Principles and Methods of New Testament Interpretation (1990) and The Table Fellowships of Jesus (1992). Jan N. Bremmer b. 1944, is Professor of History and Science of Religion at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of The Early Greek Concept of the Soul (1983) and Greek Religion (1994), co-author of Roman Mjth and Mythography (1987), editor of Interpretations of Greek Mythology ( 1 987), From Sappho to de Sade: Moments in the History of Sexuality (1989), and co-editor of A Cultural History of Gesture (1991). Rolf H. Bremmer Jr b. 1950, is Associate Professor of Medieval English at the Rijksuniversiteit Leiden. He is the author of The Fyve Wyttes (1987) and A Bibliographical Guide to Old Frisian Studies (1992), and co-editor of Aspects of Old Frisian Philology (1990), P.J. Cosijn: Notes on BeowuIf (1991), Zur Phonologie und Morphologie des Altniederlandischen (1992), Current Trends in West Germanic Etymological Lexicography (1993) and Companion to Old English Poetry (1994).
Pi1 Herceg b. 1939, is Professor of History of Religion at the Karoli Gaspar University-Theological Faculty of Budapest. He is the author of the following studies in Hungarian: The History of the New Testament (1979), The Plot of the Theology of the New Testament (1 986), "Do you understand what you are reading? " (1990) and History of Religions (1993). A. Hilhorst b. 1938, is Associate Professor of Early Christian Literature and New Testament Studies at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Simitismes et latinismes duns le Pasteur d'Hermas (1976), editor of De heiligenverering in de eerste eeuwen van het Christendom (1988), and co-editor of Fructus Centesimus. Me'langes G.J.M Bartelink ( 1 989), The Scriptures and the Scrolls. Studies A.S. van der Woude (1992), Early Christian Poehy (1993) and Evangelie en beschaving. Studies Hans Roldanus (1995). Geoffrey Jenkins, b. 1954, is Associate Professor in Biblical Studies and Judaism at the University of Melbourne. He is the author of The Old Testament Quotations of Philoxenos of Mabbug (1988). Istvin Karasszon b. 1955, is Professor of Old Testament Studies at the Karoli Gaspar University-Theological Faculty of Budapest. He is the author of the following studies in Hungarian: The Methodologv of Old Testament Interpretation (1991), The History of Ancient Israel (1992) and Religion in Ancient Israel (1995). Pieter J. Lalleman b. 1960, prepares a dissertation on the Acts of John at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. Gerard Luttikhuizen b. 1940, is Professor of Early Christian Literature and New Testament Studies at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of The Revelation of Elchasai (1985) and Gnostische Geschrifren I (1986).
CONTRIBUTORS
V
Hans Roldanus b. 1930, is Professor Emeritus of Church History at the Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. He is the author of Le Christ et I'homme duns la theologie d2thanase d'Alexandrie (1968) and De Syrisch Orthodoxen in Istanbul ( 1 984).
List of abbreviations
AAA AJ ANRW CIL Junod & Kaestli, Al NHC NHLE NTA RAC RE
SEG r n T ZNW ZPE
Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles Acts of John Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum E. Junod and J.-D. Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, 2 vols (Turnhout 1983) Nag Hammadi Codices J.M. Robinson (ed.), The Nag Hammadi Library in English (Leiden, 1 98S3) W. Schneemelcher, New Testament Apocrypha, tr. and ed. R. McL. Wilson, 2 vols (Cambridge, 1992) Reallexikon fir Antike und Christentum Realencyclopadie des classischen Altertumswissenschaji Supplementurn Epigraphicum Graecum Theologisches Worterbuch zum Neuen Testament ZeitschrifC fir die neutestamentliche WissenschaJ Zeitschrlji fir Papyrologie und Epigraphik
All references to the text of the AJ are to the edition by Junod and Kaestli, and all translations, if not otherwise indicated, are from NTA I1 (by K. Schaferdiek).
I. The Apocryphal Acts as martyrdom texts: the case of the Acts of Andrew A. HILHORST
Christianity may have proclaimed a message of peace, but it met with violence right from the beginning. Its founder died on the cross, Peter and Paul were executed as well, and the subsequent period saw so many deaths for the sake of the faith that it has rightly been called the age of the martyrs. Small wonder, then, that so many narratives about the early Christians end in an execution. This is not only so in the Acts of the Martyrs, but occurs just as often in the Apocryphal Acts of Apostles (AAA), with the notable exception of the Acts of John. It might have been expected, therefore, that both bodies of texts should have been associated with each other. In reality, they are nearly always kept apart, both in ancient and modern scholarship. Is there a good reason for this? Perhaps we can find an answer to this question by making a comparison between both genres. We might even think that there is a terminological indication that they belong together, since both of them are called Acts. This, however, would be misleading. In the Acts of Apostles, 'Acts' S whereas represents the Greek term npctg~tq,' C O ~ S ~ ~ C U O Udeeds','
1 See A. Wikenhauser, Die Apostelgeschichte und ihr Geschichtswert (Miinster, 1921) 95-8. The ,4,4,4 is customarily connected with the socalled praxeis literature (cf. ib. 95, 103-4, 106-7), but the differences are rather strong. Moreover, no complete specimen of praxeis literature has survived; Wikenhauser 98-100 can only mention the fragmentary remains ~~ by Callisthenes (+ 330 B.C.; F. Jacoby, of the l l p & c ~'Ak~cdrvGpov Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, 124 F 14) and Sosylus's 'AvvCpov IIpdrc~tq(zk 200 B.C.; ibidem, 176 F 1 ) .
2
A. HILHORST
in the Acts of the Martyrs 'Acts' refers to the trial records on which at least some of the Acts of the Martyrs were based.* In Latin there is no ambiguity. IIpctc~tqis translated by the fourth declension plural actus, whereas the court records are designated by the second declension plural act^.^ Only in English and other modem languages actus and acta coincide as 'Acts'. The Acts of the Martyrs
Turning now to the problem, we begin our discussion by sketching the martyrdom literature in its early stage and in its later development. Our point of departure will be the picture drawn by one of the great masters in the field, the Bollandist scholar Hippolyte Delehaye, in his Les Passions des martyrs et les genres littkraires, which appeared in 1921 and was republished in a revised version in 1961, a quarter of a century after his death. His treatment may be summarized as follows. The martyrdom literature consists of an account of the trial and execution of Christians who refuse to honour the gods of the Empire. Two forms may be discerned: the acta, which contain mainly the interrogation by the judge, and the martyrium or passio, which narrates the events from the arrest up to the death of the martyr. The earliest martyrdom texts stem from the second and third centuries and are evidently written under the fresh impression of the facts. The narrative is unadorned and free from fancifbl elements. The judge is often a gentleman, who reluctantly ends by
2 See H. Leclercq, 'Actes des martyrs', in Dictionnaire d'arche'ologie chre'tienne et de liturgie I 1 (Paris, 1907) 373-446, esp. 373-85; H. Delehaye, Les passions des martyrs et les genres littkraires (Brussels, 1966') 125-31; G. Lanata, Gli atti dei martiri come documenti processuali (Milan, 1973) 6-7; G.A. Bisbee, Pre-Decian Acts of Martyrs and Commentarii (Philadelphia, 1988) 33-4; G.W. Bowersock, Martyrdom & Rome (Cambridge, 1995) 37-8. 3 Cf. Thesaurus Linguae Latinae I (Leipzig, 1900) 1409. For the canonical Acts of the Apostles both actus and acta have been used, cf. Wikenhauser, Apostelgeschichte, 104.
APOCRYPHAL ACTS AS MARTYRDOM TEXTS
3
passing sentence of death on the martyr just because the latter will not accept a compromise. Each text has its individuality, and the account can usually be checked against independent sources. Therefore the value of these early martyrdoms or, to use the expression of Delehaye, historical Passions, 'passions historiques', is priceless. Their number is limited; among the most famous are the Martyrdom of Polycarp, the Martyrdom of Pionius, the Acts of the Scillitan Martyrs, the Acts of Justin, the Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas, and the Letter of the Churches of Lyons and Vienne. After the acceptance of the Church by the Roman Empire the production of texts continues, but their physiognomy changes. The individual features have made way for ready-made elements. Names, places, and chronology are often fictitious; miracles play a predominant role; the martyr grows into a superhuman character, the judge into a monster. Circumstances do, of course, account for this development. Since the author had to rely on distant memories, on meagre and uncertain information, there was nothing left for him but to fall back on the well-known commonplaces. Delehaye calls these late martyrdoms the epic Passions, 'passions Cpiques', since they follow the procedures of epic poetry, minus, he adds maliciously, the metrical form, the poetic art and the talent to realise such a magnificent idea.4
Apocryphal Acts of Apostles as martyrdom texts: the Acts of Andrew as an example As already mentioned, in most of the AAA the apostle ends in dying a martyr's death. Therefore it should be possible to give these stories their place in the panorama shown us by Delehaye. Delehaye himself, however, hardly takes the AAA into consider-
4 Delehaye, Passions, 173. For a succinct survey cf. R. Aigrain, L'hagiographie. Ses sources, ses mbthodes, son histoire ([Paris], 1953) 132-55; A.A.R. Bastiaensen et al., Atti e passioni dei martiri ([Milano], 1987) XXVIII-XXX.
4
A. HILHORST
ation; so we are left here to our own devices. My approach will be to use the Acts of Andrew (AA) as a testcase. Although it will not be attempted here, it would not be difficult to show that the results are also valid for the other early AAA. The AA have not been preserved in their entirety. In addition to Greek fragments and a little piece in Coptic we have rewritten parts of the work in Greek and Armenian and an extensive Latin summary of the entire work, made in the late sixth century by Gregory of Tours. In 1982 the existing material was enriched by the editio princeps of a substantial part of the Greek text, narrating the events directly preceding the final part, which we already had.5 All of the important text-forms appeared in a new critical edition by Jean-Marc Prieur in 1989.6 A year later, Dennis Ronald MacDonald published his edition of the texts, in which he incorporated the Acts of Andrew and Matthias in the City of the Cannibals.' In doing so he followed the example of Gregory of Tours in the summary mentioned above.8 Since, however, the atmosphere in the Acts of Andrew and Matthias is so different from that of the other Andrew stories, I cannot believe they were once part of the AA; so they shall not be included here for consideration. Judging from Gregory's abridged version, the AA proper
5 0. As~opdt~qq, 'T6 & V E K ~ O T O pap~15pto TO^ & ~ C O D T ~ ~ - O'AvGpEU a', Acts of the Second International Congress of Peloponnesian Studies, Patrae, 25-31 May 1980 I = Peloponnesiaca. Journal of the Society of Peloponnesian Studies, Suppl. 8 (Athens, 1981-82) 325-52. 6 J.-M. Prieur, Acta Andreae (Turnhout, 1989) with an extensive bibliography on pp. XV-XXVI. 7 D.R. MacDonald, The Acts of Andrew and The Acts of Andrew and Matthias in the City of the Cannibals (Atlanta, 1990). His translation of the Acts of Andrew and the Acts ofAndrew and Matthias is reprinted in J.K. Elliott, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993) 245-67, 283302. Another recent translation is by W. Schneemelcher, NTA 11, 101-51 (translated from Schneemelcher's Neutestamentliche Apolayphen 11, Tiibingen 1 9 8 9 ~although ) he omits the Acts of Andrew and Matthias. 8 Gregory of Tours, Andr. 1 . I use the edition by M. Bonnet (Hannover, 1885), as reprinted in Prieur, Acta Andreae 11, 555-65 1 .
APOCRYPHAL ACTS AS MARTYRDOM TEXTS
5
originally consisted of two parts, first Andrew's wanderings from Amasea in Cappadocia to Patras in the Peloponnesus, and second, his stay at Patras and other towns in Achaia. During the second part the apostle comes into conflict with the authorities twice. Both times he is sentenced to death, but only the second time is the sentence executed. This circumstance, and the fact that only the second account is available in Greek, the original language of the Acts, invite us to base our investigation on the latter a c c ~ u n t . ~ This account may be summarized as follows. During his stay in Patras, Andrew converts a number of people. One of these is Maximilla, the wife of the proconsul Aegeates. When the latter comes home after a long journey, he is faced with his wife's unwillingness to have any further sexual intercourse with him. Aegeates implores her to reconsider her decision, but fails to win her back. A servant informs him that Andrew has inspired her new attitude, whereupon he imprisons the apostle. Andrew addresses his fellow prisoners, is visited surreptitiously by Maximilla, and is eventually sentenced to death by Aegeates. He is then flogged and bound to the cross. In this position he addresses the crowd for three days and nights in succession. The crowd protests against the execution to Aegeates, who is prepared to release Andrew. Now, however, it is Andrew's turn to protest: his very execution means his liberation. After a last prayer he dies on the cross. Maximilla remains firm; Aegeates takes his own life in despair. Features of the epic Passions in the Acfs of Andrew
This summary already betrays a conspicuous trait of the Andrew story, namely that it is not just a martyrdom story, but shows a wealth of resemblances with the later martyrological texts, the epic Passions of the time after the persecutions. No less than six cha-
1.e. Greek Acts of Andrew, ed. Prieur, Acta Andreae 11, 442-549. Of the 65 chapters of this text, the first 32 are those only available since 1982, cf. n. 5.
9
6
A. HILHORST
racteristic features may be discerned.'' First, the martyr enjoys help from heaven which turns him into a superhuman figure. Those having seen him at work are said to fear him 'like some god' (3)," notwithstanding his unsightly appearance (26). His divine power shows itself in a number of ways: - He has the gift of clairvoyance (8, 19, 29, 45). - He heals the sick (2, 5, 25), including the already mentioned Maximilla (2, 26); this healing consists of a successful confrontation with a demon. He even raises the dead (25). When danger threatens, the brethren become invisible at his prayer (13). - Miracles make clear that God is with him. The gate of the prison where Andrew is being detained opens spontaneously for Maximilla's lady-companion who wants to visit him (28-9). The Lord himself, disguised as Andrew, brings Maximilla to the prison where Andrew is being kept (46). - Physical vexations do not harm him. He smiles while hanging on the cross ( 5 9 , and after three days and nights on the cross he is unbroken (59). Second, the martyr delivers long speeches: to Maximilla and her brother-in-law in prison (37-42), to the brethren in prison (4750), a night at a stretch (51),12 and even three days and nights while bound at the cross (56-8). Of course this preaching is successful, except with those - to use the author's term - whose father is the devil (21, 40). Third, Andrew as well as the other characters of the story have no individuality, but are stereotypes. Andrew, Maximilla, and her brother-in-law Stratocles are good without reserve, even if there are degrees in superiority. For example, Andrew is always in control of the situation, whereas Maximilla knows fear, as is
10 For examples in the 'epic Passions' see Delehaye, Passions, ch. 111. 11 The figures between brackets indicate the chapters in Prieur, Acta Andreae, and MacDonald, Acts ofAndrew. 12 The martyr's speeches in prison can be compared to the Martyrdom of Pionius 12-4, although in the latter there is no suggestion of the
speech being either interminable or at night.
APOCRYPHAL ACTS AS MARTYRDOM TEXTS
7
apparent from the scene in which she is together with Andrew and the brethren at the praetorium. Hearing that her husband is arriving, who is supposed to know nothing of the gathering, she panicks, but Andrew calms her down and organizes a safe retreat for the company (13). Stratocles is an honest brother who hangs on the apostle's lips, but he is somewhat impetuous (in 2 he nearly committed suicide, although this was before his conversion, because a beloved slave of his was dying) and slow-witted (in 52-3 he still works hard for the release of crucified Andrew, entirely against the latter's wish). The proconsul, Aegeates, Maximilla's husband, is unconvertible and a brute. He is a glutton (46), and every night he is drunk (18). After being deceived by Maximilla's female slave Euclia he 'cut out Euclia's tongue, mutilated her, and ordered her thrown outside. She stayed there without food for several days before she became food for the dogs.' (22, trans. MacDonald). When sentencing Andrew he acts as a tyrant: no interrogation is held, but by abuse and sarcasm he makes clear to Andrew that he will punish him properly (26). Judicial correctness means so little to him that he tries to win his wife over by promising to cancel Andrew's execution if she meets his marital wishes (36). Yet Aegeates is the only character with a touch of individuality, and he tends to captivate the modem reader by his desperate attempts to win back Maximilla, his wife, who has embraced the ideal of chastity (22-4, 36). Fourth, there is a supreme indifference to historical facts. No proconsul resided at all in the city of Patras. All names except Andrew's are fictitious." In the early Acts of the Martyrs pains are taken to formulate the death sentence decently; here, however, we look in vain for that (cf. 26-7). Fifth, there are numerous improbabilities. In addition to those already mentioned, the following example is telling. Maximilla, who has decided to live in continence, makes her female slave Euclia take her place in the conjugal bed for eight months every
13
Cf. Prieur, Acta Andreae I, 79.
8
A. HILHORST
night without the husband being aware of the interchange (178).14 Sixth, the terms used to designate the characters are those of the epic Passions. Andrew is called 'the blessed one' (6 p a ~ 6 1 ptoq) time and again; likewise Maximilla is more than once fl p a ~ a p i r 1 5 . 'Conversely ~ no term of abuse is too strong to characterize Aegeates. In a prayer to Jesus Christ, Andrew calls him 'that insolent and hostile snake' (16), and to Maximilla he declares that his father is the devil, the serpent (40). Her brother-in-law calls him 'Aegeates the rogue' (52), and the narrator himself has the term 'impious' for him (51). It can therefore be seen that there is a remarkable similarity between the AA and the martyrological literature of the post-persecution period. How can we account for this? The easiest explanation would be that the AA are likewise a product of the fourth or fifth century. That, however, is simply not the case. The Coptic Utrecht fragment dates back to the fourth century, which enables us to date the Greek text to the beginning of that century at the latest. Moreover, Eusebius mentions them in his Church History (3.25.6), of which the first edition was written approximately in the tirst decade of the fourth century. This presupposes at least a third century date for the AA. It is therefore best to adhere to the general opinion that the AA were written in the second half of the second century, in the period of the persecutions.16 Earlier discussions
As I remarked before, Delehaye in his standard work on the martyrological literature hardly deals with the AAA. The justification for this is given in the following curious statement:
14 A characteristic transformation of the motif 'Wife has maidservant impersonate her while she goed to her lover', on which cf. S. Thompson, Motif-Index of Folk-Literature IV (Copenhagen, 1 9572) no. K1843.4. 15 Cf. the index of words in Prieur, Acta Andreae 11, 782 s.vv. 16 For this dating, Prieur, Acta Andreae I, 412-4.
APOCRYPHAL ACTS AS MARTYRDOM TEXTS
9
Bien que constituant un genre nettement dCfini, les Actes apocryphes des ap6tres seront cette fois laisses de cGtC, et nous n'y toucherons qu'en passant. I1 n'en resultera aucune lacune importante dans nos recherches. Cette littkrature, dont les origines remontent trbs haut, a suivi des voies indkpendantes, son influence sur les Actes des martyrs se constate relativement assez tard et a Cte exagerke." There are several points here on which we should have liked to hear more: the definition of the genre, its early origins, the independent ways it followed, the starting point of its influence on the Acts of the Martyrs, the scholars who exaggerated its influence. But what especially stands out is that the author fails to respond to the fact that the AAA nearly always end in martyrdom. To that we cannot object that the martyrdom is only the final phase of a story that encompasses much more events, for he does include quite a few texts which have the same feature, such as the Vita Cypriani, the panegyrics of the fourth-century Church Fathers, the hagiographical novels and other texts." The phrase 'this time' arouses the hope that the author makes up for his omission in other publications, but as far as I know he nowhere deals with the AAA to any extent. This may be no accident. As a Bollandist scholar, Delehaye was interested in reliable information about the saints; in this respect the apocryphal Acts had precious little to offer. Also the peculiar morality and the absence of the institutional element had little to attract him. A student of hagiography such as Delehaye might be expected
17 Delehaye, Passions, 12. The only places where Delehaye touches upon the AAA as a genre are 8, 9, 12, 226. Individual Acts mentioned are those of John (46), Thecla (101, 188 n.2, 223, 277-8), Andrew and Matthias, Bartholomew, and Thomas (all of them 255 n.6). M. Van Uytfanghe unfortunately saw no opportunity to discuss the apocryphal Acts in his stimulating essay 'L'hagiographie: un ((genre)) chrktien ou antique tardif?', Analecta Bollandiana 111 (1993) 135-88, cf. ib. 179, although in a footnote he points out that the apocryphal Gospels and the AAA have much in common with the epic Passions. 18 Delehaye, Passions, 69-77 (Vita Cypriani), 141-69 (panegyrics), 227-30 (novels).
10
A. HILHORST
to include the AAA in his discussions, since they show many of the features he regards as typical of hagiography, and moreover are as early as the Acts of the Martyrs. One cannot, however, with the same right ask a scholar of apocryphal literature to give his opinion on the Acts of the Martyrs, because he may well argue that they are not of his province. Nevertheless, Wilhelm Schneemelcher in the second volume of his New Testament Apocrypha makes the following observation. The central position of the apostle in the AAA makes these works a starting-point for the later hagiographical literature, which set in on a grand scale with the rise of the veneration of the saints. The AGG [apocryphal Acts of Apostles] undoubtedly influenced this literature, especially since individual parts (e.g. martyrdoms) were, evidently at an early date, lifted out of the original AGG and circulated separately. It is certainly not altogether easy, but probably rewarding, to follow up the question of when and how the process of transition from the AGG to the legends of the saints came about.Ig Unfortunately, this does not help us much further. Schneemelcher acknowledges influence of the AAA on the martyrdom texts but the picture he offers is inaccurate. Martyrdoms separated fiom the AAA did not stimulate the hagiographical literature, but it is the other way round: the early martyrdom texts, that is, the Acts of the Martyrs, inspired the separation of the martyrdom sections fiom the larger works. And it is a half truth at best to suggest that the AAA underwent a 'transition' to the Legends of the Saints, since the AAA had their own posterity: AAA were produced far into Byzantine times. Possible explanations
So once more we conclude that we are left to our own devices. To state our problem once again: how do we account for the relation-
19 Schneemelcher, NTA 11, 76 (German original 11, 72).
APOCRYPHAL ACTS AS MARTYRDOM TEXTS
11
ship between the AAA and the martyrological literature, especially since the martyrdom sections of the AAA the second and third century show striking similarities not with the simultaneous Acts of the Martyrs, but with their successors, the fourth- and fifthcentury epic Passions? I can imagine three possible explanations. First of all, we could argue that elements thought to be typical of the epic Passions already occur in the historical ones. Of course it has to be acknowledged that the latter texts may have undergone additions and modifications in the course of their transmission, but there are details even in the original text-forms which we would tend to describe as unhistorical. The miraculous element especially comes to mind. However, if to us what is contrary to the laws of nature is incredible, the pre-scientific world view of antiquity knew of no strict exclusion of the miraculous. Here we cannot apply modem standards. A case in point is the sixteenth chapter of the Martyrdom of Polycavp, which describes Polycarp's death. Since the burning stake fails to kill Polycarp, he is stabbed to death. Thereupon 'there came out a dove and such a quantity of blood that the flames were extinguished, and even the crowd marvelled that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect' (trans. Musurillo). The dove is probably a later interpolation; it is absent from the text-form transmitted in Eusebius's Church History 4.15.20 But the blood is a different matter. A natural event such as a stream of blood, which may be supposed to check the fire, is explained as a miracle under the influence of the emotional situation. Not the miracle as such, as Delehaye aptly remarks, but its excessive frequency and stereotypy discredits a text?' And this is what distinguishes the apocryphal stories about apostles together with the epic Passions from the early Acts of the Martyrs. So this explanation does not apply.
20 Cf. B. Dehandschutter, Martyrium Polycarpi. Een literair-kritische studie (Louvain, 1979) 99-101 (both text-forms side by side on p. 124);
Dehandschutter, 'The Martyrium Polycarpi: a Century of Research', ANRW I1 27.1 (Berlin and New York, 1993) 485-522, esp. 491, 493, 497. 21 Delehaye, Passions, 37.
12
A. HILHORST
Next we could consider the possibility of the AAA being composed in a closed milieu, in which the authors, unaware of the real state of affairs during the persecutions, could dream up fanciful stories about superior apostles killed by brutal magistrates. The stories may indeed be unrealistic, but it is hard to believe that their authors lived in isolation. Christianity existed in many forms in those days. There were, amongst others, Judaeo-Christians, Gnostic Christians, Marcionites, Montanists and those belonging to the main stream of Christianity. These groups had all sorts of contacts with each other. The martyr Pionius, who proudly declares that he is 'a presbyter of the Catholic Church' (Mart. Pion. 19.5), has the Montanist Eutychianus (11.2) and the Marcionite Metrodorus (21.5) as his fellow martyrs. And to return to the AAA, these were known outside the circles in which they were written, as we can document from such writers as Tertullian (De baptism0 17) and Eusebius (Church History 3.25.6), and it would be strange if the contacts were not mutual. We simply have to recognize that the M A came into being in a society in which the persecution of the Christians was a common phenomenon. So this explanation helps us no further. Perhaps then we should say that the apostles were beings of a different order than the martyrs. Many facts, to be sure, militate against this view. Peter and Paul are venerated as martyrs in Rome together with other martyrs. The introduction of the Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas declares the recent acts of faith to be as important as those of ancient, that is of New Testament times. The succession lists of bishops join the bishops of the later periods with their predecessors up to the apostles.22 Still we should not give up this explanation too soon. To begin with, an idealization of the figures of the apostles sets in very early, namely in the canonical Acts of the Apostles. Accounts like those of the common property of the brethren in Jerusalem, the Apostolic Council, Paul's speech before the Areopagus, and his stay in Rome no doubt stylize reality. Even wonder-working is present, including punishment miracles like those in the story of 22
Cf. L. Koep, 'Bischofsliste', RAC 2 (1954) 407-15.
APOCRYPHAL ACTS AS MARTYRDOM TEXTS
13
Ananias and Sapphira (5) and Elymas (13.1 1). Adversaries of Paul's are portrayed in a less than favourable way; thus Paul has no scruples to address the same Elymas by the words: 'You utter fraud, you impostor, you son of the devil, you enemy of all true religion' (13.1 1, trans. Jerusalem Bible). True, this denigratory stance is not taken towards the Roman authorities and Paul's death as a martyr is passed over in silence, but this may well be a stylizing in its own right, meant to show to the Greco-Roman upperclass how respectable the new religion was. Furthermore, this explanation can give us more insight if we shift our attention to the Acts of the Martyrs and state with a variant of the formula just used that the martyrs were beings of a different order than the apostles. Of course the early martyrdom texts portray them with admiration. However, they are not yet the canonized saints of the later epic Passions and, indeed, of the AAA. They are contemporaries, fellow men, acquaintances of those who described their steadfastness. No fantasy was needed, for one knew the facts, which were impressive enough. Conclusion
Thus we reach the following conclusion. The authors who described the deeds of the apostles did not personally know them and had only little factual information about them. They therefore tended to idealize them and to depict them as beings of an extraordinary or even superhuman stature. This process announces itself in the canonical Acts of the Apostles and is in full vigour in the AAA. By contrast, the martyrs were described in records of facts. Only gradually, as their cult developed, did they acquire a status comparable with that of the apostles. Only then were they portrayed, like the apostles in the AAA before them, as invincible men of God. In this light we can also explain a phenomenon which remains strange in Delehaye's theory, namely the updating of early Acts of the Martyrs. For example, we have no less than three versions of the Acts of Justin. The oldest one offers a terse description of the trial, in the later one the judge Rusticus, the urban prefect of
Rome, lets slip a designation of the accused as 'miserable fellow', xav&eht&,and in the latest version he is simply 'a terrible man, a plague, and filled with all impiety'. We know Rusticus from other sources. He is a gentleman to the core, a prominent Stoic philosopher and teacher of Marcus Aurelius. Why then this distortion of the facts? Evidently because they did no longer satisfy the needs of the devotees, who just wanted to see their hero as a superman. Therefore, in the end we cannot but contradict Delehaye. The typical features we observe in the epic Passions do not make their appearance only in the fourth and fifth centuries: they abound in the AAA composed in the second and third centuries. Thus where literary history is concerned, these pieces form an organic part of the martyrdom literature, and it is rather the early Acts of the Martyrs, with their sober style and their respect for facts, that turn out to be the exceptions.
11. Miracle stories in the Acts of John
JANOS BOLYKI
Mass evangelisations are advertised by placards in the streets. Having done her shopping, an old woman is going home. She carries heavy bags in both her hands. She does not even notice the first three placards; they are just the same as all the other bills. 'They advertise something' - she says to herself. At the fourth placard she remembers she has seen something similar already. She stops in front of the fifth, puts down her shopping bags and puts on her glasses. 'Do you want to be healed?' - asks the inscription on the poster. 'Perhaps they advertise some new medicine ...' - she thinks. But no... It is something else. She reads the sixth poster to the end. Now she understands. She is invited to a religious meeting. Many things are promised to her if she attends. It is all too beautiful. But is it true?' She notices the seventh placard just when it is being put on. A thin man stands on the ladder. He smokes a pipe while working with the bills. 'Excuse me, sir' - says the elderly lady. 'Just wanted to ask: are all these nice promises true?' The man looks down at her and says with a little superiority: 'These posters promise all kinds of miracles. You have to go and see it for yourself. There you will learn how much truth there is in them!' Toward the end of the 2nd century A.D. - due to some lack in 1 G. Theissen, Urchristliche Wundergeschichten. Ein Beitrag zur formengeschichtlichen Erforschung der synoptischen Evangelien (Giitersloh, 19875) 260 draws a parallel between the early Christian miracle
stories and the evangelisation placards of today and he affirms that both aim at drawing the attention of people.
technological development - people were not able to put up seven posters, say, on the wall of the theatre in Ephesus. Instead, passersby were given a little codex with seven miracle stories of the apostle John, related to the evangelisation crusade of the apostle. Those who found it interesting, went along to the meeting of the Christians to see for themselves how much truth there was in the stories. We turn to these seven stories of the Acts of John in this contribution. Miracle stories within the composition of the AJ
We can find seven miracle stories in the AJ,* of which the order is not accidental but serves the gradual progress of the plot. It . ~ miracles are displays the progress of the mission in E p h e ~ u s The as follows. The miracles themselves: I.
Cc.19-25: Lycomedes and Cleopatra;
11.
Cc.30-3: Healing of the old Women;
The miracles in the context of the 'conquering' of Ephesus John finds accommodation which becomes the basis for the missionary work John finds publicity to his preaching
111.
Cc.37-45: Destruction of the temple of Artemis;
John challenges the whole city to make a decision
IV.
Cc.46-7: Raising of the Priest of the temple of Artemis;
From resurrection of the body to a spiritual resurrection
V.
Cc.48-54: Conversion of a Parricide;
The effect of the mission reaches the surroundings of the city
There are seven miracles in the canonical Gospel of John. We think that the role of the miracles is to show the progress of the mission the apostle carried out in the city. This progress may cover the period from the founding of the congregation to the strengthening of it.
2 3
MIRACLE STORIES
VI.
Cc.60-1: The Obedient Bugs;
VII. Cc.63-86: Drusiana and the Four Men;
17
Holiness and humour in a short story Ethical standards of a strong congregation
A. The first miracle: Lycomedes and Cleopatra (19-25) The main characters of the miracle are: Lycomedes, his wife, and the apostle John. We read about the healing of a woman who had been lying paralysed for seven days and about the raising of a semi-dead (perhaps dead?, cf. the different diagnosis in 21.9 and 23.1 8).4 These two events characterise the miracle as a sub-genre of therapy and anastasis, respectively. The following are the keywords in the story: to lament, to cry out, to fall, to arise, to raise, to trust, to disbelieve. In c.19 we find the exposition. The social milieu is made up by the upper class of the city. Lycomedes is one of the chief authorities of the city (strategos) and is described as a wealthy man.' He and his wife have a large house with several bedrooms and a spacious hall that can accommodate many people. They can easily receive John and his company to stay in their home. When John approaches the city of Ephesus, Lycomedes falls to John's knees as Jairus, the leader of the synagogue, fell to Jesus' knees (Mk 5.22). He presents his request as did the centurion in Capernaum (Lk 7.1-10). We learn that Lycomedes' wife has been lying paralysed for seven days. In ancient times this was the upper limit beyond which there was no hope to be cured. Lycomedes had had a vision in which he understood that John would cure his wife. A heavenly voice urged Lycomedes to leave behind the thoughts that were fighting against him (strateuomene, a word related to the rank of Lycomedes). He was to hurry to John. C.20 narrates the words of Lycomedes. First he wants to evoke sympathy on the side of John concerning the paralysed v, 4 7~oA.b~ ~ J R V O V and v s v ~ ~ p o p ~ f v orespectively. 5 For the strategos see Jan Bremmer, this volume, 39.
Cleopatra. Then he starts to complain: although he is without sin, nevertheless the goddess Justice has burdened him severely. He has lost his confidence and rebelled against providence; we can find a similar scene in C h a r i t ~ n . ~ In c.21 the apostle turns first to the lamenting husband. He says that someone who had seen an appearance should not have such mistrust. But his words have no effect, because Lycomedes falls upon the ground. Now even John says a prayer with tears, because he has to face two temptations - two (semi?-)dead persons lying in front of him. The enemy will take advantage of this situation - not necessarily Satan, but those who oppose the mission. C.22 tells us that 'the city of Ephesus' ran together to the house of Lycomedes. They thought the couple had died. John prays to Christ. He quotes Matt 7.7: 'Ask, and it shall be given to you Y. He may indirectly refer also to Acts 3.20 when he says that 'Now is the time of refreshment...', the loss of which had been lamented over by Lycomedes previously. In c.23 we learn that John touches the face of Cleopatra just as Jesus touched the sick (e.g. Mk 1.41). This is one way of conveying healing powers. Nevertheless the word spoken by the apostle is more important than the movement of touching. We learn that the miracle is performed in order not to give place for the mockery of the unbelieving people. In other words: everything happens for furthering the mission. Cleopatra rises on account of the word of John. The eye-witnesses ('the city of the Ephesians' as the choir of the crowd) are amazed just as the crowds who witnessed Jesus' healing miracles.' C.24 presents us with lyrical moments. Cleopatra laments over her dead husband who died because of pain over her death. John says a short and beautiful prayer: 'Lord Jesus Christ, thou seest (her) distress...'. We are moved by the death-wish of the wife who does not want to stay alive without her husband. John - taking Cleopatra's hand - steps to the couch on which Lycomedes lay. 6 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 165113. 7
Theissen, Urchristliche Wundergeschichten, 79.
MIRACLE STORIES
19
John praises God, because 'to the dead he gives (back) the dead' which means that by raising the dead he revives also those who are dead in their unbelief. John prays for the resurrection of Lycomedes by referring to the relatives of the family and to the crowd. Lycomedes rises and wants to worship John (by kissing his feet). But the apostle refuses: 'It is not my feet, man, that you should kiss, but those of God ...' In c.25 the resurrected couple ask John to stay with them. With some hesitation John accepts the invitation, although some members of his company look for accommodation elsewhere. We can observe the following literary-theological points in this miracle story: (a) The border between death (in the 20th century sense of physical death) and swoon or even paralysis becomes indistinct. That is why therapy and apostasis cannot be separated. There is an underlying view according to which every illness is the beginning of death after all; on the other hand, there is no status of death out of which there would not be a way out: healing or even rising up. (b) It is faith that evokes the miracle, but miracles also strengthen one's faith. (c) The man of God heals through the medium of prayer above all. (d) One of the main aspects of a miraculous healing is mission: to raise the faith of the crowd. (e) It is fair that those who benefit from the apostolic miracle should contribute to the success of the mission by offering hospitality to the apostle and his companions. (0 In comparison to the miracle stories in the canonical Gospels it is a surprising phenomenon that John passes on the ability of resurrecting to Cleopatra. John 'teaches her' how to raise her husband. This is unknown in the Gospels. It does not occur in the canonical Acts either. In Acts the apostles heal with the power of Jesus, but Jesus himself is not present there in his physical body. In our story John is present even when the second miracle is performed by the woman who had been cured by the apostle (24.19). In this way the missionary work is extended by the inauguration of new co-workers.
JANOS
20
BOLYKI
B. The second miracle: the healing of the old women (30-2 and 37.1-2) The full extent of the story would cover cc.30-7, but this includes long discussions (e.g. 33-6). That is why we treat as a miracle story only cc.30-2 and 37.1-2. The genre of this story cannot be categorized among the miracle stories in the New Testament. I call it a miracle of demonstrati~n.~ 'Demonstration' is a specific subgenre of the miracles. Its task is to prove the power of the gospel. It demonstrates the truth of the missionary preaching. In our case it provides the framework of the preaching: at the beginning it invites attention; at the end it proves the expectations. In the beginning of the story (30) John commands that women over 60 years of age should be catered for in the whole city. It appears that there are only four among them who are healthy; the rest are ill. John plans to gather them in the theatre by the following day. He wants to heal them in order to evoke faith in some. On the following day we find the good-willing proconsul in the theatre (3 1). However, also Andronicus, a strategos, is there. He mocks John and presents conditions for John's entering the theatre. John commands that all old women should be brought into the theatre (32). Some are brought on beds; some are even asleep. The whole city runs together (cf. Acts of the Apostles 19.40b). The text tells us briefly that after the missionary sermon - John cured every illness by the power of God (37). It seems probable that some texts are missing that would have coloured the miracle. From a theological point of view it stands out that the miracle is not only in connection with the missionary preaching - as in the previous story -, but also with deacony. When John learns that the congregation does not look after the old, ill women, he charges the city with slackness (30.9). The Christians have been led astray by the devil so that they were irresponsible toward the needy (30.1 1). It seems, therefore, that one aspect of the miracle is to strengthen
-
8 This classification is not the same as the one used by Theissen, Wundergeschichten, 71-2, 75-6, when he refers to the 'demonstration' of a miracle in the context of therapy, exorcism and the miracles of gifts.
MIRACLE STORIES
21
diacony. The word of Jesus tells John that the miracle will result in missionary success (30.13-7). The theatre assures great publicity for the miracle. It is not by accident that the place is called 'theatre' (theatron) and from the same root thea is used in the sense of 'play', 'spectacle' (cf. 60-1 for the use of technical terms of the theatre). The result of the miracle in front of a large audience is the boldness of the congregation members, of the preachers. C. The third miracle: the destruction of !he temple of Artemis (3745)
The genre of this miracle can be classified as 'demonstrative', too. It serves to prove that the God of John is right in contrast to the pagan gods. One can even claim that it has a character of judgment (cf. the scene of Elijah and the Baal priests in 1 Kings 18). The judgment-character is supported by the chiastic structure: A/ John is called from Ephesus to Smyrna, but he stays for the sake of the conversion of the Ephesians B/ The Ephesians want to kill John in the temple of Artemis C/ John threatens them with judgment from God (sermon) Dl John asks God to drive away the idol-demon (prayer) XI The judgment occurs (half of the temple collapses and the priest dies); the people cry for mercy to the God of John D'1 John thanks God for the miracle (prayer) C'I The people confess their faith in the God of John (sermon) By/ The people ask for the help of John; they want him to stay A'/ John stays on the request of the Ephesians. The chiastic structure is perfect: in the centre stands the judgment as a turning point. Before and after the judgment we find a prayer (asking and thanking respectively). Before the first prayer and after the second prayer there is a sermon and confession respectively. Three points before the centre the people turn against John and three points after the centre they turn against the cult in the
temple. The beginning and ending scene is about the staying of John in Ephesus: first, in order to achieve their conversion; second, because they have been converted. As regards the theological content of this miracle, at a superficial level it may seem to be a miracle of punishment. Indeed, one might ask: Do the collapsing of the temple and the death of the priest not point to punishment from God? We have to answer, however, that the priest is raised in the next miracle. Therefore, it is not the punishment that dominates, but the judgment coming from God (we refer once again to the similar scene in 1 Kings 18; we also note Acts 19 to be in the background of this story: the smiths of Ephesus cause a riot against an apostle, with the temple of Artemis playing a role in the scene there). In a prayer John says that the worshippers in the Artemis cult have been deceived. A demon stands behind the deception (41.68). The driving out of the demon is narrated parallel to the destruction of the temple. This implies a change in the pagan spirit, that is, the public opinion. Besides, the staying of John in Ephesus is emphasized. Although he is expected in Smyma, he has to stay in order to help the congregation stand firm in C h r i ~ t . ~
D. The fourth miracle: the raising of the priest of the temple of Artemis (46-7) The genre of this miracle could legitimately be called a semeion in the sense used in the canonical Gospel of John -, because the physical resurrection points beyond itself to the spiritual resurrection. The author plays with the verbs that express resurrection, b v i o r ~ p tand Bycipo, with an ambiguity in meaning that is familiar to us from John's Gospel."
9 E.g. b p h v E V EKE V kv rfj ' E ~ E O ~nW6 hV~ tE p ~ l v a45.2; p e p 6 v q ~ a ~ 6 x 6 ~ pou ~ ~ ~ 6( i j5OE@ 45.5; Bni csrsp~clvntrpcrv ~ a r a o r f i o w(to set them on solid rock) 45.9. 10 E. Richard, 'Expressions of Double Meaning and their Function in the Gospel of John', New Testament Studies 31 (1985) 96-112.
MIRACLE STORIES
23
If we examine the composition of the story we find the exposition in 46.1-4. In the worship service of the Christians there appears a pagan young man who is a relative of the priest of Artemis (whose death was narrated in the previous miracle). He brings with him the corpse of the priest, but leaves it outside. He attends the service with interest. Cc.46.5-23 narrates the conversion of the young man. John can see through the heart of the pagan man who is not occupied with his deceased relative, but with his own soul: he believes that if he turns to the Lord then John will raise his relative from the dead. The miracle of the raising of the dead occurs in 47.1-9. John empowers the converted young man to raise his own relative, the priest of Artemis, who is raised by the word of the young man. Finally, we find the conversion of the resurrected pagan priest in 47.10-6. John tells the priest that he is still not really alive, because he does not have eternal life yet. The pagan priest comes to faith and has eternal life. From all these we may gather the following theological and literary observations. First, we can see in the structure that the miracle of resurrection is located between two conversions. The direction leads us from the physical resurrection to a spiritual one. The theological point is clear: the spiritual resurrection is more precious than the physical one (cf. Jn 11). The centrality of the idea of the resurrection is not only aff~rmedby the frequency of the verbs (ttviozqpt and kyzipo occur seven times in this short story), but also by various beautiful apophthegms. Contrary to the classical New Testament form, as found in the Synoptics," apophthegms in the A J are not an answer to a provocative question. They rather resemble the sayings found in the Johannine dialogues. The following example may suffice: 'Now that you have risen, you are not really living, nor are you a partner and heir to the true life; will you belong to him by whose name and power you were raised? So now, believe, and you shall live for all eternity' (47.103). Second, at the beginning of the story we find interesting data concerning early Christian liturgy: the prophecy addressed to a
1 1 Ph. Vielhauer, Geschichte der urchristlichen Literafur (Berlin and New York, 1975) 298f.
person is preceded by an 'address' (hornilia), 'prayer' (euche), 'thanksgiving' (eucharistia) and the laying on of hands (cheirothesia). Third, in the context of the whole book, the previous miracles show a progress. Differing from them, this miracle presents the ideal state that is to be reached by every Christian. We feel a distinction between psychical and pneumatic Christians - the wording resembling that of the canonical Gospel of John.
~
E. The Jifih miracle: the conversion of a parricide (48-54)12 The genre of the story is a family drama rather than a traditional biblical miracle story. If we classify it as a miracle, then it is a resurrection miracle: the murdered father is raised; and this resurrection is followed by two conversions. Let us compare the structure of this miracle with that of the preceding one.
The raising of the priest: an old, dead priest; a young kinsman; corpse left outside the door; the dead priest raised; the conversion of two participants;
1
I I
1 I
I
The story of the parricide: an old, dead father the young man who murdered his father the killing happens outside the gates the murdered father raised the conversion of two participants.
The structure of the story is as follows. John meets the man who had killed his father (48). John prevents the parricide from killing his lover, her husband, and himself (49). John promises the young man that he shall raise his murdered father. The young man, in turn, promises to stay away from further killings (50). John prays for the old man. John raises him from the dead and leads him to faith (51-2). The young man cuts off 'his private parts'. He tells his lover that he had murdered his father because of her, but God has had mercy on him (53). John does not condemn the action of the young man, but tells him that the devil should not be fought
12 See also Jan Brernrner, this volume, 52f.
I
MlRACLE STORIES
25
against by destroying the member of the body that caused temptation; rather by resisting the thoughts that are 'the unseen springs through which every shameful emotion is stirred up' (54). The young man repents and joins John. One of the theological themes of the story is again the relationship between physical and spiritual resurrection. Once again we can see the theological truth expressed: the spiritual resurrection is better (more) than the physical one. In c.52 the father raised from the dead asks: 'I was released from a terrible life (in which) I suffered many grievous insults from my son, and his lack of affection, and you called me back, servant (lit. man) of the living God - for what purpose?' And John answered him: 'If you are arising to this same (life), you should rather be dead; but rouse yourself to a better (one)!' The story draws a sharp line between the spheres of Satan and God. The satanic sphere is characterised by the son's killing of his father and by his plan of further killings as well as of suicide. God's sphere is seen in Jesus' power: the lover and her husband are saved from being killed; the young man is saved from suicide; the father is raised from the dead; father and son are converted. As we have seen, John does not condemn the self-castration of the young man. This shows the anti-sexual, encratic tendency of the book. When John says referring to the castration of the young man that 'it is not those organs which are harmful to man, but the unseen springs', 54.7-8), his apophthegm expresses a compromise between two Christian ways of life: the encratic life and that lived in a family circle.
F. The sixth miracle: the obedient bugs (60-1) The previous story, that included murder and self-castration, was probably too dense for a contemporary reader (as it would be even for a reader today). A good writer needs something more relaxing. The sixth miracle belongs to the genre of entertaining. It describes itself as a light, short play (paignion, 60.3). The story is simple. C.60: John and his companions are on their way from Laodicea to Ephesus. On the first day they stay at
a 'lonely inn'. There was only one bed and even that was not made up. The story - narrated in the first person plural - tells us that the bed is offered to John. The rest sleep on the floor. They hear in the dark that John is troubled by the numerous bugs. Around midnight the apostle orders the bugs to leave and keep a distance 'from the servants of God'. He commands the bugs to behave themselves and 'to be quiet' (e~gnomonisate).'~The companions laugh at this (this is the only place of the book with humourlirony). They cannot see in the dark, but when they hear that John was able to fall asleep, they are happy, because the apostle can have a rest. C.61: In the morning the narrator and two other companions can see that the bugs gathered by the door of the room. The apostle is still asleep. When he awakes, he praises the bugs and lets them back to the bed. As a lesson, the apostle utters an apophthegm in the form of an antithetical parallelism. We can make four observations as regards the literary and theological characteristics. First, we may say that this miracle wants to make an effect through the power of humour. One can note concerning all the stories in the Bible where there is a dialogue between men and animals, that they are surrounded with humour or irony (e.g. Balaam's donkey; Jonah and the great fish). It is also characteristic that this is the only miracle in the A J which is not performed in front of outsiders with a missionary purpose, but inside the Christian community (and even there in an inner circle). Its aim is to teach a lesson which is embedded in a humorous scene. Secondly, the apostle - sleeping with a clear conscience - reminds us of Jesus sleeping in the boat (Matt 8.24). We can see self-irony on the side of the writer and the disciples. As a third observation we may refer to Bovon's view that the bugs are a symbol of bodily desires.I4 These stay away from the bed of the
13 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 24811.2 suggest the following translations:
'intelligent, bonsentiment, bienveillant'. 14 F. Bovon, 'Das Leben der Apostel: Biblische ijber~ieferun~enund apokryphe Erzahlungen', in his Lukas in neuer Sicht (Neukirchen Vluyn, 1985) 224f suggests that the bugs express the 'self-restriction of
MIRACLE STORIES
27
apostle. The story then would narrate the last temptation of the old servant. Although this is an interesting thought, it remains unconvincing. The apophthegm in the form of an antithetical parallelism seems to offer another lesson: the example of obedience (61.13-5). The bugs were obedient; the commitment of the believers for obedience toward God should supersede the obedience of the bugs. In John's words: 'This creature listened to a man's voice and kept to itself and was quiet and obedient; but we who hear the voice of God disobey his commandments and are irresponsible; how long will this go on?' In the text, the first two lines of the apophthegm correspond with one another; the other two are chiastic:
G. The seventh miracle: 'What is the meaning of this sight?' (Drusiana and the four men, 63-86) The title of the story in Schaferdiek is 'Drusiana and Callimachus'. It is true that Callimachus plays an important role, but not the only one in the story. Thus we prefer the title above because each of the four men in the story represents a specific type: Andronicus the Christian husband, who lives with his wife in a 'marriage a la Joseph' (i.e. without sexual intercourse); Callimachus the possessed lover, who would even violate the dead Drusiana, but who is converted through the miraculous punishments; Fortunatus the wicked steward, who cannot get converted, because he does not have the spark of God; and John the spiritual leader, who performs miracles.
the beloved disciple'. In his opinion several manuscripts call the bugs korides in the feminine gender; one could even translate 'girls'(korai). Junod & Kaestli, AI, differ from this view, because in their opinion one cannot tell the gender from the genitive plural in 60.7-8.
28
JANOS BOLYKI
The genre of the story differs from the categories of Theissen to such an extent that it seems unnecessary to try to harmonize them." We can only say that we find a resurrection and God's miracles of punishment in this story. However, the text itself helps us identify the genre. The apostle John asks in 73.13-4: 'What is the meaning of this sight (BEapa, 'drama')? There is a variant reading in the Venice manuscript, 71.2: 'strange drama' ({Evov BEapa), that is: 'a puzzle to be solved'. Let us accept, then, that the genre of the story is BEapa ('drama'), which awaits a solution. The following passages point to a theatrical character, too: 'the tragedy (dramatourgia) which he had plotted' (74.7) and 'the whole spectacle (theoria) of man's salvation' (77.2). If we accept this self-characterisation of the story, then we can see even more clearly the complementary characters of the previous story and of this one: a light, short play (paignion) - and an erotic-ascetic drama, full of deaths. It belongs to the question of genre to observe that we have only a part of the Drusiana story before us.I6 We hear about the anger of her husband - that he shut her in a sepulchre because she denied her obligations as a wife; about her miraculous escape; about the conversion of her husband, Andronicus - who knows her as his sister rather than as his wife from this time on, etc. If we put together all these details - leaving aside the other stories of A J - then we would have a real Drusiana novel. The structure of the story is as follows. Callimachus falls in love with Drusiana, the wife of Andronicus the strategos. The others warn him not even to think of these kinds of things (63). Callimachus sends an indecent offer to Drusiana. She falls ill and then dies in her sadness, because she fears she might have given reason to such sinful thoughts (64). The apostle John learns the details from the mourning husband, Andronicus (65-6). Here follows John's long warning (with many examples) about faith which is real only if it endures to the end (67-9). This warning does not belong directly to the miracle story. After this, Calli15 Theissen, Wundergeschichten, 82f. 16 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 264-5 note this in the critical apparatus.
MIRACLE STORIES
29
machus and Fortunatus, the steward of Andronicus, enter the sepulchre of Drusiana so that Callimachus may violate the dead body (70). As a punishment, Fortunatus is fatally bitten by a serpent which then winds itself round the feet of the semi-dead Callimachus (71). Early in the morning John, Andronicus and other Christians go to the sepulchre of Drusiana to eat bread (eucharistia), but they cannot find the key (72). By that time the closed doors of the sepulchre open automatically." An angel ('a handsome young man', the 'beautiful one') is waiting for them at the grave. He tells John to resurrect Drusiana. They find the semidead Callimachus and the dead Fortunatus (73). At the corpse of his wife, Andronicus comes to understand the preceding events. He asks John to resurrect Callimachus first (!) so that he may confess to them what has happened, and then to raise Drusiana (74). John raises Callimachus by driving away the serpent and by praying over him (75). Callimachus then tells the whole story. He adds that he heard an angelic voice which said to him: 'die that you may live!' Now he wants to believe in God (76). John says a prayer of thanksgiving for Callimachus's conversion and receives him into the congregation (77-8). On the request of Andronicus, John prays for the resurrection of Drusiana. John raises her by his word: 'Drusiana, arise!' (79-80). Then Drusiana asks John to resurrect Fortunatus, the wicked steward. Callimachus wants to oppose this. John does not want to return evil for evil. He agrees that Fortunatus should be resurrected and tells Drusiana to perform this (81). Drusiana prays for the resurrection of Fortunatus and she says to him: 'Rise up, Fortunatus, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ! ...' Fortunatus rises up, but he is afraid of the congregation of the saints; thus he flees (82-3). John curses Fortunatus who does not understand spiritual matters (84). The congregation celebrates the Eucharist in the sepulchre. John foresees that Fortunatus will die from the bite of a serpent. Somebody reports that this is fulfilled. John's final words in the story are: 'Devil, thou hast thy son' (85-6). We can observe the following three theological characteristics
17
See Jan Bremmer, this volume, 43.
30
JANOS BOLYKI
in the story of Drusiana. First, we may affirm that the ideas of physical death - spiritual death and bodily resurrection - spiritual resurrection dominate the story. Here we find that the power of God not only resurrects but can also punish by death (where it is always the serpent which executes the punishment). We meet a character who is raised from the physical death, but who is not able to get converted from spiritual death. His 'nature' prevents him from changing (a gnostic idea!). Therefore, we could call this narrative a story about two kinds of life ('resurrection' and 'salvation', 79.14) and two kinds of death. Second, the motif of forgiveness is theologically significant (81). Callimachus, who had sinned himself, does not want the resurrection of Fortunatus or to give him the possibility of conversion. John has to teach Callimachus: 'My son, we have not learned to return evil for evil' (81.10). This idea may go back to Jesus; to the Sermon on the Mount. (It is a pity that it is 'spoiled' later by the gnostic motif according to which Fortunatus is unable to repent from birth on, because he is from 'another spring' than the Christians.) John's sentence above (81 .lo) displays a striking similarity to c.28 of Joseph and Aseneth, a Hellenistic Jewish novel, where we repeatedly find that one should forgive the defeated wicked enemy.I8 18 M. Philonenko, Joseph et Aseneth: Introduction, Texte Critique, Traduction et Notes (Leiden, 1968). Chapter 28 in this novel contains a situation similar to that of the Drusiana story in as much as the call for forgiveness is related to a murderous man (the son of the Pharaoh and his companions) who wants to lead astray god-fearing women. The call for forgiveness is expressed, for example, in the following ways: 'And we know that our brothers are men who worship God and do not repay anyone evil for evil' (28.10); 'spare your brothers and do not do them evil for evil' (28.10); 'By no means, brother, will you do evil for evil to your neighbour' (28.14). The two novels (JosAs and AJ) may have even more common characteristics. On the sociological context of JosAs see H.C. Kee, 'The Socio-Cultural Setting of Joseph and Aseneth', New Testament Studies 29 (1982) 394-413 and Miracle in the Early Christian World: A Study in Sociohistorical Methods (New Haven and London, 1983) esp. 252-6, 275.
MIRACLE STORIES
31
Third, we may affirm that the sexual-ethical standpoint of this drama is encratic, perhaps even gnostic. According to this view, man can live with his sexuality only in two extreme ways: either he is full of desires so that he wants to violate even the corpse of a woman, or, he is encratic to an extent that he looks upon his own wife as his 'sister'. The story lacks the apostolic idea, according to which 'the marriage bed is undefiled' (Heb 13.4; cf. lTim 4.3, 5.14).
The miracles of the AJ in the context of 2nd century theology From a literary point of view the first and the fourth miracles fit the genre categories as worked out by Theissen (i.e. Lycomedes and Cleopatra; the raising of the priest of Artemis, respectively). Most of the miracles are so closely bound up with prayers and sermons that we may even regard them as missionary preaching which promises miracles or which ends in miracles (e.g. the healing of the old women). Perhaps it is best to characterise them as complex novels that consist of miracles, prayers and sermons (e.g. the story of Drusiana). The last two stories (the obedient bugs; Drusiana and the four men) call themselves 'a light, short playy, paignion, and a 'drama', theama, respectively. We have no reason to doubt that these genres were a deliberate choice of the author. It seems to be clear that the author does not simply want to ascribe the characteristics of a 'divine man', theios aner, to John the apostle, but each miracle takes the plot of the novel one step further. The mission in Ephesus reaches from the laying of the foundations - through important decisions - to the deepening of the faith of the believers. This is even more striking if we compare the AJ with the Acts of Andrew in the version of Gregory of Tours (Liber de miraculis beati Andreae Apostoli), where we find the short miracle stories in one block. These miracles show a wider variety (e.g. the healing of a blind, of a leper, etc.) than those of the AJ. The miracles of the Acts of Andrew display more characteristics of the genres as analyzed by Theissen. When compared with them, the miracles of the AJ are rather like complex novels.
In summary we may say that if we draw a line from the canonical Fourth Gospel to the 2nd century Hellenistic novels, then the line would cross the circle of the AJ toward the third fourth of the distance. The main themes of the miracles are: death and life; spiritual Apart from this main theme we death and spiritual resurre~tion.'~ have the following miracles left: the destruction of the temple of Artemis and the bitings of serpents - as miracles of punishment; and the cheerful story of the obedient bugs - ending in an apophthegm. In the case of the resurrections it is difficult to distinguish in medical terms between death and fainting. The blurring of the difference may be deliberate. The attention of the writer is focussed on the distinction between physical an spiritual resurrection rather than on the distinction between therapy and anastasis. We find almost all the possibilities: semi-dead and dead people raised. Later they undergo a spiritual metamorphosis or resurrection and become Christians. We read from someone spiritually resurrected who dies bodily and then is raised again from physical death. Finally, Fortunatus is raised from bodily death in vain, because 'by nature' he is incapable of conversion (expressed n p b ~r b ~ p e i r r o v , with a play on words: "Q 4 b o y &@6o1~oq 84.2-3). With the character of Fortunatus we arrive at the question of possible gnostic elements in the AJ. The tendency toward determinism belongs to gnostic soteriology: those who are not from the nature of light are unable to get converted. Although our concern here is not the whole AJ, we affirm that it is undoubtedly strongly influenced by Gnosis (see, for example, the speeches on the mystery of the cross, that express a dualistic-docetic Christo-
19 On the symbolic interpretation of the resurrection scenes see Bovon, 'Leben', 225; and K. Schaferdiek, 'Herkunft und Interesse der alten Johannesakten', ZNW 74 (1983) 247-67, where on p. 265 he uses the term 'Das Wunder als Manifestation des Heils' and notes that the scenes of raising up the dead and the conversion scenes occur together. He affirms that this phenomenon wants to express that the believers live in a 'presentic eschatology'.
MIRACLE STORIES
I
I
I 1 I
!
i i
33
logy, in 97-102). If we consider the miracles only, the emphasis on spiritual resurrection is in itself not a gnostic idea (cf. the canonical Gospel of John 11.25). However, we may note that the christophany - written in the form of a Christological reminiscence - has a gnostic character (88-93). We may even speak of polyphany since John remembers that Jesus was present among them now in body now in spirit, i.e. in many forms. In c.93 we find a recollection of the table fellowship of Jesus in the house of Simon the Pharisee (Lk 7.36ff). In a gnostic re-working the story becomes a miracle, because the bread in front of Jesus is multiplied - so that the whole company is satisfied - whereas nothing happens to the bread of the others. The encratic elements of the AJ - especially sexual temperance - are not only a gnostic characteristic but can be seen also as an On whatever basis, the writer held influence of neo-platoni~m.*~ that enkrateia is on a higher level of the Christian life than family relations. Whereas the followers of Jesus left everything behind, so also (temporarily?) family life, the AJ emphasises sexual temperance. The ethical radicalism of the AJ does not include the giving up of one's possessions or the abandoning of one's home. We may add, however, that sexual temperance could result in further suffering from the side of the environment (e.g. Drusiana's being locked up in a sepulchre - to which we find references, although it is not part of the surviving story). The anthropology of the miracle stories strongly displays a dualistic character. The pagan participants are spiritually dead whereas the Christians are already raised to a new life, even in their earthly existence. Nevertheless, we can find a description of a transition - expressed by literary-psychological means (e.g. the story of the repenting parricide). The majority of the miracles
20 Schaferdiek's remarks on the relationship between Gnosis, neoplatonism, and enkrateia in the Acts of Andrew (272-3) apply also to the relevant parts of the AJ. On the influence of Manichaeism see P. Nagel,
'Die apokryphen Apostelakten des 2. und 3. Jh. in der manichaischen Literatur', in K.W. Trijger (ed), Gnosis und Neues Testament (Berlin, 1973) esp. 152-3 and 165-71; Jenkins, this volume, Ch. XI.
shows a schematic 'either-or' character. The physical existence of man has no meaning if he is not resurrected also in a spiritual sense (52.5-12). Physical life can only yield deep sins (murder, adultery, etc.). Looking at the miracles from a sociological perspective, we may observe that wealthy men and their wives - even the leaders of the city - dominate the scene (e.g. strategos, 19.1, 31.7; proconsul, 31.5). Even the 'steward' of Andronicus is not a house-servant, but rather an overseer 70.5). A real social aspect, however, is only displayed in the story of the healing of the old women (30-6). The environment is usually of a distinguished kind: a large house that can accommodate many people, the temple of Artemis, the theatre. We are almost always in the city. The only exceptions are the story of the parricide - that occurs outside Ephesus (4854);21 and the episode about the obedient bugs - that comes to pass in a poor inn (60-1). If we consider, finally, the intention of the miracle stories, then it seems irrelevant to raise the question whether the numerous resurrections are viewed as historical facts,22or as metaphors that illustrate spiritual resurrection. The intention of the author points beyond these alternatives; his main interest lies in the mission. We could apply the self-characterization of the canonical Fourth Gospel here (20.31, RSV): 'these are written that you may believe...'. Thus the missionary intention does not only surface in the realm of a missionary story (cf. the canonical Acts), i.e. in narrating the founding of a congregation, the strengthening of it, and the example of the founding apostle. Rather we may say that this intention is there even in the sense of what is nowadays called a 'readers-response criticism'. This means that the miracle stories did not only constitute an interesting reading but also wanted to help the readers reach the goal that was reached by the characters
See Jan Bremmer, this volume, 53 note 47. On the question of historicity see R.A. Lipsius, Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden I (Braunschweig, 1 883) 5 16-9. He holds that the historical value of the AJ is minimal ('aussergeringst') for the life story of the apostle.
21 22
MIRACLE STONES
35
of the stories: salvation and resurrection. As the prayer in 79.16-7 says: 'what to men is unattainable and impossible, and to thee alone is possible, even salvation and resurrection'. Did the old lady, mentioned in our introduction as a fictitious character, get to the place of the evangelisation? We do not know. We know, however, that the A J and similar religious-missionary novels were widely read in the 2nd and 3rd centuries (just as crime stories are read today and 'Westerns' watched). The readers were not of the least civilized (i.e. not of those who could not read). Rather, we may think that the readers belonged to an educated level of the population - who, nevertheless may have been on the verge of poverty. In today's terms: they were the lower bourgeois who were threatened to become the proletariat. In any case, there was a great demand for these novels.23 This demand may be understood from various viewpoints. They have a literary value which lies in their interesting plot and romantic stories. They are easily readable. More importantly, they fulfilled an ethical role. The Hellenistic period relativised the system of norms in the local community (polis). These novels presented ideals, norms, and examples for the crowds who longed after a lifestyle enriching for a community. Finally, these Christian novels were 'modem' in the sense that they made use of a popular literary genre in order to cany out - to use these terms with a positive meaning - a successful 'missionary propaganda'.
23 On the theme of the Apocryphal Acts in the context of the Hellenistic novel see D.R. Edwards, 'The New Testament and the Ancient Romance: A Survey of Recent Research', The Petronian Newsletter 1978 (9-14 Feb.); T. Szepessy, 'The Ancient Family Novel (A Typological Proposal)', Acta Antiqua Hung. 31 (1985-88) 357-565; W. Rordorf, L a o r ~ n d -i Lex credendi (Freibourg, 1993) 445-7.
111. Women in the Apocryphal Acts of John JAN N. BREMMER
At the beginning of the 1980s, feminism began to influence the study of the Apocryphal Acts of Apostles (AAA). Stevan Davies suggested that the Acts were conceived and read by a community of Christian women; Dennis MacDonald attributed the origin of the Acta Pauli to oral traditions deriving from women who were in opposition to the ruling patriarchal order; and Virginia B u m s stated that the Acts were originally oral stories told by women in female communities, while the focus on chastity reflected the desired or experienced liberation from the patriarchal order.' But towards the end of the decade a reaction set in. Whilst in principle approving of this sociological approach, Jean-Daniel Kaestli argued strongly that the Acts are unlikely to have an oral background or an origin in a female community, and Peter Dunn has seriously questioned the degree of liberation that the Acts really
1 Cf. S.L. Davies, The Revolt of the Widows (New York and Winston, 1980); D.R. MacDonald, The Legend and the Apostle. The Battle fir Paul in Story and Canon (Philadelphia, 1983); idem, 'The Role of Women in the Production of the Apocryphal Acts', The N ~ f freview 41 (1984) 21-38; V. Bums, Chastiv as Autonomy: Women in the Stories of the Apocryphal Acts (New York and Queenston, Ont., 1987), who first expounded her views in an article with the same title in Semeia 38 (1986) 101-17. Davies, 'Women in the Third Gospel and the New Testament Apocrypha', in A.-J. Levine (ed), "Women L i b This'! New Perspectives on Jewish Women in the Greco-Roman World (Atlanta, 1991) 185-97 simply ignores the critique by Kaestli (note 2).
38
JAN N. BREMMER
offered to women.* Considering these differences in opinion it is hard to disagree with Kaestli that we now need a study of each of the individual Acts in order to appreciate the contribution of the Acts as a whole to our knowledge of ancient Christianity and to understand the role women played in that m ~ v e m e n t .It~ will be the aim of this paper to contribute to the current debate about women and the Acts through a detailed study of the place of women in AJ. I start with the episode of Lycomedes and Cleopatra.
Lycomedes and Cleoparra (19-29) The beginning of A J has been lost and our text starts in medias res with the information that John, prompted by a ~ i s i o n ,hurried ~ to Ephesus. His companions only with difficulty prevailed upon him to rest one day in Miletus. These companions are mentioned by name, except for 'the wife of Marcellus': the particular reference may well indicate that in the previous chapters John had performed a miracle for her. It is interesting to note that we find among these companions both males and females. In the Greek novel the world of the women is highly limited and the only friends of a female protagonist are usually slaves. The situation is rather different in the AAA, where women and men quite regularly
J.-D. Kaestli, 'Response' (viz. to preceding article by Bunus), Semeia 38 (1986) 119-31; idem, 'Les Actes apocryphes et la reconstitution de I'histoire des fernmes dans le christianisme ancien', Cahiers bibliques de Foi et Vie 28 (1989) 71-79; idem, 'Fiction IittCraire et realite sociale: que peut-on savoir de la place des femmes dans le milieu de production des actes apocryphes des aphtres?', Apocrypha 1 (1990) 279-302; P.W. Dunn, 'Women's Liberation, the Acts of Paul, and other Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles', Apocrypha 4 (1993) 245-61. 3 Kaestli, 'Fiction littkraire', 302. 4 This is a recurrent motif in the Acts, cf. R. Soder, Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und die romanhafre Literatur der Antike (Stuttgart 1932; repr. Dmstadt, 1969) 171-5; Bremmer, ZPE 39 (1980) 29.
2
WOMEN
39
mingle.5 Unfortunately, we are unable to reconstruct the precise route of the apostle, but his journey from Miletus via Ephesus to Smyrna, and subsequently via Laodicea (58f) back to Ephesus, suggests that he first toured the coastal cities before visiting those inland, just like the Roman governor on his yearly visits to the assize d i s t r i ~ t s .The ~ focal point of the surviving part of AJ, though, is clearly Ephesus and all non-Ephesian parts have been lost.' This seems to suggest that our surviving manuscripts derive from an Ephesian copy, since according to early Christian traditions John had taught in Asia Minor and was buried in Ephesus.' When John and his followers were approaching Ephesus, they were met by a certain Lycomedes, who requested the apostle to come to his house and to heal his wife Cleopatra, who was paralysed. Lycomedes was still young and one of the Ephesian strategoi,9 the executive council of Ephesus;lo moreover, he was 'a wealthy man': the reader is not left in any uncertainty about his importance. Cleopatra was equally young and although, according to her husband, she was now 'a withered beauty', she had once
5 For women in the Greek novel see the perceptive study of B. Egger, 'Zu den Frauenrollen im griechischen Roman. Die Frau als Heldin und Leserin', in H. Hofinann (ed), Groningen Colloquia on the Novel I (Groningen, 1988) 33-66. 6 Cf. J. den Boeft, J. Brernmer, VigChr 39 (1985) 119, overlooked by E. Plumacher, 'Apostolische Missionsreise und statthalterliche Assisetour. Eine Interpretation von Acta Iohannis c. 37.45 und 55', ZNW 85 (1994) 259-78. 7 As is observed by L. van Kampen, Apostelverhalen. Doel en compositie van de oudste apokriefe Handelingen der apostelen (Diss. Utrecht, 1990) 101. 8 Cf. M. Hengel, Die johanneische Frage (Tubingen, 1993) 113-9, 9 K. Schaferdiek, NTA 11, 172 curiously translates with 'praetor'; A.F.J. Klijn (ed), Apokriefen van het Nieuwe Testament I1 (Kampen, 1985) 14 uses 'generaal', which insufficiently indicates the political nature of the office. 10 The discussion by W. Schwahn, RE Suppl. 6 (1954) 1112f is totally out of date, cf. the index of the Inschr8en von Ephesos (Bonn, 1979-84).
40
JAN N. BREMMER
been so beautiful that the whole of Ephesus had been ecstatic about her. It is not difficult to recognise in these descriptions topoi of the Greek novel, which also regularly details the youth, beauty and noble birth of the hero and heroine." After this appeal John immediately went to his house, where Lycomedes knelt before him and started to lament his fate. He blamed his wife's illness on the evil eye of his enemies and, as often happens in pagan novels, he announced his suicide - a fiequently occurring narrative ploy to enhance the dramatic character of the situation.'' Despite the exhortations of the apostle to control himself, he fell to the ground and died. The apostle then healed Cleopatra who in turn resurrected her husband. After Lycomedes had recovered, he charged a painter with making a portrait of John, which he installed in his bedroom in front of an altar, surrounded by candles and wreathed with garlands. Irenaeus, a contemporary (see Appendix) of ASS author, informs us that Carpocratian gnostics wreathed and worshipped portraits of Jesus, Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle and other philosophers ( A h . haer. 1.25.6), and Augustine mentions that a certain Marcella from the same sect worshipped Homer, Pythagoras and Jesus and burned incense in front of their images (De haer. 7). Lycomedes' altar will have served a similar purpose.13 In this passage, then, there
1 1 Cf. Xen. Eph. I . 1 and F. Letoublon, Les l i e n communs du roman. St6riotypes grecs d'aventure et d'amour (Leiden, 1993) 114-7 (young: this element is not mentioned by Junod and Kaestli, AI, 165, 441f), 119-
26 (beautiful, noble). 12 B. Wesseling, Leven, Liefde en Dood: motieven in antieke romans (Diss. Groningen, 1993) 73-119. 13 This worship of portraits is clearly of Greek origin and was introduced by the Epicureans, cf. B. Frischer, The Sculpted Word (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 1982). In the course of time the custom seems to have merged with the Roman ritual of worshipping important 'gurus' in a lararium, cf. A.D. Nock, Essays on Religion and the Ancient World 11, ed. Z . Stewart (Oxford, 1972) 669 (where this passage is absent); S. Settis, 'Severo Alessandro e i suoi Lari (S.H.A., S.A., 29, 2-3)', Athenaeum 50 (1972) 237-51; J.D. Breckenridge, 'Apocrypha of Early Christian
WOMEN
41
seems to be a polemic going on against gnostic sects who to a certain extent competed for the same followers as more orthodox Christianity, not least for women.I4 In this episode the difference in behaviour between husband and wife is rather striking. Lycomedes is weak, grovels at the feet of the apostle and dies from grief. Cleopatra, on the other hand, is firm and the apostle saw her 'neither raging from grief nor being outside herself, although she also grieved for her partner. In fact, it is explicitly said that because of her controlled behaviour the apostle had pity on Cleopatra and prayed to Christ on her behalf. Moreover, he allowed her to resurrect her own husband," and she did not relapse into pagan practices. Clearly, the author of AJ pictures Cleopatra both as more in control of herself and as a firmer follower of Christ than her husband. Fortunately, the chapters about the relationship between Lycomedes and Cleopatra have survived almost completely,'6 unlike those about Andronicus and Drusiana, the other couple who appear as protagonists in the Acts of John.
Andronicus and Drusiana (63-86) When John returned to Ephesus for the last time, he was accompanied by Andronicus and Drusiana (a married couple), Aristobula,
Portraiture', Byz. Zs. 67 (1974) 101-9. 14 For gnostics and women see J.E. Goehring, 'Libertine or Liberated: Women in the So-called Libertine Gnostic Communities', in K.L. King (ed), Images of the Feminine in Gnosticism (Philadelphia, 1988) 329-44, repr. in D.M. Scholer (ed), Women in Early Christianity (New York and London, 1993) 183-98; H. Havelaar, 'Sofia en Maria Magdalena. Twee vrouwenfiguren in gnostische teksten', in D. van Paassen and A. Passenier (eds), Op zoek naar vrouwen in ketterij en sekte (Kampen, 1993) 25-40. 15 P. Schneider, The Mystery of the Acts of John (San Francisco, 1991) 24 curiously states that 'Lykomedes had only fainted'. This contradicts the explicit testimony of the text that he had died (23: nenekromtnon). 16 But see Junod & Kaestli, AI, on 25.3, 29.10, 19.
42
JAN N. BREMMER
'who had learnt that her husband Tertullus had died in the Way (of Christ)', Aristippe and Xenophon, and the 'chaste prostitute' (59). Allusions in later literature strongly suggest that they all played a role in the original AJ," but only some episodes about Andronicus and Drusiana have survived the 'editing' and censorship of previous centuries. The introduction of Drusiana has been lost, but we may assume that she, like Cleopatra, was a young woman, since Callimachus, who has fallen in love with her (below), is also described as a young man (71, 73, 76) - love for an older woman is hardly probable in these novels. Andronicus' age is not mentioned, but he is described as a strategos, like Lycomedes, and he is 'protos of the Ephesians at that time' (31).18 Junod and Kaestli translate this qualification with 'un notable', but this insufficiently brings out the agonistic flavour of the tern: Andronicus is a 'leading citizen' (Schaferdiek) of the town. From allusions in the Manichaean Coptic Psalter it appears that after her conversion Andronicus had locked up Drusiana and John together in a tomb.19 After two weeks they were released, the husband also converted and the couple started to live together as brother and sister (63)." Does this relationship to some extent reflect contemporary events? It is clear that an ascetic trait runs through all of the Acts, but contemporary notices about ascetic couples are unfortunately lacking. The negative influence of conversion on mixed pagan-Christian marriages, however, can be parallelled in 'real life': Justin relates the story of an anonymous Roman matrona who afier her conversion
17 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 94-6. 18 The expression strongly reminds of the honorary title 'first of the citizens', which was especially, but not exclusively, popular in Palestine. Cf. F. Vattioni, ' A proposito di protopolites', Stud Pap. 16 (1977) 23-29 (add SEG 38.1586); M. Blume, 'A propos de P.Oxy. I, 41', in L. Criscuolo and G. Geraci (eds), Egitto e Storia Antica dall' Ellenismo all' etd Araba. Bilancio di un confront0 (Bologna, 1989) 271-90, esp. 286. 19 Junod & Kaestli, AI 549, rightly point to the novel for this motif; add Letoublon, L i e n communs, 74-8. 20 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 86-91.
WOMEN
43
divorced her husband for his 'sinful' life and whose Christian teacher was subsequently executed (Ap. 2.2). In the surviving parts of A J we are told that Callimachus, also 'protos of the Ephesians', fell in love with Drusiana. But as he did not succeed in winning her favours, he fell in a state of melancholy. This distressed Drusiana to such an extent that she fell ill and, rather improbably, died 'because of the bruising of the soul of that man'. Andronicus also grieved too much, if not to the same degree as Lycomedes. He regularly burst into tears in the company of others so that John repeatedly had to silence him. After her burial, Drusiana was not yet free from her 'lover'. On the contrary, together with Fortunatus, the corrupt steward of Andronicus, Callimachus broke into the grave of Drusiana in order to commit necrophilia. When they were on the point of removing the last garment, the rather expensive dikrossion (Appendix), a huge snake suddenly appeared from nowhere, fatally bit the steward and remained on Callimachus after he had fallen to the ground. The next day Andronicus, John and some other brothers went to the grave. On arrival, the apostle opened the doors of the grave by a simple order as they had forgotten the keys. The motif of automatically opening doors derives from pagan literature,2' as does another detail in this scene. When they entered the grave, they saw an attractive young man who was smiling. The same smiling youth is also encountered in the Acts of Paul, where a youth of great beauty appeared smiling and loosened Paul's bonds (7), and in the Acts of Peter, where Jesus appeared smiling to Peter in his prison (16). The motif is well known from pagan epiphanies where the appearing divinity traditionally smiles to reassure anxious mortals.22 Erik Peterson has argued that when Christ appeared as youth, he appeared as the child that Adam was
21 The classic study is 0. Weinreich, Religionsgeschichtliche Studien (Darmstadt, 1968) 45-290 (1929'). For more passages and the most recent bibliography see J.J. Smoolenaars, Statius Thebaid VII: a commenf a y (Leiden, 1994) 40f. 22 Many parallels: 0. Weinreich, Antike Heilungswunder (Giessen, 1909) 31-12;M. Puelma, Mus. Helv. 17 (1960) 149.
44
JAN N. BREMMER
before the Fall.23 This explanation, however, is hardly persuasive and the motif deserves further attention. Andronicus considered Fortunatus unworthy of being saved but asked John to resurrect Callimachus in order that he should confess exactly what had happened, not, we may observe, so that he should convert. Drusiana, on the other hand, generously asked the apostle to resurrect Fortunatus as well, even though Callimachus opposed her request. When John charged her to do so she performed the resurrection with enthusiasm, but not before she had pronounced a prayer in which she mentioned Andronicus' earlier violence towards her. As in the case of Cleopatra, then, she is represented in a more favourable light than her husband.
Old women and widows (30-7) In addition to the two couples we have discussed, the surviving part of AJ also shows us John actively engaged on behalf of old women. He ordered Verus to bring to him all the old women of Ephesus in order to care for them. When he heard how many of them were in an ill state of health, he told Verus to bring them to the theatre, so that he could heal them there and thus also convert some of the spectators through these healings. This connection between healing and conversion is not unique in Christian texts and deserves a small excursus. In his study of the first stages of Christianisation, Ramsay MacMullen attaches great weight to exorcism and miracles as one of the means of attracting converts.24 'We should', according to him, 'assign as much weight to this, the chief instrument of conversion, as the best, earliest reporters do'. On closer inspection, these reporters - note the use of a term which suggests well-informed eyewitnesses - turn out to be the early Christian apolog-
23 E. Peterson, Friihkirche, Judentum und Gnosis (Freiburg, 1959) 18996.
24 R. MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire (New Haven, 1984) 27.
WOMEN
45
ists. And indeed, their claims were not negligible. Justin boasted that 'many persons possessed by demons, everywhere in the world and in our own city, have been exorcized by many of our Christian men' (I1 Ap. 6); Irenaeus asserted that 'some people incontestably and truly (note the defensive tone!) drive out demons, so that those very persons, who have been purified of evil spirits, often become believers and become members of the Church' (Adv. haer. 2.32.4), and Tertullian even issued the challenge 'let a man be produced right here before your (viz. the emperor's) court who, it is clear, is possessed by a demon, and that spirit, commanded by any (!) Christian at all, will as much confess himself a demon, which is true, as, by lying, he will elsewhere profess himself a "god"' (Apol. 23.4). In the light of this evidence, it is hardly surprising that Lane Fox observes that 'the fame of the Christian exorcists was widely k n o ~ n . ' ~But ' was it? In fact, Lane Fox seems to have his doubts, since he raises some objections against the efficacity of this kind of miracle. He rightly observes that we know of no historical case when a miracle or exorcism turned an individual, let alone a crowd, to the Christian faith, and he quotes Justin who in the 130s observed that miracles only impress eyewitnesses (Dial. 60.6).26 Should we not go even further? When we look more precisely at the claims of the Christian apologists we cannot be but struck by the vagueness of their utterances. Nobody ever cites a specific case. Irenaeus wrote that miracles were still frequent in his time (Adv. haer. 2.32.4), but as Lane Fox rightly observes, his claim that 'even dead bodies have been resurrected and they stayed with us for a good many years', does not improve his credibility. Theophilus, an apologist in the 180s, observes only that exorcisms worked 'sometimes and even today' (Ad Autol. 2.8), and Origen is hardly more precise: 'If I put in writing all those cases I have been present at myself, I would make myself a laughing-stock for the unbelievers, who would think that I myself had made up these stories, like those others they suspect of having 25 26
R. Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians (Hmondsworth, 1986) 328. Compare A J 2.23, 4.48, 6.14-15.30, 12.9, 18.
46
JAN N. BREMMER
made up such tales' (C. Cels. 1.46). In fact, there is a powerful argument which deters us from accepting exorcism as an important factor in the conversion to Christianity. Before Constantine, very little open advertising of Christianity is attested. Conversion by exorcism therefore could hardly have taken place in front of large crowds, and it is very hard to believe that the rather steep rise of Christianity was due to a secret army of exorcists going from door to door in order to win converts. The fame of Christian exorcism, of which Lane Fox spoke, only existed, accordingly, in the imagination of the Christians. I do not want to deny the existence of Christian exorcists, but their prominence was, so to speak, not so much a question of fame but rather of claim. This claim finds its explanation in the contemporary religious situation. The increasing distance between believer and god in the Hellenistic-Roman period went hand in hand with an exaltation of the powers of that god. Building on the Jewish tradition, the early Christians focussed on mental health rather than bodily welfare. Their special focus may well have been a felicitous one in a period in which mental health seems to have come more under stress than in the previous era, but it is impossible even to be remotely precise in this respect. The fact remains that in their praises of their own medical efficacity the Christian apologists had merely joined the chorus of those who praised the powers of their own particular god. It is this typically 'Hellenistic', aretalogical aspect of the new faith which explains the claims made for healing powers. Compared with the early Christian apologists this aspect is rather exaggerated in the AAA, where the apostles perform all kinds of miracles, including raising the dead, the most spectacular feat of religious power, and healing the ill en masse as John proposed to do in Ephesus. There is, then, a strong missionary aspect to these Acts. Let us now return to the apostle and the old women. When the masses of Ephesus heard of his plan, they were already queuing up during the night in order not to miss the spectacle. Rosa Soder has rightly observed that in the Acts the 'crowd' is a recurrent topos in descriptions of miracles and serves to enhance the dramatic character of many scenes. Yet these crowds were not only a literary
WOMEN
47
phenomenon but must also have reflected contemporary behaviour, as is well illustrated by a scene in the Martyrdom of Pionius. When Pionius and his fellow Christians were led off after their arrest wearing chains, 'quickly, as if for an unexpected spectacle, a crowd rushed up so that they jostled one another. And when they arrived at the Agora, at the eastern Stoa and the double gate, the whole of the Agora and the upper porticoes were filled with Greeks and Jews, and even women'.27 Soder has also drawn attention to the prominence of the theatre in these descriptions. This motif, too, reflects a contemporary phenomenon, viz. the enormous popularity of the theatre in Imperial times which gradually replaced the agora as the meeting place for the a~sernbly.~' When the old women and the crowd were assembled, John harangued his audience with a long sermon, in which he threatened his audience with the Last Judgment. The threat was apparently such a stock-in-trade part of early Christian preaching that even Celsus had noted that Christians 'threaten others with these punishments' (C. Cels. 8.48). According to Lane Fox, 'there was an ample place ... for plain fear in Christian conversions, and Christian authors did not neglect it: their martyrs' words on hell and the coming Judgment were believed to be an advertisement every bit as effective as their example at the stake.'29 Although Lane Fox is probably right that the threat was intended to support the plea for conversion, he provides not a single example to support his statement that the threat did actually work. Yet there can be no doubt that the early Christians had internalised the fear of the Last Judgment to an extent that is unthinkable today, as the following example may illustrate. The Carthaginian group of
27 Mart. Pion. 3, cf. L. Robert, Le mariyre de Pionios, prgtre de Smyrne (Washington, 1994) 54f, who does not comment upon the remarkable presence of the women. 28 Crowd and theatre: Soder, Apoktyphen Apostelgeschichten, 158-62; note also S. Said, 'The City in the Greek Novel', in J. Tatum (ed), The Search for the Ancient Novel (Baltimore, 1994) 216-36, esp. 221f. 29 Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians, 326ff; see also R. MacMullen, Changes in the Roman Empire (Princeton, 1990) 136.
48
JAN N. BREMMER
martyrs around Perpetua threatened those pagans who had come to their prison to jeer at them 'with God's judgment, stressing the joy they would have in their own suffering, and ridiculing the curiosity of those that came to see them'. John's words, then, clearly reflected contemporary Christian thinking in this respect.30 When the apostle had finished his sermon, he healed the illnessess, but, unfortunately, the conclusion of the episode has been lost and we simply do not know what happened afterwards. Presumably, the old women and many spectators converted and accepted the new faith. Curiously, Junod and Kaestli pay no attention at all to the fact that the apostle cures old women, although this is a most remarkable feature of the episode. Old women had joined the Christian movement from the very beginning, as the pseudo-Pauline Letter to Titus shows (2.3), but in Greek and Roman society old women were in many ways at the bottom of the social scale. They were the butt of Attic comic mockery; Hellenistic sculptors frequently represented them as drunks; and Romans typically represented witches as old ~omen.~ In' concentrating on old women, then, the early Christians showed compassion for a social category which was despised and which must have often been in dire circumstances. It is interesting that even contemporary pagans noted this concern for old women. In a book which he wrote around 165 about the self-immolation of the philosopher P e r e g r i n u ~ ,the ~ ~ satirist Lucian mentions 'old crones' among his visitors in prison (12). Lucian clearly satirised their prominent position among the Christians, but he did
30 P. Perp. 17; see also Mart. Pol. 11.2; Mart. Ptolemaei et Lucii 2; Mart. Lugd. 26; Mart. Agape etc. 4. 31 Cf. Bremmer, 'The Old Women of Ancient Greece', in J. Blok & P. Mason (eds), Sexual Asymmetry. Studies in Ancient Society (Amsterdam, 1987) 191-215; S. Pfisterer-Haas, Darstellungen alter Frauen in der griechischen Kunst (New York, 1989); P. Zanker, Die trunkene Alte (Frankfurt, 1989); H . Wrede, 'Matronen im Kult des Dionysos', Rom. Mitt. 88 (1991) 164-88. 32 Cf. C.P. Jones, Culture and Society in Lucian (Cambridge Mass., 1986) 117-32.
WOMEN
49
not realise that he was witnessing a slow revolution in the ancient value-system, which would soon develop into a tidal wave. Old women also play a small role in an episode of AJ which has only recently been recovered from an Old Irish text. According to the fourteenth-century Liber Flavus Fergusiorum, 'very many pious nuns, widows, and such holy persons following John' lived from the alms which the apostle received from his fellow Christians. When they complained continuously about their small portions and accused the apostle of embezzling charitable donations, he changed hay into gold which he subsequently threw into the sea. In this way he showed the 'hypocritical widows' that he did not need any wealth and had given them every penny of the alms he had received.33 The attention given to widows may surprise, but charity towards widows was an important activity in second-century Christianity. In the Acts of Peter we hear of a certain Marcellus who was the 'refuge' of all the widows in town (8). Peter heals some blind, old widows (21), and after he resurrects the son of a senator, the mother wants to distribute some of her property to her newly freed slaves, but the apostle tells her to distribute the remainder among the widows (28). In the Acts of Paul a father sold his possessions and 'brought the price to the widows', after Paul had resurrected his son (4). In Rome in the first half of the second century some Christians even tried to profit from this charity: Hermas saw in his visions a mountain with snakes and other wild animals, which were meant for those deacons who had embezzled money destined for widows: some of the deacons, who did the day-to-day work of charity whilst the bishop had the final responsibility, clearly lived in style at the expense of the congregational funds.34In fact, charity must have been reasonably 'big business',
33 M. Herbert & M. McNamara, Irish Biblical Apocypha. Selected Texts in Translation (Edinburgh, 1989) 93, whose translation slightly differs from that in Junod & Kaestli, AI, 114f. 34 Cf. Sim. IX.26.2 (deacons) and 27.2 (bishops); Just. Ap. 67.7 (deacons); M. Leutzsch, Die Wahrnehmung sozialer Wirklichkeit im 'Hirten des Hermas' (Gottingen, 1987) 73f, 135, 161.
50
JAN N. BREMMER
since around 250 bishop Cornelius proudly mentioned that the congregation supported 1500 widows and other needy person^.^' Not every Christian, though, was pleased with the special treatment of widows, which so strongly contradicted prevailing values. The anonymous author of a popular Apocalypse of Peter, which perhaps originated in Egypt about 135, understood this negative feeling well and therefore included in his description of Hell the following warning: In another place situated near them, on the stone a pillar of fire (?), and the pillar is sharper than words - men and women who are clad in rags and filthy garments, and they are cast upon it, to suffer the judgment of unceasing torture. These are they who trusted in their riches and despised widows and the woman (with) orphans...in the sight of God (9). The wealthy who despised widows were not alone in their contempt. As in the case of the old women (above), Lucian also mentions, presumably with a sneer, the presence of widows among the visitors to Peregrinus. For the upper classes this interest was indeed absurd, but the organisation involved in charity must have been an important factor in the overall organisational strength of the early
Conclusion What have we learned, then, about the place of women in the
35 Eus. HE. 6.43. For the importance of charity for the development of the Christian church in Late Antiquity see Peter Brown, Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity: Towards a Christian Empire (Madison, 1992) 78-103. 36 For the widows see more in detail J.-U. Krause, Witwen und Waisen im Romischen Reich, 2 vls (Heidelberg, 1994); Bremmer, 'Pauper or Patroness: the widow in the early Christian Church', in J. Bremmer and L. van den Bosch (eds), Between Poverty and the Pyre. Moments in the History of Widowhood (London, 1995) 31-57.
WOMEN
51
production, reception and text of AS! In itself, it would not be impossible for a woman to have been the author, since many women in the Roman period could read and write,37 but in fact very few women are known to have written prose fiction in antiquity.18 The simple fact of a sympathetic treatment of women in a piece of writing does not necessarily make the author a woman.39 Moreover, the treatment of women in A J is rather varied. Whereas upper-class women play an active role, old women are only an object of the apostle's actions, and widows are even severely reproached. Clearly, AJ reflects in this respect the normal hierarchical views of the Greco-Roman upper classes and, thus, are hardly the product of a community of egalitarian 'sisters'. Similarly, Burrus' idea of an oral background for some of the stories in AJ, notably that about Drusiana, will hardly stand a critical test, since the stories are too poorly informed about Ephesus for such an origin to be ~redible.~' If female authorship, then, is not immediately probable, what about its readership? In the study of the Greek novel, female ' female readership has lost much of its earlier p ~ p u l a r i t y . ~Yet readership can hardly be excluded, since throughout the Greek
37 Cf. S.G. Cole, 'Could Greek Women Read and Write?', in H. Foley (ed), Reflections of Women in Antiquity (New York and London, 1981) 219-45; add the Christian examples in Bremmer, 'Why Did Christianity Attract Upper-Class Women?', in A. Bastiaensen, A. Hilhorst, C. Kneepkens (eds), Fructus centesimus. Mklanges Gerard J.M. Bartelink.. (Steenbrugge and Dordrecht, 1989, 37-47) 42f. 38 Cf. Bowie, 'The Readership of Greek Novels', 438f. 39 See the objections to Davies' thesis in M. Lefkowitz, 'Did Ancient Women Write Novels?', and R. Kraemer, 'Women's Authorship of Jewish and Christian Literature in the Greco-Roman Period', in Levine, "Women Like This'', 199-219 and 221-42. 40 Persuasively argued by K. Schaferdiek, 'Herkunft und Interesse der alten Johannesakten', ZNW 74 (1983) 247-67. H. Engelmann, 'Ephesos und die Johannesakten', ZPE 103 (1994) 297-302 is not convincing. 41 Cf. B. Wesseling, 'The Audience of the Ancient Novel', in Hofmann, Groningen Colloquia I, 67-79; S.A. Stephens, 'Who read ancient novels?', in Tatum, The Search for the Ancient Novel, 405-18.
52
JAN N. BREMMER
novel women are represented as literate and, for example, in Chariton's Callirhoe they also form part of the internal audien~ e . ~In' the case of AJ a female readership certainly seems to have been one of the target audiences of the if only since the readership of the Acts of Paul (and Thecla?) included women (below). But there are other indications as well. In AJ the two heroines are clearly depicted as far superior to their husbands: Cleopatra does not relapse into pagan practices, unlike Lycomedes, and Dmsiana is not only more in control of herself but also resurrects her husband, not vice versa. AJ, then, allowed upper-class women clear possibilities for identification and this strongly points to female readership; considering the nature of Greco-Roman literacy, such readers were by definition members of the middle and ~ ~ p e r - c l a s s e sIndeed, . ~ ~ it would be strange if it had been otherwise, since in the first centuries women seem to have constituted the majority of Christian member~hip.~' Did AJ also suggest a 'liberated life-style to Whereas Cleopatra and Lycomedes presumably led a normal married life, Drusiana and Andronicus have renounced sexuality in their relationship. Apparently, the author left both possibilities open to married couples. In this connection there is a further scene we should consider (48-55). Before he left Ephesus for Smyrna, John met a young man who had fallen in love with his neighbour's 7
42 Cf. B. Egger, 'Looking at Chariton's Callirhoe', in J.R. Morgan and R. Stoneman (eds), Greek Fiction. The Greek Novel in Context (London and New York, 1994) 31-48, esp. 35f. 43 As was already observed long ago for the AAA in general by F. Pfister, in E. Hennecke (ed), Neutestarnentliche Apokryphen (Tubingen, 19242)169. 44 Contra P. Lampe, Die stadtrornischen Christen in den ersten beiden Jahrhunderten (Tubingen, 1989*)102. 45 A. von Harnack, Die Mission und Ausbreitung des Christenturns, 1902' (Berlin, 19244)589-61 1 ; Lane Fox, Pagans and Christians, 310. 46 For the contemporary life of upper-class married women see M.Th. Raepsaet-Charlier, 'La vie familiale des Blites dans la Rome impkriale: le droit et la pratique', Cahiers du Centre G. Glotz 5 (1994) 165-97.
WOMEN
53
Irritated by his father's warning against this liaison, he kicked him to death. Junod and Kaestli insufficiently bring out the evil character of this deed. For Greeks and Romans parricide was perhaps the most appalling crime imaginable - witness the myth of Oedipus, whose parricide led to incest with his mother.48 The story therefore has a strong moralistic flavour. Moreover, the parricide subsequently led to the self-castration of the young man, since after John had resurrected his father the man cut off his testicles and threw them before his former girl friend.49 It seems noteworthy that although John disapproved of this act, nevertheless he did not heal the youth but accepted him as he was. In other words, if AJ offered an alternative life style to women, it also suggested a life of continence for men. Finally, the prominent position of the women will also have had a certain missionary appeal among Greek and Roman women. It is important to stress the inclusion of the latter in AJ, since in the Greek novel the Roman world is mostly carefully eliminated. AJ, however, mentions a proconsul (31) and contains a number of Roman names: Marcellus, Tertullus, Fortunatus, and Drusiana, a most unusual but unmistakably Roman name.'' In the earliest stages of Christianity, these women could occupy influential positions to a degree unheard of in contemporary pagan religions
47 Considering the hostile attitude towards the country in most Greek novels, we may notice that the young man is explicitly described as coming from the chora (48), cf. E. Bowie, 'The novels and the real world', in B. Reardon (ed), Erotica Antiqua (Bangor, 1976) 91-6, esp. 94f. 48 Cf. Bremmer (ed), Interpretations of Greek Mythology (London, 1 9882)49-51. 49 For the connection between youth and castration see Nock, Essays I, 476f. 50 I have been able to find only one other instance of this name, viz. Dmsiana, the daughter of M. Flavius Drusianus (CIL 6.1414: c. 200 AD). Dio Cassius 57.13.1 mentions that the sharpest swords were called 'Dmsiana', but this does not seem relevant in our case.
54
JAN N. BREMMER
or Judaism," as still sometimes today in modem although a reaction against this more active role set in at an early stage.53 In fact, if w e can trust the transmitted text o f Tertullian's De baptismo (17.5),54 certain Carthaginian women invoked the Acts of Paul (and Thecla?) t o claim the right to instruct and t o baptise. Evidently, a certain 'liberating' effect o f the AAA can not be denied."
Appendix: date and place of composition of AJ Until now little agreement has been reached regarding the place and time of composition of the AAA, as AJ strikingly illustrates: Junod and Kaestli argue for Egypt about the middle of the second
51 Pagan religions and Christianity: Bremmer, 'Christianity and Upperclass Women'; J. Hidalgo de la Vega, 'Mujeres, carisma y castidad en el cristianismo primitive', Gerihn 11 (1993) 229-44; A. Buelman and R. Frei-Stolba, 'Les flaminiques du Culte impkrial: contribution au r6le de la femme dans I'empire romain', ~ t u d e sde Lettres 1994, 114-26. Judaism: see the balanced view by P.W. van der Horst, Hellenism-JudaismChristianity. Essays on Their Interaction (Kampen, 1994) 73-95, although women were perhaps not as important as leaders of synagogues as he suggests, cf. T. Rajak and D. Noy, 'Archisynagogoi: Office, Title and Social Status in the Greco-Jewish Synagogue', J. Roman Stud. 83 (1993) 75-93; see now also Van der Horst, 'Images of Women in Ancient Judaism', in R. Kloppenborg and W.J. Hanegraaff (eds), Female Stereovpes in Religious Traditions (Leiden, 1995) 43-60. 52 G. Kosack, 'Christianisierung - Ein Schritt zur Emanzipation? Die Bedeutung der Religion f i r die Mafa-Frauen (Nordkamerun)', Anthropos 90 (1995) 206-17. 53 Cf. R. Niirnberg, 'Non decet neque necessarium est, ut mulieres doceant. ~berlegungenzum altkirchlichen Lehrverbot f i r Frauen', Jahrb. j: Ant. u. Christ. 31 (1988) 57-73; K.J. Toresen, 'Tertullian's "Political Ecclesiology" and Women's Leadership', Studia patristica 2 1 (1989) 277-82; E.M. Synek, 'In der Kirche moge sie schweigen', Oriens Christianus 77 (1993) 151-64. 54 Cf. W. Rordorf, Lex orandi - Lex credendi (Freiburg, 1993) 475-84. 55 Contra Dunn, 'Women's Liberation'.
WOMEN
55
century, Klijn suggests Asia Minor about AD 200, and Schaferdiek Syria somewhere in the third ~ e n t u r y . ' ~Junod and Kaestli have suggested the middle of the second century on the basis of the prominence of Asia Minor and Ephesus in John's activities, whereas Schaferdiek thinks of the third century on the grounds that it is cited first by Eusebius and the Manichaeans. The latter argument is hardly convincing, since the 'profane' Greek novels are equally little mentioned by other authors and were clearly not very popular, as is shown by the limited number of papyri found; moreover, the use of the AAA by the Manichaeans hardly supports such a late date." The former argument is equally unpersuasive because Asia Minor and Ephesus are prominent since the Acts of the Apostles at least. I would therefore like to draw attention to the prominence of old women and widows in the text. The special interest in these socially marginal categories seems to fit the second century better than the third, when Christianity was already growing explosively and making strong inroads into the higher layers of Greco-Roman society. Regarding the place of composition of the AJ, Junod and Kaestli have argued strongly for Egypt, perhaps Alexandria.'' Their view is based on doctrinal parallels between AJ and pagan and Christian Egyptian authors as well as the frequency of a typically Egyptian garment, the dikrossion (71, 74, 80, lll).59 The
56 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 689-700; Klijn, Apokriefen, 13f; Schaferdiek, NTA 11, 152-6. The problem is left open by Rordorf, Lex orandi, 440f. 57 Papyri: Stephens, 'Who read ancient novels?', and Ewen Bowie, 'The Readership of Greek Novels in the Ancient World,' in Tatum, The Search for the Ancient Novel, 435-59. Manichaeans: K. Rudolph, 'Das fifihe Christentum in agypten: Zwischen Haresie und Orthodoxie', in D. Willers et al., Begegnung von Heidentum und Christentum im spatantiken k'gypten = Riggisberger Berichte 1 (Riggisberg, 1993) 21-3 1 , esp. 24n19; Jenkins, this volume, Ch. XI. 58 Junod and Kaestli, AI, 689-94. 59 Since the editio maior of Junod & Kaestli, the very rare term dikrossion has now turned up in a Ptolemaic papyrus: W.A.M. Liesker
and A.M. Tromp, 'Zwei ptolemaische Papyri aus der Wiener Papyrus-
56
JAN N. BREMMER
latter argument is especially strong, since a non-Egyptian author might have borrowed ideas from the Alexandrian theologians but would hardly have introduced an Egyptian garment in a non-Egyptian surrounding. We may perhaps add to their arguments that, as the papyri show,60 John's Gospel was the most popular of the canonical Gospels in Egypt; the combination mbnos sti (51.12) also is a typically Egyptian, acclamatory e ~ ~ r e s s i o n Equally, .~' there are some indications that the Greek novel originated in Egypt.62 If AJ was the oldest of the AAA,63 an origin in Egypt would fit neatly with other indications in that direction. However, the problem of the chronological relationship of the various AAA is not yet settled. After the rather arbitrary treatment of this problem by previous generations of scholars, valuable arguments have recently been offered for the priority of the Acts of Paul and the Acts of Peter.64 The debate is still open.65
sammlung', ZPE 66 (1986) 79-89, esp. 81. ~ Neuen Testaments und 60 K. Aland, Studien zur ~ b e r l i e f e r u n des seines Textes (Berlin, 1967) 99-103, updated and corrected by S.R. Llewelyn (ed), New Documents Illustrating Early Christianity 7 (Macquarie, 1994) 246, 257-9. 61 Cf. Isidorus 1.23; C.H. Gordon, 'His Name is 'One',' J. Near Eastern Stud. 29 (1970) 198f; H.S. Versnel, Inconsistencies in Greek and Roman Religion I (Leiden, 1990) 213. Kaestli & Junod wrongly translate mbnos szi with 'toi seul (le peux)'. 62 J. Tait, 'Egyptian Fiction in Demotic and Greek', in Morgan and Stoneman, Greek Fiction, 203-22; but see also S.A. Stephens and J.J. Winkler, Ancient Greek Novels: the fragments (Princeton, 1995) 12-8. 63 As is suggested by Junod & Kaestli, AI, 694-700. 64 Cf. F. Stanley Jones, 'Principal Orientations on the Relations between the Apocryphal Acts (Acts of Paul and Acts of John, Acts of Peter and Acts of John)', SBL Seminar Papers 1993, 485-505; D.R. MacDonald, 'The Acts of Paul and The Acts of John: Which Came First?' and 'The Acts of Peter and The Acts of John: Which Came First?'; J.B. Perkins, 'The Acts ofPeter as Intertext: Response to Dennis MacDonald', Ibidem, 506-10, 623-6, 627-33. 65 I am most grateful to Ton Hilhorst for his observations and to Ken Dowden for his helpful correction of my English.
IV. Old Testament quotations in the Acts of Andrew and John I S T VA N KARASSZON
In an ancient Hungarian proverb we are informed about the significance of the quotations in one's literary activity: 'Show me your library, and I will tell you who you are!' Quotations in ancient religious documents are testimonies to the theological standpoint of the respective authors, and their research is instructive with regard to their position in the development of the tradition. The task of reviewing Old Testament quotations in the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (AAA) is overdue; we try to fill this gap and, by way of comparison, we quote the LXX and Vulgate alongside with the text of Acts of John (AJ), the Acts of Andrew (AA), and Gregory of Tours' reworking of the Acts of Andrew in his Liber de miraculis (VA).' Old Testament quotations in the AAA are conspicuous by their paucity. This is true, not only in comparison with the New Testament, but also in the light of the commentaries of the Church Fathers. The ways and methods of quoting the Old Testament in the New Testament is a subject in itself which, in its turn, has been treated a couple of times; so it is no use dealing with it again.2 Thus much, however, must be said that the New Testa-
1 All quotations of VA and AA are according to the edition of J.-M. Prieur, Acta Andreae (Turnhout, 1989). 2 Old Testament quotations in the New Testament are, of course, far from being uniform. I think that the description of The Interpreter's Dictionav of the Bible I11 (Nashville, 1962) 977 is still valid and worth quoting: 'In general, the purpose of quoting the OT is to secure confirmation of some NT statements by an authority respected by Jews, Chris-
58
ISWAN KARASSZON
ment writings needed Old Testament quotations for purposes of legitimacy, in order to guarantee continuity within both Testaments. That is why the New Testament authors often used the scheme of promise and fulfilment: Old Testament promises are fulfilled in New Testament events, first of all in the historical . ~ is depicted with event of the earthly activity of Jesus C h r i ~ t This lucidity in Lk 4.22, in the account of the first sermon of Jesus Christ in Nazareth. After having read the text of Isaiah, the anointed one spoke: 'Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing'. The issue is quite different in the commentaries of the Church Fathers. Most recently, F. Bovon published an investigation into the missionary speeches of Jesus in the AAA and drew our attention to the basic difference between the Acts and the Fathers' homilies: 'Un exkgbte de 17AntiquitC... recherche et souligne I'harmonie entre les ordonnances de JCsus et I'Ancien Testament'. By way of example he quotes Cyril of Alexandria who explains the commission of Jesus' disciples by citing Jeremiah: the difference between the true and false prophets is actualised in his homily, so that both Testaments form a unity in his sermon. Bovon asserts that nothing of this can be found in the apocryphal Acts: 'lorsque I'envoi des disciples ou des ap8tres n'est pas placC a la lumibre de I'Ancien Testament, il n'est pas rattache non plus a une autre rkalisation historique dans la vie des a p h e s , mais A d'autres sentences de JCsus I~i-mEme'.~
tians, and God-fearing Gentiles... What is thereby confirmed may be a matter of conduct..., a general principle..., or a theological insight...' 3 I am fully aware that this overall picture of the New Testament must be specified. However, it was not by chance that the former generation of theologians took the scheme promise-fulfilment as a model, even if this model is criticised and does not take hold any more without reservations. A brief sketch of the research is to be found in G.F. Hasel, New Testament Theology: basic issues in the current debate (Grand Rapids, 1978) especially 193-5. 4 F. Bovon: 'Le discours missionnaire de J6sus: r6ctption patristique et . Rel. 68 (1993) 481-97, esp. 483, 484. narration apocryphe', ~ t Thkol.
OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
59
The present paper aims at answering the question put by this remarkable fact: why this disregard for the Old Testament in the AAA? Did the authors forget one part of the Bible or do we have to look for special theological reasons behind their attitude? Without anticipating our final results, the second answer seems to be more realistic than the first one; in that case, however, we have to make clear-cut differences between the theology of the Church Fathers and the AAA. Is this endeavour legitimate? If not, the differences consist only in the methods of demonstration, not so much in their contents. Whatever the definite answer will be, we firmly hope that our investigations will provide colleagues with a solid basis for further research. 1. VA 1 1.25-27 Non nos nuptias aut avertirnus aut vitamus, cum ab initio Deus masculum iungi praecipisset et ferninam, sed potius incesta damnamus (Gen 2.24)5 'I-kn y i b - jri 't- ' b y w 't- 'mw wdbk b 'Stw E V E K E V Z O ~ T O U ~ a z a h ~ &vOpaxo< i~~t T ~ Vxa~gpa ~ a rfiv i
pqztpa a6zo0 ~ a npoo~ohhqe?fo&zat i xpbq ah00
T ~ Vyuvai~a
quam ob rem relinquet homo patrem suum et matrem et adherebit uxori suae... Fortunately enough, there is not much to explain in this text: The apostle is confronted with pagan wedding customs and alerts his followers to the Christian way of celebrating a wedding. He does not hesitate to make sure that Christianity is not against marriage; for this purpose he quotes the above passage of the Old Testament. When looking at the Masoretic text (Mi"), LXX and the Vulgate (V), we can state that the original version and the translations are unanimous (there is only one minor difference: V does not translate the suffix -6 of MT which would yield matrem suam). At first sight, however, one can see the great difference in the wording of
5
Prieur, Acta Andreae, 591. (Turnhout, 1989) 591.
60
ISTVAN KARASSZON
V and of the Latin text of VA, so that it is by no means sure that we have to do with a direct quotation. Our text is rather a loose allusion to Gen 2.24 which inserts Deus... praecipisset ('God ordered') and interrupts the text of the Bible. For the climax of this passage is surely what is omitted here: 'and they will become one flesh.' As to the theological interpretation of this passage, we want to make two remarks. First, it is true that VA quotes the Genesis correctly if it wishes to stress the power of the affection of married couples. No question that the text intended to express this emotion which is inherent to the 'nuclear family', and our text is right in looking for a justification of love and family in this text; as we read in the celebrated commentary of C. Westermann on Genesis: 'Die Liebe von Mann und Frau erhalt hier eine einzigartige Wiirdig~ng'.~ However, there is also a remarkable difference: VA understands this text as a justification of the institution of the family and tries to deduce from it the Christian principles of family-life. This is not true of the original text; once again, we quote Westermann: 'V. 24 wie V. 23 eben gerade nicht von der Ehe als Institution zur Erzeugung von Nachkommenschaft spricht, sondern von der Gemeinschaft von Mann und Frau als solcher'.' Gen 2.24 is an assertion, not an imperative. The New Testament quotes Gen 2.24, e.g. in Mc 10.7 (par Mt 14.5); the quotation is put into the mouth of Jesus Christ. The wording is according to the text of LXX (with a minor alteration). However, the context is quite different: Jesus wished to refute the social institution of divorce, and the basis of His assertion was to be found in the Tora. Of course, he cited Gen 2.24 at full length.8
6 C. Westermann, Genesis I, (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 19762) 3 18. 7 Westermann, Ibidem. 8 D. Liihrmann's commentary on Mark (Tiibingen, 1987) states: 'Da-
durch aber wird klar, d& es nicht nur um Monogamie, sondern auch um ein Scheidungsverbot geht.' We need not enter into the details of text critical problems; according to Liihrmann, the influence of Gen 2.24 and the use of LXX is beyond doubt.
OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
61
We can state then that VA moves in the opposite direction, if it wishes to justify the social institution of marriage with the same quotation. Gen 2.24 is quoted in Eph 5.31 as well. This passage tackles the issue of the marriage, just like VA - but what a difference! The christological concentration in founding Christian marriage is totally absent from VA while it is crucial to Eph. The rather conservative commentary of E.K. Simpson speaks of a 'marvellous analogy' between the nuptial bond and Christ's relation to the Church, in which 'the earthly and heavenly bridal are inextricably blended'.9 Why is this analogy put into parenthesis in VA? Not by chance, I think, but certainly on purpose: the environment of VA is not Christian and the christological analogy would not be a convenient tool to persuade people. We may then conclude that VA knows and acknowledges the Biblical text, but it is not the intention of the author to comment on the Bible, rather to justify his own position on a special topos, namely on Christian marriage. For this purpose he makes use of the text of the Bible; he does not wish to distort it, but it puts it into light of his special situation. The way of quoting is characteristic of his intention: that is why he does not quote Gen 2.24 word by word, only roughly. 2. VA 12.33 Ut quid, o viri, casso vos labore consumitis? Deus enim pugnat pro viris istis, et vos non cognoscitis? (Ex 14.25)" fi n l B m Ihm (viz. bmgvm) 6 y&p ~ d p t o qnoh&p&i'X E P ~CI\ST&V TO~)C, AiyU7tTfoU~ Deus enim pugnat pro eis contra nos The understanding of this passage is once again rather easy: the author refers to a great miracle which is a sign of God's activity; the exclamation is a rhetorical way of demonstrating the direct 9 E.K. Simpson and F.F. Bruce, The Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians (Grand Rapids, 1957) 13. 10 Prieur, Acta Andreae, 595.
intervention of God in history and putting a question means here certainly a strong affirmation. The original text and the translations are in harmony; especially, we can praise the translation of I in the Hebrew text: peri in Greek and p r o in Latin, i.e. 'for' and not 'with'.'' VA replaces this preposition with pro viris istis, which is an explication, not only an expansion, and refers to the representatives of Christian message present in our narrative, not to the people of God. Consequently, we have to do here with an adaptation of the Biblical text, rather than with a direct quotation or a brief comment. This is also true of the further expansion of the text, et vos non cognoseitis?, which is not part of the Biblical text, but a reaffirmation of the assertion of the first part of the sentence. The question is now at hand: was VA justified in expanding the Biblical text in this way? As we have done before, also this time we turn to a modem commentary. B.S. Childs writes: 'In the repetition of the description of Israel's crossing ... the miraculous delivery is contrasted with the destruction of the Egyptians ...'I2 The rhetoric device of the Biblical author is the contrast between Egyptians and Israelites; the defeat on the first side, and the victory on the other side display the mighty acts of Israel's God, and this narrative technique gives tension and energy to the text. In comparison with VA we have to state that precisely this narrative technique and rhetoric device were picked up by the author: we see the pagans on one side, and the Christian messengers on the other; the contrast, here too, demonstrates the power of God and the truth of the Gospel. To be sure, the Biblical quotation is not exact; we observe once again that VA does not comment on the Bible, it only cites the Bible and uses it for its own purposes. But we have to state that the expansion is done on purpose (not by chance), and the author testifies to a profound knowledge of the goal of the Biblical
11 Cf. (L. Koehler) and W. Baumgartner, Hebraisches und aramaisches Lexikon zum AIten Testament I1 (Leiden, 1977) 500. Most recently, P. Reymond, Dictionnaire d'htbreu et dTaramCen bibliques (Paris, 1991) 192. 12 B.S. Childs, Exodus (London, 1974) 227.
OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
narrative: he reproduces the point exactly.
Andreas, ego semper tecum sum et non te derelinquo (Josh 1 .5)13 'hyh 'mk I' 'rpk wl' ' i b k ( o b ~ o q )Eoopat ~ a PET$ i 006 ~ a Oi ~ K&yca.cah&lymo~ 01362 ~ X E P ~ W O O ~ EC I ~
ero et tecum, nun dimittam ne derelinquam te
One has to understand this oracle against the background of the historical setting into which VA puts the quotation: Andrew takes the decision to start and he determines that the direction should be ordered by God. Impressive is the choice of this quotation: it really comes from a new beginning, since the Biblical author depicts the outset of the conquest of Canaan by these words. Of course, the difference must not be neglected, too. This beginning in the Book of Joshua follows the former narratives of Moses; that is why the text of VA and that of MT and the translations are slightly different: the word semper must be inserted, replacing the reference to Moses (represented by ~ a ini LXX and et in V). But this minor alteration is done on purpose and fulfils the same function. On the other side, LXX and V are surely right if they translate hyha with a future (Eoopat and ero); we may ask why VA used present tense here - perhaps it wished to express God's steadfast presence with Andrew. Whatever the case might be, the ancient translations are right. Much more conspicuous is, however, that the two last verbs of the Biblical text are rendered word by word in the ancient translation, whilst VA uses only one verb: derelinquo. Modem linguistics say that the use of the two verbs in Hebrew is a pleonasm; the correct translation is, accordingly, that of VA, operating with one corresponding verb only. Here VA retains its right against the ancient translations. As to the literal and theological problems of this Biblical
13
Prieur, Acta Andreae, 619.
64
ISTVAN KARASSZON
passage, we have to do with a compound unity. First of all, the widespread notion of the divine promise to accompany a hero is referred to;I4 presumably VA wishes to pick up this notion and so it intends to join the Biblical tradition. In Josh 1.5, however, this theme is interwoven with the idea of the Holy War, and VA does not seem to realise this combination. As one of the modem commentaries states: 'The motif of divine presence frames the second half of our section ... The formula is taken up into the holy war ideology of Israel'.ls In my judgement, it is totally impossible that VA would not have known the idea of the Holy War in the theology of the Old Testament: there is such a vast Biblical material on this theme that this solution should be discarded. Rather I find that the author of VA led himself by the aims and goals of his own narrative and so he neglected one of the aspects of the quoted Biblical passage. Once again, we can state that the author picked up one of the topoi of the Old Testament which he thought to share with the Bible and used it for his special intention. This intention, however, was by no way to comment on the Biblical narrative: VA writes its own history. Let us add to all this that Josh 1.5 is quoted in Heb 13.5, too. The context is a series of virtues which should prevail when the new people of God goes its way, i.e. it will introduce a new period in history, just like in the life of Andrew. The wording is, however, different; Josh 1.5 is rendered here as follows: 06 pfi os &vQ 066' 06 pfi (JE k'y~arahtno.According to H.F. WeiR, this translation has much in common with Philo's rendering,16 so we have to do here with a further branch of the development of the textual tradition. The purpose is slightly different: Heb wishes to provide the members of the people of God with a solid basis for their behaviour. This is superfluous in Andrew's case, so it remains with the divine promise in VA. 14 Cf. H.D. PreuB, '... ich will mit dir sein!', Zs. Alttest. Wiss. 80 (1968) 139ff. 15 T.C. Butler, Joshua (Waco, 1983) 12. 16 H.F. Weiss, Der Brief an die Hebraer (Gottingen, 1991) 706.
OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
4. VA 24.51-52 Non est similis tibi, Domine (Ps 86 8; LXX: 85 8)17 Yn-kmk b 'Ihym 'dny O I ~ KEonv bpot6q o o t kv ecofq, ~ d p t € non est similis tui in diis, Domine This exclamation is the climax of a narrative about the miracle of resurrecting of dead person. Eye-witnesses to the miracle acknowledge the power and so the existence of Andrew's God; it seems that the whole story was told just to this end. VA had, of course, a great number of Biblical passages at hand expressing the same contents: the incomparability of God in the Old Testament. And it seems that he made a good choice: the context of this verse reports great tribulations (genre: individual lament)," and the comparison is strengthened by the presence of foreign nations in the subsequent verses. All this fits well into the situation of the miracle in VA, and we have good reasons to suggest that all these circumstances were considered by the author of VA before deciding in favour of our verse. In the wording there is only one important change: VA drops the word b'lhym; remarkably enough, this word is not rendered correctly in the ancient translations: 'in the gods' is clearly a Hebraism, since the right translation should be 'among the gods'. However, this is a way of translating which is common to ancient translations. About the reasons for omitting this word in VA we are reduced to speculation: perhaps the author wished to avoid the alternative of the existence of other gods in order to underline the exclusiveness of the God of Christians.Ig In the theology of Psalm 86 and that of VA, however, there are basic differences. The Psalmist does not need any miracle in his poem: the quoted exclamation is a motif of confidence ('Vertrau-
17 Prieur, Acta Andreae, 63 1. 18 H. Gunkel, Die Psalmen (Gottingen, 1926) 376: 'Das Klagelied des Einzelnen in Todesnot und Feindesbedrangnis.' 19 Gunkel, Ibidem, 377: 'Das Wort setzt eigentlich das Dasein rnehrerer Gotter voraus, die sich mit Jahwe nicht vergleichen konnen.'
66
ISTVAN KARASSZON
ensmotif), even in face of the enemies and tribulations, in the structure of the psalm. The Psalmist does not intend to convert people to his God; rather he is in search of peace and rest. In this respect, VA moves far from the Old Testament. For him this exclamation is a manifesto which finds public acceptance; by the same stroke, it is the result of his Christian mission and a prelude to further missionary acts. Certainly that is the very essence of what the author intends to say: that is why VA puts this exclamation to the end of his narrative whilst the quoted verse is rather in the centre of the Psalm.
5 . VA 13.18-20 Populi autem stupebant, videntes eum post viginti tres annos ambulantem, et gIoriJicabant Deum, dicentes, quia: Non est similis deo Andreae (Is 46.9)20 ky 'nky 'I w 'yn 'wd 'Ihym ps kmwny k y 6 ~ t p 6t 8s6c,, at O I ~ KE o r t v E r t nhqv k p o O non est ultra Deus nec est similis mei All what we have said in the above paragraph is also true of this passage: after a miracle has taken place, the eye-witnesses express their acceptance of the true God; the exclamation is the climax of the narrative, indeed it is the very point of the author. However, this time we are not sure that there is a real quotation here: the ancient translations are really translations, i.e., they render the text of the Hebrew Bible in Greek and Latin. In opposition to them, VA is rather a paraphrase; the speaker in the Biblical text is God himself, but in VA the incomparability of God is confirmed by people who were present at the miracle of the healing of the young man. Perhaps the author did not wish to quote the Bible explicitly; instead he simply used Biblical terms and phraseology. Our question is here as it was above whether the author understands and interprets the Bible correctly. The first part of our
20
Prieur, Acta Andreae, 599.
OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
67
answer can be an affirmation: Yes, he was in line with the purpose of Deutero-Isaiah who referred to the mighty acts of God in order to convince his compatriots about the power of God in history. That is why he often used the example of the former deeds of Yahweh, e.g., the creation. This kind of proving God's power is the purpose of VA: it tells us about miracles which display God's activity in the course of the mission and this is a proof of his power for other people. No question: the author knew the Bible profoundly and he who cites here used the Old Testament regularly. Modem criticism, however, goes even farther. As we read in the commentary of C. Westermann on Deutero-Isaiah, the feature of the present text was that of a trial speech:2' God was accused within the framework of collective lament of forgetting His people and of being defeated by foreign gods. It is the 'Sitz im Leben' of a trial that God claims incomparability for Himself, and His former deeds will testify to His divinity. VA, in turn, does not wish to enter into trial in the name of God, and so it neglects this important aspect of the Biblical text. His goal and intention are to demonstrate the power of God which is beyond any doubt and question; finally, even outsiders accept the incomparability of God. The possibility of the existence of other gods is suppressed here, just as it was in the former passage. For this reason VA omits the word 'lhym in the second part of the sentence. Here again the goal of the narrative prevails over the Biblical narrative, but this is by no means due to a lack of the knowledge of the Bible. 6. A J 113.20 6 zQv iipyov k ~ & o r zbv q &7c&Ctov&7co6t6ob~ pto06~~~ Mt 1 6 . 2 7 ~~ a z6ze i &7co66oet & ~ & o r~qa z zfiv h xp&Ctv a6zoO Rom 2.6 65 &no66ost k ~ & o z ~ q a z zhh Epya aCzoO Prov 24.12d 65 &xo6i6ootv k ~ & o z q~ a z zhh CSpya aCzo0
C . Westermann, Isaiah 40-66 (London, 1969) 184: 'But these opening words, too, correspond to one of the parts of the trial speeches, namely, the summons to Israel to be God's witnesses.' 22 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 313.
21
68
ISTV AN KARASSZON
Ps 61.13b 6Tt 06 & x 0 6 6 0 ~ tk~K & o t ~KaT& r& Epya a13~00 This time we have not quoted MT and V; the quotations are clearly taken from LXX. This fact is quite remarkable because we did not see much affinity toward the text of LXX (in contrast to the Church Fathers). The only explanation of this might be given by the circumstance that the New Testament quotations go back to the LXX text. We can assume that the text of A J is not a quotation taken directly from LXX, but only by the mediation of the New Testament. In comparison with the New Testament, however, there are some differences in the respective theologies. The Gospel according to Matthew makes use of the Old Testament quotation in order to stress the parousia; the eschatological aspect of this text is beyond discussion. Readers of the Gospel are summoned to direct their acts in view of the last judgement, for, as Schweizer writes: 'Die Frage nach dem Menschensohn (V. 13) ist erst mit dem Hinweis auf das auch den Jungem bevorstehende Gericht und den Lohn fur rechte Jiingertreue b e a n t ~ o r t e t ' . ~It~ is immediately obvious, though, that nothing of this has been retained in AJ. The eschatological dimension is not absent in Romans, but it is clear that this quotation stands firm within the context of the justification by faith alone. This entitles the Apostle to change the overall ambience of the Old Testament quotation - a fact which is stressed in the commentary of U. Wilckens: 'Das Zitat Ps 61.13 (vgl. Spr 24.12), im dortigen Kontext positiv gemeint als H o f i u n g des von Feinden bedrangten Gerechten auf Gottes rettenden Eingriff, gewinnt so bei Paulus eine drohende Note. Gerecht ist Gottes Gericht gegeniiber dem siindigen Juden einzig darin, daB er ihm "zuruckgibt", was er sich durch seine Taten selbst envirkt hat'.24
23 E. Schweizer, Das Evangelium nach Matthaus (Gottingen, 19864) 226, who assumes that Matthew's redaction even increased the eschatological dimension of the material of the tradition: 'Jesus riickt also immer starker von der Rolle des das Gericht entscheidenden Zeugen ... in die des Richters und des H e m des Gottesgerichtes; Ibidem (quote). 24 U. Wilckens, Der Brief an die Romer (Ziirich, 1987*) 126.
OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
69
This very endeavour of the Apostle is not recorded in A$ even if we presuppose that it is a new dimension, we have to state that it suppressed this aspect of the Epistle to the Romans in its quotation. What was to be quoted from the New Testament? Prov 24.12 is a locus classicus of the Jewish doctrine of retribution ('Vergeltungslehre'); according to this, God warrants the good order of life by giving everybody what they deserve. To be sure, this doctrine was not without doubts and debates in the theology of the Old Testament. But all this does not alter the explanation of this verse. T. Romer writes with good reasons: 'Ainsi, selon les Proverbes, le Seigneur est celui qui institue et garantit le lien entre le comportement d'un individu et sa destinke. Pour que I'ordre du monde soi maintenu, les actes de I'homme doivent ktre dGment rktribuks... L'importance de ce lien entre la cause et son effet va d'ailleurs provoquer une evolution dangereuse de la sagesse, a I'origine ~ ' to Psalm d'une crise grave dont Job sera le tkmoin r k ~ o l t C . ~AS 61.13 (MT: 62), H. Gunkel mentions its relation to wisdom literature. However, the function of this last verse is that of comfort and consolation: 'Das Wort aber, das ihm (i.e. the Psalmist) zuteil geworden ist, und das ihn in seinen Schmerzen getrostet hat, ist dieses, daR Jahve allein Schutz und Gnade in seiner Hand halt. Die Lehre, mit der er schlieRt, dal3 Gott jedem nach seinem Tun vergilt, ist das standige Thema der Weisheitsdichtung in ihrer Peri~de'.~~ As we see, the history of the theology of this verse is impressive. The question emerges: what remained from all of this in AS! But unfortunately we have no chance of attempting any answer: the quotation in A J stands within the context of a series of the praise of God, so we can not say with certainty how much the author understood the fascinating history of this Biblical text. It seems to me certain that he was aware of the character of this verse as a quotation from the Old Testament in the New Testament. But the doctrine of retribution (here a positive term) became 25 T. Romer, La Sagesse duns 1'Ancien Testament (Aubonne, 1991) 9. 26 Gunkel, Die Psalmen, 263.
a topos for AJ, so he did not need to enter into details about it.
7. A J 90.8-9
... at Iorapat
& + O P ~ V[afirbv] EIS r& 6~1oOtaafir06~' This time I refrain from quoting the parallel text, i.e., Ex 33.23, because it is clear that this is not a translation, rather a loose allusion to the Biblical text. A J describes here the transfiguration of the Lord and in doing so it uses Old Testament phraseology: the glory of the Lord was to be looked upon from behind, it could not be seen face to face. In order to illustrate this, the author makes a quick hint to the Old Testament theophany which is regarded here as the counterpart of the New Testament revelation. In view of this less precise allusion we are entitled to assume that not only knew the author the text of the Old Testament, but he supposed his audience to be well acquainted with this story: He must have been sure that listeners or readers understood what he was about to quote.
Conclusion It is now time to briefly summarise the results of our sketch of the Old Testament quotations in the AAA. Even though the authors rarely quote the Old Testament, they testify to their profound knowledge of the Bible. Consequently, the paucity of Old Testament quotations should be explained by their special purpose and theology. The first answer to this finding is at hand: they did not feel the necessity of proving the continuity within the Old and New Testament any more; rather they accepted that this was granted by the New Testament itself. That is why they did not hesitate to quote from the Old Testament as an authoritative source; in those cases where quotations from the Old Testament are used both by the New Testament and the AAA, we can state that the latter did not need the authority of the New Testament any more: it was their free choice whether they followed the New
27
Junod & Kaestli, AI, 195.
OLD TESTAMENT QUOTATIONS
71
Testament way of quoting or not. The authority of the Old Testament was not damaged or diminished, only its relevance bore not so heavy as that of the New Testament (a comparison with quotations from the New Testament reveals this quite clearly). Much more important is, however, our second remark: it seems that in the time of the AAA several topoi of Christian doctrines developed, and the authors' purpose was rather to comment on these topoi and not on the Old Testament. This will be definitely different in the homilies of the Church Fathers! In the above investigation we witnessed the following topoi: Christian marriage, the power of God in miracles, the presence of God with the missionaries, the praise of the Almighty God by Christians and pagans alike, God's incomparability and the negation of foreign gods - all these must have been fervently debated issues during the missionary activities of the early Christians.
V.
Die Eucharistie in den Johannesakten
HANS ROLDANUS
Unsere Kenntnisse uber Form und Entwicklung der Eucharistie in den ersten Jahrhunderten sind durftig. Immer wieder zeigt die Forschung eine Vorliebe von der Annahme auszugehen, daB es einen apostolischen Archetypus gegeben habe, aus dem sich alle, uns bekannten Traditionen, besonders die eucharistischen Gebetstexte, entwickelt hatten. Vor kurzem hat Paul Bradshaw dargelegt, daR sich einer solchen Annahme einige Fakten, bzw. Unsicherheiten entgegenstellen.' Die Annahme, daR das Vorbild in einer im ersten Jahrhundert ublichen judischen Mahlzeit und den d m gehorigen Segensspni'chen und Danksagungen liegt - ein Stutzpunkt fiir eine urspriinglich identische Gestalt der christlichen Eucharistiefeier! - hat sich als unmiiglich enviesen. Andererseits gelingt es nur schwer, die vorhandenen Dokumente alle in einen Stamrnbaum einzufugen. Das gilt besonders von Didachd 9-10, was dazu gefuhrt hat, daR man diese Kapitel entweder fiir die Beschreibung einer nichtsakramentalen Mahlzeit (z.B. einer Agape') hielt oder als Beweis einer urspriinglich dualen Feiertradition ansah. Bekannt ist die von Hans Lietzmann 1926 vorgeschlagene n , ~Rekonstruktion, die m a r in ihrer Trennung in zwei T ~ ~ e eine Radikalitat keine breite Zustimmung gefunden hat, dennoch aber in abgeschwachten Formen (z.B. von 0. Cullmann und W. Rordorf)
1 P.F. Bradshaw, The Search for the Origins of Christian Worship (London, 1992) 13 1-60. 2 H. Lietanann, Messe und Herrenmahl (Berlin, 1955') 241f; Bradshaw, The Search, 5 1 ff.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
73
weitergefuhrt wurde. Diese Sachlage sol1 uns bei einer Untersuchung der eucharistischen Stellen in einer apokryphen Schrift aus dem 2. Jahrhundert davor warnen, diese irgendwo als (Fehl-) entwicklung von der urspriinglichen Form der Gebetstexte sowie des Ritus einzustufen. Dabei sol1 auch bedacht werden, daR wir das eucharistische Material in den Acta Johannis zwar mit dem Befund aus der Didache' und aus Justins Apologia vergleichen konnen, aber daJ3 diese zwei Dokumente wahrscheinlich nur Beispiele bestehender Brauche im 2. Jahrhundert sind und nicht zu zwingenden Entwicklungslinien veranlassen mussen. Die heute anerkannte Pluriformitat des Urchristentums legt es vielmehr nahe, auch eine Vielzahl eucharistischer Brauche anzunehmen, obwohl G. Dix und andere mit Recht behauptet haben, daB im palastinensischen Urchristentum ein unabanderlicher Kern des eucharistischen Ritus bestanden haben Die Zweispurigkeit hat sich auf zwei Fragen zugespitzt. Einerseits auf das Verhaltnis zwischen Doxologie und Anamnese: wann und wo wurde mit dem, jetzt allgemein anerkannten, anfanglich eschatologischen Fokus der Feier die Erinnerung an Jesu Selbsthingabe in den Tod verbunden? Und hat es daher eucharistische Gebete gegeben, in denen nur ein Aspekt, z.B. der Lob an Gott oder ein allgemein gehaltener Dank f i r seine Gaben, also ohne Erinnerung an Jesu Sterben, hervorgehoben wurde? Bradshaw nach ware das sehr wahrscheinlich. H. Feld spricht davon, daR sich das Motiv des Dankes 'in der Geschichte der Theologien und Liturgien am eindeutigsten und beharrlichsten durchgehalten' hat.5 Andererseits hat es sich auf den Zusammenhang von Brot und Wein zugespitzt: wahrend der Wein urspriinglich als Hinweis auf das vollendete Gottesreich gedeutet wurde, sind - jedenfalls schon bei Paulus - die getrennten Handlungen des Brotbrechens und der
3 G. Dix, The Shape of the L i t u r g ~(Westminster, 1945). 4 Bradshaw, The Search, 160. 5 H. Feld, Das Verstandnis des Abendmahls (Darmstadt, 1976) 57. Er beachtet dabei allerdings nicht, wie es Bradshaw, The Search, 15ff. u. 44 tut, den Unterschied zwischen ~dhoy60.1 und ~dxapto.r6o!
74
HANS ROLDANUS
Weinspendung zusammengeriickt und in ihrer Deutung parallelisiert, so daR beide den ganzen Christus als Gabe repAsentieren. Behm hat hier eine 'durch anthropologische Vorstellungen bedingte Sinnverschiebung in der Abendmahlsterminologie... bei Paulus' gesehen, der auch Johannes gefolgt sei. Behm spricht sogar von einem 'anthropologischen Mflverstandnis der Abendmahlsworte' (ThWB 111, 739-42: meine Kursivierung). Diese anthropologisierende Umdeutung der Einsetzungsworte sei, Behm nach, verantwortlich f i r den ProzeR, wobei 'die Abendmahlselemente in die Mitte der Betrachtung riickten' (ibidem). Zu dieser Ansicht p a t nicht gerade die Theorie Lietzmanns, nach der eben das Jerusalemer eschatologische Freudenmahl ohne WeingenuR gewesen ware, welcher Brauch sich dann mindestens bis in die Gemeinden, in denen die Johannesakten entstanden und f i r welche sie bestimmt waren, erhalten hatte.6 Wir mussen also darnit rechnen, dal3 es f i r die in unserem Text fehlende Weinkommunion andere, eigene Beweggriinde gegeben haben mag. Beide, der hier beschriebene Vollzug der Handlung wie die dabei gesprochenen Gebete, verdienen unsere Auherksamkeit. Auch wollen wir den etwaigen Nachhall johanneischer Eucharistievorstellungen nicht auRer acht lassen. 1. In den Acta Johannis ist an zwei Stellen mit Klarheit von einer Eucharistiefeier die Rede und zweimal stellt sich die Frage, ob wir mit eucharistischen Anspielungen zu tun haben. Einmal ist das der Fall bei einem Gastmahl, ein anderes Mal bei einem Reihentanz. Sie finden sich in dem, sich von der iibrigen Erzahlung abhebenden, Stuck cc.87-105, das von Hennecke-Schneemelcher (HS), von Junod & Kaestli (AI) und von Klijn (K) begriindeterweise zwischen dem ersten, summarischen Satz und dem Rest des c.37 angesetzt wird:' es handelt sich um eine eigentiimliche 'Evangeliumsverkiindigung des Johannes' (so HS), welche dem Thema der
6 Lietzmann, Messe und Herrenmahl, 239-49. 7 E. Hennecke und W. Schneemelcher (Hrsg.), Neutestamentliche Apolayphen I1 (Tiibingen, 19714) 125-76 (K.Schaferdiek); A.F.J.Klijn (ed), Apokriefen van het Nieuwe Testament I1 (Kampen, 1985) 9-55.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
75
'irdischen Erscheinung Christi' (so K) gewidmet ist. Die Eigenartigkeiten dieses Zeugnisses des Johannes uber Christi irdische Erscheinung stellen besondere Fragen zur Interpretation der genannten Stelle, cc.93-6, zumal diese Kapitel von Junod & Kaestli (AI) und von Paul Schneider (PS) als Interpolation angesehen ~ e r d e n .Wenden ~ wir uns zuerst den eindeutigeren Erwahnungen eines eucharistischen Rituals zu: sie befinden sich in dem Abschnitt der iiber einen zweiten Aufenthalt von Johannes und seinem Gefolge in Ephesus berichtet, cc.62-115. Erstens gibt es die fortgesetzte Geschichte um Drusiana, cc.6386. Die eigentlichen eucharistischen Handlungen stehen in den letzten zwei Kapiteln: Johannes nimmt ein Brot, um es zu brechen, spricht zuerst ein Lobgebet im Plural, von dem zwei Satze mit F o ~ & < o p ~eingeleitet v werden, ein mit pap.rupoCp~v,ein folgender mit a i v o O p v und vier mit &\)~apzo.r06p&v. Dann gibt er 'allen Briidern teil an der TOO Kvpiov ~ \ ) ~ a p t o . r l a 5Die ' . Teilnehmer an dieser Feier sind, auRer Johannes, einige von ihm mitgefiihrte Briider (72.5), und die drei Hauptfiguren dieser mit c.63 anfangenden Episode: der schon bekehrte (vgl. c.31 mit 37!) Andronicus, seine Frau Drusiana und ein, sie gegen ihren Willen begehrender, junger Mann namens Callimachus. Dieser ist Ursache verschiedener Todesfalle, weil namlich nicht nur Drusiana, da sie kein Skandalon sein will, sich aber doch mitschuldig achtet, aus dem Leben scheidet, sondern auch Callimachus und Andronicus' geldgieriger Venvalter Fortunatus, der jenem geholfen hat, in Drusianas Grab hineinzuschlupfen, um mit ihr Nekrophilie zu treiben, f i r diese Greueltat mit dem Tod durch einen SchlangenbiR bestraft werden. Es mussen also zwei Tote aufenveckt werden: auf Bitten von Andronicus zuerst der Callimachus, damit er bekenne, was er gemacht hat. Er bereut seine Untat und ist also auch ein Bekehrter. Dann Drusiana, auf deren Dringen auch Fortunatus fiir eine Weile ins Leben zuriickkommt, um aber bald danach wiederum den Tod zu finden, weil er ein Unwiirdiger ist. Ihn trim ein Bannspruch des Johannes, in dem auch von AusschluR &xd E \ ) x ~ 8 P.G. Schneider, "'A Perfect Fit": The Major Interpolation in the Acts of John', SBL 1991 Seminar Papers, 5 18-32.
76
HANS ROLDANUS
p t o z C a ~die Rede ist. Zweitens veranstaltet Johannes kurz vor seinern eigenen Tod einen Gottesdienst, cc.106-10. Er spricht Abschiedsworte, ein Dank- und Furbittegebet; dann folgt ein Dankgebet iiber erbetenem ) , ein vorn bisherigem Brot (aizqoaq &pzov ~ 6 x c c p l o ~ q o s v also Beten sich abhebendes, eucharistisches Gebet, wonach er dieses Brot bricht und es 'uns allen gab, indern er fiir jeden der Briider betete, er rnochte der Gnade des H e m und der heiligsten Eucharistie wurdig sein'. Ausdriicklich wird envahnt, daR Johannes auch selbst an der Brotgemeinschaft teilnimmt (1 10). In beiden Fallen handelt es sich also urn ein explizites eucharistisches Ritual. Da dies, wie schon gesagt, in cc.93ff. nicht der Fall ist, bleiben wir vorlaufig bei diesen zwei Eucharistiefeiern stehen und wollen die einer naheren Betrachtung unterziehen. 2. Welchen Sinn und Bedeutung hat ein eucharistisches Mahl an den beiden Stellen? Man konnte meinen, es venveise nach Tod und Aufenveckung. Die erste Eucharistiefeier findet ja in einem Grab statt, wo kurz zuvor zwei Menschen des wahren Lebens teilhaftig geworden ~ i n d Es . ~ war sicher eine frornme Besorgnis der Drusiana, die sie in den Tod gefuhrt hat, aber der Verfasser konnte sehr wohl gemeint haben, daR sie diesen Tod nicht verdiente und deshalb darin auch nicht bleiben sollte. Ihr Tod kann in der Erzahlung auch die Funktion haben, das sexuelle Begehren des Callimachus bis ins Widerliche steigern zu lassen: er will sich ja an ihrer Leiche vergreifen. So tief ist seine Begierde, aber so griindlich zeigt sich auch seine Bekehrung, denn durch sein spontanes Siindenbekenntnis macht sich Callimachus sozusagen seiner Ruckkehr wiirdig. Bei dem Sterben des Johannes folgt diese m a r nicht, aber durch zweierlei wird doch klargemacht, daR der Tod hier nicht das letzte Wort hat: erstens ubefallt ihn das Verscheiden gar nicht,
Einige Zuge erinnern an die biblische Auferstehungsgeschichte: Die kleine Gruppe kornmt am dritten Tag rnorgens friih am Grab, wovon die Ture offenbar geschlossen sind (sie offken sich erst auf Befehl des Apostels), und es erscheint ein schoner Jiingling (72-3).
9
DIE EUCHARlSTlE
77
denn er behalt die Initiative bei seiner Bestattung und dem Geistgeben. Und zweitens dankt er fiir seine Bewahrung und ist sicher, ungehindert von bosen Machten zu seinem Herrn zu kommen (c.111, 114). Es ist aber klar, daR hier die Eucharistie weder gedacht ist wie ein @ppa~ov CleavaaCa5 im Sinne des Ignatius, noch wie eine Nahrung oder Stiirkung auf das ewige Leben hin, wie es Irenaus lehrte.1° Der Sinn mu8 wohl ein anderer sein, denn das wahre und ewige Leben braucht den Kommunikanten nicht mehr verburgt zu werden. Johannes und Drusiana sind schon ganz rein und bei dem Callimachus vollzieht sich die geistig-moralische Reinigung auch ganzlich, bevor er an der Eucharistie teilhat: auf dem Hohepunkt seiner Siinde sieht er einen schonen, strahlenden Jungling, der zu ihm sagt: 'stirb, auf daR du lebst!' Und er stellt fest, daR 'jener', d.h. der Unglaubige, Zuchtlose und Gottlose in ihm schon gestorben is? und sein Ich auferweckt. Die Eucharistiefeier hat also eher Bestatigungs- als Versprechungscharakter. Das zeigt sich auch am Los des Fortunatus. Als Drusiana in ihrer Herzensgute ihn auch auferweckt sehen mochte, erhebt Callimachus den Einwand, daR die Stimme des schonen Junglings, die er gehort hat, jenen nicht genannt hat. Auch Andronicus wuBte schon, daR sein Verwalter, im Gegensatz zu dem nur 'irregeleitenen' Callimachus, der Rettung unwurdig ist. Johannes aber nimmt keinen Standpunkt ein und uberlaRt es Drusiana zu handeln. Als Fortunatus seinen GeGhrten im lusternen Abenteuer, Callimachus, als offenbar Glaubigen sieht, mijchte er gar nicht wieder leben und entweicht der fiommen Gesellschaft. Dann versteht aber Johannes, der uber Callimachus schon wuBte, daR er 'ein Diener Jesus Christi werden sollte' ( 7 9 , daB sich die Seele des Fortunatus kraft ihrer Natur nicht zum Besseren wenden kann: Er hat ja dargetan, wer er ist. Er besitzt auch nicht die Moglichkeit, Gott zu verherrlichen: an seinem Benehmen zeigt sich, wie seine Wurzel und Natur sind. Daraufhin 'exkommuniziert' ihn Johannes mit dem Erofiungsspruch: 'Sei fern von denen, die auf den Herrn hoffen'. Er wird ausgeschlossen vom ganzen Wandel und allen religiosen 10 Ignatius, Eph. 20.2; Irenaeus, A h . haer. 4.18.5, 5.2.3.
78
HANS ROLDANUS
Handlungen, 'von ihrem Fasten, von ihren Gebeten, von ihrem heiligen Bad ( h o u ~ p 6 v ,Taufe), von ihrer Eucharistie, von ihrer fleischlichen Nahrung, Trank, Kleidung, von ihrem Liebesmahl (dryttxq),' usw. (Ich komme auf die Reihe von Eucharistie bis Agape' noch zuriick, besonders wegen der Erwahnung von x6zoq). Wahrend die kleine Gruppe die Eucharistie begeht, stirbt Fortunatus erneut infolge eines Schlangenbisses, und Johannes konkludiert, anscheinend zufi-ieden: 'Da hast du dein Kind, Teufel!' (c.86). DaB es sich nach der Eucharistiefeier ergibt, daR Fortunatus schon drei Stunden tot war, unterstreicht seine radikale und totale Exkommmunikation. Deshalb wird klar, daB nur die Glaubigen wiirdig sind, an der Eucharistie teilzunehmen. Auch bei seiner letzten Eucharistie betet Johannes 'fir jeden der Briider, er mochte der Gnade des H e m und der Heiligsten Eucharistie wiirdig sein' (1 10). Die Wiirdigkeit als Bedingung kommt schon vor in der Didache' 9.5 und 10.6b: Da sind es die Getauften, die auch tatsachlich heilig leben. In den AJ sind es die 'von Dir ~berfiihrten',und aus dem Kontext ist klargeworden, da8 sie zu dieser Glaubenseinsicht und zum Heil pradestiniert sind. Der geldgierige Fortunatus hat ja iiberhaupt keine Chance dazuzugehoren, wahrend der Leichenschander ohne jeden Verdienst gerettet wird." Schneider meint, daB in diesem Teil der AJ der Kern die 'geistige Wiedergeburt und die Umwandlung in die Verwandschaft des H e m ' sei. Die Botschaft dieser Auferweckungsgeschichte sei, daB 'es nicht geniigt, physisch von den Toten auferweckt zu werden; man solle geistlich zu einem Christen auferweckt werden'.
11 In c.69 wird 'von schmutziger Lust entbrennen' als Siinde gestellt vor 'sich von Geldgier verlocken lassen'. In c.76 scheint Callimachus schon durch den Anblick der Schlange, die den Fortunatus totbeifit, von seinem liisternen Vorhaben zuriickgehalten zu werden.. 'Zu Recht - meint er - denn jener ermutigte meinen Wahnwitz, als ich schon von jenem unschicklichen und schrecklichen Wahn abgelassen hatte'. Was ihn aber noch mehr ergreift als der Tod seines Gefahrten, ist die Erscheinung des 'Schonen', und zwar in dem Augenblick, da er seine Untat doch durchfiihren will. Hier ist also eine Unausgeglichenheit von pradestinierender Gnade und schwachem Verdienst!
DIE EUCHARISTIE
79
Bei dieser, an sich richtigen, Betonung des 'geistlichen' bleibt aber m.E. auRer Betracht, dal3 diese geistige Auferstehung eine Sache offensichtlicher Wiirdigung und Erwahlung ist: es ist die von Nichtvorbestimmten gesauberte Gemeinschaft, die die Eucharistiefeier begeht.12 Es versteht sich von selbst, da8 Johannes und die, die ihn zu seinem Ausgang begleiten, auch 'Wurdige' sind! 3. Im Vollzug der eucharistischen Feier geht der Kommunion ein von Johannes ausgesprochenes Gebet voran. Er nimmt ein Brot, um es in der Grabkarnmer zu brechen und spricht zuerst ein formelhaftes Gebet, wovon, wie schon angedeutet wurde, jeder Satz anfangt mit einem 'Wir preisen, wir danken', und dergleichen. Nach diesem Lobgebet kommt er aus dem Grab und 1aRt die Briider 'an der Eucharistie des H e m teilnehmen' (86). Seine letzte Eucharistie findet an einem Sonntag statt. Hier reihen sich, wie oben gesagt, ein Dank- und Furbitte- Gebet aneinander, in denen er besonders die Wohltaten und Hilfsbereitschaft Jesu preist (log), und ein eucharistisches Gebet, das iiber das erbetene Brot ausgesprochen wird (1 09). Nach diesem zweiten Gebet bricht er es und verteilt es (1 10). Wir konnen also feststellen, daR auch in dieser Schrift 'Eucharistie' sowohl das vor der Kommunion ausgesprochene Dankgebet als auch das verteilte Brot bezeichnet. Auch 1aRt sich vermuten, daR mit dem hier beschriebenen Typus des Gemeindemahles nicht eine Agapbfeier verbunden war: im Bannspruch iiber Fortunatus steht Eucharistia durch 'fleischliche Nahrung, Trank und Kleidung' von Agapk getrennt (84). Es scheint nicht zu bezweifeln, daR hiermit der natiirliche Lebensunterhalt gemeint ist. Wurden Agapk und Eucharistia zusammengehoren, dann miinten .rpo+q und 716205 explikativ die Elemente der kombinierten Mahlzeit bezeichnen. In Did.lO.3 ist das allerdings der Fall: aber da werden X V E U ~ ~ T I Krpo+qv ~ V at x o ~ b v ,gefolgt durch 'ewiges Leben', als Gnadengabe 'an uns'
12 Schneider, "'A perfect Fit"', 527: 'spiritual rebirth and transformation into the Lord's kindred'. Vgl. 'spiritually resurrected' (ibidem) und 'spiritual race' (521, 526).
80
HANS ROLDANUS
unterschieden von der Nahrung und Trank, die Gott allen Menschen gegeben hat. Einer spirituellen Deutung stehen in unserem Text aber sowohl die Prazisierung 'fleischlich' bei Nahrung, als auch der Einschub von 'Kleidung' im Wege. Mit n6.coq als Hindeutung auf den Abendmahlsgetrank fallt nun aber auch die einzig mogliche Anspielung auf den Gebrauch von Wein bei der hier beschriebenen Eucharistie aus. Lietzmann hat in seinem Messe und Herrenrnahl darauf hingewiesen, daB Lukas (auBer dem Bericht vom letzten Mahl von Jesus vor seinem Tode natiirlich!) eucharistische Gemeindefeier nur in der Form einer Brotkornrnunion kennt (Lk 24.30,35; Act 2.42,46; 20.11; 27.35). Auch in den Petmstraditionen (Hom. Clem., Petrusakten) wird nur Brot verteilt. Von den beiden Eucharistien der AJ will Lietzmann gezeigt haben, dal3 ihre Form 'dem Typ der DidachGgebete nahekommt'.13 Das kann nur von den Gebeten, auf die wir unsere Aufinerksarnkeit noch richten miissen, behauptet werden. Denn wenn die Gemeinde der AJ tatsachlich nur die Brotkommunion praktiziert hat, wie es auch Lietzmann sicher vorkommt, dann ergibt sich bei sonstigen ~bereinstimmun~en ein deutlicher Unterschied mit der Didache', die den Becher kennt und sogar voranstellt (c.9). Es muR dann nach dem Grund gefiagt werden, weshalb die AJ von diesem Gebrauch abweichen, wenn sie doch iibrigens mit der Form der Didache' bekannt sind. Dieser Punkt ist interessant im Rahmen der Frage, inwieweit die AJ an die kanonische Apostelgeschichte referieren. Es sollte aber auch bedacht werden, daR im c.6 des Evangelium Johannis, Jesus sich zunachst nur als Brot vom Himmel oder Brot des Lebens bezeichnet. Erst ab vs.53 ist auch vom Trinken seines Blutes die Rede, d.h. erst nachdem der redende Christus den ubergang vom lebendigen Brot des Himmels zu dem Fleisch, das er f i r das Leben der Welt hingibt, gemacht hat (vs.51). Nach Bultmann sol1 mit 51c ein Einschub der 'kirchlichen Redaktion' anfangen, der ein sakramentales, mysterienhaftes Interesse verriete. Gegen diese Auffassung ist eingewendet wor-
13
Lietanann, Messe und Herrenmahl, 24 1 f.
DIE EUCHAMSTIE
81
den, daR dem Evangelisten ein Interesse an der Leibhaftigkeit des Offenbarers und seiner Offenbarung gar nicht fremd sei. H.Leroy, Ratsel und M$verstandnis (1968) zitierend, faRt Feld zusammen: 'Wir haben es also in 6,51c-58 nicht mit einem vom Interesse am Abendmahl als kultischem oder sakramentalem Akt bestimmten 'Abendmahlsbericht' zu tun, sondern mit einer 'Interpretation der in der johanneischen Gemeinde gefeierten Eucharistie von der &no<-Rede her'.'I4 Wahrend also Bultmann annahm, daR es sich um 'eine nachtragliche Interpretation der @to<-Rede auf das Herrenmahl' handelt, pflichtet Feld Leroy bei, dal3 fiir den 4. Evangelisten 'das sakramentale Essen zum Zeichen des Glaubens an die Offenbarung Jesu wird und die Teilhabe an der Lebenssphare des Offenbarers bedeutet ...' Seine Tendenz sei nicht, 'die Sakramente zu verdrangen oder zu ersetzen, sondern sie ebenso wie die ihm vorliegende Jesus-Tradition einer tieferen Verstehens-Dimension zuzufiihren', wobei das Risiko eines, auf grober Identifikation beruhenden MiRverstandnisses mit in Kauf genommen wird.15 Diese Interpretationsmoglichkeit sollten wir auch fiir den Ort der Eucharistie in den A J im Gedachtnis behalten. Da nun auch in der Erzahlung von einem Gastmahle bei einem Pharisaer (93), dessen eucharistischer Charakter noch zu diskutieren ist, ausdriicklich nur von Brot die Rede ist, stimmen alle Mahlzeitberichte in diesem Punkt iiberein, daB das Trinken von Wein fehlt. Die Beschreibungen lassen auch nicht zu, zu vermuten - wie es in anderen Schriften wohl naheliegt -, 'Brot' stehe sozusagen 'ritualtechnisch' ftir eine komplette Feier mit Kommunion von beiden Elementen. Wenn fiir diese enkratitischen Leute die Konsumierung von Wein sowieso verpont war, dann konnten sie sich eventuell nicht nur in der Tradition der Apostelakten wahnen, sondern auch zuriickgreifen auf die johanneische Identifizierung von Brot und himmlischem Offenbarer, unter Beseitigung der 'sarkischen' Komponenten des 4. Evangeliums und des 1. Johannesbriefes. Dies sind vorlaufig reine Vermutungen. Schneiders 14
15
Feld, Das Verstandnis des Abendmahls, 70. Ibidem, 69, 7 1 .
82
HANS ROLDANUS
einfache Feststellung, die AJ seien, da Eucharistie gefeiert wird, 'not rejecting physical worship', rechnet m.E. zu wenig mit der Moglichkeit, daJ3 einem herkommlichen Ritus eine einseitig-vergeistigende Bedeutung beigelegt wird.I6
4. Vom Ort der Gebete und ihrem eucharistischen Charakter war schon die Rede; es gilt jetzt, Struktur und Inhalt dieser Gebete naher zu betrachten. a. Das im Grab der Drusiana ausgesprochene Gebet besteht aus acht kurzen Satzen, die alle anfangen mit einem Verbum in der 1. Person des Plurals: 'Wir preisen (2x), wir bezeugen (lx), wir loben (Ix), wir danken (4x)'. Es folgt stets eine Form vom Pronomen 06. Wir haben oben gesehen, da8 das Verbum ~ljxap t o ~ € odominiert und durfen auch feststellen, d d ~ 6 h o y g o(Mt. und Mk. beim Brotbrechen) fehlt. Auch die von Bradshaw als fiir Ersteres charakteristische Formelkonstruktion ist konsequent anwesend, namlich die aktive Form des Verbums und die zweite Person fiir den Gelobten, wahrend der Grund mit einem Kausalsatz angegeben wird." Zweimal wird der Angeredete identifiziert: mit 'Du Herr' oder 'Du Herr Jesu Christus'. Damit ist dieses Gebet sofort soteriologisch bestimmt und hat weder einem vorangehenden Lob Gottes Wesens, noch eine Danksagung fiir die Schopfung(sgaben). Es fangt gleich an rnit dem Preisen des 'Namens (Christi), der uns aus der Verirrung und erbarmungslosen Betorung bekehrt'. Die nachste Lobpreisung gilt dem, was Christus 'uns vor Augen gezeigt hat . Die Gemeinde legt Zeugnis ab f i r seine, auf mannigfache Weise in Erscheinung getretene Gute und lobt 'Deinen guten Namen, der die von Dir ~berfuhrten uberzeugt hat'.'' Die, feierlich mit 'Du Herr Jesus Christus' einsetzende, Vierzahl von 'Wir danken Dir' ( ~ l j ~ a p t o z o O p 6oot) v betrim erstens wiederum eine geschenkte uberzeugung; dann Christi Verbindung mit der Natur die gerettet wird; drittens den geschenkten Glauben, daJ3 Christus f i r jetzt und 7
16 Schneider, "'A Perfect Fit"', 521. 17 Bradshaw, The Search, 15ff. 18 Ich lese, mit Junod & Kaestli, AI, .r8 Bh6yE,av statt BhEyE,av~t.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
83
allezeit allein Gott ist;19 und letztens danken die sich zum SchluR 'Deine Diener' Nennenden f i r den Gmnd, zusammenzukommen und erneuert zu ~ e r d e n . ~ ' So christologisch und soteriologisch diese Eucharistie auch sein mag, nirgendwo wird eine Verbindung zwischen den gelobten Heilstatsachen und dem herbeigebrachten Brot gemacht. Mit einer 'Hingabe' von Christus haben sie nichts zu tun; um so mehr mit 'Offenbamng': sein Name und seine Gottheit, sein Herausfuhren aus der Verirrung und seine vielfaltig gezeigte Gute und sichtbaren Zeichen - welche wird nicht gesagt. Die Relation dieses Offenbarers mit der Natur, die gerettet wird, wird mit xpfloavrt angedeutet. HS ubersetzen mit: 'der Du Bedurfnis gehabt hast nach der (menschlichen) Natur'; K mit: 'der Du unserer geretteten Natur bedurftest'. Junod & Kaestli haben: 'Toi, qui as d8sir8 la nature sauvie', und fiigen in einer Anmerkung hinzu, dal3 es sich auf Gmnd eines Vergleiches mit den Paulusakten um die Natur der Menschen handeln muB. Es ist nicht klar, inwiefern hier auf die reale Menschwerdung angespielt wird. Da bei 'Natur' nicht 'unsere' steht, konnte es sich auch um die zerstreuten, gottlichen Teilchen handeln, nach denen das Bedurfnis des Gott-Christus ausgeht. Der Gedanke an eine 'Sammlung' ware dann fortgesetzt im SchluB, wo ja vom (guten so HS) Gmnd der Sammlung, und vielleicht der Wiederherstellung, der an der Eucharistie Teilnehmenden die Rede ist. Da auch die Bezeichnung 'menschliche' oder 'der Menschen' fehlt, besteht ebenfalls die Moglichkeit, an 'geistige' Natur allein zu denken. Der ganze Kontext legt es nicht nahe, dal3 hier ausnahmsweise eine plastisch-konkrete Menschwerdung gemeint ware, sowie diese bei Ignatius und Irenaus den Gmnd f i r eine Vermittlung und Verburgung des wahren Lebens darstellt. b. In bezug auf die Abschiedseucharistie beschranken wir uns auf das Gebet, das mit der Bitte nach Brot und dem Verb ~ 6 x a p i o r q o ~ v eingeleitet wird. Auch dieses Gebet richtet sich an
Hier sind mit Junod & Kaestli, AI, nlortv und 8 ~ b qzu erganzen. Falls mit der Konjektur von Junod & Kaestli hier drvcrybpwot gelesen wird und nicht das Synonym von 'gesarnmelt', drvahq6p~vot.
19 20
84
HANS ROLDANUS
Jesus. Obwohl der Vater genannt wird, ist die angesprochene 2. Person nur Christus. Nach einer rhetorischen Eroffnungsfrage 'Welches Lob (alvov) oder welches Opfer (npoo$ophv) oder v ) wir nennen, da wir dieses welchen Dank ( ~ I S ~ a p ~ o r l asollen Brot brechen, als Dich allein, Jesus?' - folgt ein sechsfaches FoC&
21 Falls wir mit Junod & Kaestli, AI, 'Hoffnung und Liebe' streichen. 22 Im Blick auf diese Stichworter ist kaum zu verstehen, weshalb R.H. Miller, 'Liturgical Materials in the Acts of John', Studia Patristica 13 (Berlin, 1975) 375-81, obwohl er deren Herkunft erkannt hat ('expressed in his parables'), meinte, da8 'the group (which produced the AJ) only knew isolated sayings of Jesus from the tradition behind the Fourth Gospel'.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
85
damit benennen, Deine GroBe erkennen, die uns in der Gegenwart nicht erschaubar ist, den Reinen aber erschaubar nur abgebildet allein in Deinem Menschen' (p6vov kv T@ p6vq o o u &v8phx6 E ~ K O V ~ < ~ ~ EMit V Odiesen V ) . Worten wird das Gebet beschlossen, und geht Johannes zur Brotbrechung uber. Klar ist, dal3 allein Jesus die mit dem Brotbrechen lose verbundene Lobpreisung zukommt. Seine GroBe ist nicht erschaubar fiir Menschen in ihrem gegenwartigen Zustand. Denen, die aber rein und wiirdig (1 10) sind, ist er mit vielen Heilsaspekten bezeichnet ( h ~ x 8 ~ i worden, q) die zusammen seinen Namen (ebenfalls verbunden mit einem h ~ x 8 9 vdurch die vom Vater ausgehende Offenbarung) bilden. Diese Offenbarung ist aber nicht ohne, sondern durch ihn, den Sohn, geschehen und er hat einen Menschen, in dem er 'abgebildet' wird (oder: 'sich abbildet'). So wird seine unerschaubare GroBe doch erkannt (St& z o b ~ o vyvopl
86
HANS ROLDANUS
es nicht. Miller stellt kurzerhand fest, dal3 'there is nothing to connect the rite with the death of Jesus or communion with his body and blood. He is the one who has revealed salvation, and because ~ ~ Erklarung dafur gibt er of this, the Eucharist is ~ e l e b r a t e d . 'Eine weiter nicht. 5.a. Lietzmann hat von den beiden Gebeten, c.85 und 109, gemeint, sie stiinden dem Typ der Didachegebete nahe: beim letzten Gebet betrafe dies den 'doxologischen Aufbau sowie den Hinweis auf x&ptq und sclory, & 8 a v a o t a und &$8apola..' Bei dieser Feststellung wollte er aber 'von den theologischen Besonderheiten der Johannesakten' absehen. Dennoch sprach er beiden Gebeten 'inhaltlich Venvandtschaft mit der Didache (zu), insofern es ein reines Dankgebet von spiritualistischem Charakter ist.' Lietzmann ging es darum, einem vor-paulinischen Urtypus der Eucharistic auf die Spur zu kommen, der sich durch alleinige Brotkommunion und Fehlen jeglicher Beziehung auf Leiden und Tod des H e m Jesu kennzeichnete. In den vor und nach der Kommunion auszusprechenden Gebeten der Didachk (c.9 und 10) fehlt tatsachlich jede Leidensanamnese. Aber den klaren Gebrauch des Weinbechers muRte Lietzmann schon einer 'Einwirkung des paulinischen Typs oder der ublichen judischen Sitte' zuschreiben, weil dieser ja zu der urspriinglichen Form des Jerusalemer Typus gar nicht gehorte.24 Wir wollen jetzt nachgehen, welche Parallele es zwischen unseren zwei Johannesgebeten und denen der Didache' gibt. Did. 9 hat zwei kurze mit ~6xaptoro13p6vo o t anfangende Gebete, die mit einer doxologischen Formel schliel3en. Die erste Bitte, gesprochen beim Becher, dankt 'fir den heiligen Weinstock Davids, Deines Knechtes, den Du uns durch Deinen Knecht Jesus kundgetan hast.' (9.2). Die zweite 'fir das Leben und die Erkenntnis, die Du uns durch Deinen Knecht Jesus kundgetan hast' (9.3). Zweimal finden wir also y v o p i r o und eine Danksagung f i r eine geistige Erkenntnis. Es fallt auf, dal3 hier Gott gedankt wird f i r das, was Er 'durch Jesus, Seinen Knecht' getan hat. Im Dank23 Miller, 'Liturgical Materials', 378. 24 Lietzmann, Messe und Herrenmahl, 249.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
87
gebet nach dem Mahl wird wiederum gedankt fiir 'die Erkenntnis, den Glauben und die Unsterblichkeit, die Du uns durch Deinen Knecht Jesus kundgetan hasty (10.2) und fiir 'die geistige Nahrung und Trank und das ewige Leben, die Du uns durch Deinen Knecht geschenkt hast' (10.3). Diese geistige Nahrung wird, auf gleicher Linie mit naturlichen Speise und Trank, als Gabe des 'allmachtigen Herrschers, der alle Dinge um seines Namens willen geschaffen hat' gewurdigt. Fur Gottes heiligen Namen ist auch schon gedankt worden, d d Er diesen 'in unsere Herzen hat einziehen lassen' (10.2). In den A J wird konsequent Jesus selbst angeredet und es kommt der Ausdruck n a i ~nicht vor. Auch eine Bezugnahme auf die Schopfung fehlt. Andererseits sind die Kennzeichnungen Jesu Wirken als Offenbarung, der einigermden verselbststandigte Namen und die Ausfullung der empfangenen Gaben mit Erkenntnis, Glauben, Unsterblichkeit (unter den mannigfacheren Bezeichnungen in den AJ-Gebeten) deutliche Parallelen. Hinzufiigen kann man den Lobpreis von Gottes Macht, vergleichbar mit Jesu alleiniger Herrschaft in A J 85 und 109, und die in der Didachd zweimal erwahnte Sammlung der Ekklesia (9.4 und 10.5), die im o u h k y 6 o e a t von c.85 ihre Parallele hat. b. Aber nicht nur die Didache', sondern auch die Beschreibung der Eucharistiefeier in Justins Apologie sollte zu einem Vergleich mit denen der A J herangezogen werden. Zwar geben die Kapitel 65-7 keine Gebetstexte und beschreiben sie die Handlungen; aber die werden auch erklart und von den Gebeten wird kurz der Inhalt angede~tet.~~ Wir begegnen gemeinsamen Worten, Strukturen und Elementen, konnen andererseits aber auch genau feststellen, was in den AJ nicht vorkommt. Zuerst fallt bei Justin der Unterschied zwischen ~ 6 x a iund der eigentlichen ~ h x a p ~ o r auf, l a den der Vorsteher erst ausspricht, nachdem ihm Brot und Becher gebracht worden sind (65.1 und 3; 67.5). Inhalt der ~ h x a iist die Bitte, daR die Teilnehmer wurdig befunden werden, damit sie das ewige Heil C.67 ist zum Teil eine Wiederholung, die die Eucharistic in den Rahmen sowohl des sonntaglichen Gemeindegottesdienstes wie des weiteren Gemeindelebens stellt.
25
88
HANS ROLDANUS
erlangen. Auf dieses gemeinsame Element der Wurdigmachung haben wir oben schon hingewiesen. Im eucharistischen Gebet wird dann Gott gelobt dafiir, daR 'diese' von ihm gewiirdigt worden sind. In 66.1 werden die Bedingungen dieser Wurdigung naher ausgemalt: es gehoren dazu der Glaube, 'da8 unsere Lehre wahr ist', und die Taufe; beides findet sich auch in den AJ (z.B. 84). Die Betonung des Befolgens von Christi Geboten (Ap. 65.1, 66.1) aber fehlt. Das eucharistische Gebet ist ein Hinaufsenden von aIvoq und 665a, welche Worter beide in Verbalform die Lobsagungen in den AJ einleiten. Sie wenden sich an den 'Vater des Alls, durch den Namen des Sohnes und den Heiligen Geist' (65.3).26 In AJ 85 ist es der 'bekehrende Name', ein zweites Ma1 der 'gute Name des H e m Jesus Christus' genannt, der an erster Stelle gepriesen wird. In c.109 kommt 'Dein Name' zweimal wieder, d m noch das Verbum 'benennen', dessen alleiniges Objekt Jesus ist. Dieser Name wird verherrlicht, einmal weil er vom Vater, einmal weil er durch den Sohn ausgesprochen worden ist. Diese Andeutung verschiedener Funktionen von Vater und Sohn ist fiir die AJ merkwiirdig, da sonst, und gerade noch, nur Jesus als Gott erscheint, fiir den Menschen gar keine angemessene Pradikation (xpooqyopfa) erfinden konnen (107). Doch handelt es sich wohl nur um einen einzigen Namen, dessen Hauptbedeutung ' ~ b e r fihmng' und 'Eingang zum wahren Leben' ist (85 u.109). Somit haben die beiden Gebete der AJ nur soteriologischen Inhalt und stimmen insofern mit den eucharistischen Gebeten der Didachd und Justins uberein, daR auch die fast nur Heilstatsachen loben und nicht, wie manche anderen Eucharistiegebete, Gottes Wesen und seine Schopfungstaten, prei~en.~'
26 Wahrscheinlicher als 'des hl. Geistes'; vgl. 67.2: 'wir preisen den Schopfer aller Dinge durch seinen Sohn Jesus Christus und durch den Heiligen Geist', was dort aber nicht im eucharistischen Gebet steht. 27 Nur Did.10.4 konnte ein solcher Lobpreis von Gottes Wesen sein, ~ i v 'vor allem' gedankt wird, weil hier zum SchluB des ~ b x c r p t o ~ Gott ' d d er machtig ist'. Es kann aber auch sehr gut ein Riickblick auf die zuvor gelobten Gnaden- und Schopfungsgaben sein.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
89
Nach der Erklarung, daB 'bei uns diese Speise "Eucharistie" genannt wird' - wie das auch in den A J der Fall ist (siehe oben) wird in Justins Apologie eine klare Verbindung zwischen Brot und Trank und der Fleischwerdung Jesu Christi gemacht: wir nehmen keine gewohnliche Nahrung und Trank zu uns, sondern, sowie Christus, als unser Retter und um unserer Rettung willen, Fleisch und Blut besah, so wird die Speise, wofur gedankt wurde, durch Veranderung uns zur Nahrung, da uns in den Einsetzungsworten beim letzten Abendmahl von den Evangelisten gelehrt worden ist, daB es Fleisch und Blut jenes fleischgemachten Jesus sind (66.23). Eine derartige Auslegung der Konsekration, unter Bezugnahme auf die Inkamation, fehlt in den AJ, die, wie wir schon festgestellt haben, jeden direkten Bezug vom BrotgenuB auf die Hauptmomente des Lebens Jesu auslassen. Wir konnen nicht feststellen ob es sich um absichtliche Auslassungen aus dem, Justin bekannten, Typ handele. Wenn schon eine Fortsetzung jener Eucharistie ohne Anarnnese, sowie sie in der Didachd bezeugt ist, vorlage, dann ist aber die nach Lietzmann und Cullmann G r diesen Typus charakteristische Feier der leiblichen Prbenz des Herm durch eine stark vergeistlichte und gnostizierte ersetzt worden: Der Jubel, der f i r die kontinuierte Tischgemeinschaft mit dem irdischen und jetzt erhohten Jesus kennzeichnend war, mul3te hier dann eine Form erhalten haben, die, einseitig und akzentuiert, die Erkenntnis der Erhabenheit des offenbarenden und gnadeschenkenden Jesus hervorhebt. Wir haben ja am negativen Beispiel von Fortunatus gesehen, daB das richtige Naturell Vorbedingung nicht nur der Rettung, sondern auch des 6oc&<s1v r b ~ p s i r r o v(84) ist! 6. Hier stellt sich nun die Frage, ob der Hymnus Christi (cc.94-6) ehvas mit Eucharistie zu tun hat. a. Sein doxologischer Charakter ist klar: Elfinal begegnet man 66kcr, einmal aivor3pEv os und stqapto.roOpEv oot, wahrend das christologische Hauptstiick dargestellt wird als eine Auslegung dessen, wofur wir danken. Der Hymnus geht aber nach sieben Strophen in einen Tanz des Herm mit seinen Jungern uber und wird auch als solcher abgeschlossen. Von einem Gebet uber ein Brot ist so wenig die Rede wie von einer Teilung und Kommu-
90
HANS ROLDANUS
nion. Das spricht schon gegen die Auffassung, daB es sich um eine Eucharistiefeier handele. Es spricht aber auch einiges dafiir. Zuerst der Ort: cc.87-105 bilden ein, diesem Apostel eigenes, ihm anvertrautes Evangelium, das er mitteilen mochte, 'damit Ihr die Ihn (=Christus) umgebende Herrlichkeit erkennt, die da war und ist jetzt und immerdar' (87). Es liegt dem Johannes besonders daran, diese Herrlichkeit mittels der verschiedenen Erscheinungsarten Jesu zu bezeugen. In diesem 'Evangelium' steht der genannte Hymnus genau an der Stelle, 'bevor er von den gesetzeswidrigen Juden (...) ergriffen wurde' (94). Nach dem Tanz geht Jesus fort, wahrend seine Junger sich auf einer Flucht zerstreuen, 'wie Verirrte'. Johannes ertragt es nicht, den H e m leiden zu sehen; er flieht auf den Olberg, und wahrend der Finsternis zur sechsten Stunde erscheint ihm der Herr um ihn zu erleuchten und zu belehren (97). Diese Liturgie steht also genau an der Stelle, wo in den kanonischen Evangelien das Mahl des H e m mit seinen Jungern erzahlt wird; allerdings in der jetzigen Form der A J ! Der Hymnus und die folgende Offenbarung des Geheimnisses des Kreuzes, cc.94-102, werden von JK und PS als eine Interpolation angesehen. PS meint, daR cc.94-6, also der Hymnus samt seiner Einleitung und seinem abschliebenden Satz (97), Teil einer zuvor bestehenden Sondererzahlung waren, bevor cc.97-102 an sie angehangt wurden, und das Ganze in die A J eingeschoben wurde.28 Im Gegensatz zu JK sind 94-6 nach ihm keine literarische Erfindung, sondern Teil einer realen, sei es geheimen Liturgie, die ~~ beniitzt eine Vielfalt er als 'Sakrament' b e ~ e i c h n e t . Schneider von Ausdrucken, wie 'des H e m geheimes Sakrament', 'geheime Liturgie', 'Mysterienritus', 'esoterische Lehre des Sakraments' und dergl. Wir haben, nach Schneider, mit einem wirklichen Sakrament zu tun, einem 'Tanz des Sakraments', das als gottliche Gabe esoterische Lehren und Gnosis vermittele. Es sei aber ein Sakrament der Einweihung und der Transformation in die Ver-
28 Schneider, 'A "Perfect Fit"', 518, 520. 29 Schneider, 520: 'a genuine sacrament'; 'an actual sacrament'.
DIE EUCHARlSTIE
91
wandtschaft des H e m , keine E~charistie.~' PS meint also, da8 die in cc.94-6 erhaltene Liturgie zwar einen, von den ubrigen AJ unabhangigen Ursprung hat, aber, vermehrt mit cc.97-102, vortrefflich mit der Vorstellung einer geistig-erhabenen und herangereiften Gruppe zu~amrnenpa8t.~' ~ b e r d i e swolle der Interpolator seinen Leuten am Beispiel des H e m (der zugleich in der Welt litt und dem Physischen enthoben war) deutlich machen, daD auch sie das Martyrium nicht suchen mussen, aber auch nicht besturzt sein sollten, wenn es zu ihnen kame. Zu dieser Belehrung diene die Zusammenfugung der Auseinandersetzung einer doppelten Kreuzeswirklichkeit mit der Liturgie eines Einweihungssakraments. Fur den gereiften Christen bestehe kein leidender Christus mehr: sie sehen Ihn jetzt anders. Deswegen durfen sie auch sich selbst betrachten als gegen die Leidenswirklichkeit unempfanglich (53 1). Der 'vollkommene AnschluD' ('Perfect Fit') zwischen dem zusammengestellten Einschub (cc.94-102) und dem ubrigen Text der A J sei also ermoglicht durch die dort schon vorhandene Unterscheidung zwischen unreifen und reifen Glaubigen. Dafur stutzt sich PS auf die zentrale Botschaft der geistigen Auferweckung (520f.). Wir haben gesehen, daB diese Auffassung Schneiders einer Erganzung bedarf, namlich der Hervorhebung des Wurdigungsgedankens. Auf der einen Seite konnte dieser Aspekt der Wurdigung zur Interpretation von cc.94-6 als ein Sakrament der Einwei-
30 Schneider, passim und 526 + Anm.24: 'Its initiates are transformed into members of a spiritual race that hears and obeys the voice of the Lord. They are reborn to a new life as the Lord's kindred, and bear his image and likeness. The initiates' transformation is completed in the sacrament's dance..'; deshalb 'This sacrament can be understood as a prototype of the gnostics' destiny - when all of them will be finally gathered up into the Cross of Light, etc.' Schneider spricht hier also iiber das Therna 'Sammlung', das er in bezug auf die beiden Eucharistien nicht zur Sprache gebracht hat (siehe oben). 31 'The Acts' community would easily see the interpolator's position as an extension of their own division of mature and immature Christians' (530).
92
HANS ROLDANUS
hung beitragen, insofern bei den beiden Eucharistiefeiern gerade die Exklusivitat des Teilnehmerkreises betont wird. Andererseits war dort ein vorangehender Einweihungsritus nicht vonnoten, da die Wurdigkeit schon vorher erreicht worden war, entweder durch die Bekehrung zurn asketischen Leben (wie bei Drusiana und ihrem Mann), oder auf Grund einer Erwahlung (wie sich am Beispie1 Callimachus' gezeigt hat). Fur Johannes selbst, und f i r seine Gefolgsleute, die mit ihm sein 'Letztes Mah17 begehen, spricht diese doppelte Auszeichnung natiirlich von selbst! ~ b e r d i e sgilt der Unterschied in c.85 nicht 'reifen gegenuber unreifen Christen', sondern 'zum Leben und zum Tode Bestimmten'. Wollte man aber doch, mit PS, diesen Niveauunterschied als Schlussel des Zusammenhanges der Interpolation mit dem Rest der A J betrachten, dann w k e die Stelle von Eucharistiefeiern an der Schwelle des wahren Lebens eher ein Argument zuungunsten der Existenz eines spezifischen Initiationssakramentes und f i r einen eucharistischen Nachhall im Reigentanz. Doch kann man meiner Meinung nach einen anderen Zusammenhang wahrnehmen. Wir haben festgestellt, daB die Doxologie der eucharistischen Gebete fast ausschlieBlich auf Christus' gottliches Wesen gerichtet war und daB sich der Gegenstand des Lobes auf 'Erkenntnis' und 'Leben' konzentrierte. Der verwerfliche Fortunatus (dessen Name wohl gar nicht zu seinem wirklichen, geistigen Los paBt - nur zu seinem irdischen Umgang mit Geld!) ist f i r Glauben und Erweckung zurn Leben nicht bestimmt, und daher - wie wir auch schon gesehen haben - unfahig, 'das Bessere zu preisen' (84). Das Vermogen, durch richtige Erkenntnis Christus in seiner rettenden Gottlichkeit zu verstehen und zu ~erherrlichen,~'ist wohl ein Hauptgedanke uberall da, wo in diesen Akten von ~ o E $ ~ < o ~ E v und ~ l j x a p t o ~ o f i pdie ~ v Rede ist. Genau das liest man am SchluB des Hymnus: das Begreifen ist die Bedingung zum 8oE,ohoysiv! b. Auf den Inhalt dieses Hymnus einzugehen, und damit auf die Frage nach dem Verhaltnis der hier vorgetragenen Lehre zu der der ubrigen Akten, kann hier nicht die Aufgabe sein. Wohl 32
Jesus wird sehr oft mit 'Herr' bezeichnet.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
93
aber auf die Frage, ob irgendwelche Parallelen mit der doxologischen Struktur und dem Grund des Lobes der friiheren eucharistischen Gebete aufzuzeigen sind. PS hat diese Frage ausgelassen, vermutlich weil er cc.94-96 von vornherein als ein Einweihungsgeschehen ansieht (anstelle der Taufe, die der Verfasser der AJ nicht gekannt haben sol1 (520). Wahrend die eucharistischen Gebete in c.85 und 109 nur einen christologisch-soteriologischen Teil haben, Gngt c.94 mit einem dreifachen trinitarischen Lobpreis an. Somit kommt die Struktur des ersten Teiles des Hymnus, d.h. bis zu dem 'Tanz der Gnade',33 uberein mit den liturgischen Angaben Justins (65.3 und 67.2)' die ja von einem triadischen Lobpreis wissen, sowohl am Anfang als auch am Ende der Feier. Das Verherrlichen betrifft also zuerst Gottes Wesen, obwohl schon Heilsgiiter wie 'Gnade' und 'Licht' mit envahnt werden. Aber die gehoren doch noch nicht zu dem, 'wofiir wir danken', d.h. zum christologisch-soteriologischen Teil des ~ 6 x a p t a ~ ~Ein i v . weiterer Unterschied ist, daB, wahrend Christus in den beiden eucharistischen Gebeten angesprochen und gepriesen wird, er sich im Lob des Hymnus selber mit einschlieat: 'Wofur wir aber danken, sage ich', und in den acht Strophen ist er sowohl der Handelnde wie jeweils Objekt dieses Handelns: 'Gerettet werden will ich, und retten will ich' - usw. Diese enge Verbundenheit setzt sich im 'Tanz-Lied' fort, wo aber die Paradoxe starker klingen und das Erkennen von Christus bis in das groBe Paradox des LeidenslNichtleidens hinein vertieft wird. Tanzen erscheint wie ein Weg zum Verstehen dessen, was . ~ ~ Christozentrische und diesen Christus ist, sagt und t ~ t Dieses Akzent auf Erkenntnis haben wir in den beiden anderen eucharistischen Gebeten auch feststellen konnen. Verschieden von jenen sind die Paradoxe; und die Anspielung auf das Leiden, das sowohl
33 94,8-95,17 bei Junod & Kaestli, bzw. die Strophen 1-11 in HS' ~bersetzun~. 34 Siehe Str.17: 'Wer nicht tanzt, begreift nicht, was sich begibt'; 31: 'Der du tanzt, erkenne, was Ich tue..'; 49-50: 'Ich hiipfte, du aber begreife das Ganze, und wenn du es begriffen hast, sage: "Ehre sei Dir, Vater!"'
94
HANS ROLDANUS
als Realitat anerkannt als verneint wird. In den Doppelsatzen steht auch einmal, daR Christus 'will essen und gegessen werden'. Dies sol1 aber f i r eine eucharistische Deutung nichts besagen, denn diese Ausdriicke heben sich nicht von einer ganzen Reihe, deutlich bildlicher, Begriffe ab. Hier sol1 nun auch kurz die Frage aufgeworfen werden, ob vielleicht die unmittelbar vorangehende Szene, c.93, eine eucharistische Anspielung enthalt. Miller scheint der Meinung zu sein, daB dies tatsachlich so Wie eine Unterbrechung der Belehrung uber die abwechselnde Materialitat und Immaterialitat Christi wird berichtet von einem Gastmahle bei einem Pharisaer. Das Wunder, das hier zu einem Entsetzen der Gastgeber fihrt, besteht hierin, daR Christus mit dem Ihm vorgesetzten Brot seine Jiinger speist, so daR keiner von ihnen sein eigenes anzugreifen braucht. Diese Erzahlung mft eher die der wunderbaren Speisungen in Erinnerung, da Mehrere mit wenig Brot gesattigt werden und eine Menge Brot iibrigbleibt.36 Nur die Ausdriicke: 'Das seinige segnete Er und verteilte es unter uns' konnten an eucharistischen Brauch erinnern, sowie auch die Exklusivitat der Brotverteilung (nur 'unter uns'; die Gastgeber schauen erstaunt zu, bekommen selber aber nichts). Fragwurdig aber bleibt es. Im sog. 'Evangeliumsverkundigung des Johannes', die die Gemeinde dieser Akten iiber die ganz besondere Art Jesu Erscheinungen belehrt, kann also nicht eindeutig ein eucharistischer Ritus nachgewiesen werden. Es sind aber eucharistische Merkmale vorhanden im Lobpreisstile des Hymnus, und in der Gastmahlepisode, wo drei synoptische Motive zusammenni'cken: die Einladung Jesu und seiner Jiinger bei einem Pharisaer, die wunderbare Brotvermehrung, und die Verteilung von gesegnetem Brot wie beim letzten Abendmahl. Es mussen wohl andere Interessen gewesen sein, die in dieser Sektion der Akten den Brotritus, womit die Gemeinschaft mit dem H e m und den Briidern bestatigt und
35 Miller, 'Liturgical Materials', 376 spricht von 'drei Beschreibungen von Eucharistien', will sich auf c.85 und 109 beschranken, erwahnt aber dann doch c.93. 36 Es findet sich das gleiche Wort xoprct<~~v wie bei den Synoptikern.
DIE EUCHARISTIE
95
gefeiert wird, zuriickgedrangt und fast aufgelost haben, ohne jedoch alle Elemente davon auszuwischen: indem man einerseits die Brotkommunion der hymnischen Exaltation, andererseits die Doxologie dem Erscheinungswunder opferte.
1
7. Kann dennoch, trotz dieser Unterschiede, von einer Verbindung oder Entsprechung von cc.94-6 mit den expliziten Eucharistien in c.85 und 109 gesprochen werden? Ich wiirde vorschlagen, sie zu suchen im doxologischen Charakter und in dem, was dazu befihigt. Ich mochte Schneiders These von einem 'Fit' in diesem Sinne modifizieren. Die ~bereinstimmun~en zwischen der 'brotgebundenen' Eucharistie und der des hymnischen Reigens sind: 1. Der Hauptakzent liegt auf dem Loben, wozu die an der Feier Teilnehmenden auf Grund eines ihnen innewohnenden Geheimnisses und durch erhaltene Einsicht befahigt sind. 2. Diese Befihigung hat ihren Grund in einer Ausenvahlung (siehe auch c.88), demzufolge das Sakramentelle, d.h. entweder die Kommunion durch Brot onder durch den erhebenden Reigentanz, die Heilsbezogenheit der Teilnehmenden eher bestatigt als vermittelt. Ihre Wiirdigkeit, dem feiemden Kreis zuzugehoren, schlieRt eine Einfiihrung in tiefere Erkenntnisse hinein nicht aus, scheint aber davon nicht abhangig zu sein. Es ist eine Feier der Briiderschaft von geistig Neugeborenen. 3. Der Inhalt des Lobens ist stark soteriologisch gepragt und 1aRt jede Bezugnahme auf 'Schopfungsgiiter' aus: die Gaben, wofiir gedankt wird, sind geistiger, erleuchtender Art, und lassen sich auf die Gemeinschaft mit Christus, dem Spender des, allen irdischen Bedingungen enthobenen, Lebens resiimieren. 4. Auf die irdische Erscheinung Christi wurde in den eucharistischen Gebeten nur in verschwommenen Ausdriicken angespielt, ohne daR eine Verbindung zur Brotgabe gelegt wurde. Der Hymnus steht im Rahmen einer weiterreichenden Belehrung iiber die Erscheinungsarten des H e m . Daher sind cc.94-6 wie eine Zuspitzung der schon vorhandenen Ansatze zum geistigen Verstandnis des eucharistischen Ritus, der im Rahmen der Drusiana-Erzahlung und der Abschiedsszene des Apostels beibehalten ist. Man diirfte annehmen, daR die Form des eucharistischen
96
HANS ROLDANUS
Rituals: Vorsteher, geschlossener Teilnehmerkreis, Furbitte, eucharistisches Dankgebet, das das Brot 'konsakriert', und Verteilung des Brotes, tatsachlich, wie es Dix meinte, den Kern der allen verschiedenen Gruppen der Anfangszeit gemeinsamen eucharistischen Praxis bildete, da8 auch die Gemeinde vom Typ der A J sie ubernommen hat; allerdings und nur mit Ausnahme des Weins. Verschiedene Elemente aus den Vorschriften der DidachP und der Beschreibung Justins sind wiederzuerkennen. Falls die AJ-Gemeinden die dort bezeugte Praxis kannten - was natiirlich gut moglich ist konnten sich eine Angleichung am Typus der Didache' (keine Bezugnahme auf das Leiden Christi) und vielleicht - wenn sich Bekanntschafl anderswie beweisen IieBe - eine Bezugnahme auf die kanonischen Apostelakten (Brotbrechen allein und Jubelstimmung) vollzogen haben. Die in den Gemeinden der DidachZ und Justins kontrollierte Wurdigkeit ware ebenfalls, unter Modifizierung des Bedingungscharakters auf esoterische Kenntnis hin, fortgesetzt. Ein Vergleich mit Kap. 6 des Johannesevangeliums 1aBt erwagen, ob nicht eine einseitige Akzentuierung von 6,63 ('Der Geist ist's, der lebendig macht; das Fleisch ist nichts nutze. Die Worte die ich zu euch geredet habe, die sind Geist und Leben'.) unter Beseitigung von 6,57 ('so wird auch, wer mich iRt, leben um meinetwillen'. Ebenso v.56 und 58) vorliegt. Die von Leroy und FeId hervorgehobene zweifache Verstehens-Dimension des Evangeliums ware damit aufgehoben, sowie Behms 'anthropologische Umdeutung': letztere aber nicht als Ruckkehr zur Eschatologie, sondern zugunsten einer pneumatischen Existenz der Auserwahlten. Damit waren die beiden symbolisch-soteriologischen Griinde fGr den Weinritus, auch abgesehen von asketischen Bedenken, hinfallig geworden.
VI. Polymorphy of Christ PIETER J. LALLEMAN
In several Apocryphal Acts of Apostles (AAA) polymorphous appearances of Christ are described.' This aspect is very important in the Acts of John, but it is also present in the Acts of Peter, the Acts of Paul, the Acts of Andrew and the Acts of Thomas. In this chapter I will deal with polymorphy in order to gain a better understanding of the christology of the AJ and so of the AJ as a whole. Moreover, the study of polymorphy can yield important facts concerning the relations between the AAA, especially those between the AJ and the APet. In their edition of the AJ Junod and Kaestli maintain that they see the AJ as the oldest precisely because of the way this text uses polymorphy.2 Metamorphosis
We will first give some examples of polymorphy, limiting oursel-
1 Mr.H. Garcia kindly sent me his study called Polymorphie du Christ duns la tradition Johannique gnostique (Memoire de D.E.A., Ec6le pratique des hautes Ctudes, Paris, 1994), which has been very helpful in preparing this chapter. I also wish to thank Professors Jan Bremmer and
Gerard Luttikhuizen for critically reading my text and Mr. P.W. Dunn for his help with the English language. 2 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 698-700; see especially F.S. Jones, 'Principal Orientations on the Relations between the Apocryphal Acts (Acts of Paul and Acts of John; Acts of Peter and Acts of John)' in SBL 1993 Seminar Papers (Atlanta, 1993) 491, 499f.
98
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
ves to the polymorphy of Christ: * In the AJ, the devout woman Drusiana tells the Christian community: 'The Lord appeared to me in the tomb like John and as a youth' (87). This causes John to tell how he knew the Lord; his words are contained in AJ 88-93. * Origen says: 'Although Jesus was one, he had several aspects; and to those who saw him he did not appear alike to all.' He then explains that the polymorphy was linked with the capacities of the persons who met Jesus. He also discovers a clue to the polymorphy of Jesus in the fact that Judas had to designate the Lord to his captors with a kiss.' Polyrnorphy has long been a neglected aspect of early Christian thinking,4 and regarding the origins of and motifs behind this concept no consensus has yet been reached.' An important aim of the present chapter is a clarification of the definition of polymorphy. One of the few scholars to pay attention to it, Peter Weigandt, holds that polymorphy is not always part of a docetic system. It is almost limited to the M , while the AJ are unique in describing polymorphic appearances of the Lord before his resurr e ~ t i o n .As ~ reasons for the use of the motif Weigandt mentions love of miracles and emphasis on the divinity or supernatural
3 Origen, Contra Celsum 2.64. I use the translation by H. Chadwick (Cambridge, 1965). Cf. quotations from his commentaries on Mt and Lk in E. Hennecke (ed), Handbuch zu den Neutestamentlichen Apokryphen (Tiibingen, 1904) 45 1 . 4 A possible reason for this lack of attention is the absence of polemics amongst the Church Fathers, cf P. Weigandt, Der Doketismus im Urchristentum und in der theologischen Entwicklung des zweiten Jahrhunderts (Unpublished dissertation Heidelberg, 196 1) 54. 5 E.g., there is no entry s.v. in the Encyclopedia of the Early Church (Cambridge, 1992). In 1982 Eric Junod signalled the lack of an encompassing study: 'Polymorphie du Dieu Sauveur', in J. Ries (ed), Gnosticisme et Monde Helle'nistique (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982) 38-46. 6 Weigandt, Doktismus, 40-57, has an excursus on polymorphy. Most Nag Harnmadi texts were not yet accessible to him.
POLYMORF'HY OF CHRIST
99
character of the person.' Eric Junod has given the following definition: 'Polymorphy is a deliberate appearance by somebody in several forms. The change of form is not hidden, but instead evident for the witness.' He adds that beings as diverse as Jesus, Satan, Simon Magus, Attis and signs of the zodiac can appear polymorphous, and that polymorphy serves theological, anthropological and cosmological interests.' We will use this definition because it enables us to distinguish polymorphy fiom metamorphosis. To put it more exactly, polymorphy is part of the wider concept of metamorphosis or shape shifting, which is the idea that a person or thing (usually a deity) can at any moment assume another form, stature or age.g In the N T milieu at least two types of metamorphosis were current: in the Hellenistic world the idea of a god temporarily assuming human form, and in Judaism as well as in the mystery cults the idea of a human being transposed into supernatural forms.I0 Polymorphy is a metamorphosis of such a kind that the person or deity can be seen differently by different people at the same time. Several phenomena in early Christian texts have been too easily labelled as polymorphy, whereas we are concerned with cases of metamorphosis. Amongst these are appearances of the Lord in the
7 Weigandt, Doketismus, 48. The view of Erik Peterson, Friihkirche, Judenturn und Gnosis (Rome, Freiburg and Vienna, 1959) 183-208, that Tatian was the origin of the polymorphy of age because he equated Christ and Aion has already been rejected by Weigandt (Doketismus, 40I), Junod ('Polymorphie', 42 n.3) and by G.G. Stroumsa, 'Polymorphie divine et transformations d'un mythologkme: I'Apocryphon de Jean et ses sources', VigChr 35 (1981) 412-34 (= idem, Savoir et salut, Paris, 1992, 43-63), 412f. 8 Junod, 'Polymorphie', 39-40: 'Or la polymorphic est une apparition dClibCree de quelqu'un sous plusieurs formes; le changement de formes n'est pas dissimule, il est au contraire rendu Bvident pour le tkmoin' (39). 9 Cf J.P. Carse, 'Shape shifting', in M. Eliade (ed), Encyclopaedia of Religion 13 (New York and London, 1987) 225-9. The motif of metamorphosis in Christian theology remains a neglected subject. 10 J. Behrn, 'pa~crpop~do', TWNT 4 (Stuttgart, 1942) 764.
100
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
form o f somebody else, but not in several forms at the same time." Three examples: * In the A P the virgin Thecla is condemned to death. Just before her execution w e are told that she 'saw the Lord sitting in the likeness o f Paul and said, "As if I were not able to endure, Paul has come to look after me"' (21). * In the ninth parable in the Shepherd of Hermas w e meet 'a man s o tall, that h e overtopped the tower.' He is designated as 'the glorious man, the Lord o f all'. Later on Hermas is told that 'The glorious man is the Son o f God'.12 * A special case of metamorphosis is the appearance o f Christ to a woman in female form, as one o f the Montanists claimed.I3 Polymorphy has also been confused with another phenomenon in early Christianity, the ideal of the puer senex.I4 This topos concerns the spiritual virtues o f human persons and says that real Christians should be free from the influence o f their age.I5 This
11 It is even doubtful if the first example given above (from AJ 87) falls within the definition! J.-M. van Cangh, 'Miracles Cvangeliques miracles apocryphes', in F. Van Segbroeck et al. (eds), The Four Gospels 1992. Festschrift F. Neirynck 3 (Louvain, 1992) 2317-8, recognizes both forms as polymorphy: 'Le premier et le plus frequent est celui de I'apparition du Christ ou de I'ap6tre sous les traits d'un be1 enfant ou d'un jeune homme pour opCrer une dklivrance' and: 'I1 faut distinguer ce type de polymorphie d'un autre type, ou le Christ prend diffkrentes formes antithetiques, en mCme temps.' 12 Hermas, Sim, ix.vi.1; ix.vii.1; ix.xii.8, transl. K. Lake (Loeb). 13 Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 49.1 tells about either Quintilla or Priscilla: "'Christ came to me dressed in a white robe", she said, "in the form of a woman", ...' (transl. F. Williams, Leiden, 1994). 14 For example, see the otherwise excellent book by C. Markschies, Valentinus Gnosticus? (Tubingen, 1992) 208- 10. 15 C. Gnilka, Aetas spiri~alis.Die ~ b e r w i n d u nder ~ natiirlichen Altersstufen als Ideal friihchristlichen Lebens (Bonn, 1972) 45: 'Die wechselnden Erscheinungsformen eines ubernaturlichen Wesens, bzw. das Ineinander von Jugend und Alter in der ausseren Erscheinung eines solchen Wesens, sind doch eben etwas recht anderes als die Aufhebung der altersbedingten Mangel durch das geistige Streben eines Menschen!'
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
101
puer senex ideal is much more spiritual than polymorphy.
Several scholars have written on polymorphy without regard for its proper definition. In addition to Weigandt, there is Gedaliahu Stroumsa, who has written an essay on polymorphy in which he stressed the Jewish background of the motif. He made a distinction between angelic and human forms taken by Christ.16 To take another example, Jacques M6nard argues that the use of polymorphy in Origen was due to Iranian influences." Four points need to be made concerning this statement, the first two of which have to do with the definition: 1. The Iranian eschatological text quoted by M6nard does not describe polymorphy. It describes how the believer sees his daena, his own faith personified, of which the stature depends on his deeds and moral attitude. This daena is not a polymorphous being for it merely grows and experiences a metamorphosis in time." There is no reason to see Iranian religion as the origin of the motif we are dealing with.I9 2. Origen does not attest to the type of polymorphy that MBnard attributes to him.20 He never says that Christ became physically taller or smaller, but he talks about change and visible polymorphy
The former, outward phenomenon is polymorphy; it is only the latter for which Gnilka reserves the term puer senex. Junod 'Polymorphie', 46 does not refer to Gnilka but supports the same thesis. 16 Stroumsa, 'Polymorphie', 415. This distinction is not suggested by the texts themselves. Would the hearers and readers of antiquity have felt any difference here? Stroumsa also fails to distinguish polymorphy ftom the puer senex ideal (419). 17 J.E. MCnard, 'Transfiguration et polymorphie chez Origkne', in Epektasis. Mklanges Danie'lou (Paris, 1972) 367-72. 18 The same holds true for the garment in strophe 92 of the Hymn of the Pearl in ATh, cf. P.-H. Poirier, L'hymne de laperle des Actes de Thomas. Introduction - texte - traduction - commentaire (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1981) 433f. 19 Cf Junod, 'Polymorphie', 40 n.2. 20 MCnard 368f 'I1 existe dks lors une polymorphie du Christ selon laquelle il se fait grand pour les grands et petit pour les petits.'
102
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
without using indications o f size.2' In fact, Origen never clearly indicates what exactly these changes in Christ's appearance amounted to.22 3. Philo is an exponent of the idea that God reveals himself according to the capacities of man. Thus He appears on purpose as God or as Lord, or as an anthropomorphic being.23 It is more likely that Philo was the source of Origen's ideas than the Iranian religion, since Origen stands in the same Platonist tradition. 4. MCnard tacitly assumes that polymorphy is a gnostic motif.24 SpeciBc forms of metamorphosis Polymorphy can be distinguished from the wider concept of metamorphosis, in which a person (often but not always Christ) takes several forms consecutively but not at the same time, during his descent from heaven to the earth. Probably the earliest extant text to present us with this 'metamorphosis of descent' is the ' descends through the heavens, in Ascension of I ~ a i a h . ~Christ
21 Origen, Contra Celsum 2.62-6; 2.21, 42; 4.14-9; 6.68-77. 22 Menard (369) is wrong in assuming that the Gospel of Thomas logion 13 hints at the polymorphy of Christ. 23 Philo, Quod deus 53-68; De somniis I 232-7; cf. A.F. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven. Early Rabbinic Reports about Christianity and Gnosticism (Leiden, 1977) 178. 24 Menard, 'Transfiguration', 371. K. Beyschlag, Die verborgene ~ b e r lieferung von Christus (Munich and Hamburg, 1969) 101 also sees poly-
morphy a as typically gnostic motif. While Christ unites in himself all aspects of life, they are 'aufgehoben' in him. He even lifts the boundaries between 'I' and 'Thou'. His very being is an image of the redemption. This view is correct in so far as the motif recurs in later gnostic texts like the Gospel ofEve and Pistis Sophia, but it does not explain the origin of the motif. 25 The date of the text is uncertain; we may think of the second century AD. See M.A. Knibb, in J.H. Charlesworth (ed), The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Garden City and London, 1985) 151, who notes that APet 24 seems to quote Ascensio Isaiae 11.13; C.D.G. Miiller,
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
103
each heaven taking a form similar to the angels who live there in order not to be recognized. He thus conceals his divinity (10.8-10, 17-31). Irenaeus tells something similar about Simon Magus, adding that Simon apparently ( 8 ~ 8 0 ~ q ~ E v suffered at) in J ~ d a e a . ~ ~ The parallel with Ascensio Isaiae is remarkable. Note that the motif here plays a clearly docetic role. In the Physiologus, stemming from Egypt in the Christian era, the same form of metamorphosis is found. The first chapter deals with the lion and says, with an eye on Christ: 'Between angels he has become an angel, between archangels an archangel, between thrones a throne, between powers a power, as long as he descended; and he came into the womb of the holy virgin Mary in order to save the human race that had gone astray, "and the Word became flesh and dwelt amongst us."'27 A very specific and apparently late form describes Christ's adaptation to hearers or spectators on earth. Here it is difficult to see if we have real polymorphy or merely metamorphosis. Christ takes the stature of the person he is meeting or he adapts himself to the faith and capacities of the other. We can call this functional metamorphosis, which we find in the gnostic Gospel of Philip (57.28 - 58.10) and with Origen. The latter never explicitly says that Christ was being seen differently at the same time, but he clearly implies it so that he can be classified with those having a polymorphous view of Christ. Polymorphy in the AJ
Having distinguished between polymorphy and the broader concept
NTA 11, 603-20; E. Norelli, Ascension du prophe'te Isai'e (Tumhout, 1993). 26 Irenaeus, Adv.Haer. 1.23.3, apud Hippolytus, Refutatio, 6.19.5-7. 27 Physiologus, ed. F. Sbordone (Rome, 1936; reprint Hildesheim and New York, 1976); cf. U. Treu, 'The Physiologus and the Early Fathers', Studia Patristica 24 (Louvain 1993) 197-200, who calls this piece gnostic, but fails to give arguments for this.
104
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
of metamorphosis, we can now analyze the motif of polymorphy in the AJ. This analysis must focus on cc.87-93, which contain the twelve 'testimonies' concerning Christ to which we already referred.*' The testimony of Drusiana in c.87 is not included in this counting but can be seen as a thematic i n t r o d u ~ t i o n . ~ ~ Not all of these twelve 'short stories', though, depict the Lord as polymorphous in the strict sense. Nr. 11 relates that he did not eat.30 Nrs. 5 and 10 are nearly the same and tell us what could be felt when he was touched. Nr. 5 states that the Lord's body was not always materially the same, a secret only revealed to John. Nr. 10 goes a step further by adding that John came to know that sometimes the Lord was not material at all. Though the change in corporeality is not described exactly, we get the impression that it happened under John's hands and so practically at the same time. Therefore we see it as a case of polymorphy. Nr. 6 is rather close to the NT transfiguration stories: Christ is surrounded by supernatural light, a situation witnessed by the same three apostles as in the Gospels. Nr. 7 is also situated on a mountair~.~'John secretly looks at Jesus from behind (cf. Ex 33:23)
28 The label 'testimonies' was introduced by Junod & Kaestli, AI, 468, 474. For easy reference I give the chapter and line numbers in their edition and in Bonnet's: test. 1 2 3 4 5 6
1& K 88. 9-20 89. 1- 7 89. 7- 8 89. 9-10 89.10-15 90. 1- 4
Bonnet 194. 8-20 194.20-25 194.26-28 194.28-195.2 195. 2- 7 195. 8-11
test. 7 8 9 10 II 12
J &K 90. 4-22 91 92 93. 1 - 4 93. 4-10 93.10-13
Bonnet 195.1 1-196.2 196. 3-10 196.11-18 196.19-22 196.22-197.4 19. 4-7
29 The number twelve seems just accidental. Neither the text nor Junod & Kaestli attach any significance to it. 30 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 478 n.1, refer to Ignace, Marcion, Valentinus and Clement of Alexandria as other authors who discussed whether or not Jesus had to eat. 3 1 P.G. Schneider, The Mystev of the Acts of John. An Interpretation of the Hymn and the Dance in the Light of the Acts' Theology (San Francisco, 1991) 51 n.1, wrongly sees only one transfiguration story in c.90.
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
105
when he is naked and sees that he is not human at all; and in an instance from very tall he becomes very small. Here, in the longest testimony by far, we have a combination of the motifs of nrs. 4 and 6. This is metamorphosis rather than polymorphy. Nrs. 1-4, 6-9 and 12 have to do with the way Christ is seen. Of these nr. 3 tells that Christ never closed his eyes, and it thus suggests a supernatural quality in the traditional Greek way.3' Nr. 12 relates that Christ left no traces when he walked, or rather hovered, over the earth. These testimonies give a docetic view of Christ but not a polymorphous one. Thus only nrs. 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9 and 10 speak of polymorphous appearances. Nr. 1 narrates that at the very same moment different people saw Christ in different ages. Nr. 2 amounts to the same, only adding a difference in beard-growth. Nr. 4 differs from nrs. 1 and 2 in several ways, as it indicates that John saw Christ's stature varying greatly from time to time. In this testimony it is not his age that is important; there are no other disciples involved; and contrary to nrs. 1 and 2, this time Christ assumes forms that are physically impossible. This contradicts Schneider's view that John, seeing the older or bigger forms of the Lord, stands for the mature believers. Judged from that point of view, John's faith can only be ~ we will have to say that this short called ~ n s t a b l e . 'Alternatively, testimony comes from another source than nrs. 1 and 2; but so far no indications of that kind have been given. A doubling of the Lord occurs in testimony nr. 9 and probably also in nr. 8 - but this brief testimony can be read in different ways. John claims to understand the situation thinking of 'his abundant grace and his unity within many faces (nohunp6oonov kv6rqra, A J 91)'. Here especially the words nohunp6oonov t v 6 r q r a are important, as well as the fact that John is not surprised but understands. Because of the context the man talking to
Junod & Kaestli, AI, 477. Pace Schneider, Mystety, 64: 'And, with James and John seeing progressively older manifestations of the Lord, the spirituality of both groups of Christians should be seen as maturing.' We will come back on Schneider's interpretation below. 32 33
106
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
the Lord is best seen as another double of the Lord.34 Note that in nr. 8 the one 'hypostasis' is recognized as the Lord, whereas in his counterpart the uninitiated disciples only see an ordinary man. In nr. 9 both 'hypostaseis' look identical, but this constitutes another ~ariation.~'Weigandt sees the gnostic idea of pairs (ou
34 Pace Schneider, Mystery, 65, who says that John himself is meant. 35 Testimony nr.9 is overinterpreted by Beyschlag, ijberlieferung, 106 who explains the double as a kind of angel (Mt 18.10; Acts 12.13-5) and makes much of the fact that the episode happens during the night which the text does not say. 36 Weigandt, Doketismus, n. 222. He deals with AJ 42-56, 82-6. 37 This argument refutes Schneider's view that in the AJ John is a more or less divine person. Also note the fact that John is not 'in total control' of his body (Schneider, Mystery, 71), but suffers for thirty days (90.17-2 l)! 38 Garcia (see n.l), passim. Schneider, Mystery, 37 n.2 suggests that this motif was developped in a passage now lost. Note that in the AJ the word xoh6pop4oq occurs only here and in c.82 (not in cc.87-93).
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
107
Christ as a voice could suggest transcendence. Yet this is not real polymorphy, but metamorphosis: Christ is seen in the same way by all those present. In the supposed interpolation (94-102) we have real polymorphy without the occurrence of the word polymorphy. While Jesus is hanging on the cross, the Lord appears to John in a cave on the Mount of Olives (97). The cross of light which John sees is best interpreted as a manifestation of Christ himself (98). At that moment Christ is invisible above the cross with only his voice audible, which means that we have at least two and possibly four manifestations of Christ at the same moment.39 The cross of light, again, has many names: Word, Mind,40 Christ, Door, Way, Bread, Seed, Resurrection, Son, Father, Spirit, Life, Truth, Faith, G r a ~ e . ~This ' long list seems to be a forced effort to find polymorphy in the Gospel of John. The author of cc.94-102 knows this Gospel well and tries to replace its teaching by his own. Paul Schneider has given a sophisticated analysis of the polymorphy of the AJ, which is however strongly influenced by later texts in which the motif occurs. He is convinced that it is significant that it is John who sees the Lord as old, and James who sees him as young. John is the nearly divine hero and James an ordinary believer. Schneider states that Christ adapts to the capacities of his public, an idea that we also meet in the Gospel of Philip and in Origen. He does not discuss the dates of the texts he uses, but it is methodologically incorrect to interpret the AJ from later texts. The influence was in the other direction, with the second century
39 To me AJ 98.3 remains obscure: 'and in it (the Cross) was one form (pop$fl pta) and the same likeness (i6da 6pota).' Garcia: 'I7ApGtre et la communautC croyante constituent proprernent la forme unique et ressemblante dans la croix, forme unique encore perfectible.' See also Luttikhuizen, this volume, 135. 40 J.K. Elliott (ed), The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993) here adds 'Jesus' with the Vienna MS, but the older witness of the text, the Acts of the Council of Nicea in 787, does not have this. 4 1 AJ 98.7-12; in c.109 a comparable list of epithets is given for Christ himself.
108
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
AJ containing a primitive, rather rough form of polymorphy which influenced third century conceptions such as those of Origen, the Gospel of Philip (57.28 - 58-10; 61.21-35) and possibly the ApoJ (on which see below), not everything in these later texts already being present in the A J . ~ ~ We add two observations. It is remarkable that the polymorphy of the AJ is not limited to one aspect but covers several aspects: stature, age, corporeality. Junod & Kaestli correctly observe that John never tells us how the Lord looked normally: he is never a real human being.43 Van Cangh describes (this type of) polymorphy as a negative t h e ~ p h a n y . ~ ~ The number three, which plays a leading role in early Christian thought and which we will come upon in the APet and the ApoJ, is conspicuously absent from the AJ. Each polymorphous appearance is centred around a duality. We conclude that the motif of the polymorphy of the Lord is the leading idea behind cc.87-93, but that it is much less important in the other parts. The motif is hardly explained to the readers. The message is nevertheless clear: Christ was not human. Polymorphy functions as a means to illustrate a docetic christology. That we find the motif of polymorphy in the main part of the AJ as well as in the supposed interpolation is an indication that the interpolation is not so different from the main part as Junod & Kaestli think. The other Apocryphal Acts In the other Acts the metamorphoses are more numerous than the instances of polymorphy and so we will start with them. It is not
42 Schneider, Mystery, 57-66, 69. He contradicts, wrongly in my view, Junod & Kaestli, AI, 471f, 484 ('Ce thhme [une vision adaptee a leur
capacite] n'apparait nulle part dans le discours de Jean'). 'C'est qu'il n'y a pas d'aspect habitue1 puisque le Seigneur n'est pas un homme, mais le Dieu immuable', Junod & Kaestli, AI, 479. 44 Van Cangh, 'Miracles', 2318.
43
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
I
1 i
i
1
, I
109
necessary to say much about the two types of appearances of the Lord which recur in all AAA: the appearance in the form of the apostle who stars in the respective acts (AA 46.12-13; ATh 11, 27, 151; AP 21; APet 22, 35) and the appearance as a beautiful young man (AA 32.6; ATh 154; AP PHarnb 3.28f; APet 5).45They serve to stress the miracles in these texts. The AAM contains other metamorphoses as well: into a ship's captain (5, 17) and a little child (18, 33).46 Satan appears in the form of an old man (24). Jesus tells Andrew: 'I showed you that I can do anything and appear to each person in any form I wish' (18). Jesus' life on earth is not narrated. In ATh a young man addresses Thomas thus: 'For thou art a man that has two forms, and wherever thou wilt, you are found...', after which he says that he saw another man standing beside Thomas this must be Christ (34). Thomas says about Christ that the disciples saw his transfigured appearance, but not his heavenly form on the mountain (143). The theme of the twin is important in the theology of the text. Thomas is not Jesus himself in another form.47 The word 'polymorphous' is found three times in the ATh. In c.48 it is used in praise of Jesus without an appended story, and in c.153 it is followed by an illumination of the prison room in which Thomas uses the word. Only in c.44 the word is linked with a polymorphous appearance, viz. of Satan to a woman and her maid, five years before: the woman at that time saw a young man, the maid an old man (43). Satan now appears again, but this time only the apostle and the woman can see him (44). This is a unique case of polymorphy: the Lord is visible and invisible at the same time. There is no polymorphy in AP and AA, but important examples
-
45 Cf. Weigandt, Doketismus, 44-5, and J.-M. Prieur, Acta Andreae (Turnhout, 1989) 360-5. 46 D.R. MacDonald (ed), The Acts of Andrew and The Acts of Andrew and Matthias in the City ofthe Cannibals (Atlanta, 1990). 47 ATh 1 1 , 66, 160. Cf. L.van Karnpen, Apostelverhalen. Doel en cornpositie van de oudste apokriefe Handelingen der apostelen (Diss. Utrecht, 1990), 192-3.
110
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
occur in APet 20-21, where we read that everybody saw the Lord as his capacities permitted.48 After a description of the transfiguration which forms a separate episode, Peter continues with: He ate and drank for our sakes, though himself without hunger or thirst, he bore and suffered reproaches for our sakes, he died and rose again because of us. (...) this (God) who is both great and little, beautiful and ugly, young and old, appearing in time and yet in eternity wholly invisible ...49 Peter ends this sermon with a list of christological predicates like the lists we have in the AJ: 'the door, the light, the way, the bread,' (etc)." A short time later a group of blind widows is healed by a great light and sees the Lord: And they said, 'We saw an old man, who had such a presence as we cannot describe to you'; but others (said), 'We saw a growing lad'; and others said, 'We saw a boy who gently touched our eyes, and so our eyes were opened.' Peter confidently interpretes this as a polymorphous appearance of the L01-d.~'We see that the APet is quite close to the A J on the subject of polymorphy, as it is in the speculation about the
48 ... motus dominus misericordiam suam, in alia figura ostendere et efigie hominis videri, quem neque ludei neque nos digni inluminari possimus. unusquisque enim nostrum sicut capiebat videre, prout poterat videbat (Acta Apostolorum Apoclypha I , ed. R.A. Lipsius [Leipzig 1891, repr. Hildesheim, 19591 67.7-10). 49 Manducavit et vivit propter nos, ipse neque esuriens neque sitiens, baiulavit et inproperia passus est propter nos, mortuus rst et resurrexit nostri causa. (..) hunc magnum et minimum, formonsum et foedum, iuvenem et senem, tempore adparentem et in aeternum utique inbisibilem ... (Lipsius 67.26 - 68.4). 50 APet 20, cf. AJ 98, 109. 5 1 APet 21 (Lipsius 69.9-13): quae dixerunt: Quoniam seniorem vidimus, speciem habentem qualem tibi enarre non possumus; aliae autem: Iuvenem adulescentem; alii autem dixerunt: Puerum vidimus tangentem oculos nostros subiliter: sic nobis aperti sunt oculi.
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
111
cross.52 In both texts the motif is linked with the life of Christ on earth. But the APet state that Christ adapted to the people he met, which motif is a later development that recurs in Origen and the Gospel of Philip. The origin of polymorphy
Polymorphy in the narrow sense is not found in texts that are older than the AJ and the APet (second century AD). We will therefore look at older texts presenting metamorphoses, asking ourselves if they can inform us about influences on the concept of polymorphy. We will look respectively at Egypt, the Greek world, Judaism and the New Testament. An Egyptian origin, more specifically in the cult of the sun, is suggested by Peter Weigandt, who holds that the motif entered ~ to him, in the later Christianity through the A P o J . ~ According period of the Egyptian religion the sun god is seen as polymorphous as regards his age: he is young, middle-aged and old. The oldest testimony is dated in the reign of Darius I1 (424-402 BC). However, leading Egyptologists do not support the idea that the metamorphoses of the sun should be seen as a kind of polymorphy. According to Erik Hornung, numerous gods are called 'manyfaced', 'Lord of faces' etc. Polymorphism (as well as 'polynomialism', i.e. having more than one name) is a fundamental characteristic of nearly all Egyptian deities, but the number of forms a god could adopt was limited and each god had his own id en tit^.'^ The examples Hornung gives have to do with concrete
52 APet 37-39, AJ 98-100. The APet seems to know the AJ in the full version, i.e. including cc.94-102. This is an argument for the priority of the AJ. 53 Weigandt, Doketismus, 49-51, who follows A. Jacoby, 'Altheidnisch -Aegyptisches im Christentum', Sjinx 7 (1903) 107-17, esp. 110. For the ApoJ see Appendix. 54 E. Hornung, Der Eine und die Vielen. ~ ~ ~ t i s Gottesvorstellunc h e gen (Darmstadt, 1971) 114-7.
112
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
forms like animals, human forms and celestial bodies. I would prefer to avoid the word polymorphy and to say instead that the deities were capable of metamorph~sis.~'Although metamorphosis of age is very important in the Egyptian conception of the sun, the sun is by definition not polymorphous in the strict sense of the word that we use.56 From pre-Christian Egypt there seem to be no examples of gods who show two different forms at the same time, who are sometimes material and sometimes not, or who have a double, as Jesus in the AJ." Oxyrhynchus papyrus 1380 (early second century AD) contains an invocation of Isis. Among the many names and titles of the goddess are 'polymorphous' and 'of many names'. The text has syncretistic traits. Isis is connected, among many other things, with both the sun and the moon. It seems that here 'polymorphous' means no more than 'capable of many metamorphoses'. In the Greek religion metamorphosis is very common. There are also many double and even more threefold deities5' A common example from Hellenistic times is the goddess Hekate who has two identities, as a single and as a threefold person.59 A recent study of Hekate in the first centuries AD, however, says that 'she manifested herself not anthropomorphically or theomorph-
55 The publications of Jan Assmann about the Egyptian sun-cult do not support Weigandt either, see e.g. J. Assmann, Liturgische Lieder an der Sonnengott. Untersuchungen zur altiigyptischen Hymnik I (Berlin, 1969) 333-49; idem, Re und Amon. Die Krise des polytheistischen Weltbilds im k'gypten der 18. - 20. Dynastie (Freiburg and Gottingen, 1983) 54-8. 56 As far as I know, the Egyptians never considered the fact that at a given moment, in other countries the sun is seen in a different position (= in their view a different form). 57 AJ89.9-10, 89.10-15; 93.1-4 and 92 resp. 58 H. Usener, 'Dreiheit', Rheinisches Museum 58 (1903) 1-47, 161208, 321-62, who sees the doubling and tripling as secondary developments. 59 See A. Kehl, 'Hekate', RAC 14 (Stuttgart, 1988) 310-38.
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
113
ically but as a formless, speaking fire'.60 There is no evidence of polymorphy in the Greek world. In Judaism mystical groups often speculated about the body of God. A tradition in which this speculation was laid down is the Shi'ur Qomah (The Measure of the Body).6' Gershom Scholem introduced the label gnostic to describe this strand of Judaism, whereas Stroumsa speaks of a macrocosmic divine body, more or ~~ thought that less parallel to the Greek m a k r a n t h r o p o ~ . Scholem this tradition dated from the first century AD; his dating is still defended today but rejected by others as much too early.63 Charles Mopsik has recently shown that the main pillars under Scholem's dating are unconvincing; at the same time he has launched another argument to prove the antiquity of the Shi'ur Q ~ m a h . ~ ~ Having found the Hebrew term ill3 1 1 1YUl behind the words ptrpov .rlAt~laqin Eph 4:13, he goes on to say that the whole Deutero-Pauline epistle to the Ephesians is dependent on a Jewish system of exegesis, which in his eyes proves the very early exist-
60 S.I. Johnston, Hekate Soteira. A Study of Hekate's Roles in the Chaldean Oracles and Related Literature (Atlanta, 1990) 126. 61 For the first translation of this text with some notes see P.W. van der Horst, 'The Measurement of the Body. A Chapter in the History of Ancient Jewish Mysticism', in his Essays on the Jewish World of Early Christianity (Freiburg and Gottingen, 1990) 121-35. Note the Introduction of the volume, 14-5, in which for the eighteenth-century (!) date of the manuscript Van der Horst now follows P. Schafer, 'Shi'ur Qoma: Rezensionen und Urtext', in his Hekhalot-Studien (Tiibingen, 1988) 7583. 62 G.G. Stroumsa, 'Form(s) of God: some notes on Metatron and Christ', Harvard Theol. Rev. 76 (1983) 269-88, esp. 270 (= Savoir et Salut, 65-84). 63 G. Scholem, Jewish Gnosticism, Merkabah Mysticism and Talmudic Tradition (New York, 1960) 36-42; idem, Von der mystischen Gestalt der Gottheit (Ziirich, 1962, repr Frankfurt, 1973) 13-28. Rejected by M.S. Cohen, The Shi'ur Qomah (London and New York, 1983) 52, 58, 65; cf. Van der Horst, "Measurement", 125. 64 C. Mopsik, 'La datation de Chi'our Qomah d7apr6s un texte nCotestamentaire', RevSR 68 (1994) 131-44.
114
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
ence of Shi'ur Qomah speculations. Although it is not unlikely that in this case oral traditions are much older than the written texts, the evidence is hardly sufficient to see the speculation of Shi'ur Qomah as predating early Christian polymorphy. In Jewish speculative thinking not only God was represented as having a giant body but so were, probably at an earlier period, angels, even the angel of the Lord.65 Indeed, Stroumsa follows Scholem in suggesting that the Shi'ur Qomah speaks about another heavenly being than God Himself.66 The idea of a giant Christ, a form of metamorphosis, is probably due to Jewish influence. For instance, the Gospel of Peter describes how two giant angels lead a still larger person out of the sepulchre on Easter morning. In Ascensio Isaiae 9.27-40 we find a comparable angelchristology. 67 Having said this, I do not believe that another suggested influence is real. The angel Metatron could be described as makranthropos, but also as both old and young6' and as a servant (1Y 3, On the other hand, Jewish speculations about Metatron are relatively late and thus more probably dependent on Christian traditions and texts such as Phil 2 and Col 1 rather than vice versa." But all this is not the origin of Christian polymorphy.
65 G.G. Stroumsa, 'Le couple de I'ange et de I'esprit: traditions juives et chretiennes', RevBib1 88 (1981) 42-61, esp. 43f (= Savoir et salut, 2441); J . Denker, Die theologiegeschichtliche Stellung des Petrusevangeliurns. Ein Beitrag zur Friihgeschichte des Doketismzls (Berne and Frankfht,1975) 102f. 66 Stroumsa, 'Form(s)', 277f; see also J.E. Fossum, 'Jewish-Christian Christology and Jewish Mysticism', VigChr 37 (1983) 260-87, 262. 67 GPe 10.39-40, Ascensio Isaiae 9.27-40, cf. Denker, Petrusevangelium, 105-6. This element is vital for the discussion concerning the Docetic character of the GPe, see Denker 114-8. 68 Stroumsa also mentions a rabbinic exegesis combining Dan 7.9 and Song of Songs 5, thus saying that God is sometimes revealed as young, sometimes as old ('Polymorphie', 420-I), but these sources are later than the second century, cf. Segal, Two Powers in Heaven, 33-41. 69 Stroumsa, 'Polymorphie', 420-4 sees similarities with the ApoJ. 70 Contra Stroumsa, 'Form(s)', 281-4; idem, 'Polymorphie', 425-7.
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
115
If the motif of polymorphy did not originate in Egypt, Greece of Judaism, what about the NT? It has indeed recently been suggested that the origin of the motif of polymorphy in later Christian authors is to be found in the NT stories about the appearances of the risen Lord, which were later projected backwards to the pre-Easter period.71 Among these appearances, some scholars want to include the transfiguration on the mount or traditions behind it. But the majority of scholars think it unlikely that the story of the transfiguration in Mk 9 is a post-Easter story transferred back into the lifetime of J e ~ u s . ' ~So if we say that the story of the transfiguration influenced the concept of polymorphy, we are talking about a story from the life of Jesus. During the transfiguration three witnesses see the Lord changed from 'merely' human into something supernatural, possibly less material. This story was used by the author of A J 87-93. Nothing suggests that he was the first to read the story as a testimony of polymorphy, but lack of sources prevents us from going further. Next to be investigated are the stories about the appearances after Easter (Jn 20, 21, Mk 16, Lk 24, Acts 9.3 par, 1 Cor 15). In none of these stories the Lord is seen in more than one way at the time. But there are several hints at a change of stature, most of all in Mk 16.12, which is, though not authentic, very old:73... E ~ ~ v E -
R.I. Pervo, 'Johannine Trajectories in the Acts of John', Apocrypha 3 (1992) 47-68, esp. 61-2. Contra: 'Eine Himmelsstimrne bei einer Auferstehungsvision ware ganz singular', K.H. Schelkle, Die Petrusbriefe - der Judasbrief (Freiburg, 1964') ad loc; cf. H. Paulsen, Der zweite Petrusbrief - der Judasbrief (Gottingen, 1992). 7 2 In contrast with Schmithals and Robinson (ibidem), see J. Gnilka, Evangelisch-Kathofischer Kommentar 11.1 (Markus) (Ziirich, 1979) and Paulsen on 2 Peter. 73 K. Aland, 'Der Schluss des Markusevangeliums', in M. Sabbe (ed), L'tvangile selon Marc. Tradition et rbdaction (Gembloux, 1974) 435-70, 71
esp. 449f, prefers a date early in the second century, for the text had influence on EpAp, Gospel of Peter, Justin and Hennas. Whether or not the section Mk 169-20 circulated indepently or had already become part of Mk at that time is not important for our present purpose. Cf R. Pesch,
116
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
p68y Ev EzCpq pop$.rj ... The motif of polymorphy may well have risen from a docetic reading of the words used here. After Easter, the Lord's appearance is always that of a human being but he is not always recognized as Jesus (Lk 24, Jn 20). He comes and goes whenever he wants, even through physical barriers, which might suggest a less 'solid' body. Mary's failure to recognize her beloved friend (she first thinks that she meets the gardener and later recognizes [?I Jesus) can have been read to imply that he was really different at that moment. The ideas about the church as the body of Christ in the Epistle to the Ephesians have engaged many. Paul (!) may have inherited Hellenistic-Jewish (Philonean) thoughts and applied them to Christ as the Son of Man or simply the Man. The readers are confronted with a poly-interpretable text, which can lead to taking the words about the measure of the fullness of Christ in 4:13 quite literally.75 But such a reading leads to the speculations of Shi'ur Qomah rather than to the polymorphy of the AJ. Conclusions To sum up, it is possible to speak about metamorphosis of Jesus in the NT, but polymorphy in the strict sense is not present. Yet the narratives about the risen Lord could easily be developed into stories about polymorphous appearances before Easter. Did such development need some external stimulus, such as gnosticism or docetism? Or would a general lack of appreciation for life this side of death and for the Jewish setting of the gospels have been suficient? It probably would.
Markusevangelium (Freiburg, 1977) ad loc. 74 These words occur in what amounts to a summary of the narrative of the two men walking to Ernmaus in the evening of Easter Day (Lk 24). 75 See the survey of C. Colpe, 'Zur Leib-Christi-Vorstellung im Epheserbrief in W. Eltester (ed), Judentum - Urchristentum - Kirche. Festschr$ J. Jeremias (Berlin, 1964) 172-86.
POLYMORPHY OF CHRIST
117
The A J are a unique text.76 They (or the related APet) are the first to present us with polymorphous appearances of Christ. Even the earthly Jesus - i.e. Christ before his death, resurrection and ascension - could appear in several forms at a time. Thus the motif of polymorphy serves a docetic position. Real polymorphy has not been found in other religions, but it recurs in later Christian texts, though hardly with reference to the earthly Jesus. That may explain the lack of polemical interest on the part of the Fathers. Preparations can possibly be seen in Egypt (metamorphosis of age) and in Judaism (metamorphosis of stature), but the NT alone (metamorphosis of substance) might be sufficient as a background. Appendix: The ApoJ and the date of the A J Several facts suggest that the A J are early. We have seen that the motif of polymorphy is still unreflected and that it probably influenced later texts such as APet, ApoJ, Trimorphic Protennoia, Gospel of Philip and Origen, where the motif was often 'softened' into post-resurrection metamorphosis. On the other hand, docetism in its pure form which denied the human aspect of Jesus altogether, was a very early phenomenon which can be dated to the days of the Fourth Gospel, Ignace and Marcion, that is to say no later than about 150 AD. After that moment it disappears from our sources.77 In the A J the docetic viewpoint is first expressed by means of polymorphy, but it makes no use of the number three, which was so frequent in later centuries. The chapters 87-93 are a non-gnostic text, in contrast to cc.94-102; they date from the period before gnosticism got hold of most non-orthodox forms of Christianity. We cannot say that polymorphy is a sign of gnosticism, although gnostics used it. Weigandt considers the ApoJ to be an Egyptian text which was brought to Asia at an early date where it influenced the A J
76 We will never know how many comparable texts were lost, since they were banned by Orthodoxy like the AJ. 77 Weigandt, Doketismus, 144-6, 153-5.
118
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
and other AAA, so that it served as a mediator text for the idea of po1ymorphy.j Under influence of Weigandt, Junod & Kaestli have suggested that the AJ themselves are of Egyptian origin, but this theory is highly vulnerable. If Michel Tardieu is correct in dating the earliest version of the ApoJ to about 170 AD and Weigandt himself is correct in seeing docetism as belonging essentially to the second third of the second century, dependence of the AJ on the ApoJ is extremely unlikely, for the AJ are above all docetic. Concerning the place of origin of the ApoJ the scholarly community nowadays keeps silent.78 In the narrative introduction to the ApoJ 'John' tells that in a vision he saw a child, an elderly person and a young person appearing through one another.79 The Saviour tells John: 'It is I who am [the father]; it i s I who am the mother; it is I who am the son'(2.12-14). This 'explanation' does not fit the vision very The order 'child - old person - youngster' is not the order in which the Egyptian sun-god appears. The Christian trinity rather than Egyptian religion has influenced the wording of the 'explanation'. But I want to go further. The ApoJ is probably dependent on the AJ and Phil 2, and the polymorphy of the AJ served as an example for the ApoJ. This dependence could also explain why John, of all disciples, gave his name to this apocryphon. The oldest form of the ApoJ was known to Irenaeus and thus predates his writings (+ 180); consequently, the AJ must be older still.81
78 M. Tardieu, Codex de Berlin (Paris, 1984) 40-6; Weigandt, Doketismus, 51f, 155. 79 ApoJ (NHC 11.1) 2.1-8. The third form is elsewhere translated as servant, see F. Wisse, in The Nag Hammadi Library in English, ed. J.M. Robinson (Leiden and San Francisco, 1988); Stroumsa, 'Polyrnorphie', 414, 418. The Coptic has hal; in the Berlin codex 8502 the third form is
absent. 80 As is noted by Junod, 'Polymorphie', 43, and Stroumsa, 'Polyrnorphie', 414, who sees the reference to the Trinity as an editorial gloss. 81 This agrees with the conclusion by Brernrner, Ch. 3, Appendix.
VII. A gnostic reading of the Acts of John GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
Recent scholarship on the Acts of John agrees about the Gnostic character of cc.94-102. For instance, Eric Junod and Jean-Daniel Kaestli, the most recent editors of the text, state: 'I' etude des ch. 94-102 et 109 met en Cvidence une theologie originale, au caractere gnostique trks marquCY.'More in particular they suppose that cc.94-102 must be situated 'dans le voisinage immkdiat, sinon A I'interieur m6me du courant valentinien'.' Knut Schaferdiek, in the introduction to his German translation of the AJ, affirms: '... der Hymnus und die Offenbarungsrede iiber das Kreuzesgeheimnis (the contents of cc.94-102, G.L.) tragen deutlich gnostischen Charakter'.3 Paul G. Schneider, referring to the person who inserted cc.94-102 into the AJ, speaks of 'an unknown Christian gnostic', 'the gnostic interpolator', or, briefly, 'our gnostic'. He is more hesitant, though, about the Valentinian connection for cc.94-
1 E. Junod and J.-D. Kaestli, Acta Iohannis I1 (Turnhout, 1983) 580, 588, and their conclusion on 627: 'Les caractdristiques que nous venons de degager ne laissent subsister aucun doute quant a 1' origine gnostique d' A J 94-102 et 109'. Because of the affinities in content and terminology between c.109 and cc.94-102, the authors consider c.109, too, to be a Gnostic section of the AJ. 2 Junod & Kaestli, 627. Cf. p.629: 'la gnose d'AJ 94-102 et 109 s'apparente tout particulibrement avec le valentinisme de 1'6cole orientale'. See also their discussion of previous studies about the Valentinian character of the A J (or esp. cc.94-102 of the AJ), 589-93. 3 K. Schaferdiek, 'Johannesakten', in W. Schneemelcher (ed), Neutestamentliche Apokryphen I1 (Tiibingen, 1989') 153.
120
GERARD LUlTIKHUIZEN
102.~ Given the Gnostic character of AJ 94-102, the question of how we should imagine the relationship of these chapters to the rest of the Johannine Acts arises. Actually we seem to be dealing here with two issues: a literary-critical question (do the two parts of the text have different origins, and, if so, when, where, by whom, and for what reason were they combined?), and the question I wish to pursue in this paper: what does the Gnostic character of cc.94-102 mean for our understanding of the Johannine Acts as a whole? With respect to these questions there seems to be more divergence of opinion in previous scholarship. I will now briefly summarize the pertinent views of the above-mentioned authors. I The Gnostic character of cc.94-1 02 Junod and Kaestli do not detect clear Gnostic features in the religion of the main text of the AJ (680-2). In their opinion this text and the Gnostic chapters date from more or less the same time (the second half of the second century), but they assume that the two portions of the book originated in different areas. While they are inclined to locate the origin of the body of the text in Egypt, they assume that the interpolated Gnostic chapters originated in a Greek environment in Syria (631f and 700). At an early date (in any case before the end of the third century, 700) the Gnostic portions were added to the AJ. The editors suggest two hypothetical explanations for the insertion of these heterogeneous chapters. In the first theory, the author of the AJ himself came across the Gnostic texts about John, and, although the contents of these passages were not in accordance with his own theological views, he adopted them just because they provided further information about the apostle John and his relationship with the Lord. Junod and Kaestli, though, prefer another theory. In this
4 P.G.Schneider, The Mystery of the Acts of John (San Francisco, 1991) 142f, and "'A Perfect Fit": The Major Interpolation in the Acts of John', SBL Seminar Papers 1991, 51 8-32, passim.
A GNOSTIC READING
121
explanation it is a Gnostic community, more precisely a Gnostic community affiliated with the Johannine tradition, that combined chapters 94-102 with the rest of the AJ. The editors suggest that the rather simple AJ present features that would have been attractive to people interested in more secret revelations and more complex speculations (700-2). This suggestion, which seems to me highly relevant, is not worked out in any detail by Junod and ~aestli.' Schaferdiek admits that, in content and form, cc.94-102 differ from the rest of the Acts. Apparently it was as a finished piece of text that these chapters were incorporated into the AJ. On the other hand, he emphasizes that cc.94-102 form an organic part of the book, a part, that is, of the 'alternative' Gospel preaching of John included in the Acts (86-102). For this reason he is convinced that we are not dealing with a secondary addition but with an integral component of the original composition (cf. p.152). Schaferdiek maintains that the book as a whole was composed somewhere in ~ Eastern Syria not before the first half of the third ~ e n t u r y .Its purpose was to present a tradition about the apostle which was different from that of the 'main church'. He alleges that the Gospel preaching in cc.86-102 fits in with this polemical design. He also makes the interesting observation that the Gnostic chapters 94-102 determine the 'Deutungshorizont', within which the other parts of the text should be read (p. 153). He does not elaborate this observation, however, nor does he consider its implications for our interpretation of the Acts. Schneider sees a disparity between cc.94-6 ('the Lord's secret sacrament') and 97-102 (the revelatory discourse): he assumes that
5
Schneider, "'A Perfect Fit"', 518f.
6 Schaferdieck, 'Johannesakten', 154. The AJ presuppose that the rea-
ders were familiar with the tradition of John's activities in Ephesus and Asia Minor. According to Schaferdiek, this precludes a dating before the third century. Cf. also his essay 'Herkunft und Interesse der alten Johannesakten', ZNW 74 (1983), 247-67. But see also the Appendices to the contributions by Jan Bremmer and Lalleman in this volume, who discuss this problem more in detail.
122
GERARD LUTnKHUIZEN
whereas according to 94-6 all the disciples had been initiated into the Lord's mystery and attained gnosis through his sacred dance, in cc.97-102 the initiation is resewed for John, and while the disciples received gnosis through their participation in the Lord's dance, John receives gnosis by hearing the revelation. Schneider therefore argues that the major interpolation (cc.94-102) has a more complex genesis than suggested by Junod and Kaestli. In his view, cc.94-6 render a genuine Gnostic sacrament. He is inclined to attribute the revelatory discourse of cc.97-102 to the author of the AJ, i.e. to the person who collected and reworked the stories about John. This author created the discourse in order to integrate the mystery rite into his own composition.' Against Junod and Kaestli, Schneider stresses the continuity of ideas between cc.94-102 and the rest of the Acts: 'The author of the acts compiled various stories about John's missionary efforts and reworked them so that they could lay the groundwork for his readers to understand the revelatory discourse and accept the ~ proposes legitimacy of the sacrament and its g n ~ s i s ' .Schneider that the author added cc.94-102 to his composition because he saw in the resurrections of John's converts examples of the Gnostics spiritual rebirth and transformation into the likeness of the Lord. I will argue below that Schneider does not pursue his attempt to understand cc.94-102 within the present context of the Acts far enough. Schneider also surmises that the Acts were composed at a time of persecution. By introducing Christian readers to the mystery rite, the author offered them an alternative to persecution and martyrdom. In my own contribution I will first pay attention to the definition of 'gnosis', 'Gnostic', etc. (11). After that I will turn to the structure (111) and the contents of cc.94-102. I will begin with the revelatory discourse in cc.97-102 (IV),since I am convinced that the preceding chapters must be understood in the light of this discourse (V). Finally, I will discuss the question of what the 7
Schneider, Mystery, 214-8; ' A "Perfect Fit"', 518-20. 8 Schneider, Mystery, 218. 9 Mystev, 218-20; cf. '"Perfect Fit"', 530-2.
7
A GNOSTIC READING
123
meaning of the Johannine Acts is if cc.94-102 are read as an integral part of the book (VI). This chapter will not focus on the sources of the AJ and on the question of why an author or redactor may have inserted cc.94-102 into the Acts but rather on the finished text and its readers. What was the meaning of the Johannine Acts for those readers who found an appropriate expression of their beliefs in cc.94-102? Of course, modem investigators are able to find out if and to what extent an ancient text such as the AJ is composed of heterogeneous materials. On the other hand, we must take it for granted that for the intended readers, the finished text had some consistency. They will hardly have evaluated cc.94-102 as an erratic block.1°
I1 Towards a deJinition of 'gnosis ', 'Gnostics ' What do we mean by 'gnosis', 'Gnostics', and by qualifying a text as 'Gnostic'? I will refer to two different attempts to clarify this terminology. The 'final document' of the international colloquium on the origins of Gnosticism (Messina 1966) proposes that we distinguish between 'gnosis' and 'Gnosticism'. Gnosis is broadly defined here as 'knowledge of the divine mysteries reserved for an tlite', while 'Gnosticism' is viewed as a more limited phenomenon. The document advises that in defining 'Gnosticism' we start from a certain group of systems of the second century AD (systems 'which everybody agrees are to be designated with this term'). It is observed that this limited type of gnosis 'involves a 10 It will be clear that I do not agree with the judgment expressed by Richard Pewo, 'Johannine Trajectories in the Acts ofJohn', Apocrypha 3 (1992) 47-68, esp. 58: 'The distinctive content and theology of ch. 94102 add further weight to the hypothesis that these passages are an interpolation into the earlier text of the AcJn. This puts a decisive close to efforts directed at using this material as the normative clue to and key for the theology of the AcJn in its entirety'. As long as there is no conclusive evidence to the contrary, it is fair to start from the assumption that to the final redactor and his readers the finished text conveys a consistent theology.
124
GERARD LUTnKHUIZEN
coherent series of characteristics that can be summarized in the idea of a divine spark in man, deriving from the divine realm, fallen into this world of fate, birth and death, and needing to be awakened by the divine counterpart of the self (on the basis of a call from Above, or a revelation) in order to be finally reintegrated'." Other authors do not try to collect a set of supposedly Gnostic ideas but start from the fact that in the ancient sources the word 'Gnostic' refers to members of a social group or a professional school of thought and not to ideas. They therefore put the question, which groups did call themselves 'Gnostics' or were so called by their environment? The writings and ideas of these people can only be called 'Gnostic' in a secondary way." The earliest testimonies all occur in works written by adversaries of the Gnostics, notably Irenaeus, Celsus, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus, Plotinus, Porphyry, Epiphanius. They report the rites and doctrines of the Gnostics and in particular a complex and distinctive myth about the constitution of the supramundane world of light, the origin of the material world and its rulers, and the creation and early history of humankind. Of special importance is Irenaeus' summary of a piece of work which, he reports, belonged to the Gnostics (Adv. haer. 1.29). Thanks to two manuscript findings we now know the title, The Apocryphon of John, and the complete text of this treatise in
11 U.Bianchi (ed), The Origins of Gnosticism (Leiden, 1970) XXVI. These attempts at defining 'Gnosis' and 'Gnosticism' have been criticized by several authors and for several reasons. Cf. the discussion by U. Bianchi, 'A propos de quelques discussions recentes sur la terminologie, la definition et la methode de 1'Ctude du gnosticisme', in G. Widengren (ed), Proceedings of the International Colloquium on Gnosticism (Stockholm, 1977) 16-26. 12 See the provocative paper by M. Smith, 'The History of the Term Gnostikos', in B. Layton (ed), The Rediscovery of Gnosticism I1 (Leiden, 1981) 796-807, who is followed by Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures (New York, 1987) and 'Prolegomena to the Study of Ancient Gnosticism' (unpublished paper).
A GNOSTIC READING
125
Coptic. It is contained in the so-called Berlin Codex and in no less than three of the Nag Hammadi manuscripts, which suggests that it was highly appreciated among Gnostics. The comparison of this text to Irenaeus' report entitles us to label it 'Gnostic'. We have here a comparatively solid basis for defining ancient Gnosis,I3 for from a comparison with The Apocryphon of John it is possible to determine the Gnostic character of other writings. As I have argued elsewhere, we should not just compare terminological items and isolated motifs and ideas but rather try to find out to what extent the basic thought structure underlying the text in question corresponds to the mythical thought pattern of The Apocryphon of John.14 Among the Nag Hammadi writings and elsewhere we find various texts which appear to be closely related to the mythological Gnosis of The Apocryphon of John, among which are The Apocalypse of Adam (NHC V.5), The Hypostasis of the Archons (NHC 11.4)' The Gospel of the Egyptians (NHC 111.2 and IV.2)' The Three Tablets of Seth (NHC VIM), Trimorphic Protennoia (NHC XIII.I), and the first part of The Letter of Peter to Philip (NHC VIII.2). It will be clear that these texts can properly be called Gnostic. Their distinguishing mark is a complex myth about the origin of the world and the creation of man.15 The question then is how we should designate religious groups or philosophical schools and their writings that are more remotely affiliated with the Gnosis of the Johannine apocryphon. The best solution seems to me to be the one proposed by Bentley Layton. Referring to The Apocryphon of John and related documents he speaks of 'classic Gnostic scripture'. This category more or less coincides with what Hans-Martin Schenke has called 'Sethian
13 I try to avoid the term 'Gnosticism', an 'ism-word' first used in the 17th century, cf. Layton, 'Prolegomena'. 14 See my 'Johannine Vocabulary and the Thought Structure of Gnostic Mythological Texts', in Gnosisforschung und Religionsgeschichte. Festschrift Kurt Rudolph (Marburg, 1995) 175-81. 15 As Layton, The Gnostic Scriptures, 9, alleges, without the myth of origins, classic Gnostic literature could not be recognized.
126
GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
Gnosis'.I6 Other movements can be labelled 'Gnostic' insofar as they appear to be influenced by the mythological Gnosis known to us from the above texts. This applies, for example, to the school(s) of the Valentinians. The partial similarities of the surviving Valentinian texts and fragments of texts suggest that we are dealing with a reform of the classic mythological Gnosis." It is important to note this here because, as indicated in my introduction, several scholars, among them Junod and Kaestli, see in AJ 94-102 an expression of Valentinianism. New elements in this type of thought when compared to the classic or Sethian Gnosis are inter alia the central role of the Christian Saviour, the tripartite structure of reality (pneumatic, psychic and hylic, whereby the demiurge and non-enlightened Christians are connected with the psychic level), and a typically mystical understanding of salvation. In our discussion of cc.94- 102 of the Johannine Acts we will have more occasion to direct attention to characteristic features of the Valentinian branch of ancient Gnosis. With regard to the meaning of qualifications such as 'Gnostic', 'Christian', 'Valentinian', etc. I would like to make one additional remark. In common parlance the Bible, the Old Testament included, is a Christian book. The reason obviously is not that the Bible was written by Christians but that it is read by Christians
16 Cf. Schenke, 'Das sethianische System nach Nag-Hammadi-Handschriften', in P. Nagel (ed), Studia Coptica (Berlin, 1974) 165-73 and 'The Phenomenon and Significance of Gnostic Sethianism', in B. Layton (ed), The Rediscovery of Gnosticism I1 (Leiden, 198 1) 588-616. These Gnostics viewed themselves as the spiritual descendants of Seth (or Norea, a daughter of Eve). 17 Cf. K. Rudolph, Die Gnosis. Wesen und Geschichte einer spatantiken Religion (Gottingen, 1990') 347f; Layton, Gnostic Scriptures, XII, XV, and 220. It is, however, very doubtful whether Valentinus himself is responsible for the Gnostic component in Valentinian teaching, cf. Ch. Markschiess, Valentinus Gnosticus? (Tiibingen, 1992) esp. 392-402. Who is responsible for the 'gnosticizing' of Valentinus' teaching remains unclear.
A GNOSTIC READING
127
and accepted by them as normative scripture. It seems to me therefore questionable whether the decisive criterion for labeling a text as 'Gnostic' should be that it was produced by Gnostics. We should also consider the question of whether Gnostics used the text in question and found in it a meaningful expression of their convictions. I11 The structure of cc.94-102 Chapters 94-102 belong to a comparatively lengthy section of the Acts in which the apostle himself is speaking. In this passage (87105) John discloses what he, the disciple whom the Lord loved (90.7), experienced in the period before the ascension of the Lord." It is possible to consider this part of the book as a gospel narrative (even as an alternative to the New Testament gospels, ~ it should be noted that particularly the Gospel of J ~ h n ) , 'but John's words are presented by the author of the Acts as a speech. Note that -- in conformity with the typical introduction to a revelation discourse delivered by an otherworldly figure -- the opening frame story in c.87 tells how the addressees were perplexed, apparently because they were not yet established in their faith." The aim of John's speech is to show that the Lord is not a human being liable to physical vicissitude and suffering but the unchangeable and invincible God (104). John's revelatory gospel preaching consists of three main parts. Chapters 88-93 report the various epiphanies of the Lord as they were perceived by the apostle. Chapters 94-6 record an antiphonal song accompanied by a dance which the Lord and his adherents performed during the evening of his arrest. Chapters 97-
18 We do not know to whom John adresses his words, for the preceding context has not survived. 19 Cf. esp. Schaferdiek, 153f, and Pervo, 'Johannine Trajectories'. 20 Cf. Ph. Perkins, The Gnostic Dialogue (New York, 1980) esp. 41f; Luttikhuizen, 'The Evaluation of the Teaching of Jesus in Christian Gnostic Revelation Dialogues', NovTest 30 (1988) 158-68.
128
GERARD LUITKHUIZEN
102 contain a revelation which the Lord granted to John alone. We may assume that to the readers of the finished text, John's speech about the Lord had a very special significance. I mention three reasons for this assumption. Firstly, we have here a speech of the apostle himself, the main character of the Acts. His words quite likely have a function similar to that of the speeches of the leading figures in profane historical books and in the New Testament Acts. These speeches served to review the situation for the reader, to elucidate backgrounds and perspectives, and they brought out the inner thoughts and experiences of important persons.21Secondly, the purpose of John's address is to complete and strengthen the faith of his audience. When John has delivered his speech, his addressees (and with them the readers of the Acts) are supposed to have reached a fuller understanding of the Lord and a better insight into the nature of his suffering. Thirdly, these chapters have a specifically esoteric character for they contain a mysterious ceremony (96.2 and 101.2-3) performed and explained by the Lord, and a revelation granted by the Lord exclusively to the main character of the Acts. It is likely that all this indicates that we come quite close here to the inner core of the religious beliefs of the final editor and his readers. As the contribution by Pieter Lalleman (Ch. VI) is devoted to the first part of John's speech in which the apostle speaks about polymorphous appearances of the Lord, I will confine myself to cc.94-102. First a few more words about the literary structure of this part of the Acts. In c.94 John tells how the Lord summoned his disciples (who figure as an anonymous group) to sing with him a 'hymn' to the Father. The Lord opened the song and the disciples were asked to respond with 'amen'. The antiphonal singing was performed while the disciples were dancing in a ring around the dancing Lord. The song opens with a doxology (94.8-17). It is more difficult, though, to define the literary form of c.95. I doubt whether it has the
H.J. Cadbury, The Making of Luke-Acts (London, 1961) 184; Herceg, this volume, Ch. VIII.
21
A GNOSTIC READING
129
features usually attributed to the hymn.22 The greater part of this chapter (lines 1-18 and 31-42) consists of antithetical self-proclamations uttered by the Lord ('I wish to be saved, and I wish to save' etc.), and affirmed by his followers. In c.96 the meaning of the song and the dance are explained by the Lord. It is noteworthy that here (and in the preceding lines of the song in c.95) the Lord changes to the second person singular. This change of address is not indicated explicitly, but the context of the Johannine Acts clearly suggests that the Lord is instructing his beloved disciple. This understanding of the teaching of c.96 facilitates the transition to the subsequent revelation granted to John alone. In cc.97-102 we distinguish the following sections: 97.7-12 relates the meeting of John with the Lord in a cave on the Mount of Olives (together with the preceding lines of c.97, this section can also be regarded as belonging to the narrative frame of the revelation); 98.1-6 records a vision of the cross of light; 98.7-101.16 is an instruction by the heavenly voice of the Lord. In lines 11-13 of c.96 the Lord intimates that it is not yet possible to fully know who he is until both he himself and the apostle have ascended. Although it is tempting to understand this statement as a reference to the meeting of the Lord and John in a cave on the top of the mountain," it is more probable that the words allude to the eventual return of the Lord and his disciple to the divine world. As we shall see below, full knowledge will only be possible in the eschatological future. The words, 'that which you do not know, I myself will teach you' (96.16) are more likely to refer to the revelation reported in the following chapters. It seems evident that John -- and with him the readers of the
22 In my 'The Poetic Character of Revelation 4 and 5', in J. den Boeft and A. Hilhorst (eds), Early Christian Poetry (Leiden, 1993) 15-22, esp. p.15, I define the hymn briefly as: 'a cultic song in which the emphasis is on the praise of God'. For a detailed examination of this genre see K. Berger, 'Hellenistische Gattungen im Neuen Testament', ANRW I1 25.2
(Berlin, 1984) 1032-1432. Cf. e.g. Kaestli, Semeia 38 (1986) 84.
23
130
GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
Acts -- gradually receives insight into the divine identity of the Lord, the true meaning of his suffering, and the suffering of humankind. A significant passage in this connection is c.90 where John confesses that an epiphany of the Lord had made him afraid. He tells how thereupon the Lord appeared to him as a man of small stature (thus adapting himself to the failing comprehension of the disciple), how he pulled his beard and said: 'John, be not faithless but believing'.24 Also, cc.94-102 bear testimony to the gradual increase in John's knowledge. It is not fully clear what the mysterious rite of c.95 contributes to the belief and comprehension of John and his fellow disciples. I wonder whether this rite was supposed to be understandable at all without the private instruction added in c.96 and the subsequent revelation (101.1-3). It should be observed that the theme of suffering is not mentioned explicitly in ~ . 9 5 . ~ ' The author of the surviving text and his readers can hardly have believed that the dance ceremony had transformed the disciples into the image of the Lord or that it had united them with him.26 This is apparent from the reaction of John and his fellow disciples to their dance with the Lord: 'After the Lord had so danced with us...he went out. And we, like men amazed or fast asleep, fled one this way and another that' (97.1-3).27 John fled to the Mount of Olives, weeping about the Lord's suffering. A few lines hereafter, however, the Lord discloses that he himself had put it into John's mind to come up the mountain. In this way it is suggested that John's inad-equate reaction was part of the Lord's strategy. The revelation by the Lord in cc.97-102 is introduced in basically the same way as John's speech of which it is a part.
24 See further Junod & Kaestli, AI, 582. 25 A.J. Dewey, 'The Hymn in the Acts of John: Dance as Hermeneutic', Semeia 38 (1986) 67-80, esp. 72. Cf. below, n.31. 26 Pace Schneider, Mystery, 83f, 177 and passim. 27 Junod and Kaestli, AI, 597, suppose that the bewilderment and the sleep of the disciples illustrate the predicament of those who have not yet received the Gnostic call from the transcendent world.
A GNOSTIC READING
131
While, as we have seen, c.87 tells how the attendants were perplexed (at an appearance of the Lord) because of their failing belief, c.97 reports that John could not endure (and thus did not understand) what was happening to the Lord. John's mental state at that time was not fundamentally different from the present inadaquate knowledge of his audience. The readers of the Acts are invited -- with John's audience -- to share in the experience of the apostle when he came into the cave and heard the voice of the Lord from above the cross of light. No doubt cc.97-102 form the climax of John's speech. Yet it would be a mistake to imply that these chapters reveal the full and definitive truth about the Lord. First of all, John makes it clear that he is not able to render everything he had seen and heard (87, 88.3-8, 90.2-4, 102.1-2). Nor did the Lord convey the full truth to John. In c.102.4-7 the apostle intimates that according to his firm conviction the Lord did everything by means of symbols ( o u p p h t ~ Q q )and conditionally (or by way of accomodation, o i ~ o v o p t KG~)."What is more, in c.99.7-8 (cf. 101.4-6) the voice of the Lord explains to John that (as long as John is in this world?) he cannot see the Lord as he really is, just as the place of Rest cannot In so far as John is able to see him, this be seen and de~cribed.~' is because he is related to the Lord (he is his ouyy~vYjq,101.6). From c.96.11, quoted above, we may gather that it will be possible for John to see the Lord as he really is when both have ascended to the heavenly realm. This interpretation differs from the explanation of cc.94-102 forwarded by Paul Schneider who, as I have noted before, sees a disparity between cc.94-6 and cc.97-102. He claims that these two sections include the same themes, but that cc.97-102 introduce
The term o t ~ o v o p ~ ~ ocan 5 < also be used in opposition to 'absolutely' and mean: 'progressively', cf. Lampe, A Patrisfic Greek Lexicon,
28
943b. 29 He also asks John to let him keep what is his. This might be a reaction to John's attempt to spy on the Lord (cf. A J 92 and 93.10-3).
132
GERARD L U T T I W Z E N
these themes as if for the first time and only to the apostle John." Schneider argues that in cc.94-6 we come upon the (slightly adapted) text of an actual initiation rite. Before its incorporation into the Johannine Acts, the mysterious ceremony already had a narrative setting (94.1-7 and the first sentence of c.97). In Schneider's view, the idea of cc.94-6 is that those who participate in the mysterious rite receive salvific gnosis from the Lord's dance and are spiritually transformed (united with the Lord). He seems to take it for granted that in the instruction of c.96 the Lord addresses all the disciples." If Schneider's explication of cc.94-6 is correct, the reaction of the disciples, reported in 97.2-3, is quite unexpected and indeed strange. For as Schneider himself emphasizes, cc.94-6 (in his interpretation) imply that the disciples had been initiated into the Lord's mystery. Schneider's understanding of the meaning and purpose of the dance with the Lord before it was incorporated into the Johannine Acts either leads to the conclusion that the author of the Acts has not understood the alleged earlier function or that he has inserted the text of the mysterious rite into his writing in a very clumsy way. The explanation proposed in this paper is more concerned with the finished text. It starts from the assumption that it is precisely the present arrangement of the episodes combined with the redactional frame story that discloses how the author of the surviving text wished the readers to understand his work. Within the context of the Johannine Acts, it seems plausible that in the instruction of c.96, the Lord addresses John (not the assembled disciples who, by the way, do not play a prominent role in the AJ),
30 Schneider, "'A Perfect Fit"', 5 19. But Schneider, Mystery, 191f, admits that the hymn of c.95 has nothing to do with the theme of suffering. This theme is introduced in the instruction of c.96. 31 Schneider's investigations into the possible meaning and purpose of the alleged Gnostic sacrament must remain hypothetical, however interesting they are. Cf. Mystery, 192: 'What our discussion about this dance has shown is how little we do know about it'; For c.96 see Mystery, 186.
A GNOSTIC READING
133
and that cc.87-105 make clear how in successive meetings with the Lord, John's faith was gradually established. If the readers of the Acts are prepared to join the apostle in the gradual maturing of his perception of the Lord, they will possess their souls indestructable (104). IV The contents of cc. 97-102
We now turn to the theological ideas or the pattern of religion expressed (or clearly implied) in cc.94-102. The revelatory discourse of cc.97-102 must be considered to be the climax of John's speech.32 The foregoing passages (94-6) become understandable only if they are seen in connection with this concluding revelation. For this reason I will begin with cc.97-102. In c.97 John tells how the Lord came into the cave where the apostle found himself after his flight from the crucifixion site. Apparently the Lord comes to John in a human form for John reports that the Lord 'stood' in the cave. We are concerned with an epiphany of the same Lord whose voice the apostle hears from heaven after his vision of the cross of light. This appears from the words spoken by the Lord in the cave at the conclusion of c.97: 'I (will) speak to you ...' The account of the vision is relatively short (98.1-6). John reports that the Lord showed him a cross of light which was firmly fixed. Apart from that, he saw around the cross a large multitude without one form, in the cross one form and one likeness, and above the cross the Lord himself without form but speaking to John in a voice which so far was unknown to the apostle. The vision is followed by an audition. John hears the heavenly voice of the Lord explaining to him several aspects of the vision. In 98.8-99.4 the cross of light is explained, in 100.1-2 the multitude around the cross, in 100.2-7 those in the cross. Other pas-
32 As Schneider, "'A Perfect Fit"', 525, puts it, this revelatory discourse functions as 'a bridge, by which the Acts' community and readers are to understand the full ramifications of their Christian faith'.
134
GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
sages of the explanation concern the suffering of the Lord (1 01.1-3 and 6-14) misunderstandings about the Lord's identity, and John's relationship to the Lord (98.7-8, 99.4-7, 100.7-12, 101.4-6 and 1416). It may be noted that the shapeless figure of the Lord above the cross of light is not explicitly explained. This must be understood in the light of the Lord's statements in cc.99.7-8 and 101.5-6 to the effect that he cannot be seen (i.e. by human beings?) as he really is (101.5-6). In addition the apostle emphasizes that he is not able to communicate everything he had seen (cf. above). In the passages of the vision account and the subsequent instruction relating to the cross of light at least two ideas are combined: a. the cross of light, and b. the idea to the effect that the Lord's cross (i.e the horizontal bar of the cross, cf. below) is firmly fixed and that it separates the lower world from the world above, and thus is more or less identical with the putative boundary between these two areas. The latter idea is indeed well known from heresiological reports about Valentinian doctrines.33 Apparently the boundary was viewed as a cross precisely because a cross used to be firmly established in the soil. This can be gathered from Hippolytus' account in Refitatio VI 3 1.6, where it is made clear that the boundary (tipoq) was called a cross ( o r a u p6q) by the Valentinians, because of its stability and immobility ( 6 ~ nSnqyev t & ~ h t v f iat' ~ a p ~ r a ~ t v f i r a qI) .am not sure whether the other idea (the cross of light) can also be associated with Valentinian speculations (below). In c.100.1-2 the multitude around the cross is briefly explained. It seems evident that the idea here is that the cross of ~ ~that case, those around light has the form of the capital T . In the cross are situated around the vertical or main bar of the cross (and thus below the boundary of the spiritual world), just as those around the cross of wood in Jerusalem were standing around the main bar. This explanation, if correct, is not without consequences, for it means that the connection made by Wilhelm Bousset and 33 Cf. esp. Irenaeus, A h . haer. I 2.4 and 3.5; Hippolytus, Re$ VI 31.57; fic. Theod. 22.4 and 42.1; Junod & Kaestli, AI, 612-4. 34 So rightly Schneider, Mystery, 96.
A GNOSTIC READING
135
others between the cross of light and Plato's cosmic soul is based on a misunderstanding of the form of the cross.35 The T-shape of the cross of light better explains the division by the cross of the spiritual and the material worlds, the picture of a multitude around the cross (cf. the expression 'those at the right and those at the left side', viz. of the vertical bar, 98.16), and the idea that the cross (in fact the horizontal bar, the boundary of the supramundane world) is firmly established (by the main bar). According to cc.98.2 and 100.1-2, the multitude around the cross is not uniform.36 This same category of people is denoted with other negative qualifications: 'the multitude' (99.6), 'those outside the mystery' (100.1 I), and 'the lower nature' (100. If), i.e. the nature allegedly originating fiom 'the inferior root' (98.18). It should be noted that our text clearly distinguishes 'the nature of man' (the race of spiritual human beings?, see further below) from this nature. The outsiders are blamed for their failure to understand the suffering of the Lord. In c.100.10-1 John is asked by the Lord not to care for these people and to despise them, and in c.102 John laughs at them all when he heard what they said about the Lord. With respect to those in the cross two -- at first sight conflicting -- statements are made. In c.98.3 John sees one form and i d p o i a ) in the cross, and one resemblance (pop+.? p i a ~ ai66a in c.100.2-7 the voice of the Lord explains why those in the cross have not (yet?) one 'form'. These passages become more understandable within the frame of reference of classic Gnostic mythology. The expression 'those
35 In Timaeus 34BC, Plato speaks about the X-form of the cosmic soul. See Bousset, 'Plato's Weltseele und das Kreuz Christi', ZNW 14 (1913) 273-85, esp. 279: 'Das Kreuz ist ein Lichtkreuz, es ist ja urspriinglich das groBe Chi, das die Gestirnbahnen bestimmt'. Cf. also A. Bohlig, 'Zur Vorstellung vom Lichtkreuz in Gnostizismus und Manichaismus', in B. Aland (ed), Gnosis. Festschrift fur Hans Jonas (Gottingen, 1978) 472-91. Junod & Kaestli, AI, 657, take it for granted that Bousset's derivation of the cross of light fiom Plato's cosmic soul is correct and generally accepted. 36 Cf. Junod & Kaestli, AI, 657f.
136
GERARD LU'TTIKHUIZEN
in the cross' (which, as far as I know, occurs nowhere else) quite possibly alludes to the concept of particles of divine light fallen, and thereupon detained, in the world of darkness. In Gnostic mythology, the saviour or revealer comes down into the cosmic world in order to reveal to these light particles their origin and destination and to lead them back to the transmundane world. Inasmuch as they are particles of one light, they can indeed be regarded as having one 'form', but in so far as not all of the light seed has been brought together, the light from the divine world has not yet regained its original unity. In several Gnostic writings the saviour addresses the particles of light (the Gnostics) as his 'own', i.e. those belonging to the divine saviour.)' It would seem that this idea also occurs in c.100.7-9: 'For so long as you do not call yourself mine, I am not what I was; but if you hear me, you also who hear shall be as I am, and I shall be what I was, when [...I,. From here some light falls on the preceding passage (100.2-7): 'and those whom you see in the cross: if they have not one form, (it is because) every member of him who came down has not yet been gathered togeBut when the nature of man (or: men?)39 -- the race which comes to me in obedience of my voice -- shall be taken up, then he who now hears me shall share in it; he shall no longer be what he is now but shall be above it (above the cross?) as I am
37 Cf. e.g. The Letter of Peter to Philip (NHC VIII.2), 136.17-25: '1 was sent down in the body because of the seed that had fallen away....And I spoke with him who is mine (here the light seed is personified). And he listened to me, just as you who listened today'; Trimorphic Protennoia (NHC XIII), 50.18: 'the seed (i.e. the light particles) that is mine'. Cf. the opening section of The Apocalypse of Peter (NHC VII.3), 70.21f 'Blessed are those belonging to the Father, for they are above the heavens' (i.e. above the planetary sphere). 38 I.e. the Gnostic saviour (not the putative figure of primordial Man, as Bousset, art. cit., assumed). 39 The MS reads &vQpono~@1501q, which does not yield sense; Hilgenfeld has bvep6nov 4601s; Junod & Kaestli, AI, 21 1, &vQp6nou $1501~.
A GNOSTIC READING
137
now'.40 I conclude that John (representing the true believers) is called to hear and understand the words of the Lord and thereby to unite himself with the Lord (who represents the divine light). When all the believers are one with the Lord, the original unity will be restored. In c.101 the correct understanding of the Lord's sufJering is set against an incorrect understanding. Those who hold to the incorrect view are denoted here rather vaguely as 'those people'. In cc.98.2 and 100.lf they are symbolized by the multitude around the cross. What these people believe with respect to Jesus' suffering is clearly indicated. They profess (or rather will p r ~ f e s s ) ~ ' that the Lord suffered physically on the wooden cross in Jerusalem, that he was pierced, beaten, etc. (101.6-10). The account of beliefs rejected here seems to be an adequate rendering of the views about the reality of the suffering of Christ in emerging mainstream Christianity. At the close of this section I shall return to the relationship between the community of the AJ and mainstream Christianity. The belief that it was the divine saviour himself who was humilated and crucified is also rejected in several Christian Gnostic writings. I will mention a few clear examples.42 The L e ~ e rof Peter to Philip contains a short sermon by Peter. This sermon opens with a summary of the real suffering of Jesus ('he wore a crown of thorns...he was hanged on a cross', etc.) but then Peter continues: 'My brothers, Jesus is a stranger to this suffering.' The sermon concludes with an appeal to the audience not to listen
40 Cf. The Letter of Peter to Philip, 137.24-5: 'just as you who listened today' (the immediate context is cited above in 11.37). In both texts the actual recipients of the revelation are ranked with the mythical light
seed. 41 As the assumption is that the Lord delivers this revelation before his
ascension, he speaks about future beliefs. Cf. the use of the future tense in 99.6: 'what they shall say is humble and not worthy of me'. 42 See further Junod & Kaestli, AI, 581-677; Schneider, Myster)), 90113; C.L. Sturhahn, Die Christologie der altesten apo,byphen Apostelakten (Diss. Gottingen, 1952) 21-41.
138
GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
to 'these lawless people' (NHC VIII.2, 139.16-30). The first) Apocalypse of James reports an appearance of the risen Lord to James. James says to the Lord: 'Rabbi, I have found you! I have heard of your sufferings, which you endured. And I have been much distressed.' But the Lord answers: 'James, do not be concerned for me...I am he who was within me. Never have I suffered in any way, nor have I been distressed (NJ3C V.3, 3 1 .5-20).43 In The Apocalypse of Peter, Peter asks the Lord: 'What is it that I see, o Lord? Is it you yourself whom they take ... Or, who is the one who is glad and who is laughing above the wood (i.e. the cross), and do they hit another one on his feet and on his hands?' The Lord answers: 'The one you see glad and laughing above the wood, that is the living one, Jesus. But the one into whose hands and feet they are driving the nails is his fleshly part, which is the Cf. also The Second Tractate of substitute' (NHC VII.3, 81.7-21.~~ the Great Seth in the same codex VII.56.6-19: 'It was another...who drank the gall and the vinegar; it was not I... It was another upon whom they placed the crown of thorns. But I was rejoicing in the height over all the wealth of the archons and the offspring of their error, of their empty glory. And I was laughing at their ignorance'. 45 What these texts have in common with cc.97-102 of AJ is the conviction that the divine saviour did not and could not suffer physically, since he was a stranger to this suffering, as The Letter of Peter to Philip claims. According to The Apocalypse of Peter and The Second Tractate of the Great Seth, the one who suffered on the cross was an artefact of the cosmic rulers, the archons, themselves (in Gnostic mythology the archons created the human body). Consequently, the archons and their tools on earth humiliate 7
43 Transl. by W. Schoedel, NHLE, 264f. 44 Transl. by H.W. Havelaar, The Coptic Apocalypse of Peter (Diss. Groningen, 1993) 34. In this writing, the Lord warns inter alia of the error of 'those who will adhere to the name of a dead man' (74.13-4). According to Havelaar, 71f, this can only be a reference to the belief of nascent orthodox Christianity in the crucified Jesus. 45 Transl. by R.A. Bullard and J.A. Gibbons, NHLE, 365.
A
GNOSTIC READING
139
their own creature. The saviour, who is above the cross, therefore laughs at their ignorance. Unlike the above Gnostic texts, however, the AJ does not make clear who was the mortal person on the cross. The Gnostic idea that the saviour had put on a material body upon his descent into the lower world (with a view to concealing himself from the archons), does not occur in the AJ.46 In c.101 it is denied that the Lord suffered in a physical way, but it is not denied that he suffered. The passages speaking about his true suffering, however, are rather cryptic. In c.10 1.2f the Lord says to John that he wishes that that suffering which he showed to him and to the other ones while dancing, be called a mystery.47In c.lOl.9ff the Lord likewise points to the mysterious character of his real suffering: 'the things they (the ignorant people) do not say, these things I did suffer. As to what these things are, I will speak to you in riddles (alvtooopaf oot), for I know that you will understand.' The words that follow are enigmatic indeed. John is asked to understand the Lord as seizure, piercing, blood, wounding, hanging, suffering, nailing, and death of the Word. This seems to mean that the physical sufferings of Jesus can be seen as symbols of a more spiritual suffering which the Lord has to endure. The subsequent conclusion of the revelation discourse is likely to shed some light on the idea of this spiritual suffering. Here the Lord appeals to John to understand -- after the Word and the Lord -- the man and what he has suffered (101.14-16). In agreement with Junod and Kaestli (674f), I assume that the notion of the suffering of the man (or: the suffering of an)^* does not refer to the human suffering of Jesus but indeed to the spiritual suffering of the Lord It is possible to explain this notion from Gnostic mythology. First of all, Gnostics believed that the divine saviour shared in their suffering inasmuch as he, too, came down into the world of
Junod & Kaestli, AI, 602; Schneider, Mystev, 100-2. These words explain the dance ceremony in c.95. Cf. section V of this chapter. 48 Cf. the apparatus criticus in Junod and Kaestli, 215.
46
47
140
GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
darknes4' But there is more. The Gnostic myth expounds how an original divine unity disintegrated: a portion of divine light fell apart and came down into the dark world where it was spread out and imprisoned within human bodies and ruled by demonic powers. It would seem that it is these light particles that are denoted as 'members of the saviour ('the one who came down') and, collectively, as the 'nature of man' which 'will be taken up' (101). As we have seen, the saviour and the light particles belong together, obviously because they share the same divine phusis. It must have been a small step to conclude that in the suffering of his members, the saviour suffered himself. I surmise that this idea is suggested by the cryptic statements of our text about the suffering of the Lord. The real suffering is not that which was experienced by Jesus on the wooden cross, but the suffering of the divine light in the dark and demonic world. As indicated above, the purpose of John's speech in cc.87-104 is to make clear that the Lord cannot possibly have had a real human body -- and thus cannot have suffered physically -- since he is and remains the unchangeable God (104). In the revelation discourse of cc.97-102, the focus is on the close relationship between the Lord and John, the representative and model of the true believer. John and those who adopt the revelation handed down by him are viewed as the 'members' of the Lord and as his 'relatives (ouyy~veiq).Furthermore, it is suggested in cryptic terminology that their suffering is his suffering. The question of how the Lord as the unchangeable and invincible God can be subjected to any kind of suffering is solved by a 7
7
49 There is some logic in what the apostles (representing the Gnostics) say in The Letter of Peter to Philip, 138.15f 'If he, our Lord, suffered, how much more must we (suffer).' After all, the Lord came voluntarily into the world and the truth was always with him, whereas the Gnostics were forced to be here, and before their reception of the gnosis they lived in total ignorance about their true identity, origin, and destination. The remark by his fellow apostles is responded to by Peter: 'He suffered because of us' (138.18), i.e. the saviour has come into the world in order to redeem the Gnostics.
A GNOSTIC READING
141
rather complicated Christology. In the conclusion of the revelatory discourse this Christology is alluded to in a very brief and somewhat cryptic way: John is asked to understand first the Word, then the Lord and, in the third place, the man (Man) and what he has suffered (101.14-1 6). The distinction of various aspects or levels in the divine saviour is not an isolated case. We find similar views of Christ in Valentinian and other Christian Gnostic writings. In fact the most significant parallel occurs in a non-Valentinian text, The Apocalypse of Peter (NHC VII.3). Henriette Havelaar, in her comments on this text, has made clear that the Apocalypse distinguishes three figures or aspects in Christ. His highest aspect is designated as his 'intellectual Pleroma'. This aspect of the saviour remains in the divine world, while another part of him descends into the world. The supreme aspect of the saviour can be equated with the unchangeable Lord of AJ 104.2. The second aspect is the saviour in so far as he came down into the world, probably at different times and in different appearances. This figure, designated as 'in-tellectual spirit' or 'holy spirit', appears to Peter and speaks to him, just as the saviour as Lord appears to John and to other disciples in the Johannine Acts. The third aspect of the Saviour in The Apocalypse of Peter is designated inter alia as 'the living Jesus' and the 'incorporeal body' of the saviour. It is this part of the saviour that was temporarily united with a material body (the 'substitute' of the living Jesus). However, before the crucifixion the living Jesus withdrew from this physical body." In these and other texts various aspects or levels in Christ are distinguished with a view to warranting his unchangeable divine identity on the one hand, and on the other explaining his involvement in the inferior world. In The Apocalypse of Peter the lowest manifestation serves to explain how the divine saviour could be united with a human body, created by the archons. In the AJ, as we have noticed, this idea seems to be absent. According to our text, the Lord never appeared in a real body.51 Here the aspect of 50 51
Havelaar, Apocalypse of Peter, 160-4. Schneider, Mystey, 101.
142
GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
the Lord as 'Man' rather serves to warrant his identity with the human light particles in the world. When the human 'nature' (the 'members' of the Lord) will be gathered together in the luminous cross -- and thereupon uplifted unto the place of Rest, above the cross -- this aspect of the saviour will quite probably no longer exist. Then the divine saviour will be who he was (100.4-10). I can be brief about the various names and metaphors used to refer to the Lord. Apparently, they basically have the same function as his polymorphous appearances. In 98.8ff the Lord explains: 'because of you this cross of light is sometimes called word by me, sometimes intelligence, sometimes Christ, sometimes door', etc. This clearly means that the transcendent Lord has to adapt himself to human understanding (cf. 98.12f). The Lord cannot be seen nor defined in human language as he really is (99.8 and 101.4-6). His epiphanies and the metaphors used to refer to him are indispensable and deficient at the same time. Previous studies have already pointed to the very interesting explanation for this phenomenon in The Gospel according to Philip (NHC II.3).53 Section 67 (67.9-12) of this Valentinian Gnostic Gospel states: 'Truth did not enter the world naked but in symbols and images. It (the world) will not receive it in any other way.' This fundamental thesis is elaborated in sections 11-3. Of special relevance in connection with the manifold names and predicates of the Lord in AJ 98.8-13 is the conclusion of section 12 (54.13-8): 'For our sakes truth produced names in the world because it cannot possibly be known without names. Truth is one. It is (however) manifold for our sakes who are instructed about this one thing through many (names) in love.' If applied to the various designations of the Lord in AJ 98.8ff, this insight means that in this world the transcendent Lord cannot be understood as he really is (cf. once again 99.8 and 101.5f). Human language does not provide one fully adequate term or name to refer to the Lord. There are only many deficient metaphors or symbols. This also holds true for the polymorphous 52 The plural indicates that John represents the true believers. 53 See esp. Junod & Kaestli, AI, 619; Schneider, Mystery, 94f.
A GNOSTIC READING
143
epiphanies of the Lord. There is no single adequate shape in which the transcendent Lord could manifest himself, therefore he appears in diverse shapes. The Lord uses these inadequate shapes and words in order to instruct his 'members' living in this inferior world. C.102.4-7 makes clear that John knew that the Lord did everything 'in a symbolic way', and that he did so with a view to converting and saving humankind. It becomes more clear now why c.98 speaks of a cross of light. Apparently the cross at the boundary of the world above is viewed as the place where the particles of divine light are assembled. If Junod and Kaestli are right in reading &vayoyq for av&yyq in 98.15, this term might be highly significant: the cross is the place where eventually the light will be lifted up into the place of Rest. Unfortunately the explanation of the cross in 98.15-7 is badly transmitted. I am not sure whether we are entitled to associate the passages speaking about oo4ta with the classic Gnostic and Valentinian myth of S ~ p h i a . ' ~ In these chapters we come upon a typically mythical pattern of religion. I will sketch the main lines of this mythical belief. Two categories of human beings are distinguished. The first category has its roots in the inferior world, the other comes from above. They are 'members' and 'relatives' of the one who came down, the divine saviour and Lord. If we may infer that 'Man' (&vepoxoq) is a designation of the saviour (100.3f and 101.14-6), it would seem that he (or an aspect of his) is identified with this category of human beings. It is presented as a mystery and hinted at cryptically that the Lord suffers with the human beings belonging to him. In a vision the Lord shows the destination of spiritual humankind. At the boundary of the world above John sees a cross that already is being filled with light. When all the members of the divine saviour are gathered in this cross, the human 'nature' will be lifted up unto the place of Rest --above the cross and the boundary -- from where the voice of the Lord (as Word?) speaks
54
But cf. Junod & Kaestli, AI, 613, 661f.
144
GERARD LUlTIKHUIZEN
to the apostle." Apparently the cross of light can be called Christ, because here all his members are united with him. When this process has been completed, the Lord will be who he was (100.7-9). It may be noted that this process is not a 'natural' one. Human beings are not saved because they belong to the race of spiritual people. After all, John affirms that the Lord did everything with a view to converting people (&I< &vep6nou Bnto'rpo@qv, 102.6). Moreover, the apostle and the 'race that draws near to me (i.e. the Lord)' are emphatically summoned to hear and obey the Lord (100.4-9). If it is correct to speak of a dualism of two categories of human beings, this dualism reminds us of the type of dualism we find in the canonical Gospel of John. In the end it is those who accept the Lord and his message who will be saved. Although the motif of the cross of light as such does not occur in the surviving classic Gnostic and Valentinian literature, we seem to be dealing in A J 97-102 with an expression of a typically Gnostic mythological thought pattern. This idea presupposes Gnostic views of the world and man. Our world is regarded as a lower world separated from a transcendent world (the place of Rest) by a fixed boundary. In conformity with Gnostic anthropology, a class of human beings living under the boundary of the superior world is believed to originate from the world above. The concept of salvation is connected with this view of man. The human beings originating from the world above are summoned to become what they basically are: as they belong to the saviour they should listen to him and confess that they are his (100.7), and so be (re-)united with him. It is precisely this idea that is expressed in the cross of light: when all the light scattered in the world is assembled in the luminous cross (which is also called 'Christ'), the saviour will be who he was (100.8f: 'if you hear me...I shall be that which I was...'). The transcendent Lord as
55 The (metaphoric) terminology is not used in a consequent and consistent way: in c.101 .I Iff John is called to consider the suffering and even the death of the Word (h6yo~).Cf. c.96.6 where the Lord says to John that he was sent by the Father as Word.
A GNOSTIC READING
145
he really is cannot be adequately described in the language of this world. This can merely be communicated through symbols and metaphors. For the Acts' community, the close relationship -- in fact the consubstantiality -- of the saviour and his 'members' quite likely entails that he suffers with the suffering humankind. This 'mysterious' view of the suffering of the saviour is opposed to the belief in the physical suffering and death of the Lord. As we have seen, the rejection of this belief occurs in several Christian Gnostic writings. Whereas the underlying mythical thought pattern is evidently Gnostic, I doubt whether it is possible to be more specific and to There are define this Gnostic thought structure as Valenti~~ian.'~ two instances in cc.97-102 which might suggest that the author was familiar with Valentinian ideas. Firstly, as we have seen, the equation of the boundary of the world above with the cross of Christ is reminiscent of Valentinian mythology. But the mere occurrence of a mythological motif used by Valentinian philosophers does not necessarily mean that our text is an expression of Valentinian mythology. Secondly, it is attractive to relate the phenomenon of the plural names and appearances of the divine Lord to the expositions in the Gospel according to Philip on the indispensability as well as deficiency of human language in communicating the transcendent truth. But I doubt that these expositions are inextricably bound up with the Valentinian type of Gnosis. In addition, the Valentinian character of the various sections of this composite Gnostic Gospel is not evident. Finally, we are facing the question of the relationship of the Christians of the Johannine Acts to nascent orthodox Christianity. It is highly plausible that the latter category is referred to metaphorically in the picture of the multitude around the cross. These people are defined as 'the inferior @boy7.They are 'outside the mystery' and John is asked by the Lord to despise them (100.lf and 10-2). These negative qualifications clearly suggest some kind 56 The arguments by Junod & Kaestli, AI, 627-31, in favour of the (Eastern-)Valentinian character of the Gnostic ideas of cc.94-102 are not convincing.
146
GERARD LUlTIKHUIZEN
of controversy. It is, however, hard to assess whether this means that the Acts' community has separated from the larger group denoted as 'the multitude'. Also on this point, a comparison with The Apocalypse of Peter may be helpful. The Gnostic group behind The Apocalypse of Peter rejected the doctrines and the exclusivistic claims of emerging orthodoxy, in particular its belief in salvation through the cross of Jesus (see above). But Henriette Havelaar points to text data suggesting that the 'Petrine' Gnostics formed a minority group within one ecclesiastical organisation. She argues that groups holding different beliefs can belong to one community as long as they share common symbols (the examples she mentions are 'Christ' and 'the Cross'!). A schism can be the result of a conflict concerning the explicit interpretation of certain common This is what we have in the revelatory discourses in A J 97-102. The controversy with 'the many' concerns the interpretation of the common symbols of the suffering and the cross of the Lord. It should not be overlooked that the interpretation forwarded by our text is presented as a mystery. 'The many' do not understand the real meaning of the suffering of the Lord because they are 'outside the mystery' (100.1 1). This might suggest that we are dealing with an esoteric group of Gnostic Christians who, as enlightened persons, looked down on the supposedly superficial beliefs of the multitude (cf. 99.6: what they say about the Lord is Z C L X E ~ 'low', V ~ V , 'humble'). In that case these esoteric Christians may have viewed themselves as a higher level or an inner circle of a large community of Christian believers.58 The enlightened Christians may have believed that 'those outside the mystery' could be converted to their esoteric understanding of the Lord and his suffering. The revelatory discourse was perhaps included in the Johannine Acts with a view to convincing these 'outsiders' of the truth allegedly preserved by
57 Sections 3 and 4 of chapter 7 ('The Adversaries'). 58 For this view of the relationship between Gnostics and emerging orthodoxy see K. Koschorke, Die Polemik der Gnostiker gegen das kirchliche Christentum (Leiden, 1978) 220-32.
A GNOSTIC READING
this small group of followers of the apostle.
It is not my intention to discuss cc.94-6 in detail. A few observations will suffice to make clear what the dance ceremony of c.95 could mean if it is interpreted in the light of the subsequent revelation. I do not deny, by the way, that it may be usehl to examine the possible sources and backgrounds of cc.94-6, but I doubt that the readers of the Acts were supposed to understand the text from these backgrounds. It is more probable that the secret meaning of the dance rite should be understood from the instructions by the Lord in the following chapters. In c.96 the Lord's esoteric instruction of the dance ceremony is formulated in the second person singular. Within the context of the Acts and their veneration of the beloved disciple, it is more or less self-evident that the person instructed here is John (above, section 111). Without this esoteric instruction and the subsequent revelation of the cross of light, the mysterious ceremony of c.95 is bound to remain obscure. This means that the ceremony is comprehensible only to John and to persons acquainted with John's esoteric teaching (among them the readers of the book)59 and, consequently, that the 'historical' participants, John included, did not understand what the Lord was demonstrating to them.60 In the subsequent frame story (97) their inadequate comprehension comes to light.6' We are told how John is chosen to understand the secret meaning of the ceremony. In cc.96 (and 101) the apostle is informed that the dance is a 59 The words, 'who does not dance, does not know what happens' (95.29-30), quite probably speak about the dance as it was meant by the Lord (this meaning is only revealed in cc.96 and 98-102). 60 As indicated in my introduction, Schneider tries to solve this problem by means of source criticism. 61 I therefore do not believe that the disciples are pictured as having received esoteric gnosis, having ascended to the cross of light, and having become members of the race that obeys the Lord (Schneider).
148
GERARD LUTTIKHUIZEN
symbolic expression or an illustration of the theme of suffering. What true suffering means is hinted at in cc.97-102. In cryptic terminology it is disclosed to John that the Lord suffers with true humankind. An important component of this idea is the consubstantiality -- in a way the identity -- of the Lord as 'Man' and his 'members' or 'relatives'. Just as the Lord's members have a share in his divinity, the Lord shares in their human 'nature'.62 The idea of the consubstantiality of the Lord and those belonging to him might explain the antithetical statements in c.95. In the first two lines of this chapter, the Lord sings: 'I wish to be saved, and I wish to save'. It would seem that in the first line the Lord speaks as 'Man' and .in the second in his capacity as divine saviour. By the antiphonal 'amen' the participants are supposed to respond to these words of the Lord, quite possibly by applying the words to themselves. The subsequent chapters make clear that the members of the Lord still await their final redemption in the cross of light (accordingly, they wish to be saved) but, on the other hand, that even now they share in the divine essence of the Lord (and therefore are able to participate in his redemptive activity: they wish to save others?).63 Those who share in the mysterious dance with the Lord are 62 Previous studies have already examined the antiphonal song and the dance rite within a Gnostic frame of reference. In that respect, the interpretation proposed here is not new. Otherwise it should be granted that any interpretation of the mysterious ceremony must remain tentative and hypothetical. Cf. Schneider's remark cited above, n. 32. 63 Lines 18-30 of c.95 are notoriously difficult. I do not believe that L dances'), are a liturgical the words of 95.18, X&PL< X O ~ E ~ E('Grace direction or the title of this part of a supposed sacrament (Schneider, Mystery, 173f). It is more plausible that these words belong to the frame of the narrative: John relates how the Lord as Charis ('Grace', one of his many names, cf. 98.12) was dancing, or started dancing, and thereupon (in lines 19-22) invited the disciples to dance with him. But I grant that in this interpretation the present tense X O ~ E ~ E('dances') L is awkward. We would expect a continuation of the past tenses used in c.94. Perhaps the text of the only surviving manuscript is corrupt here.
A GNOSTIC READING
149
able to enter the world above and to experience how the divine sphere of the Ogdoas (the 'Eighth') participates in this dance. The term Ogdoas is well known from Gnostic I i t e r a t ~ r e .A~ ~close parallel can be found in the untitled Hermetic tractate known as The Discourse on the Eighth and Ninth (NHC VI.6): 'For the entire Ogdoas, my son, and the souls that are in it, and the angels, sing a hymn in silence' (58.17-21).65 In this text an initiate experiences how he is transferred into the divine realm above the seven planetary spheres. The classic Gnostic tractate Marsanes (NHC X) explains that the Eleventh and the Twelfth speak of the invisible supreme God.66 The Eighth and the Twelfth are common Gnostic -- not specifically Valentinian -- designations of levels or realms of the supramundane world. Supposing that only after the mysterious dance rite is its secret meaning disclosed to John, we may compare the function of this ceremony with that of vision accounts in the Book of Daniel and in other apocalyptic writings, notably in Gnostic apocalypses. As a rule, the vision is not understood immediately. It becomes clear only when it is explained to the seer by an angelus interpres or -in Christian Gnostic apocalypses as The Apocalypse of Peter -- by the Christian saviour. The fact that John did not immediately understand the full meaning of the dance ceremony fits into the Acts' picture of John's gradual perception of the divine Lord (above, section 111). This idea of a growth of insight in contacts with the divine saviour is highly characteristic of Gnostic revelatory literature. VI Connections between cc.94-102 and the Asian episodes In this final section we will pay attention to the relationship of
64 Cf. F. Siegert, Nag-Hammadi-Register (Tiibingen, 1982) 276. 65 Trans. NHLE, 325. 66 Unfortunately, the relevant passage of codex X (p. 4, lines 13f) is seriously damaged, cf. NHLE, 463.
150
GERARD LUlTIKHUIZEN
cc.94-102 to the other portions of the book which speak about the activities of the apostle John in Asia. I propose that in discussing this question we try to put ourselves in the position of those historical readers who endorsed the ideas of John's speech, especially the Gnostic views expressed in his account of the revelation granted by the Lord during the crucifixion scene. What did the other parts of the book mean to these readers (among them first of all the editor of the text and his spiritual kinship)? We may presume a priori that their interest was not in the possible differences but rather in the basic agreements between cc.94-102 and the episodes about John's mission in Asia. The Asian episodes were quite possibly attractive to them not only on account of their novellistic features but also because aspects of these stories confirmed them in their religious convictions. My thesis is that the stories about the apostle's activities in Asia appealed to Gnostic Christians who sympathized with the contents of cc.94-102 because these stories demonstrate what is true spiritual life. The following observations may clarify this. To the Gnostics of cc.94-102, the outstanding example of the true follower of the Lord is obviously the apostle himself. John is a ouyysvfjq or spiritual relative of the Lord (101.6). At the conclusion of c.27 Lycomedes directs these words to John: 'if it is permitted that next to God those men are called gods who have benefited us, it is you, father ...' The reason why John is feared or respected by the wicked powers and venerated by his converts is that the apostle is able to raise people to a higher level of being. In so far as in the Acts deceased people are raised in the literal sense of the word (it is significant that people who are not dead but in coma or paralyzed are also raised by John!) they do not rise to their former lives. John's resurrections are basically conversions to a new spiritual life.67 In c.52 John says to an old man: 'If you ~,iseup to the same life, you would be better to remain dead. But rise up to a better!' The resurrection of the body is without meaning if this
67 Schneider, Mystery, 24-6.
A GNOSTIC READING
15 1
resurrection is not a sign of the spiritual resurrection. Because Fortunatus does not accept the new life he is bound to die even after his dead body was raised by the apostle (84.1-2: John saw that Fortunatus' soul was not prepared to turn to the new life). John's converts are reborn and resurrected to a new spiritual life in spite of the fact that they still (or again) live in this Basically, their resurrection takes place during their lifetime.69 It seems clear to me that Gnostic Christians could identify themselves with these converts as well as with the 'members' of the Lord or with the race of (spiritual) humankind which was being gathered together in the cross of light." The spiritual quality of the new life of John's converts appears from their ability to imitate the apostle in raising people from the dead. It is perhaps noteworthy that two followers of John who are reported to have performed such a miracle are women. C.24 tells how Cleopatra spoke to her dead husband as she was told by the apostle, and so raised Lycomedes immediately. In c.83 Drusiana raises Fortunatus. As spiritual souls, John's converts are called to despise their bodies. The body is a 'dead house' for the soul (77.8). Accordingly, John's portrait by a painter is considered to be a picture of what is dead (29.19). The body, however beautiful it may be, ends
68 Cf. Bolyki, this volume, Ch. 11. This view is in agreement with the 'praesentic' eschatology of (passages of) the canonical Gospel of John, but it is at least compatible with the dualistic anthropology of cc.97-102, too. 69 The view that resurrection takes place during this life and not after death is already disputed in the second Letter to Timothy (2.16-8). Cf. section 90 (73.1-7) of the Gnostic Gospel according to Philip: 'Those who say: "One dies first and (then) one will rise" are wrong. If one does not receive the resurrection during this life, one will receive nothing when one dies.' 70 This holds true even if the antithesis with people who are not willing to be converted differs from the antithesis between the people being assembled in the luminous cross and the many around the cross, who seem to be non-enlightened Christians rather than pagans.
152
GERARD LUTTIKHLTIZEN
in the grave (35.1-3). True Christians despise things of the moment, while their faith remains the same to the end of life and is immune to all kinds of confusions and temptations (68.1-8 and 70.2-3). The rejection of the body and its desires is highlighted in Drusiana's celibate life. Along the same lines, Cleopatra is pictured as a spiritual person in full control of her emotions. C.24 tells how John felt sony for Cleopatra when he saw that after the death of her husband she became neither distraught nor excited. Thereupon John said to the Lord: 'You see this self-control; you see this restraint, you see how Cleopatra's soul cries in silence..' Apparently a truly spiritual person should not be ruled by or give expression to such emotions as distress and excitement." The Asian episodes may have been relevant to Gnostic Christians inasmuch as these stories showed how people like Cleopatra and Drusiana, but also Callimachus, Fortunatus, and others, reacted to the message of salvation mediated and put into practice by the apostle. Finally, in this connection I would like to note that in the stories about John's activities in Asia we do not find any reference to the Old Testament and to the biblical Creator God, to the incarnation, the earthly ministry, and the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, nor to a hierarchical organization of the church.72 Junod and Kaestli are probably right when they maintain that the Johannine Acts without cc.94-102 (and 109) do not have a specifically Gnostic character (681: 'cette religion n'est pas gnostique'), but on the other hand it would be difficult to find textual data that are clearly inconsistent with the Gnostic pattern of religion as it becomes manifest in cc.94-102. In fact, as we have seen, the Asian episodes may have been not only interesting (because of their novelistic character) but also highly relevant (because of their spiritual content) to Gnostic readers.
71 Cf. Schneider, Mystery, 32-6. 72 Junod & Kaestli, AI, 680.
VIII. Sermons of the Book of Acts and the Apocryphal Acts P A L HERCEG
In this contribution we will deal with the Acts of John and the Acts of Andrew, and we intend to stay exclusively within the boundaries of the above title and to comment on the comparison of the sayings of the book of Acts with the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (AAA). My main concern will be the content, the analysis of the content, and the analysis of the actors in the stories. As a reference we will use the recent work of F. Bovon on Luke, some of whose significant conclusions will constitute the basis of my study.' These are specifically as follows: 1. It seems that the purpose of the AAA supports the remark of the Murator-Canon: Acta autem omnium apostolorum sub uno libro scripta sunt. Since Luke does not mention this, it seems that the AAA were intended to complete the circle. 2. The fact of canonisation brought about profound changes. a) An officially prescribed tradition emerged which served as an irritant to those who carried on the tradition. Therefore, those maintaining the tradition, if not opposed to the canonical Acts but inspired by it, aggressively maintained their own traditions. b) With the act of canonisation, even within certain restrictions, a specific narrative energy was able to function, which made the non-canonical tradition lose its raison d'etre. It seems that a 'restrained' energy was trying to break out from the AAA. 3. In its style and methodology, the treatment of the tradition has changed. Bovon recognizes the fact that the apophthegm, as
1
F. Bovon, Lukas in neuer Sicht (Neukirchen-Vluyn, 1985).
154
PAL HERCEG
defined by Bultmann, and the 'novella', as defined by Dibelius, are missing from Luke's Acts; however, the AAA do renew their usage. 4. Both in content and dogmatic teachings, one can sense the milieu of the age of the Apocryphal Acts and early Christianity. To what degree have the writers of apocryphal texts known or used canonical texts? It is remarkable that the AAA only quote short logia which contain not complete sentences, but merely fragments. Therefore, we cannot explain these as quotations from biblical texts properly understood, but merely as literary forms which could have been used both by both canonical and secular literature. Here I provide some illustrations of this important distinction: AJ 18 'Be as you wish' - Luke 13.8 AJ 62 'Touched his clothing' - Matthew 9.20 AJ 106 'Inheritors' - Ephesians 3.6 In the following quotations one can assume a broader knowledge of the biblical texts: 'Building on a foundation' - Ephesians 2.20 'Ask and it will be given' - Matthew 7.7 'Do not collect treasures' - Matthew 6.19 'Unquenchable fire - Mark 9.43 'Clothed in soft clothing' - Matthew 11.8 'A child fed by milk' - Hebrews 5.12 'One who was loved before' - 1 John 4.9 'Flute playing and crying' - Matthew 11.17 (but here Jesus himself quoted the words of a game. In certain places, however, the quotation of the canonical text is quite certain.) 'Return evil with evil' - Romans 12.17, 1 Thessalonians 5.15, 1 Peter 3.9 'Do not be faithless' - John 2.7 (but here it refers to Thomas)
SERMONS
155
AJ 94 'Logos, who possesses no darkness' - 1 John 1.5 AJ 112 'The apostles of the Gentiles' - Romans 1.6, Galatians 1.2 (but in the canonical text the reference is to Paul, in the apocryphal text to John) We may conclude that there are, along with the logia, passages which remind one of the canonical text. However, in two of the above-mentioned examples, we can see that the statements addressed to Thomas or to Paul were transferred to John. It seems to me that in these cases we are dealing not with quotations but merely with applications of the canonical text's technical terms. It is my opinion that we can partially prove that there are certain common points here because from the synoptic text we can find not only certain expressions reminding us of the logia of Jesus, but also many references which resemble the words of the Passion narrative. (Obviously, this is a parallel to the Martyr stories.) From the Gospel of John, chaps. 10, 13, 20 and 21, one recognises possible parallels. From Luke's Acts 2, we may mention the section which deals with the life of the congregation. From the works of Paul, we can find some sections from Romans, Galatians and First Thessalonians. From the Catholic letters, we can mention the Letter to the Hebrews and also the parallels from James. To conclude this section, one may say that we cannot really prove the use of passages from the canonical text. In fact we cannot even assume that it was known. We can only look at them as random logia. The more often used text fragments do challenge us, however. We still cannot assume the knowledge and the usage of the written text, but, knowing its wide-spread application in the Christian Church, we can look at them as merely well-known statements or popular expressions. We can now conclude that if the usage of the canonical text gives us such an uncertain picture, it is understandable that the content of the canonical texts could be even further divorced from the statements of the AAA.
Statements of the Book ofActs It is generally believed that, in the book of Acts, the intention of
Luke was to introduce the work of the Spirit, and thus to continue the writing of the story of Jesus. This purpose determines both the content and the form (methodology and style). Since the apostles lived in a missionary situation, their statements (except perhaps those of James in chap. 15 and of Paul before Felix in chap. 24), addressed to Jews (like Peter's) and to Gentiles (from Paul), were sermons in which the Christ-event had its content and purpose, as the following analysis of the sermons may show: A. The Sermons of Peter 1. Acts 2 starts with an Old Testament foundation by calling to remembrance the prophesies of Joel. After this we see a short rehearsal of the life of Jesus, the signs which justify him, the fact of the resurrection and its apologetic defence contrasted with David, and finally the statement that he is Lord and Christ. To this the necessary response is repentance and baptism. The Christ-event ensures the historical continuity of the people of God, even when it represents a certain separation between Christianity and Judaism. But it means nothing more; the expression in the distance (makran) does not mean either the pagan or the Diaspora. 2. Acts 3 is a reference to the God of the fathers and then to the sonship of Jesus, to his messiahship and to his prophetic role. Here also the continuity of the promises is emphasised. The main point of the sermon is that Jesus' role and his dignity were taken away by the Jews. 3 . Acts 4 contains a shorter version of the sermon than the two preceding ones. Only Jesus' resurrection is mentioned. Only the quotation from Psalm 118 gives the New Testament foundation. In the second portion of this part, the prayer of the congregation did return to the judgment of Jesus and to the predetermination of his suffering. An interesting expression calls Jesus the 'servant of God', just as David was mentioned earlier as the 'servant of God'. 4. Acts 10 tells of God sending Jesus to Israel to explain God's majesty. After the witnessing of the resurrection, the dispersion of the apostles is mentioned, emphasising the prophetic statements concerning Jesus. 5. In Acts 11 we read of the happenings in the house of Cor-
SERMONS
157
nelius (so it is not a declaration of the Christ-event). But the final message will lead us back to Christ. The Church cannot prevent the mission which God through Christ has established and launched. B. The Sermon of Stephen Acts 7 is a narrative of Old Testament salvation history; but the events are not described according to Jewish tradition. The emphasis and the conclusion, according to Stephen, have been altered. The founding fathers have not yet received the promised land, the very brothers of Joseph are jealous, Moses is misunderstood by his own people and even rejected by them, and later with the manufacture of the golden calf they prove their disobedience. After the Holy Tabernacle the temple was built, though God would not inhabit man-made structures. The destiny of the prophets has always been persecution. In this way, Stephen arrives at the Son of man as certainly the last link of the chain of those who were sent by God and rejected by his people. Consequently, the sermon of Stephen is not tied to the Christ-event, but only arrives at the event and also interprets it as the apex of God's salvation plan. (We may even suggest that it represents the pinnacle of the disobedience of the Jewish people.) This speech, therefore, is not a missionary sermon, but a mere apologetic statement. It was delivered not to present Stephen's own personality or destiny, but to show the meeting of Judaism and Christianity. C. The Sermon of Philip Though this sermon in Acts 8 has only survived in a very reduced form, fiom its context one sees that Philip explains the expiation of Jesus on the basis of Isaiah 53. Its actualisation is revealed fiom the flow of the event, the conversion of the eunuch, and his baptism.
D. The Speech of Peter and James In Acts 15 Peter refers only to his own work and role, especially to those acts which he had done in the pagan mission. James supports this statement. In the same way as Peter makes reference in the
158
PAL HERCEG
text to Christ, James follows this approach. It is a particularly interesting aspect of this speech that it builds upon those biblical texts which are not messianic or cannot be referred to Christ, like Amos 9.11-2. Even this is quoted according to the Septuagint, not the Hebrew. Although the pericope refers to the conversion of Gentiles, it is remarkable that the act of God is completely rudimentary (especially the way the Christ-event is mentioned).
E. The Sermons of Paul In Pisidian Antioch (Acts 13) The sermon in the synagogue begins with the Egyptian liberation with the leadership of God and his promises, and later refers to the kingdom, to Saul and David, whose promised descendant is Jesus proclaimed by John the - Baptist. Jesus is therefore the promised one, in whom was found the forgiveness of sins and the justification which the law of Moses could not deliver. Although the end of the speech is polemical, the sermon does not contain the proclamation of Christ and his significance. In Lystra (Acts 14) there is an obstacle of language between the apostles and the people of Lystra; moreover only a few sentences remain from this speech. To avoid misunderstanding, Paul speaks about the creator, the living God, who is not without proclamations and who is a benefactor, but the speech abruptly ends there. The next logical step would be that the greatest proclamation of God is the sending of Christ, which at the same time is the greatest benevolent act; but this remains only speculation. In Athens (Acts 17) Paul starts with the author of the unknown God. Later he mentions the creator, the purpose of the created world and mankind, namely that man should seek God the creator. In this way he arrives at the demand of conversion which is urgent, due to the coming of judgment day and the judge himself. Here, probably, would have followed the statement about Christ. In Ephesus (Acts 20) at the beginning of the speech, one can find a statement concerning Christ. After this the apostle deals with his own election and destiny, but always in the context of the task he was commissioned for by Christ himself.
SERMONS
159
The speech before the crowds (Acts 22) is the self-confession and apologetic statement of an apostle who had just escaped from mortal danger. He describes his own past anti-Christian activities and the event of his calling. It is Christ who made him his servant, whose purpose was made clear by the words of Ananias: 'You will be his witness before all mankind' (verse 15). (This could serve as an ars poetica of the apostle.) He arrives at his call to the Gentiles, but at this point the crowd prevents him from continuing. In the speech before the Great Council (Acts 23) we find merely a few sentences from the apostle. His introduction was interrupted by the High Priest after which, looking for a way out, he starts speaking about the resurrection. It seems from the text that he is not dealing specifically with the resurrection of Jesus, but with the clarification of the issue of the resurrection in general. The speech before Felix (Acts 24) is a personal defence by Paul, in which he rejects the accusations made against him. Standing before this Roman ruler, he is not in a missionary situation. Any reference to the promises or to justification would be pointless and meaningless in such a situation. Since king Agrippa was a Jew, the apostle open his speech before him (Acts 26) with a reference to the Old Testament. He discusses the promises given to the fathers, their hopes which were fulfilled by the Christ-event. He himself at one time denied this, becoming a persecutor of the church, though later an apostle. He repeats the story of his calling and his sending to the Gentiles. He arrives at the pronouncement of the conversion, tying it to the resurrection and the prophetic promises. This was interrupted by the listening Roman, and it was also uncomfortable to the Jewish king. After this short overview, we may attempt to emphasise a few characteristics: 1. Every sermon of the book of Acts (except James, the defence before Felix and perhaps the one before the great Council) is tied to the Christ-event. Either it speaks specifically about the event or it starts from that point, but this historic core is always present.
160
PAL HERCEG
2. The sermons speak about the Christ-event within the direct context or within the continuity and the apex of the prophecies and the promises given to Israel. 3. Consequently, the significance of the Christ-event is more than the meaning of its historicity. In it one finds the fulfilment of the promises, the forgiveness of sins, the justification of man, and the promise and certainty of the resurrection. 4. There is a definite requirement upon the listeners which is the consequence of the narrated historic event. Since in Jesus Christ God's will has been fulfilled, to this act men should turn and respond. 5. Generally speaking, the sermons are tied to a given situation. In them one can sense the missionary colours of the apo'stolic age. Circumstance and sermon are in complete harmony with each other (they fit perfectly into a historic framework). 6. One can sense without question that the apostles were the servants of Jesus and of his cause. This is even sharper in comparison; they are not 'divine men', not autonomous personalities, but proclaimers in the Old Testament sense of the expression. 7. These sermons have a clear missionary purpose. They intend to convince and to convert the listeners, to make them members of the Church of Christ. Speeches in the Acts of John The AAA are not artistically created texts, nor so unified as the book of Luke. Since they are fragmented, a comparison is not really appropriate. But one thing is still understandable, that none of the AAA was built on a single concept: all are descriptions of almost accidental situations. Perhaps the absence of a coherent concept is the result of this fragmented status. The main actors, the apostles, are no longer historical persons, not people made of flesh and blood, but legendary persons, who live in a golden mist, engendered by the concept of the theios aner. Their speeches, sermons and prayers are not tied to the Christ-event or to its actualisation (often divorced even from the situation of their origin). The background is often sketchy, repetitive or not described at all.
SERMONS
161
Let us now look at the following examples from the Acts of John: A J 18-25 deals with the resurrection of Lycomedes and Cleopatra. At the death of Cleopatra and her husband Lycomedes, John delivered this prayer, 'What did you do my Lord? Why did you take back your benevolent judgment? I beg you please, do not allow that those who rejoice, rejoice in the suffering of others.' He is referring to the promise of Christ, 'Ask and it shall be given'. John refers also to the name of Jesus in which he speaks, the Jesus of whom every creature is afraid, the height, the depth, the darkness, death, hell, and so on (this part reminds us of Romans 8). When the resurrected Lycomedes wishes to kiss the feet of John, he resists him, saying: 'Do not kiss my feet, but the feet of God.' These sermons do not crystallise around the greatness of God or the misery of man, but they contain a defensive apology because of those enemies who question John's personality and his healing powers. John 'possesses' the power to heal; the mentioning of Jesus happens almost with reference to this power. One of his remarks reminds us of Acts 3 (when the apostle does not ask for gold or silver, but in the name of Jesus restores Cleopatra). Another statement also reminds us of the book of Acts (the way John was asked to stay with us). In spite of the similarities, one can sense the dissimilarities also. The centre of the stories is not the proclamation of the historical Jesus, but rather the legitimisation of the victorious Christ and his authorised servant. In A J 26-9 Lycomedes painted the image of John which he hung on the wall, lighting a candle before it; and John surprisingly asks the question: 'Is this one of your gods; are you still pagan?' When John discovers that it is his picture on the wall, he uses a mirror to compare himself to the picture and says, 'You did not paint me, you painted only my body, only what is visible, but the colours are missing, like faith, knowledge, fear of God, love, humility, goodness and so on. Since these are missing, the picture is incomplete and childish! You painted a dead picture of a dead man!'2
2
On this episode see also Jan Bremmer, this volume, 40f.
162
PAL HERCEG
These words remind us of Gal 5.22 and Col 5.23, since they refer to the fruits of the Spirit and the characteristics of the new man. But in these letters, these characteristics are gifts. Here, however, they are John's own characteristics. In addition certain dualistic colours are apparent here. In A J 30-6 all the elderly women gathered in the theatre, except four, are unwell. They expect from John, in the presence of a large crowd, that he should heal them. John says he did not come to Ephesus with a human message. He is not a merchant, but he came to say that Jesus Christ would like to liberate the people of the city because they are faithless and possess outrageous customs. For that reason, they should no longer collect earthly treasures. Nor should they put their hopes in anything which is of this earth, like wealth or poverty or healthy bodies or adultery (!), because nature and the law will avenge transgressors. The deeds of men lead to unquenchable fire. This is the way he proclaims salvation, after which he heals the elderly women. These words remind us of certain passages in the Sermon on the Mount. At the same time, this speech has no visible connection with the real situation. Even the sermon of John the Baptist has been adjusted to the listeners and their ~ituation.~ In A J 37-45, on the memorial day of the temple of Artemis, the crowd wants to kill John, since he opposed the occasion. John, following the tradition of 1 Kings 18, prays for God's judgment and calls the people to conversion. During his speech the altar collapses. John says, 'Where is the power of that god, where are the offerings, where is the memorial day and the reeds, where is the great farce and the whole poison mixing?' Because he is asked to stay with them, John promises to do so until they will give up the milk of the wet nurse and will stand on a solid stone (see Heb 5.12 and Ps 40.3). It is useful to compare this with the text of Acts 19 which also deals with the situation in Ephesus. Paul did not ask God's judgment, and in reality he is not the actor but God himself is. In our story, however, John is in the centre and he is the actor also. 3
On this episode see Jan Bremmer, this volume, 46-9.
SERMONS
163
In AJ 48-55 a youth commits a carnal sin with the wife of one of his workers. Having been reprimanded by his father, he killed him, and with a sickle in his hand he tried to kill the woman, her husband and finally himself. John promises that he will resurrect the father. In this way he proclaims the mercy of God and calls the youth to repentance. He, however, with his sickle, has committed self-castration. John explains to him that conversion is not the cutting of the limbs but the changing of the mind.4 In AJ 56-7 John's joy over a pheasant is interrupted by a priest who is jealous of him. John discloses the thoughts of the priest. The priest replies, 'Now I know that God lives in you, you happy one, and happy is the one who does not tempt God in you. Whoever tempts you tempts the one who should not be tempted.' This text reminds us of the Acts 8, concerning Simon the magician, and James 1.13 concerning the temptation. The words addressed to John, which he did not refuse, are remarkable. Paul had a different experience in Lystra. In an inn one night, John is covered with bugs (AJ 58-61). He asks them to be 'do the right thing' and give the men of God a break for the night, and so they do. John has the following comment: 'This creature heard the word of man and stayed put and did not break the commandment; we however heard the word of God and with light heart transgress his commandments.' 1 Corinthians or Hebrews quote historical examples of what it means to obey or disobey the word of God. Here a legend permits the same opport~nity.~ In her great shame Drusiana dies (when a criminal looked at her lustfully: AJ 62-86). John then proclaims that a captain feels safe only when his boat is in a quiet harbour, and a farmer can rest only when the seed is sewn in the ground. In the same way, man can rest only when all the obstacles are behind him. John provides a long list of these obstacles: worry, children, parents, wealth, poverty, honour, beauty, desire for wealth, jealousy and so 4 On this episode see Bolyki and Jan Bremmer, this volume, 24f and 52f, respectively. 5 See also Bolyki, this volume, 25-7.
164
PAL HERCEG
on. Those who believe should look at the end of things to avoid dead ends, not to love the treasures of this world more than the ones beyond. While John is preaching, a demented lover wants to seize the dead body of Drusiana, but a serpent kills him. A disciple is in the crypt, half-dead from fear of these happenings. John is grateful that God protected Drusiana, even in her death, from defilement. Through his prayer, Drusiana returns to life. When she and her husband beg John to resurrect the evil Fortunatus, a disciple called Callimachus opposes their request. John warns this disciple, 'We did not learn to pay back evil with evil because, even if we don't know God, he will never forget us.' This reminds us of 1 Peter 2.22. Although Fortunatus is resurrected, he cannot tolerate the presence of John and runs away. John is praying that behind the acts of man there is Satan who is dancing among his own, who is a fruitless wood, good only for the fire (see Jude 12). At that moment Fortunatus receives another snake bite and finally dies. John concludes, 'Satan, he was your child.' It is remarkable that both the prayers and the speeches are quite removed from concrete situations. Especially in the last instance, we sense dualistic polemics with Satan. A J 87-105 needs to be discussed in sections, since it is longer than the other speeches. A. In cc.87-93 (an enlarged explanation of the appearances of Jesus) Drusiana remarks after her resurrection that she found Christ peculiar in the appearance of her grave (perhaps in two forms). John found nothing unusual about this, since the disciples experienced many things with Jesus. At their calling, Paul, John and James all judged the appearance of Jesus differently, once as a small child and at other times as a mature person. When they followed Jesus on the sea shore, one of them saw him with a long goatee and another as a smooth-faced man. When John rested on Jesus' bosom during supper, he felt the body of Jesus as either soft or hard. During the transfiguration of Jesus, they saw that he was not wearing his usual clothing. His feet were snow white and his head reached the heavens. When they were full of fear Jesus said: 'John, don't be faithless, but a believer (John 20.27).' They also
165
SERMONS
observed many times that Jesus' feet did not touch the ground when he walked. There is no particular meaning in any of these appearances or any kind of revelatory content. Only in canonical texts do we find meaning concerning his transfiguration. In the comparison with Moses or Elisha we find the legitimisation of Jesus' personality and mission. The above statements merely serve to demonstrate his supernaturalness and incomprehensibility. B. cc.95-6 (the Last Night). Before his capture, Jesus asked his disciples to form a circle and to answer his prayer by repeating the response of 'Amen'. His prayer includes such statements as: 'Glory be to thee, Logos! Glory be to thee, Spirit. We magnify you, Father. We give homage to you, Light', and 'I wish to save and to be saved, I wish to hear and to be heard, I wish to wash and to be washed. I wish to play the flute, so dance, I wish to cry so please cry all of you, I wish to escape and to stay', and so on. These are long lists of logia whose meanings remain obscure. The following are the closing logia: 'I am a lantern to those who see me. I am a mirror to you who know me. I am your door when you knock, to you wanderer I am a road . For all these the disciples answered 'Amen'. The following sentences are even more uncertain of meaning. Jesus states that they know him only in part, and they don't know him in part. They are unable to understand his suffering and its secret. This whole speech gives us just a glimpse of Gnostic meaning and is ultimately incomprehensible. This is quite different from what we know of the canonical Passion stories. This text almost reminds us of the mystery dramas, but certainly does not correspond to the canonical Passion stories. C. cc.97-105 (From the Apparent Death of Jesus). Jesus took his disciples from the city and they escaped wherever they could. Jesus himself escaped to the Mount of Olives. There, however, the Lord enlightened John by saying, 'Down in Jerusalem I was crucified before the crowd, I was speared with a lance, they gave me vinegar to drink. However I tell you and what I tell you please listen to. And he showed a cross of light and whoever was on the cross had no shape, only a voice; but even that was unusual but quite sweet, benevolent and godly.' This voice said, 'This light of cross will be called for you logos or understanding or Jesus or 7
166
P A L HERCEG
Christ or door or way or bread or seed or resurrection or Son or Father or Spirit or life or truth or faith or mercy (looking rather like a list of inlportant concepts from the Gospel of John). This is the way he is called by man, however; this is true only from his own viewpoint. This is not a cross that you would see made out of wood and I, whom you don't see now-only my voice you can hear-I am not on the cross because whatever man speaks about me is inferior and not worthy of me. When you understand me, you will be like me and I will be as 1 was, because I will keep you with me. You heard how I suffered, why I did not suffer, how I did not suffer while I suffered, how I was speared though they did not nail me. I was hanged without being hanged, how blood was flowing while it didn't flow.' In such a style continues this almost incomprehensible text. For the conclusion John says, 'And when I came down from the mountain I just laughed at everything, the way he told me, whatever people were speaking about him, because I understood that the Lord has arranged all these in a symbolic way to obtain the salvation and eternal life of the people. Therefore we worship him whose sufferings we have experienced, but not with hands, mouth, tongue, or one of the organs of the body, but we worship him with the accommodation of the spirit, he who was man without this body(!).' Certainly, the closest relative of this text is a docetist Gnostic heresy. Instead of the picture of the historic Jesus and the historicity of the Christ-event, we have a 'revelation'. In A J 106-15 John is saying goodbye to the brothers and to the 'eternal companions' (see Eph. 3.6). He warns them to keep a sinless and particularly self-denying life. Afterwards, there comes a scene of the Lord's Supper where he asks Verus to.dig up one of his deceased brothers grave for his own use. Having opened the grave, John lays his garment into the grave and prays, 'Glory to you who elected me for the apostleship of the Gentiles (see Rom. 1.5 and Gal. 2.81. I have remained clean. I did not touch a woman. When I was young, I wished to many, but you told me, "I need you". You who gave me faith, you give me the reward now when I conclude my assignment. Make me worthy for a rest, protect me from the flames, from hell, from evil angels, from the Satan. Be
SERMONS
167
with me Lord Jesus Christ.' In this way he descends into the grave and gives up his ghost. It is peculiar that the idea of 'death as enemy' is completely missing, as is the proclamation of the resurrection. It is slightly similar to the conditions of Socrates' death (except perhaps the violent death). Speeches in the Acts of Andrew
The extant text of AA only contains two speeches. In cc. 1- 18 Andrew is the captive of the proconsul. At the same time, the proconsul's wife, Maximilla, and Iphidemia, are visiting Andrew in jail, stirring up the anger and envy of the proconsul. We can see the forces of the martyrdom of Andrew. The first speech of Andrew is an exhortation to the believers, 'Don't be disheartened, as if you would not be a carrier of his goodness. Rejoice in the company which we keep with Him. Our generation is a happy one, because from whom did we receive love? We do not belong to time; therefore we cannot pass away with it. We are not the result of a movement which would eventually destroy us. Our birth is not from this world so we cannot return to the earth. We belong to the great one who is merciful to us. We belong to the one who is permanent, who is heavenly.' Aegeates, the proconsul, asks John to restore his marriage to Maximilla in exchange for his freedom. Because John is not willing, Andrew says the following, 'I see in you the repentance of Eve, but in me, Adam has been converted. Because of whatever they suffered without understanding, you now, being converted, could accomplish it.' And finally the warning ends with the prayer of gratitude: 'It is good for you, human nature, that in spite of all your weaknesses you were able to save me. Good for you, spirit, who proclaims loudly what you have suffered, because now I understand that you are greater than what we can think or what we can say. You are mightier and have more glory because you are without substance, a holy light, one above the body, and so on. Remaining clean, which neither torture nor deadly pain can prevent, it is a reference to the body'.
Aegeates now decides on the crucifixion of Andrew. In his farewell address, Andrew warns the brothers to build solidly on the given foundation which is immovable (Eph 2.20 and 1 Cor 3). He warns them to remember forever what they have seen and heard 'And whatever you see now', continued Andrew, 'should not frighten you; it is a peculiar play only. Namely, that the servant of God, whom the Lord by his mighty words and deeds, has given so much. Now, the power of evil men shall be pushed out of life. Because this is not happening only with me but with everyone who loves him, believes in him and proclaims him. Against these, Satan equipped his servants. When he is disclosed, he shall attack again with greater fury; therefore, you must know what is yet to come. Don't be afraid! Wait with joy, whatever will come'. This speech reminds us in a remarkable way of the words of 1 Peter and, generally speaking, of the Acts of the Christian martyrs. Here, suffering is unavoidable, but at the same time whoever knows its meaning and its preordination will rise above it. (And the next step is that the endurance of suffering shall become a reward.) In AA 19-25 Andrew welcomes his cross, 'I welcome you cross, you too should be joyful because I know that you have been tired for a long time since you have been standing erect waiting for me. You too reach towards heaven, showing the highest logos. You stretched right and left, demonstrating your fearful power. 0 cross, you are the instrument of salvation of the Most High! 0 cross, you are the sign of Christ's victories over his enemies. 0 cross, you are rooted in the ground, but bring forth heavenly fruit'. The servants do not nail Andrew to the cross, but only tie him to it. They do not cut his muscles below his knee, so that his suffering will be lengthened. Andrew is smiling, because he knows that the deed of Aegates is in vain. Anyone who belongs to Jesus is armoured against all forms of revenge. He spends three days and three nights on the cross, preaching to the crowd. On the fourth day, the people demand that he be taken down. Even Aegeates considers this, but Andrew is opposed and asks the Lord to save him from this situation. This is the way he passed away.
SERMONS
169
Once again we can sense the relationship with the text of the Martyr Acts, in addition to a certain mystery of the cross. In conclusion, we can now demonstrate the following from the speeches in the Acts of John and Andrew: 1. These apostles are relatives of the theios aner age's personality. They are not the flesh and blood actors of the canonical Acts, but individuals living in a golden mist. 2. Because of this, they possess a power which elevates them almost to the supernatural. They display all the abilities of Jesus' full power. They can heal, raise the dead, deliver promises without precondition and without explanation. 3. They are ethically unblemished. Any hurt inflicted on them is completely unjustified. 4. The ideal presented by them is more radical than the one in the canonical texts. Here the significance of virginity is much emphasised. 5. The background is repetitious. The outsiders are always those who are faithless. 6. The situations in most instances are not missionary, but apologetic, brought about not by attacks on the fundamental truth of Christianity, but by unjustified attacks against the apostles. A summav of the comparison of the two Acts The Acts written by Luke narrate the missionary expansion of the first century. The circumstances reflect real-life situations The apostles are real flesh and blood individuals. The content of their preaching is a narration of the Christ-event, its actualisation and interpretation. The apostles are the servants and the messengers of Christ. Behind the signs they perform is always clearly visible the power and intention of Christ and his missionary goal. In contrast, in the AAA, some peculiar characteristics of third-century Christianity are present. Here the apostles have become legendary figures, godly men. Their sermons are not the interpretation of the Christ-event, but a form of self-defence (even their assignment remains largely unclear). We do not see in them the hesitation of Peter or Paul's self-confession. The ends of the stories usually do
170
PAL HERCEG
not point to the furthering of the missionary goal but the glorification of the apostles or the embarrassment of the enemies. The perspective of Luke, by comparison, is limitless. Even on the horizontal level it looks out over the then known entire world. The perspective of the apocryphal books is different. Its emphasis is not horizontal but vertical, as can be sensed particularly in the act of the preparation for death. Here they concentrate not on this world, but on the future one. The missionary commandment, 'You shall be my witnesses', is only indirectly true, in the sense that in these persons a transcendental power is present. But what is more significant is the historical basis, its eternal impact, and that the missionary responsibility that comes from it is not present. It is not insignificant, as we look at the fact of the canonisation, that the work of Luke is a document of the mission-oriented church's age, built and grounded upon history, while the Apocryphal Acts are the documents of legend. They are such epigonal works, where the patterns are not only those of the canonical literature, but also those of the Hellenistic world. These works are built upon the developing church's non-canonical literature, born out of the narrative energy mentioned by Bovon (above).
IX. The influence of the apocryphal Acts on Jerome's Lives of Saints TAMAS ADAMIK
In this contribution 1 will discuss three questions: 1. Why did the apocryphal literature on apostles develop? 2. To what literary genre do the Apoclyphal Acts of Apostles (AAA) belong? 3 . Do they influence Jerome's Lives of Saints and later medieval Latin 1iterature? 1. As Christianity expanded, the authority of the apostles grew continuously; consequently, the average Christian wished to know more and more about them.' From the Gospels it was clear that Jesus had chosen twelve apostles and out of the canonical Acts of the Apostles they knew that the traitor Jude was replaced by Matthew. Nevertheless although the Acts of the Apostles contain mainly the acts of Peter and Paul, there is also an act of Philip since he baptizes a man of Ethiopia (Acts 8.26-40). But Luke's Acts only relate some of the activities of Paul, and even fewer of Peter. Strangely enough, we know little of the activity of other apostles from this work. On the other hand, in the Gospels, especially Mark, it was written that Jesus sent his apostles in order to preach his teaching: 'And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned. And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my name shall they cast out devils, they shall speak with new tongues. They shall take up
I M. Michaelis (ed), Die Apokryphen Schrvten zum Neuen Testament (Bremen, 1962) XII-XVIII, 216-20.
172
APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF JOHN
serpents, they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover. So then after the Lord had spoken unto them, he was received up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God. And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word with signs following' (16.15-20, tr. Authorised King James Version, cf. Mt 28.16-20, Lk 24.47-8, John 20.21-3). From these words it is evident that the apostles went out into the world to preach the teaching of Jesus to all peoples. But out of this statement it is also clear that the apostles could perform miracles, as did Jesus. At the same time, the Christians knew that the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles did not contain every action and deed of Jesus and his apostles. For example, John writes: 'And there are also many other things which Jesus did, which, if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written' (21.25). In the second half of the second century AD local traditions had already developed several stories and legends on the activities of certain apostles. At the same time the so called 'romanhafte Literatur der Antike' was highly developed in Greek speaking territories, which provided a niche for a variety of narratives on the apostles. Already at an early date, Christianity was very wide-spread in Greek speaking territories, and it was in these territories that the apostles whose Apocryphal Acts were written were active. It is worth mentioning that almost all heresies also developed in this area. So it is understandable that between 150 and 300 AD the surviving AAA - those of Peter, Paul, Andrew, John - were written in Greek (with the exception of the Acts of Thomas which were originally written in Syrian but soon translated into Greek2) in Greek speaking territories. 2. The question of the literary genre of the AAA is debatable. In 1924, M.R. James highlighted that the Acts did not belong to history although their authors declared that they wrote only the truth concerning the life of the apostle. However, if we regard
2
H.J.W. Drijvers, in Schneemelcher, NTA 11, 323.
JEROME'S LIVES
173
them 'as folk-lore and romance, again, they are p r e c i o ~ s ' .Erwin ~ Rohde's study of the ancient romances influenced other scholars to take them for novels. It is true that they contain romantic elements but they are not novels in the proper sense of the word. F. Pfister interprets them as aretalogy and as such they belong to praxeis1iteratu1-e.4 We can however argue that aretalogy can not be a literary genre. Rosa Soder identifies five motifs in the AAA: travel, aretalogy, teratology, tendentious Christian teaching and eroticism,' but in the end she could not define precisely their literary genre. W. Schneemelcher claims the purpose of these writings to be as follows: the AAA were written in order to teach and to amuse the simple Christian people, that is, their authors wanted to create an amusing Christian literature in the centre of which the apostle, the theios aner stands. In this sense they are popular stories: 'evidence of ancient popular narratives of the adventures, exploits and love affairs of great men, as now fixed in literary form and in a Christian ~ p i r i t ' . If ~ we regard them as popular stories, their relation with the ancient novel is evident. I am not satisfied with the opinion of Schneemelcher, nor with that of Ph. Vielhauer when he writes: 'Die apokryphen Apostelakten nehmen die sehr alte Vorstellung von den Aposteln als theoi andres auf, gestalten sie aber literarisch in Form der romanhaften Praxeis und - diese iiberformend - in der Periodoi aus',' because they do not define their literary genre according to ancient literary
3 M.R. James, The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1924) XIII. 4 F. Pfister, in Schneemelcher, NTA 11, 78. 5 R. Soder, Die Apolayphen Apostelgeschichten und die romanha$e Literatur der Antike (Stuttgart, 1932) 216. 6 W. Schneemelcher, NTA 11, 78f, quoting Soder, Die apolayphen Apostelgeschichten, 187. 7 Ph. Vielhauer, Geschichte der urchristlichen Literatur (Berlin and New York, 1978) 718. T. Szepessy, 'The Apocryphal Acts of Apostles and the Ancient Novel' (in Hungarian), Antik TanulmJnyok (Studia Antiqua) 38 (1994) 139, regards them as a 'proper Christian type of story'.
174
APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF JOHN
criticism. The AAA were written in the ancient world: they have therefore to be defined according to ancient literary theory. I believe that the only literary genre in which we can place the Acts is biography. Biography as a literary genre was early developed in Greek literature,' as is illustrated by such works as Isocrates' Evagoras, Xenophon's Agesilaos, Plato's Apology, and, later, Plutarch's Parallel Lives. There were various kinds of biography: rhetorical eulogy (encomium), peripatetic life according to virtues and vices, novelistic biography, as for example, the life of Alexander the Great,9 the Life of Aesop, and, finally, the literary biography as developed by Alexandrian scholars. At a very early stage pagan biography already included novelistic elements, and later, when the ancient Greek novel came into being and formed its patterns and devices, the biography took them over. The R4A always deal with the life and deeds of a single apostle who is the central figure. It is natural that they do not mention the childhood of the apostle since the Gospels and the canonical Acts of the Apostles did not refer to it. It can be regarded as logical, too, that travelling plays an important part in Acts of apostles, since the conversion of different people and nations to Christianity presupposes a journey. Miracles also form an essential part of the Acts of apostles, because when Jesus sent his apostles away in order to preach, he said that they would perform miracles. That is why miracles play such an important part in the A A , as in the canonical Gospels and Acts of the Apostles. In addition, several motifs, such as love, teratology, and aretology were taken over from the ancient novel. 3. When we regard the AAA as biography, we can easily
8 See most recently H. Koester, 'Romance, Biography, and Gospel. The Genre of the Gospels', in Working Papers of the Task Group in the Genre of the Gospels (Missoula, 1972) 120-48; A. Momigliano, Lo sviluppo della biographia greca (Turin, 1974); A. Dihle, Die Entstehung der historischen Biographie (Heidelberg, 1987); D.R. Edwards, 'The New Testament and the Ancient Romance: A Survey of Recent Research', The Petronian Newsletter 7 (1987) 9-14. 9 Th. Hagg, The Novel in Antiquity (Oxford, 1983) 115.
JEROME'S LNES
175
understand why they influenced the lives of the Saints: because the Apocryphal Acts and the lives of the Saints both belong to the literary genre of biography. Already M.R. James established: 'Documents of this kind may be said to shade off gradually into the category of the lives of the Saints'." In the third part of my paper I would like to demonstrate that the influence of the AAA can be observed in the Lives of three hermits written by Saint Jerome and in later medieval Latin literature. Jerome can be honored as the creator of the Latin hagiography. Vying with the Life of Saint Antony written by Athanasius, he wrote three Lives: Vita Pauli (Life of Paul, about 377 AD), Vita Malchi monachi captivi (Life of the captive monk Malchus) and Vita Hilarionis (Life of Hilarion, both about 391 AD)." In all three accounts Jerome makes it perfectly clear that he will tell a true story. Posterity believed it. For example, everybody regarded the hermit Paul as a historical person: the first Christian hermit. Only at the end of last century modem historians began to doubt Jerome's account because they could find no historical sources to prove Paul's real existence. All this means that the person of Paul is, probably, a figment of Jerome's imagination. Fiction was an important element in the ancient criticism of the novel: Macrobius writes about the novels of Petronius and Apuleius: arguments Jictis casibus amatorum referta (In somnium Scipionis 1.2.7-8). The five motifs listed by Rosa Soder ( 5 2) can also be found in the Lives of Jerome, who borrowed some of them from the ancient novel," whereas others were taken from the Apocryphal Acts. It is superfluous to demonstrate that Jerome was well acquainted with apocryphal Christian literature. I cite only one sentence of his: 'We rank among the apocryphal writings the journey of Paul and Thecla and the whole tale of the baptized
James, Apocryphal New Testament, XVIII. 11 P. Leclerc, 'Antoine et Paul: mktarnorphose d'un hkros. JCrome entre I'occident et I'orient', ~ t u d e sAugustiennes (Paris, 1986) 257-65. 12 H. Kech, Hagjographie als Christliche Unterhaltungsliteratur 10
(Gottingen, 1977); M . Fuhrmann, 'Die Monchsgeschichten des Hieronymus', Entretiens Fondation Hardt 23 (1977) 41-99.
176
APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF JOHN
lion'. It is to be noted that Jerome calls the baptized lion of the Acta Pauli a 'tale' @hula), but his Lives of hermits 'real history' (vera historia).I3 In spite of this, his Lives contain episodes where wild animals speak. There are three motifs which Jerome could have borrowed only from the AAA: those of teratology, self-mutilation and finally the notion that married life is sinful. In the Lives of Jerome animals play an important part. For example when the old hermit, Antony, starts through the desert in order to visit Paul, the first hermit, he does not know where to go. A centaur shows him the way (7), afterwards a satyr (8), and finally a wolf (9). Arriving at Paul, the raven which every day brought a half loaf to Paul, now brings a whole loaf a half for Antony, a half for Paul (10). And when the 113 year old Paul dies, two lions help Antony to bury his corpse (16). In the Life of Malchus also a lion plays an important part: he saves the life of the hero (9). In the Life of Hilarion there are a lot of animals: race-horses (20), a big dromedary (23), oxen (28), a wild ass (31), serpents (32), a boa (39): all these animals perform marvels by order of saint Hilarion. Animals play the same role in the AAA as they do in the Lives of Jerome. We may therefore suppose that Jerome took this motif from these Acts. For example, in the Acts of John various animals obey the apostle: bugs (60-1) and a serpent (71-6). In the Acts of Thomas a lion tears a man who injured the apostle to pieces (6). Thomas orders a serpent to suck out the poison from a man whom it has bitten (31), a donkey delivers a speech on Jesus (39), and Thomas commands a wild ass to speak against the pagans (73). There is a tasteless example of self-mutilation in the Life of Paul: A young Christian man bites off his own tongue and spits it
13 Jerome, De viris illustribus 7: Igitur periodus Pauli et Theclae et totam baptizati leonis fabulam inter apoclyphos scripturas computamus,
cf. W . Schneemelcher, 'Der getaufte Lowe in den Acta Pauli', in Mullus. Festschrift Th. Klauser (Miinster, 1964) 316-26, repr. in his Gesammelte Aujiatze zum Neuen Testament und zum Patristik (Thessaloniki, 1974) 223-39; H.J.W. Drijvers, History and Religion in Late Antique Syria (Aldershot, 1994) Ch. X.
JEROME'S LIVES
177
into the face of a woman seducer (3). The biting off of one's own tongue occurs in the Pythagorean tradition,14 and Cyprian also tells such a story (De Iapsis 25). But in these two examples the motif of spitting the tongue into somebody's face is missing, which seems to suggest that Jerome took the motif from the Acts of John, where a young man castrates himself and casts his balls before his temptress (53).15 The third motif, viz. that married life is sinful, is to be found in the Life of Malchus.I6 When Saracens capture Malchus and his travelling companions, the saint enters the estate of a rich Saracen. At the same time, a captured woman also becomes the property of this man. Malchus works in the farm as a shepherd, and his master is satisfied with him. In order to reward him the Saracen gives him the woman as his wife. At first he protests, but his master becomes angry with him, and wants to kill him, so he has to marry the woman. In the evening he introduces his wife to the cave, and decides to commit suicide in order to preserve his virginity. The woman realizes this and begs him not to kill himself, since she will not live a full married life with him. In this captivity, she became Christian, and decided to live in chastity. Even if her original husband who was captured by the Saracens was reunited with her, she would preserve her chastity. She would die rather than lose her chastity.'' How could Jerome, who always stressed that he was an orthodox Christian, write this heretical sentence? I think that he was influenced by the AAA because they abound in such stories of sinful married life. For example, in the Acts of John, Drusiana becomes Christian and after that she refuses to live as a wife. Her husband is furious with her and says to her: "'Either I must have you as the wife whom I had before, or you must die!" And she
14 Fuhrmann, 'Monchsgeschichten', 72. 15 See also Bolyki and Jan Bremmer, this volume, 24f, 52f. 16 Fuhrmann, 'Monchsgeschichten', 67. 17 Vita Malchi 6 (PL 23,59 A): Etiam si vir meus ad me rediret, servarem castitatem, quam me captivitas docuit, vel interirem potius quam perderem.
178
APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF JOHN
chose to die' (63). In the Acts of Andrew, Maximilla, the wife of Aegeates, becomes Christian, and afterwards she refuses to live as a married woman. The angry husband imprisons the apostle Andrew, but he promises his wife: If she will live as his wife, he will release the apostle from prison. Maximilla visits Andrew in prison and asks for his advice what to do. The answer is unambiguous: Maximilla should not obey her husband, and she has to abstain from the sordid and sinful married life. The words of the apostle are as follows: 'Maximilla do not do this. Do not succumb to Aegeates' threat. Do not be afraid of his hostility and plots. Do not be overcome by his clever flatteries. Do not be willing to give yourself up to filthy and evil sorceries, but endure all his torture'(5). In the Acts of Thomas we find an even more rigorous point of view. When Thomas arrives at the wedding of a princess the king asks him to pray for the happiness of the bride. Thomas requests Jesus to give to the young couple what is best for them. In response Jesus appears to the couple and asks them to abstain from the carnal pleasures because they are sordid and dirty. His rigorous words are as follows: 'and know this, that if you abandon this filthy intercourse you become holy temples, pure and free from afflictions and pains both manifest and hidden, and you will not be girt about with cares for life and for children, the end of which is destruction. But if you get many children, then for their sakes you become robbers and avaricious (people who) flay orphans and defraud widows, and by so doing you subject yourselves to the most grievous punishments' (12). Hereupon the young couple decides to live together as brother and sister. After Jerome, Latin hagiography began to flourish. Venantius Fortunatus, Gregory of Tours, Gregory the Great, Paulus Diaconus and others wrote lives of Saints, and we may suppose that they knew the AAA." For example in the 10th century, a nun, Hrotsvitha of Gandersheirn, wrote six prose plays: Gallicanus, Dulcitius,
18 A.G. Elliott, Roads to Paradise. Reading the Lives of the Early Saints (Hannover and London, 1987) 1-8, 43-5.
JEROME'S LIVES
179
Sapientia, Calimachus, Pafiutius and Abraham.19 Her plays were to be the opposite of those by Terence, who, as she confesses in an apologetic preface: 'deals with the shameless profligacy of wanton women. I, to the best of my poor ability, use his method to glorify the laudable chastity of Christian virgins. One thing, however, has often embarrassed me and brought a hot blush to my cheek - the form of my work has compelled me to set forth the detestable madness of unlawful love and the poisoned sweetness of such lover's talk. These things, which we are forbidden even to mention, I have had to imagine for my plays and give as themes to my dutihl pen'.20 But she adhered to her purpose in the conviction that the greater the temptation of her heroines, the greater their glory. The plays which Hrotsvitha mentions in her confession are: Calimachus, Pafiutius and Abraham. The latter two dramatize stories of harlots reclaimed by holy hermits disguised as lovers. Calimachus, on the other hand, is written on the basis of the 'love story' of Drusiana and Callimachus in the Acts of John (63-86). When she had become a Christian, Drusiana, the wife of Andronicus, refused even her husband's lawful embraces. But Callimachus fell in love with her because she was very beautiful. Since he insulted her with his love, Drusiana prayed to Christ that she might die; she departed this life and was laid in her tomb. John gave a speech about her, but while he was adressing the brethren, Callimachus bribed the steward of Drusiana's grave, since he wanted to dishonour her corpse. However, a serpent appeared and killed the steward, although it did not bite Callimachus and sat upon him. The next day John came with Andronicus to the sepulchre. He sent away the serpent and raised Callimachus from dead. Now Callimachus and the brethren entreated John to raise Drusiana also, as he did. At Drusiana's request John even
19 For the most recent bibliography see G. Althoff, Friihmittelalterliche Studien 25 (1991) 125 n.11, 137, n.46. 20 K. Young, The Drama of the Medieval Church I (Oxford, 1962) 4; H. Homeyer, Hrotsvithae opera (Munich, 1970) 21 (anti-Terence); F.A. Wright and T.A. Sinclair, A History of Later Latin Literature (London, 1969) 187f (quotation).
180
APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF JOHN
raised Fortunatus, the steward, who seeing John, Andronicus, Drusiana and the rest of brethren glorifying God, said: 'I did not want to be resurrected, but would rather be dead, so as not to see them', and he ran away. John prayed to God to excommunicate Fortunatus and gave the Lord's Eucharist to all brethren. Unable to accept redemption Fortunatus was later found swollen and dead. Hrosvitha elaborated this story in nine scenes: 1. Calimachus meets his friends. 2. Calimachus confesses to his friends that he loves Drusiana. 3. He confesses his love to Drusiana. 4. Drusiana prays to Christ: 'Command me, Christ, to die quickly in you in order not to ruin this wanton young man'.21 After that she gets a fever and dies. 5. Andronicus informs John that Drusiana has died. 6 . Fortunatus helps Calimachus to go into the sepulchre. 7. Fortunatus and Calimachus are attacked by a serpent. 8. John and Andronicus go into the sepulchre and they see Christ in the shape of a beautiful young man. 9. John raises Calimachus, Drusiana and Fortunatus, but Fortunatus prefers to die rather than to live as a Christian. The message of the play formulated by Hrotsvitha ends as follows: 'Let us celebrate with pleasure that day for the marvellous change of Calimachus, and for the resurrection of both, giving thanks to God, who rewards and punishes everybody according to his dignity, after having examined with acuteness of judgment all and having all arranged properly'. 22 Hrotsvitha knew that she had borrowed the story of Calimachus from the Apocrypha. In a prose preface she writes: 'But if somebody reproaches me that I took over some topics from the Apocrypha - according to the opinion of some people -, this is not the crime of an evil-minded purpose, but that of ignorance because
P. de Winterfeld (ed), Hrotsvithae Opera (Berlin and Ziirich, 1965*) 138: lube me in te, Christe, ocius mori, ne jiam in ruinam delicato iuveni! 22 Hrotsvithae Opera, 145-6: Nos autem diem istam, et pro miranda Calimachi mutatione, et pro utriusque suscitatione, cum laetitia agarnus. gratias ferentes deo, ... qui, solus omnia subtiliter examinans, omnia recte disponens, unumquemque, iuxta quod dignum praenoscit, praemiis suppliciisve aptabit. 21
JEROME'S LIVES
181
when I began to work on the material for this topic I did not know that that on which I decided to work was dubious. But when I realised it, I refused to destroy it because what seems to be false will perhaps prove to be true'.23 In conclusion I would like to stress four points. a) It is understandable that even at the end of the second century AD the AAA began to appear in the Greek speaking territories because the apostles had been active in these places and local Christians were keenly interested in their lives and activities. Moreover, up to the end of the second century the literary genres had sufficiently developed to compose and absorb local traditions concerning the apostles. b) As to the literary genre of the AAA, I think that they can be ranked among biography, but they took over a number of motifs from the Gospels, the Canonical Acts of the Apostles and from the ancient novel. c) With his ardent passion for the monastic way of life that propagated virginity and chastity,24 Jerome found shocking examples of all this in the AAA, from which he was free to borrow because the Church had not officially condemned them; it was only in AD 787 that the Acts of John were condemned by the Church. Jerome intended his Lives of hermits to be used for the instruction and entertainment of simple Christian believers, as did the authors of the AAA, but in the centre of his Lives he put the new heroes of the Christian age: the Saints. d) In medieval Latin literature hagiography took over motifs from different sources, including apocryphal Christian literat~re.~'Instead of
23 Hrotsvithae Opera, 2: Si autem obicitur quod quaedam huius noperis iuxta quorundam aestimationern sumpta sint ex apocrrfis, non est crimen praesumptionis iniquae, sed error ignorantiae, quia, quando huius stamen seriei coeperam ordiri, ignoravi, dubia esse, in quibus disposui laborare. At ubi recognovi, pessumdare detractavi, quia, quod videtur falsitas, forsan probabitur esse veritas. 24 E. Coleiro, 'St. Jerome's Lives of the Hermits', VigChrist 11 (1957)
161-78. 25 E. Junod and J.-D. Kaestli, L'histoire des Actes apoctyphes des apdtres du IIP au UP sigcle: le cas des Actes de Jean = Cahiers de la Revue de Thdologie et de Philosophie 7 (Geneva, Lausanne and Neuchd-
182
APOCRYPHAL ACTS OF JOHN
Terence's 'shameless profligacy of wanton women', Hrotsvitha wanted to represent encratite Christian love, and she realized her purpose in the same way as the authors of the apocryphal Christian literature: she cast out the devil by B e e l ~ e b u b . ' ~
tel, 1982) 104-7. 26 M. Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters I (Munich, 1911) 623: 'Man muss aber eigentlich sagen, dass sie den Teufel mit Beelzebub austrieb', cf. Matthew 12. 24: 'This fellow doth not cast out devils, but by Beelzebub the prince of the devils'.
X.
The reception of the Acts of John in Anglo-Saxon England
ROLF H. BREMMER JR
Events from the Acts of John have been known to Anglo-Saxon theologians in one way or another from fairly soon after the introduction of Christianity into England around 600.' Almost simultaneously, missionary activities were launched from Rome and Ireland. St Augustine was sent by Pope Gregory the Great and arrived in Kent in 597. St Aidan landed in Iona early in the seventh century, and from there he spread the faith and ecclesiastical customs as shaped by a Celtic frame of mind and a century-long isolation from developments on the Continent. The two traditions clashed in the middle of the seventh century and the famous Synod of Whitby (664) settled the controversies in favour of Rome. This outcome led to a withdrawal of Irish ecclesiastics from England with quite a few followers. However, their spiritual legacy proved of tremendous importance. The Anglo-Saxon Christian literature, whether vernacular or Latin, is intricately linked up with Irish works or echoes thereof.' Particularly, the Irish taste for the apocryphal and the fantastic found a fertile soil among Anglo-Saxon theologian^.^
1 Anglo-Saxon England is the term for England from the invasion and settlements of Germanic tribes in the course of the fifth century to one generation after the Norman Conquest of 1066. 2 For a concise survey, see M. Lapidge, 'The Anglo-Latin Background', in S.B. Greenfield and D.G. Calder, A New Critical Histoiy of Old English Literature (New York, 1986) 5-37. 3 A recent survey: C.D. Wright, The Irish Tradition in Old English Literature (Cambridge, 1993).
184
ACTS OF JOHN IN ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND
This is not to say that the Acta. Johannis was introduced in England by Irish monks, although the possibility should not be dismissed off-hand. The first Anglo-Saxon to show knowledge of incidents from John's extra-biblical adventures is Aldhelm (c. 640709), who received his education in the monastery of Malmesbury from Maildhub, its Irish founder. Intrigued by the new impulses of learning that were being given to the school of Canterbury, he moved to the capital of Kent about 670. Theodore of Tarsus and Hadrian, appointed by the Pope in 669 as archbishop of Canterbury and abbot of its monastery of SS Paul and Peter, in an effort to reorganize the Anglo-Saxon church, had brought an impressive amount of books with them, including a number of Greek texts. To what extent Greek was read by Anglo-Saxon monks is hard to assess, but some knowledge was current for some time.4 Aldhelm, then, included several events from the Acts in the prose version of his De Virginitate: John's miraculously restoring of the crushed precious stones to their former state, his bringing an unnamed matron - the widow Drusiana - back to life, and his accepting the challenge to drink poison and subsequent resurrection of two victims of the poison.' Several sources could have been used by Aldhelm for his information. The apocryphal life of St John became first known in the West in a collection of lives translated from Greek in the sixth century in Gaul, known as ~ manuscripts of this Pseudo-Abdias' Historiae A p o ~ t o l i c a e . No
4 Cf. B. Colgrave and R.A.B. Mynors (eds and transls), Bede's Ecclesiastical History of the English People (Oxford, 1991 ; impr. edn.) IV.2. It is relevant to mention this fact, for it leaves a possibility for the Acta Johannis to have been known in its original Greek version ascribed to Abdias, although I do not think this very likely. 5 Cf. De Virginitate, ed. R. Ehwald, Aldhelmi Opera Omnia (Berlin, 1919) 254115-17, 254117-25513 and 25513-8. For a translation of Aldhelm's text, see Aldhelm: The Prose Works, trsl. and ed. M. Lapidge and M. Herren (Cambridge and Totowa, NJ, 1979) 80f. 6 J.A. Fabricius (ed), Codex Apocryphus Novi Testamenti, 2 vols (Hamburg, 17 19*) 11, 402-742.
ROLF H. BREMMER JR
185
work survive from Anglo-Saxon England, which reduces its claim for Aldhelm's source.' Aldhelm's contemporary, the Venerable Bede, was familiar but not very pleased with the Pseudo-Abdias.= A more likely candidate is Pseudo-Mellitus' Passio J o h a n n i ~ , ~ which was certainly known in Anglo-Saxon ~ n ~ 1 a n d . IAs ' the order of events is not synchronous with those in the Pseudo-Mellitus," Aldhelm must have used another source, perhaps Isidore of Seville's De Ortu et Obitu Patrum.I2 Despite Aldhelm's immense popularity, no one after him seemed to have been interested in using the legendary exploits of S t John for a long time, at least if we rely on manuscript evidence. Renewed interest in the apocryphal life of S t John appears during the Benedictine Revival, a movement which had started in Flanders and Northern France and reached England in the middle
7 Cf. F.M. Biggs, T.D. Hill, P.E. Szarmach (eds), Sources of AngloSaxon Literary Culture. A Trial Version (Binghampton, NY, 1990) 5 If, s.v. Ps Abdias (C.D. Wright). However, a manuscript of the PseudoAbdias, produced in an Anglo-Saxon monastery on the Continent in the eighth century, survives in the University Library of Wiirzburg, cf. J.E. Cross, 'Cynewulf s Tradition about the Apostles in Fates of the Apostles', Anglo-Saxon England 8 (1979) 163-75, esp. 166. 8 Bedae Venerabilis, Expositio Actuum Apostolorum et Retractio, ed. M.L.W. Laistner (Cambridge, MA, 1939) Retractio 1.13195-6 and VIII.11 120., cf. Cross, 'Cynewulf s Tradition', 165 n.3. 9 Edited in Patrologia Graeca 5, cols 1241-50. The author's name also occurs as Melitus and Miletus. 10 See Biggs et al., Sources, 57, s.v. Ps Mellitus (C.D. Wright), a very usehl survey. 11 Aldhelm's passages correspond to the contents (not the text) of Ps Mellitus' Passio Johannis, 1242120-1243122, 1241132-1242120, and 1247138-124916. 12 PL 83, ch. 72, cols. 151-2, as suggested by Lapidge and Herren, Aldhelm: The Prose Works, 176, but Aldhelm gives details which are not to be found in isidore's text. Cross, 'Cynewulf s Tradition', 165, suggests the Pseudo-Mellitus as Aldhelm's source, which for reasons of narrative order seems unlikely. Neither work therefore can be Aldhelm's immediate source.
186
ACTS OF JOHN lN ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND
of the tenth century. A strong concem for religious instruction becomes clear from cycles of homilies that are linked with this movement. Two Latin homiliaries from the turn of the millennium survive that both include a version of the Passio Johannis, which in turn have served as the source for a vernacular sermon by Elfric (c. 955-1017?), abbot of the Benedictine monastery of Eynsham near Oxford. Both Pseudo-Abdias' and Pseudo-Mellitus' accounts of St John were used for two sermons (items 9 and 10) in an eleventh century collection of Latin homilies preserved in Cambridge. Quite a few vernacular sermons go back to items included in this cycle (though not necessarily this manuscript), and thus testify to its popularity. The collection itself may have been compiled either in the British Isles or on the Continent, probably sometime during the ninth century.I3 Item 9, preceded and concluded by homiletic matter, gives the opening parts of the Ps Mellitus text which deals with the resurrection of Drusiana and the conversion of Graton and his two pupils (PG 5, 1241117-1243122). Item 10 treats of John's assumption, and, besides a passage taken from the Mellitus (1249127-39), is mainly taken from the Pseudo-Abdias with some omissions and adaptations. l 4 Another witness to the Mellitus text is found in the so-called Cotton-Corpus legendary, a collection of Latin hagiographical texts covering some 160 feasts of the ecclesiastical year, and thus the largest representative of its kind. The legendary has been preserved in five manuscripts, though not always complete nor always in the same order and recension. Most of these manuscripts date from between 1060 to 1150175, but the collection must have been known in England before 1000, as the extensive use shows that Elfric made of it for his cycle of Old English Catholic Homilies. Elfric is one of the most prominent representatives of the Benedictine Revival in England and exerted himself to reach the
13 On these matters, cf. Cross, 'Cynewulf s Tradition', 88-93. 14 For a full description see J.E. Cross, Cambridge Pembrohz College MS. 25: A Carolingian Sermonary used by Anglo-Saxon Preachers (London, 1987) 22, items 9 and 10.
ROLF H. BREMMER JR
187
goals of his monastic order by using the vernacular for his many writings. He was especially concerned with the propagation of orthodox doctrine and did much to discredit heterodox and apocryphal matter. One of his homilies is on the Assumption of St John." Long ago it was observed that underlying the Old English text was that of Ps Mellitus, though the introduction which identifies the bridegroom at Cana with John, as well as the passage on the genesis of the Gospel of St John (see the Appendix) are not to be found in M e l l i t ~ s . 'It~ now appears that Elfric did not use an individual version of Ps Mellitus, but relied on the text as it is found in one of the manuscripts of the Cotton-Corpus legendary." Elfric's sermons were highly popular and the one on the assumption of St John survived in no less than nine manuscripts, an impressive testimony to the proliferation of this apocryphal account." But how is it that the orthodox Elfric included the apocryphal account of St John's life in his cycle of homilies? Had not Bede expressed his doubts as to the value of this text? Elfric does not identify the source of his text, but elsewhere he refers to Jerome, who in his Ecclesiastical History also wrote about St John. It would appear then that Elfric on the authority of this Church Father included the sermon into his ~ y c l e . ' ~ 15 P.H. Zettel, 'Saints' Lives in Old English: Latin Manuscripts and Vernacular Sources: Elfric', Peritia 1 (1982) 17-37. Elfric's Old English sermon is found in B. Thorpe (ed), The Homilies ofthe AngloSaxon Church. The First Part, Containing the Sermones Catholici or Homilies ofRljiric (2 vols, 1844-46) 1.4. 16 M. Forster, ~ b e rdie Quellen von Rrfric's Homiliae Catholicae. I. Legenden (Berlin, 1892) 17f. The same reason (against heretics) for John to write his Gospel is briefly mentioned by Isidore, De Ortu 72.127. 17 Zettel, 'Saints Lives', 33-6. 18 N. Ker, Catalogue of Manuscripts Containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford,
1957) items 1516, 4314, 4813, 5618, 22016, 235 (fragments), 25714, 30913, 331135. 19 M.R. Godden, 'Elfric's Saints' Lives and the Problem of Miracles', Lee& Studies in English N.S. 26 (1985) 83-100, esp. 90-2. Elfric's attribution of this Ecclesiastical History is erroneous. He refers to
188
ACTS OF JOHN IN ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND
Appendix Translation of Abbot Elfiic's Homily on the Assumption of St John the Apostle for December 27th VI. Kal. Jan. ASSUMPTIO SCI IOHANNIS APOSTOLI John the Evangelist, Christ's favourite, was taken on this day, through God's visitation, to the joy of the heavenly kingdom. He was the son of Christ's maternal aunt, and he loved him especially - not so much because of their kinship ties but because of the purity of his perfect chastity. In a state of virginity he was chosen by God, and he persisted in undefiled chastity until the end. It is read in historical narratives that he wanted to many, and Christ had been invited to his wedding feast. It then happened that they got short of wine at the wedding feast. The Saviour then ordered the servants to fill six stone vessels with pure water, and with his blessing he turned the water into excellent wine. This is the first sign which he openly performed in his state of man. Then John was so inspired by that sign that he straight away left his bride in virginal state, and ever afterwards followed the Lord, and was deeply loved by him, because he had withdrawn himself fiom sexual desires. Indeed, when the Saviour hanged on the cross redeemed mankind, he entrusted his mother to this dear disciple so that his pure way of life would take care of the pure virgin Mary, and that she would carry on to serve her sister's son. After some time had elapsed, after Christ's ascension to heaven, a cruel emperor ruled the Roman empire after Nero, called Domitian, a persecutor of Christian men. He ordered a tub to be filled with boiling oil and the famous evangelist to be thrown into it. But through God's protection he got out of that hot bath
Rufinus' translation and extension of Eusebius' work, which often went under the name of Jerome.
ROLF H. BREMMER JR
189
unharmed. Afterwards, when the cruel man could not prevent the blessed apostle from preaching, he sent him into exile to an island called Patmos so that he would die there from bitter hunger. Yet the Almighty Saviour did not abandon his beloved apostle in neglect, but in his exile showed him the revelation of the future, about which he wrote the book called Apocalyps. And in the same year the cruel Domitian was killed by the hands of his counsellors. And they all unanimously advised that all his decrees should be annulled. Then Nerva, a very honourable man, was chosen to become emperor. With his permission, the apostle returned home with many regards - he who had been sent away into exile with scorn. Men and women joyfully ran to meet him, and said: 'Blessed is he who has come in the name of God.' Just when the apostle John was entering the city of Ephesus, they carried towards him the corpse of a widow in order to bury it; her name was Drusiana. She had been a woman of great faith and eager in almsgiving, and the poor, whom she had indeed fed with a generous heart, followed her corpse, sad with weeping. Then the apostle ordered the bier to be set down, and said: 'My Lord, Saviour Christ! Raise yourself, Drusiana! Arise, and go back home and prepare a meal for us in your house!' Drusiana then arose as if she had been woken up from sleep, and mindful of the apostle's command, went back home. On the second day the apostle went along the street when he saw where a philosopher was guiding two brothers who had turned all their parents' treasures into precious stones, and they wanted to crush these in the sight of all the people as a spectacle to show their contempt of worldly possessions. It was a custom in those days for those who diligently wanted to learn secular wisdom to change their property for gems, and to break them into pieces; or for a bar of gold, and to throw it into the sea so that the thought of those riches should not hinder them in their studies. Then the apostle called the philosopher Graton to him, and said: 'It is stupid for anyone to despise worldly riches for praise of men, and be humiliated in God's judgement. Useless is the medicine that cannot heal the sick; equally useless is the doctrine which does not heal the sins and vices of the soul. As a matter of fact, my teacher
190
ACTS OF JOHN M ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND
Christ instructed a young man who wanted to have eternal life with these words, that he should sell all his wealth and divide the proceeds amongst the poor, if he wanted to be perfect, and from then on he would have his treasure in heaven and, on top of that, eternal life.' Graton the philosopher then answered him: 'Those precious stones have been crushed because of empty bragging, but if your teacher is the true God, join the fragments to complete stones, so that their value can benefit the poor.' John then gathered the fragments of the precious stones, looked up to heaven and spoke as follows: 'Lord Saviour, nothing is difficult for you; you have restored this broken world for your believers through the sign of the holy cross. Restore now the precious stones through the hands of your angels so that these ignorant men realize your power and believe in YOU.'Well, suddenly the precious stones then became whole so that you could not see even a trace of their having been broken. Then the philosopher Graton together with the boys fell at John's feet, and believed in God. The apostle baptized him with all his household, and he began publicly to preach the faith in God. The two brothers, Atticus and Eugenius, sold their gems, and divided all their wealth amongst the poor, and followed the apostle, and also a large crowd of believers joined him. Then the apostle arrived one day at the city of Pergamum, where the aformentioned boys used to live, and they saw their servants dressed in purple cloth and shining with wordly splendour. Then they got shot through by the devil's arrows and became sad at heart that they as poor men travelled with only one, miserable, coat, and that their servants were shining in wordly splendour. Then the apostle perceived the fiendish fraud, and said: 'I see that your heart and your face have changed, because you have divided your riches amongst the poor and followed my Lord's teaching. Therefore, go now to the wood and chop a burden of rods, and bring that to me.' They did according to his command, and he blessed the green rods in God's name, and they were turned into red gold. Again the apostle John said: 'Go to the sea shore and fetch me pebbles.' So they did; John then blessed them by God's majesty, and they were turned into expensive gems. Then the apostle said: 'Go to the smithy, and examine this
ROLF H. BREMMER JR
191
gold and these gems.' They then went, and came back again, saying: 'All the goldsmiths say that they have never seen such pure and red gold before. Also the jewelers say that they have never before run accross such valuable gems.' Then the apostle said to them: 'Take this gold and these gems, and go and buy landed property, because you have lost the heavenly riches. Buy yourselves purple tunics, so that for a short time you will shine like roses to quickly wither. Be flourishing and rich for the time being to be poor for ever. I say, cannot the Almighty Ruler bring about to make his servants rich before the world, swimming in wealth, and shine without compare? But he has ordained a war for the believing souls so that they believe in order to possess the eternal riches, those people who despise temporary riches for the sake of his name. You have healed the sick in the name of the Saviour, you have put devils to flight, you have given blind people back their sight, and healed every kind of disease. Mind you, now this gift has been taken away from you and you have become poor wretches, you who were excellent and strong. You radiated so much awe to the demons that they left the possessed demoniacs at your command; now you fear the demons yourselves. The heavenly possessions are for all of us to share. Naked we were born and naked we will depart. The brightness of the sun, the light of the moon and of all the stars are common to the powerful and the underdogs. Rainshowers and the church door, baptism and forgiveness of sins, holy communion and access to God are common to all, to poor and rich. But the unhappy miser wants to have more than is sufficient for him, even though he does not enjoy freedom of care in his plenty. The miser has one body and many cloths; he has one belly and the sustenance of a thousand men. Indeed, what he cannot give away to any other man because of the vice of greed, he hoards, and does not know for whom. Just as the prophet says: "Every man is vexed in vain who hoards and does not know for whom he saves it." He certainly is not the lord of his possessions when he cannot share it; but he is the slave of these possessions, when he wholly serves them. And, on top of that, diseases develop in his body so that he cannot enjoy food or drink. He worries day and night whether his money is safe. He greedily
192
ACTS OF JOHN M ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND
watches over his profit, his rent, his buildings. He robs the destitute, he satisfies his pleasures and his delight. Then all of a sudden he departs from this world, naked and guilty, carrying only his sins with him. Therefore he must suffer eternal punishment.' While the apostle was still giving this instruction, a certain widow was carrying her son's corpse to be buried - he had been married a month before. Then the grieving mother, together with the mourners, fell down crying at the feet of the holy apostle and begged him to raise her son in God's name just as he had done with the widow Drusiana. John then took pity with the grief of the mother and the mourners and stretched his body on the ground in a long prayer and finally got up and again for a long time prayed with his hands raised high. When he had done this three times, he ordered the son's corpse to be unwrapped, and said: 'Young man, you who have lost your life too soon because of the pleasures of your flesh; young man, who didn't know your Creator; you didn't know the Saviour of men; you didn't know the true friend; and therefore you have run over to the worst enemy. Now I have shed my tears, and I have eagerly prayed because of your ignorance that you would rise from death, and would inform these two brothers, Atticus and Eugenius, how great glory they have lost and what punishment they have won.' Right then the young man Stacteus arose and fell at John's feet, and began to rebuke the brothers who had erred in these words: 'I saw the angels who had charge of you sadly weeping while the cursed demons were exulting in your ruin. The heavenly kingdom was ready for you as well as radiant buildings filled with meals and the eternal light. Those things you have lost through folly, and you have obtained instead dark dwellings filled with serpents and with crackling flames, filled with unspeakable torments and with repulsive smells. There groaning and wailing will cease neither day nor night. Therefore, pray with earnest heart to this apostle of God, your teacher, that he will raise you from eternal destruction, just as he raised me from death. And he will lead your souls, which now have been erased from the book of life, back to God's favour and mercy.' Then the young man Stacteus, who arose from death, together with the brothers, stretched himself in John's footsteps, and all the
ROLF H. BREMMER JR
193
people with them, praying resolutely that he would intercede for them with God. The apostle then ordered the two brothers to sacrifice as penance to God thirty days of remorse, and during that time pray eagerly for the golden rods to turn back to their former nature and the precious stones to their insignificance. After the period of thirty days, when they had been unable to restore the gold and the gems to their nature with prayers, they came weeping to the apostle, and said: 'You have always taught mercy, and that people should have mercy on others. And if one has mercy on another, how much more God will be merciful on men, the work of his hands. What we did wrong with covetous eyes, we now repent with weeping eyes.' Then the apostle answered: 'Carry the rods to the wood, and the stones to the beach: they have been restored to their nature.' When they had done this they received God's favour again, so that they expelled demons and healed the blind and the sick, and did many signs in God's name just as they had formerly done. The apostle then converted to God the entire region of Asia, which is reckoned to be one half of the world. And he wrote the fourth book of Christ, which deals especially with Christ's divine nature. The other three evangelists, Matthew, Mark and Luke, rather wrote of Christ's human nature. Then heretics emerged in God's church and said that Christ did not exist before he was given birth to by Mary. Then all the sufiagan bishops asked the apostle to compose the fourth book and to crush the audacity of the heretics. John then ordered a general fast of three days. And after that fast he was so much filled with the Ghost of God that he surpassed all God's angels and all creatures with an exalted mind, and he began the evangelical narrative with these words: In principio erat uerbum, et uerbum erat apud Deum, et Deus era? uerbum, et reliqua, that is in English: 'In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. This was in the beginning with God. All things have been made through it, and nothing has been created without it.' And so on, in the entire evangelical narrative he made many things known about Christ's divine nature, how he was born from the Father eternally without a beginning, and reigns with him in unity with the Holy Ghost,
194
ACTS OF JOHN M ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND
forever without end. He wrote only a few'things about his human nature, because the other three gospel writers had composed their books sufficiently about that topic. It happened at a certain time that the idol worshippers who were as yet not believing, said that they wanted to force the apostle to their pagan religion. Then the apostle said to these idolaters: 'Go all together to God's church, and all of you call to your gods that the church may fall down through their power. If that happens I will convert to your pagan religion. But if the power of your god cannot throw down the holy church, I will throw down your temple through the power of the Almighty God, and I will crush your idols. And it will seem right then that you abandon your error, and believe in the true God, who alone is Almighty.' The idolaters agreed with this proposal, and John with kind words urged the people to go further up, away from the devil's temple. And with a clear voice he called in front of all of them: 'In God's name, may this temple fall down with all the idols that dwell in it, so that this crowd will realize that this pagan religion is the worship of the devil.' Indeed, then the temple all of a sudden fell to the ground, with all its statues turned to dust. On that same day twelve thousand pagans were converted to faith in Christ, and consecrated with baptism. Then the oldest of the idolaters still refused with great obstinacy, and said that he wouldn't believe unless John would drink poison, and would overcome the lethal drink through God's power. Then the apostle said: 'Even though you'd give me poison, it wouldn't harm me through God's name.' Then the idolater Aristodemus said: 'You must first see another man drink it, and die on the spot, so that at least your heart will be afraid because of that lethal drink.' John answered him: 'If you want to believe in God, I will receive this drink without fear.' Then Aristodemus went to the prefect and took two thieves from his prison, and gave the poison to them in the presence of all the people before John's eyes. And immediately after the drink they died. Then the idolater also gave the poisonous drink to the apostle, and he armed his mouth and all his body with the sign of the cross, and exorcized the poison in God's name, and then with a firm heart drank it all. Then Aristo-
ROLF H. BREMMER JR
195
demus and the people watched the apostle for three hours of the day, and saw him having a glad face, without any paleness and fear. And they all cried: 'There is one true God, he whom John worships.' Then the idolater said to the apostle; 'Still I doubt. But if you will raise these dead criminals in the name of your God, then my heart will be cleansed from any doubt.' Then John said: 'Aristodemus, take my tunic, and lay it over the corpses of the dead men, and say: "The apostle of the Saviour Christ has sent me to you so that you may rise from death in his name, and each man may realize that death and life are subservient to my Saviour."' He then took his tunic at the apostle's command and laid it upon the two dead men. And they immediately arose sound and well. When the idolater saw this, he prostrated himself at John's feet and then went to the prefect, and with a loud voice made the miracles known to him. Both of them then went to seek the apostle, and begged for his mercy. Then the apostle ordered them to fast for seven days, and afterwards baptized them. And after having been baptized they threw down all their idols, and with the help of their relatives and with all skills they erected a famous church for God in honour of the apostle. When the apostle was ninety-nine years old, the Lord God appeared to him with the other apostles whom he had taken from this life, and said: 'John, come to me. It is time that you with your brothers should feast at my banquet.' John then stood up and went towards the Saviour. But he said to him: 'Now on Sunday, the day of my resurrection, you will come to me.' And after these words he returned to heaven. The apostle was very glad with this promise, and on the Sunday morning early awake came to the church, and from cock-crow to nine o'clock he instructed the people in God's law, and sang mass for them, and said that the Saviour had invited him to heaven on that day. He then ordered his grave to be dug near the altar, and to carry away the sand. And he went alive and sound into his grave, and called with outstretched hands to God: 'Lord Christ, I thank you that you have invited me to your banquet. You know that I want you with all my heart. Often I have begged you to allow me to go to you, but you said that I should stay to gain more people for you. You have kept my body
196
ACTS OF JOHN M ANGLO-SAXON ENGLAND
from all pollution, and you have always enlightened my soul, and nowhere forsaken me. You have placed your reliable word in my mouth, and I have written down the teaching which I have heard from your mouth, and the miracles which I have seen you perform. Now I entrust to you, Lord, your children, those whom your church, virgin and mother, through water and the Holy Ghost have gained for you. Receive me to my brothers with whom you came and invited me. Open before me the gate of life, so that the princes of darkness won't encounter me. You are Christ, the son of the living God, you who have saved this world at your Father's command and sent the Holy Ghost to us. It is you we praise and thank for your manifold benefits throughout the world without end. Amen.' After this prayer, a heavenly light appeared above the apostle within the grave, and shone so brightly for one hour that no man's sight could look on the rays of light. And with that light he gave up his spirit to the Lord who had invited him to his kingdom. He went so happy from the pain of death from this present life as he was free from bodily decay. Truely, his grave was afterwards found filled with manna. Manna was the name of the heavenly bread which for forty years fed the people of the Israelites in the desert. Now this food was found in John's grave, and nothing else. And the food is growing in it until the present day. Many signs have been shown there and sick people have been healed, and set free from all harms through the apostle's intercession. This the Lord Christ has granted to him, to whom is glory and honour with the Father and the Holy Ghost, forever without end. Amen.
XI. Papyrus 1 from Kellis. A Greek text with affinities to the Acts of John 1 GEOFFREY JENKINS
Among inscribed materials which have emerged in recent years from
an excavation in the Egyptian Sahara are a number of fragments from Greek codices, so far as the present writer is aware some ten fragments in These seem to derive from more or less complete leaves or sheets of codices which were at one time present in a Manichaean library located in close proximity to the site of excavation, and must date to the first half of the fourth c e n t ~ r y . ~ As seems appropriate in the circumstances, I publish here the editio princeps, here and there in a slightly provisional form, of two
1 For lack of knowledge of any official designation, I call this text Papyrus 1. I had previously referred to it as P.Kellis 96, by a numbering scheme now outdated. See my 'Newly-discovered Manichaean Greek Texts from KeIlis in the Dakhleh Oasis' in the Proceedings of the International Conference on Manichaeism, London, 1992, forthcoming. I have not had access to any other transcriptions, reconstructions or discussions of this text. 2 See in general on these excavations funded by the Australian Research Council at Ismant el-Kharab (ancient Kellis: Egypt 1:25000 survey [I9321 Sheet 311420 ref. 473:314) the reports in C.A. Hope, 'Excavations at Ismant el-Kharab in the Dakhleh Oasis', The Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology 1, 43-54. 'The 1991 Excavations at Ismant el-Kharab in the Dakhleh Oasis', The Bulletin of the Australian Centre for Egyptology 2, 41-50, (with O.E. Kaper with an appendix by G. Bowen [dealing with the coins from House Three]), 'Excavations at Ismant el-Kharab - 1992'. 3 The date is assured by the presence of dated papyri within the archaeological context, as well as by palaeographical considerations.
198
GEOFFREY JENKINS
of these fragments which adjoin and derive from one particular codex, reserving for later publication the fragments relating to at least three other codices and some miscellaneous scraps and writings on wooden board. I assume that only these two fragments derive from the codex in question, primarily on codicological ground^,^ though this provisional conclusion may yet be subject to further discussion with the publication of other fragments.5 Papyrus I
Plates 1&2
Two substantial fragments deriving from a codex inscribed front and back in a somewhat ornate and flowing Greek uncial hand, the same having contributed all of the text on both fragments. The papyrus material of the codex is both in poor state of repair and rather roughly manufactured. A few lectional marks have been provided by what appears to have been the hand of a later reader, but the punctuation is clearly original. Spaces between words are not used. The fragments connect as a pair. The fragments derive in all likelihood from precisely the same immediate archaeological context, despite the fact that they were placed in different glass frames of papyri from House Three and the fact that two other adjoining Greek papyrus fragments were separated by 15m in the locus! Unfortunately, there seems to be no external indication which side of the text preceded in the codex, nor whether our leaf stood in the front or back half of what was presunlably a codex of single quire construction (ie on which side of the page the gutter was to be found). In order to construct the accompanying plates, I have assumed, as seems likely from the content, that writing parallel to vertical fibres 4 Such arguments can of course be problematic, especially when one is not certain which margin where preserved belonged to the gutter side of the page. Palaeographical arguments, though making important contributions, cannot be expected to allow for the change of hand in a codex. A striking example of precisely this phenonlenon is found in a codex sheet from House Three in Area A at Kellis, which displays distinctly different hands on either side of the gutter, both front and back. 5 It is conceivable that two other adjoining Greek fragments from House Three derive from the same codex, but if so then certainly not from the same leaf and probably not from the same sheet.
PAPYRUS 1 FROM KELLIS
199
preceded, though if this were the case it tells us nothing for certain about the construction of the codex. I have also assumed a more or less square construction for the page. There is little doubt that the same hand has added all the text. This is clear from the characteristic zeta, which contrasts distinctively with each and every one of the six or so Greek hands otherwise known from this archaeological context. Even so, all these hands give the impression of an early fourth century date. I had initially selected the fragments on the basis of palaeographical assessment, initial impressions being tested against codicological arguments. Assessments based on content are probably the least useful in the case of such fragmentary texts as these, and so they have not been used at all to establish which fragments belonged t ~ g e t h e r . ~ Our first task is to establish the structure of the page of the codex from which these fragments derive.' It is immediately clear both from tear profiles and text preserved that the two fragments join as a pair. This came as no surprise after some years of familiarity with the texts from House Three in Area A at Kellis, since so often the papyrus fragments have turned out to be closely interrelated.' The reason for this is clear, namely that the materials discarded into the present archaeological context originally contained relatively few leaves or sheets of few codices, rather than (almost) complete codices of which few fragments survive. Reconstructed, What was actually done was to sort over the entire collection selecting 6 all the fragments which bore the same writing on font and back. As expected, with very few exceptions this material came from codices (which were literary or sub-literary). The fragments were noted for glass frame of origin, to facilitate subsequent study of the spread of papyrus in the archaeological context, and then transferred to new assemblages for sorting according to language and then hand. 7 Of course the readings are relevant here, and will be invoked, but reconstruction of the text depends so heavily on length of line that the codicological argument seems to me to deserve priority in the discussion. 8 The classic example of this behaviour is the text once numbered P. Kellis 118, more than one hundred fragments of a Coptic codex which the present writer assembled into just four sheets of a codex.
200
GEOFFREY JENKINS
they constitute consecutive leaves or even sheets, rather than fragments from here and there throughout the codex in question. What is most intriguing then is that these reconstituted pages are often almost complete, indicating that the complete page must have been lost into the locus and must have subsequently broken down. This looks unexpectedly like the situation found in ancient rubbish dumps, where odd pages only are found, usually those discarded by some random process after a codex fell apart. This explains of course why so often we find in such settings not sheets but leaves, since the codices fell apart by breaking along the fold of the spine of sheets placed under considerable strain by the single-quire f ~ r m a t . ~ Incidentally, this leads to the view that the Manichaean materials of House Three need not necessarily belong to the latest period of occupation of the house. There is even a chance that they do not belong to the house at all, and have been carried in at the end of occupation from surrounding buildings. Perhaps possible too is another suggestion, namely that these odd pages were left behind when Manichaeans hurriedly vacated the dwelling. I am unsure how to resolve this matter, but what seems quite certain is that there is a reasonable chance that all the fragments of a given textlcodex found in House Three (at least the main room=Room 6) will derive from relatively few codices and relatively few leaves (or sheets) of these same codices. It is this experience which leads to the presumption that the two fragments of Papyrus 1 will derive from nearby within the codex, but in any case confirmation is here ready to hand in the fact that the fragments join.
Edition and reconstruction At a reasonable guess based upon the size of the hand and the materials preserved, we have here to do with a papyrus leaf of width
9 The second text published in this volume (designated Papyrus 2) is a case in point.
PAPYRUS 1 PROM KELLJS
20 1
at least about 1501nrn.'~Our first task is precisely to determine, if possible, the width of the column, so as to be able to estimate how many letters are missing from each line. Once this statistic is known, we may proceed to such a reconstruction. Unfortunately, however, the determination of the width turns out to be dependent on the reconstruction of at least some lines, since one would otherwise have only a notional indication deriving from the ratio of height to width of the column of writing. Not only is such an indication in general notoriously inexact and unreliable, but in this particular case we know no more than that the height is at least 120mm. This would suggest that the width was at least 120mm too, a figure quite consistent with superior margins of 25mm. But all of this will scarcely provide the basis for confident reconstruction.
fi Side A fi superior margin 23mm
+17 ]NAYTRN.~TOZYAONO?TAQ,YA[ right hand side IHTRAIJOTRNCOMATRNAY[ margin l l m m IN1 A C C ~ N OKOCOKAI I ATTI 8EI ACAI A[ ]..[..]otoTOMHAOxAZEI
[email protected][ 5 ].TTOCTATQATTOANA[ ]TTOllOAI TEI ACoAllOM [ ]RN.A~CKOINRNEI N[ IEYXAPI CTEI AC.AJJOTPO[ ITTOAI AKONI ACOATI Rq [ 10 IOEJIl MEAEI AC.AYTRN [ ] . . ! Q c Y N H c ~ ~ ~ E P.[I ].PAECTIOTAUKAIKATAZl RCON [ ]?EYN.~KA~ENTHCHBACl AEI AAI [ ]HATI AEKKAHCIAoKAI ENTQAr[ 15 ].onncancar;~ NAOZANTR[ ]OYCZYMllANTACAI RNACUO[ ] OOOAMHNcc I have assumed margins of 10 (as currently extant) and 15mm in this calculation.
10
GEOFFREY JENlUNS (2 lines vacat)
]EoKYr!;HMRNFFi].XPE[
Notes to readings 8 IETXAP Descenders of chi and rho clearly visible 11 OoT[EPIO.[ Pi enlarged; rho with characteristic descender; perhaps @[.I. [. 18 Traces fully consistent with kuvrie ilpc;lv. Under the first linear abbreviationis (which clearly survives) read [lH]Y? This is the proper noun expected, and IC seems too short, but the final traces look more like epsilon than upsilon. One certainly expects here the triliteral, not biliteral, nomen sacrum.
1..[ =two illegible letters =uninscribed space of one letter [. .] or [ f21 =two obliterated letters < E > =editor's addition (OeO)
secondary addition of scribe subsequently deleted by
editor At this point in the argument then we are altogether dependent on a reconstruction to provide some indication of width for use in further reconstruction. The problematic circularity of this situation is obvious, and further compounded by the fact that we have no more than, on best indications, about one half of the column width preserved. This means that there is very little chance that we will be able successfully to guess what stood in the lacunae. We owe the partial resolution of this conundrum to Stuart Pickering of Macquarie University, who on examining the fragments quickly observed affinities with the Acts of John. In fact a first glance might suggest that ours was actually a copy of the AJ, though on reflection the differences between the texts almost certainly demonstrate that the similarities must be explained in some other terms than as the result of normal textual variation. To this issue of the textual and literary we must return. For the moment it seems reasonable on the basis of the mentioned similarities to study in detail some lines displaying close affinities with the AJ, so as to
I
I
1
PAPYRUS 1 PROM KELLIS
203
determine likely line width, and then to reconstruct the whole on this basis. l1 What we need for this purpose is consecutive lines of the papyrus showing affinities with consecutive text of the AJ. The best example is clearly the case of lines 4-7 of Side B, read as:
5
MENHCafloEYXAPCTOYM[,]~[ OAONAEARKOTI HM [ - EI CAEI~UO!COI AO[ XETRKEXAPI CM.[
A passage from AJ 85 shows close parallels, indicated here by underlining the words also found in the papyrus:'2 E ~ ~ X ~ ~ L O T O D ~ ooi . L ~ V T@ f i v &Trapainlrov < I T I ~ T L Vi>f l v s ~ a vDv i 6c6w~6-n ~ a f i q vBn ob p6vos < 0 ~ b > ~ a a>. i oi ooi GoGXot ~ i r ~ a p t a ~ o f iopo~ ~v~ E T U ~ r p o + d o ~ KTX. w~
e Side B e
l 3
superior rnargin 23mm
5
A1 POYNTEC@YXACccnflEYXAP.[ _+ 17 ARCHM I N ANAn AYECOAI EN [ XRPI CANTI@YCIN@YCERC[ MENHCocoUEYXAPCTOYM [,IN[ OAON AEARKOTI HM [
- E I CAE1 ~ ~ O ~ AO[ C O I
10
XFETRICEXAPICM ,[ I ACE1 C.AI AAXAD KY.[ AN.AO5AN.f NQCI N.4 XAPl TAC.ARPEAC*ALE[
I should note that the decipherment of the text has been camed out without an eye on the connections with the AJ, so as not to imperil the integrity of the readings. 12 The degree of overlap is much diminished (presumably), due to the amount of text lost from the papyrus. 13 As it turns out, there is no indication how close to the beginning of Side B the present end of Side A may have been, assuming this order. 11
GEOFFREY 3ENKWS
15
20
]A1 AOMENAC.Y~OZOY [ ]MOI CTOYTOI C.MHl?q$l)b! [ 1 OOTEAEI OYBOROPNKAII-~$YXH[ ]NREKOJCATOrErONOCCoTM[ ]MI ACT1 NOCENEKEN.. ,[ ]
[email protected]~NAA~ NONKET[ ]TI NAEYXAPI C T ~ANKAQNTEZ[ I ]KO1 NRNHCAI TOYCOYMYCTlj[ ] E H ~rOMENH$YXHEHON[ I ]?*OAAA ~ ~ M O N O N T AN[ HN 1. ,AC.OZYTAPEI e a MONOCK[ , ,
Notes on readings 1 P, [ Only the minutest trace consistent with iota is visible. 8 KY. [ traces consistent with beta, but not with rho. 9 rNOZ1 N*.[ either sigma or omicron would be possible. 10 ACE[ Theta might just be possible for epsilon. 11 The two fragments connect across this line Eta is virtually certain, as perhaps is the delta 12 MH@F?N[ whose base is well preserved. aKoaL is quite consistent with the uncertain traces remaining. 19 EnON[ Omicron in corr from omega? 21 MONOCR[ Supralinear stroke to kappa tenuously preserved. It is not unreasonable to suggest that 01 aoi 60[ (especially since preceded by &i), began the phrase oi ooi SoDXoi, a slightly idiosyncratic expression which seems not to occur anywhere else in the early Christian literature encoded for TLG Disk C.I4 Standing as ~ ~ E6 V~ 6 w ~ 6inn order, it makes it does just after E ~ X ~ ~ L U T O and certain that the two texts in question are closely parallel. If the parallel extends beyond occasional wording to overall structure, as seems likely, then line 5 will be easiest to reconstruct, for it must contain words anticipating c i s cifi of line 6 , and a Bn 14 A corpus of some 60 authors selected from the database, ranging in date down to the sixth century.
PAPYRUS
1 FROM
KELLIS
205
clause followed by something like (671) 0% p6vos <0cbs > ~ a i uijv ~ a is i what general parallels would lead us to expect. If we are from this to derive our estimate of column's width, however, we must deal with a complicating factor, namely that the papyrus and the AJ seem to differ not only with respect to literary content but also with respect to the text of that which they both preserve. This is especially clear in the case of AJ 85, where it is self-evident from the need for numerous editorial emendations that the text is very poorly preserved indeed, presumably as the result of careless copying of a highly repetitious passage. In fact the very text in question must be defective, since it lacks a substantive to go with rilv d.rrapaiqrov (which can hardly stand as a substantivized adjective-what would it mean?) and rah-qv stands in a very odd position if, as must be the case, it qualifies the missing substantive. Junod & Kaestli add . r r i ~ n v ,referring to another occurrence of the adjective at 107.14.'~ Our papyrus . the suggests another emendation, namely the addition of 6 6 6 ~Since papyrus reverses the order of $pIv 6 c 6 w ~ 6 n the , suggestion that ~ a 6 - q(if~ it was present at all) occurred in the text preceding b86v is reasonable. One might prefer to omit the demonstrative. This would lead to a reconstruction of line 4 as: pivqs. Efi~aplcs~oDpkv[ csoi, TC$ rrjv d.rrapaiqrov with a length of 39 letters.16 Junod & Kaestli are surely right to follow Bonnet (as they much of the time do) in adding 0c6s after p6vos, invoking many parallels including 42.7 and 77.19. The omission would have been accidental, facilitated perhaps by the use of nomina sacra. Were we to assume the presence of 0c6s, we would reconstruct as: b6bv 6 c 6 w ~ 6 n fippv, 6 n oi, p6vos 0 ~ b s~ a vDv i ~ a i with a length of 39 letters. 15 P.291, n.85.2. It is not entirely clear from their note why they preferred T ~ ~ U T LtoS rapovala. Especially if one thinks of 666s as 'means of ~ r salvation', there would be little difference between 666s and r l a ~ when qualified by 'unwavering' NTA 11, 253 or 'irrkcusable' (Junod & Kaestli, AI, 290). 16 We count one for punctuation and two for the space.
206
GEOFFREY JENKINS
Although both dci and € i s dci occur in the A J , ' ~there does not appear to be any textual evidence for cis in the known tradition at this point. We reconstruct line 6 as: - € 1 d~ ~ i . 0i TO^ 80fiX01 € b x a p l ( ~ ~ ~ f i0'01 p i V K E IT\U with a length of 40 letters. Somewhat provisionally then, we conclude that, as a working hypothesis, a line length of about 40 letters should be employed. Clearly, the more successes one has with this hypothesis, the more certain it may become. Equally clearly, there are so many unknowns in this equation-the text of the AJ, the lacunae of our papyrus, the textuallliterary overlap of the two texts-that we can have no certainty here, but I suggest that there is reasonable evidence supporting this indication as a starting point. Of course since we have invoked the parallel between the AJ and Papyrus 1 as evidence for this hypothesis, it will be as well if we do not draw conclusions about this relationship based on nothing more than the assumptions made at the beginning! It should be noted here in defence of this construction that the resulting text would not appear to be much different in its relationship to the AJ where certainly known than where lacunose. This is of course a rigorous test of such reconstructions, where textual variants often turn out to be far and away morelless frequent where the text is unknown than where it is known. It should be noted, however, that in this case the differences will be both textual and literary, so that a measure of aberrance is in this case not so easily come by.I8
Reconstruction Side A +17 ]LV a h 6 v . ~b S6Xov ofi TZI ]q T$ ci-irb TGV ( T W ~ ~ T W ah[V
TOV
17
(PljX[X11
bXopa]vias d v o l ~ o s ,~ a ~ i 3.r<E
> tecias Stb-
The latter is infrequent, but found at 88.8. 18 See for example the broken first folio of the Isocrates codex from Kellis, where there could be many variants in the lost text not guessed at.
PAPYRUS
1. ,[,,].
1 FROM KELLIS
p? 80~d[€tV Ti) ].ITOUT&TY6 1 ~ b&am~o+fis d ] r b I T O X L T E ~ ~ S , a r b p[ ]wv, a'is KOLVWVE^~V p i u ~ l s dlvb I~fixaptoTias, dlrb TPO[49s o a p ~ 6 s , ci11~b G t a ~ o v i a sbyiwy[ 10 C ~ I T~ ]I ~T L ~ E X Ea~f i~ ~Sk v ci-rrb G L ] ~ ~ \ ? ~ v TI T) sE. ~ L[-~ , I T ~ T ] ~ SQ i, a ~ o ~K ~a' L ~a-ratiwaov[ +,pas +tXo[]y~^Lv. K C L ~t v oij P a u t X ~ I aS L [ ~ K ~ ' L i v %jb y i a i ~ ~ X ~ aK i~ a' L ,i v T@ hjiiq V~ELV 15 r(v~l3)pan.1. Bvws 86owatv 86Eav T@[ OE@ 4pc;jv. c i s -r]obs m p ~ d v ~ aiwvias as ] cipiv. Ti)
5
(2 lines vacar)
Comments on the Reconstruction (Side A) The reconstruction of Side A has proved extremely difficult, even though it is possible to discern the profile of AJ 84 on almost every line. In particular the following should be noted: J assumption that the word is 5. We print ] , ~ O ~ T ~ TonQ the c i ~ i v u a o a ~ d -,r w'unreservedly'. 7. AJ has 5s ~otvwv~T.v
p i u ~ t s ,with relative pronoun attracted to the case of ~fiwGiasetc. The pronoun a'is of Papyrus 1 presupposes feminine plurals, as ~ f i w s i a smay be. 13. +tXo[]w~lv, following the lead of the rather pedantic accent, which as a circumflex would be inappropriate to [dctv. 11.In this context mpt+,[- would surely need to be verbal and probably imperative (possibly from -rrept+ljw), rather than I T E ~ L +.[-.
GEOFFREY JENKINS
Side B [ciTfoKae-] a i p o i j v ~ c sJluxCs. Ehxapi [aToDpiv UE K(fipi)€ ' 1T)(UO)D X p ( i o ~ ) iB , n 6i6ws fi@v dva~rafiro0ai Zv[ ooi. Ehxapio~oDpiv ooi TC$ x w p i a a v n +irot.v +bocws, [fiv +0ctpopCqv q s o q l o p i q s . E h ~ a p i u ~ o O p [ i ] yGOL. [ TC$ 7i)v d ~ a p a i q ~ o v i ~ a i 5 b6bv 6 c 6 w ~ 6 nfippv, 6 n ui, p6vos 0cbs ~ a vDv E ~ S &EL. Oi ooi 6o[DXo~ c i ~ ~ a p i m G pUE, 6 ~ ~ ( l j p i 'II$(Jo)D )~ X p ( i o ~ ) i ,T@ ~ c x a p t o ~ [ i v iwp l v Boa ~ C p a ~ o-qp~la. a, Boas iaocis, GiSaxds, ~ u P [ c p V i ) o ~ ~csi ,v a ~ a i r o ~ i sBoav , Gta~ovia v , 66tav, yvijutv, B[aas r r i u ~ c i s , +7 ~ o l v w v i a s , 10 X ~ ~ L T U S .Gwpias, d s € [ 1 [ 8 0 p € ~ K ~ T U TO$S b+BaXpoi,s 6~6opCvash r b aoD[ j@v, p i +at.vopCvas b+0aX POISTO~~TOLS- p ~ 8 '&?aT[s T ~ ~ T c~i ~Lo vSo p i v a s . TEXELOGUBW ocv ~ a ili JlvxTi[ _+I1 ?? otpavV$ ~ K O D O ~Tb . ~ E Y O V ~ OOU S Q [ U ( ~ ~ ~ PqLsO V O~KOVO15 p i a s n v o s E v c ~ f y? ~ ? ~ ~ [ y p a ~ c vb ~TOD a t otpavvoD T i v a aivov ~ ( i r p t . ) ~~. [ i v a ~fpoo+ophv Myou. Tiva c h ~ a p t o ~ ( ~ ~ ~ KXGVTES[ ) i a v . T ~ V a [ p ~ o v TODTOV TOG ~ o i v w f i o g t TOO UOD ~ U ~ T $ [ P L O U , +13 ?? ~ i j$]~ ~ c ~ i y o p+vxfj, C q hov[opaowpcv ~ a Gotd[wp~v i 20 8t.a b v 6 p a ~ o svlo]G ELM' oi p6vov f i v & v [ & a ~ a a i v j, v b66v. ~b JdXas. Ci, y a p Ei p6vos ~ [ f i p t c 1
,
. # I @
Table of line lengths
PAPYRUS 1 FR O M KELLIS
209
The precise nature of these parallels between Papyrus 1 and the A J is worthy of a detailed examination here. So as to preserve certainty, no reconstructed readings (for which there is no indication in preserved materials) have here been included in the following table: 2
3 4 6 7
Pauvrus 1 Side A awo TWV owpa~wv Ivias ~ U V O ~ K O Sat T O p-q SoEa<~iv To +US arro rroXi~c~as a ~ Ks O ~ V W V E L V
Papyrus 1 Side B 3 Xwptaavn +uaiv 3-4 +uacws[ I p ~ q s 4 Euxapia-roup[ 5 OSOV S E ~ W K -qp[ O~ 6 ] E L S act. 01 croi SO[ 8 Lacreis 6t6axas 8 9 10 11 12 12 14 15 16 17 20 21
AJ 84 ciwb TGV crwpd~wv tXopavias a6vot~r~ a i ~b S6vaaOa~ 80&
84.12 6 8 13 14
A_J 85, 106, 109 xpiaavn [+6utv] 85.9 +6arws crqCopiqs 9 chxap1~~0Gpc~ 9 i f l v 6 ~ 6 w ~ 6 n 10 vDv ~ a dci. i oi aoi SoDXoi ~ ~ U E .L .S . 6 ~ 6 a x d s 106.6 ~ u p c p 4 a ~ i s 7 KU.[ SoEav yvwoiv 66Eas 8 XapiTas Swpcas x a p t ~ a s ,Swpcds 8 StSopcvas urcp crou 8iS6p~vatplv i~rr' a h ~ o 6 9 ] ~ O L STOUTOLS 6+0aXpok T O ~ ~ T O L S 9-10 pv6 a ~ o a i [ pl$i ~ K O ~ T S 10 TO ycyovos aou ~b Y E Y O V ~ S. . 11-12 pu~~ptov . pua-njptov n v o s EVEKEV d u o s ZVEKEV 12 n v a atvov G Tiva alvov 109.1-2 n v a cuxaptonav Tiva ~irxaptodav 2 aM ac povov ciM -i( a& p6vov 3 au yap E L povos G at^ yap d (+p6vos 6 ) , ~ 6 p t c
210
GEOFFREY JENKWS
Comments on the Reconstructions (Side B) We have provided a reconstruction of most of Side B and some few part lines of Side A. By accident, it seems, we are able to deal with one side much more readily than the other. The explanation for this is the closer affinity which Side B shows with the AJ than Side A. Even so, some sentences of Side B deserve comment, and their reconstruction a brief justification.
>
1
xwpiaavn +daiv +6oews, [rilv
[Ebxapio~oDpivDo1 TO] ayro-
+ B E L ~ O ~ & ~f lV s' ~
1~6~~sThe fact that xpl;joavn. +6aiv +6o~ws awCop&vqs in AJ is defective requires no demonstration. In fact the emendation to xcopioavn, now justified by the new evidence from Papyrus 1, had already been suggested," though not adopted by Junod & Kaestli who preferred to delete +6atv. This scarcely solves the problem, as the awkwardness of the translations shows." This is then a case where the defectiveness of AJ makes reconstructing the obviously preferable but not preserved (!) text of Papyrus 1 doubly difficult. It seems likely that AJ has lost a few words through haplography. One might have preferred then to reconstruct using a further occurrence of +6acws 'facilitating' homoeoteleuton, but this would make the line overlong. It seems sure that ayCo]p&~qs (if correctly read) will qualify +6ocws, suggesting a meaning something like: We give thanks to you, who have separated the nature which is perishing from the nature which is being saved. 19
See for the choice of this term the parallel in AJ 77: 6 TOG
~ a e a l l J . & ~ a v ~i ao u s ~ b v dvep6-rrou A u ~ p w n ) ~~ a TOD l o6p.a~a(sic).
TU
@EL~~~J.EV~
20 I think by Bonnet, though I could not confirm this. 21 Eg 'we thank thee who hadst need of (our) nature that is being saved' in NTA 11, 253. The use of $ t a ~ sin two cases can scarcely be the result of the provision of a choice within a tradition which could not decide which case to employ. Junod & Kaestli, A I , translate 'A toi qui as desire la nature sauvte', with a valuable note which is, however, made redundant if one prefers xwplrw to xprfirw.
PAPYRUS 1 FROM KELLIS
21 1
The result is perhaps more consistent with the doctrine of the document, and obviates the necessity to explain the need of a $bo&oqoqCop6vqq on the part of the deity. 2) 01 60[6h0t ~ 6 ~ a p t o ~ o OoE, p 6 ~ ( 6 p t 'Iq(o0)6 )~
xp(toz)€,z q K E X O I ~ ~ O ~ ~ [ VqCpiv ~ 6oa zEpaza, oq p~ia,doa5 t&oetq,6t6axck5, K u P [ E ~ v T ~ dlvanafio~t5, ~E~~, doav 81a~ovCav, 665av, yv6otv, b[oaq nfoz~tq, *7 ~otvovfaq, 10 ~&ptzaq, GopEaq, ... This long list of gifts of grace seems to have suffered in transmission of the AJ, in part perhaps because of a certain confusion introduced by the use of a sequence of occurrences of parts of doo5. Preserved materials of Papyrus 1 indicate the likely construction of this sequence as:
r@ ~&xaptop[€vq fi piv 6oa + neut.pl. substantives (eg z6para) doaq + fem.pl. substantives (eg t&ostq) doav + fem.sg substantives (eg 8taKovfav) boa5 + fem.pl. substantives (eg niozstq). &524 . . . I St60pGvaq ktl. Though the profile of this construction is visible in the AJ, there is also present a certain confusion resulting from scribal c a r e l e s ~ n e s s . ~ ~ Our reconstruction is unlikely to be correct, since line 8 is overlong (at 45) and line 9 too short (at 33). It is reasonable to think that &vanafio~t5 was absent from line 8, since the corresponding verb occurs in the introduction to the prayer of line 2 (where it is lacking ~~ omitting &vanafiosywill not solve the from the A J ) . However,
24 The relative pronoun, though obviously resuming antecedents of all
genders and numbers in the list, is attracted into the number and gender of the nearest sublist, namely feminine plural. At the corresponding point AJ similarly employs the neuter plural 6oa with BtS6p~vafollowing. 25 It appears probable that the form of these lists found in Papyrus 1, though textually more sound that that of the AJ, is also secondary, since the presence of two sublists in feminine plural would be unexpected. 26 A nice parallel is provided by the case of xaptopcr~a, which does not stand as expected between t€iostgand StBaxdrg,but is anticipated by the
212
GEOFFREY JENKINS
problem of length of line 8. Nor can we suggest a likely candidate to fill the gap of k7 in line 9. Of much significance in this case would be the addition of yvo?o~vafter 66tav, which is parallel with the addition of y v d a e ~ s , but before 66tas, in MSS d apud Junod & Kaestli. 3 ) G~Sopivasb ~ bDOG[ j p l v , p i + a ~ v o p i v a sb+BaXpols TOGTOLS. p ~ ) ? ' + t p j l [ s~ a l j ~ a cl si ~ o u o p ~ v a s . The occurrence of J p o i s here would seem to guarantee p i +a~vopCvas b+BaX- in the lacuna. Moreover, o h in line 13
indicates that the present thought concludes with line 12. That the definite article was present with neither b+BaXpois nor d ~ o a i [ sis obvious from preserved materials. 4) T E X E L O ~O&V ~B~ ~ LaI 4i +ux-rj[ v@ i ~ o i i o a .
+11
T@
ofipav-
This probably self-contained section has no close parallel in A J , though this fact need only reflect the defective character of that textual tradition. i ~ o i l o awill be construed with j + u x i [ giving: 'Let then the soul which is willing to ..... to heaven (?) be perfected'. Were we able to be more certain of ocpa 1 v@, it might be possible to suggest something like 'ascend' to fill the gap of 11 letters.
+
5 ) ~b Y E Y O V ~ SDOU ~ [ U G ~ P L O V O ~ K O V O 15 pias Tivos ZVEKEV ~.**.. m p a [ y p c i ~ ~ u b~ aTOG i ofipavvoD +$ha[.
..
This first of a series of rhetorical questions is paralleled in the A J by ~ T T L U T ~ ~ E V O~b L
YEYOV~S
EIS ZIVO~L~TTOUS
01~0vopias
is of course not rhetorical in the same sense, but the general structure of the text of Papyrus 1 is plainly present. ne.rrpa[ is palaeographically very uncertain, but reasonable on grounds of space, and the traces must in any case belong to a verb with $Ghat as subject. It is p u o d p ~ o v Tivos ZVEKEV
T E T T ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b T EK U ~ PTL O~ SL. This
corresponding verbal form ~ ~ x a p t . a p [ i vinoline 7, which has no equivalent in the AJ.
PAPYRUS
1 FROM
KELLIS
213
intruiging that this substantive is present here. It does not seem to be used as a terminus technicus by Manicheans, if the available ~ however, found in some Gnostic indexes are any i n d i c a t i ~ nIt. ~is, texts as a word borrowed into Coptic from Greek, suggesting that it did enjoy a technical usage in some circles.26 No equivalent of EL" civOpLjsrou" is present.
6)
T i v a a l v o v K ( ~ ~ L ) iE i, v a ?rpou$opav X d y o v , Tiva ~ l j x a p i o ~ ( O ~ O ) lKXGVTES[T~)V av, B ~ T O V TOGTOV TOD ~oivwv-fjuaiTOG 000 puunj[piov, +13 ?? q:'] i s r O ~ O t y o p i v q+uxij, i?rov[opbowpcv ~ a iSotb[cc)p~v 20 Sih 6 v 6 p a ~ o svio]D ; dM' 02 y6vov j v dv[&u~aatv, j v bS6v, ~ i IliXas. ) The construction here is even more complex and extensive than that found in the closely related AJ passage (109). There we encounter: T i v a alvov ... Zsrovopdowy~vdM'4 ai. pdvov, 'IquoD ('What subject of praise ... might we invoke other than you, 0 J e s u ~ ? ' ) . ~The ' fundamental construction in Papyrus 1 is identical, though made much more complex by the addition of several subordinate clauses. Most of the additional elements are paralleled by additional elements in what follows in A J as objects of 8 0 t b [ o p ~ v , on the basis of which we have reconstructed Zsrov[op&awp~v~ a i ~ o ~ & [ o -njv ~ E vciv[dcr~ao~v, -njv 6 6 6 ~ .~b IBXas. q]i s r O ~ O i y o p i q$uxfj is of course not certainly dative, and might rather be read as -ti] Zsr0c0~yop6q+ V X ~ though , in that case it is difficult to guess of what verbal form + u x i would be the
25 Perhapspalc or p e r p a l c presupposes$fiAaC.Cf. n a p e q p a l c at Psalms 151.4 and a n o r F y e in the Kephalaia. 26 A parallel with 'watcher' might be sought here, suggesting perhaps the theological locus of the text found in Papyrus 1 (assuming it not to be Manichaean proper). See eg Pistis Sophia (edn of C. Schmidt with translation by V. Macdermot, Leiden, 1978), where reference to 'the watcher of the veil' ( n e @ ~ ) r a 3M n r a T a n e T a c n a ) iscommon. Note alsoAJ 112: d TOV ~ ~ ~ E +irAaE I w v~ a TOV l ir~~oyelwv. 27 Isaiah 66.12 in LXX offers a much-quoted parallel to this construction with t1~1~ I v ayhp ti-riPM+w (=subj!) dM ' q] i d KTA.
214
GEOFFREY JENKINS
subject. Perhaps the verb is to be reconstructed as i T r o v o p d q ~ €but , ~ h i j v ~ in e sline 17 and a6 in line 20 seem to virtually preclude that possibility.28 One meets with the +UX$ hrciyopCq occasionally in Christian literature, construed with a prepositional phrase or a dependent infiniti~e.'~ It is plain that the relationship between these two texts is in this case highly complex, reflecting both textual and literary considerations. These seems no obvious way to determine which, if either, of these two forms should be judged the more original.
Conclusion This splendid text has raised numerous important questions for both AJ and for Egyptian Manichaeism. Three might here be mentioned by way of summary and conclusion: 1. Is Papyrus 1 to be judged Manichaean? Our view is that no particular feature of the text would in itself suggest Manichaean provenance. Moreover, and perhaps more importantly, the differences between Papyrus 1 and the AJ do not seem to arise from Manichaean editing. The archaeological setting would, however, strongly suggest that this text was in use among Manichaeans, presumably then as one of many 'reference texts' in their library. As such it may perhaps be quite close to that liturgical tradition or document from which the author of the AJ supposedly excerpted Eucharistic prayers. 2. Given the textual and literary relationship between Papyrus 1 and the AJ, which if either may be thought derivative from the other? Surely the answer here is that both texts depend in some way on a third text, if not independently on two other related texts. It is most unlikely that Papyrus 1 was excerpted from the AJ in any form of
28 A possible hint that W ~ C V was read is the accidental writing of ~ r o by the scribe, which though corrected (immediately?)might indicate that he was anticipating the vowel of the subjunctive. 29 See eg 4 JIuXfi r p b s ~ b viauTijs iTr~iyop&vqA E I J T ~in~ John ~V Chrysostom on the Acts of the Apostles, PG 60, 168.35.
PAPYRUS 1 FROM KELLIS
215
the latter remotely like the one we now know. The differences are too great and too complex for such an explanation, but paradoxically not great enough for one to conclude that Manichaean editing has taken place. This might lead to the view that both the Manichaeans of Kellis and the compiler of the AJ made use of a collection of Eucharistic prayer^,^ and that the common tradition shared between them reflects their common but independent use of this source. One might designate this document El (for Eucharistic liturgy) and discuss briefly the implications of such a suggestion. 3) Did both the compiler of the AJ and the Kellis Manichaeans know this document in similar textual and literary form? This question looks more difficult to answer with respect to the AJ than the Manichaeans, since in Papyrus 1 we apparently encounter El as they knew it, and their text seems generally sound and preferable to that of the AJ. It is crucial in this connection to observe that Papyrus 1 shows few if any signs of Manichaean editing. As for the AJ, the problems of poor textual transmission virtually preclude a certain solution to this question, though it does appear likely that the materials of El had undergone some literary development which distinguishes them in the two settings where they seen. Whether this development occurred before the incorporation of El into the AJ, or was part of the process of incorporation, would seem difficult to say, though it may now be possible in the light of Papyrus 1 to discuss this issue. The importance of Papyrus 1 is thus drawn into sharp focus. The consensus that Manichaeans used the five Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles should be rethought in light of the possibility that they possessed copies of some of the documents on which the compilers drew as source^.^' If Papyrus 1 from Kellis is such a document, emerging from a Manichaean library at around 300, perhaps many 30 The use of such a document by the compiler of the AJ has long been recognised. 31 See the excellent summary in J.-D. Kaestli, 'L'Utilisation des Actes Apocryphes des ApGtres dam le Manicheisme', in M Krause (ed), Nag Hammadi Studies 8 (Leiden, 1977) 107-16.
216
GEOFFREY JENKINS
of the affinities suggested between Manichaean sources and these AAA are due to indirect connection and do not indicate direct borrowings. To the study of this and to many other intriguing questions we now leave Papyrus 1.
Appendix A single codex sheet from Kellis A Manichaean miniature Greek codex (papyrus 2 ) GEOFFREY JENKINS
House Three in Area A at Kellis in the Dakhleh Oasis has proved a rich source of Manichaean text. In particular, the fact that literary works in three languages2 have been found is indicative of the presence of Manichaean monks, who were clearly in possession of texts with which we had not been familiar, even when the rich finds from Medinet Madi are taken into a c c o ~ n t . ~ The archaeological context seems to offer strong support for the conclusion that all the literary text emerging from House Three and perhaps its larger environment is Manichaean. This observation is important, since some of the items deriving from the context are .~ a special very short and not distinctively ~ a n i c h a e a n Moreover, 1 This papyrus number is that of the author, and may not correspond to the numeration scheme employed by the Dakhleh Oasis Project. I have discussed this text at length with Ken McKay and Stuart Pickering, both of whom made significant contributions to this argument. I have not seen any other transcriptions or discussions of this text. 2 These are (Manichaean) Syriac, Coptic of two dialects-sub-Achmimic and Achmimic-and Greek, the finds including several Syriac-Coptic bilingual pieces. 3 There is no guarantee that the Medinet Madi texts are representative of the full Manichaean corpus. In particular it should be noted that the Coptic texts of the Egyptian corpus are most likely translated from Syriac, not from Greek. Therefore Greek Manichaean works, which I would argue are most likely original Greek compositions and not translated from Syriac at all, may well represent a different genre and a different content and origin from the Medinet Madi texts. 4 Of course what may be thought distinctively Manichaean may change with the study of these texts.
218
APPENDIX
problem obtains with Greek manichaeica, since w e often d o not recognise the genre of a given text as Manichaean, nor notice its terminology as characteristic of that religious system. This aspect has been a great surprise to the editors of these texts, who would have expected t o be able to recognise Manichaean texts with comparative ease, once it became clear, from the presence of Syriac for example, that the context contained Manichaean remains. Perhaps, as I shall argue elsewhere in detail, this is the result of finding texts which had been in use in a liturgical setting, and for which we are not able to establish clear parallels from other known Manichaean source^.^
Papyrus 26
Plate 37
Two adjoining fragments (almost three!), which constitute a complete sheet of a papyrus codex in miniature format, inscribed front and back in Greek with parts of two prayers. The text appears to be continuous from front to back of each leaf, but not across the gutter on either side. Each page bears nine lines in a single column of average width 18mm for pages 1 and 2 and 21mm for pages 3 and 4. The page measures 41 x 28mm wide (hlw = 1.46). Nomina sacra for d v e p w ~ ~ o s~, a r f i pand ~ r v c i r ~are ~ afound. Word-final nu is four times marked by a supralinear stroke (three on page 3), and page 1 commences with a much-enlarged delta. No other form of punctuation is found (though see page 4, line The possibility explored in my comments on Papyrus 1, namely that 5 some of these texts were not distinctively Manichaean at all but rather items in a sort of Manichaean 'reference library', should also be borne in mind. 6 I have enumerated the pages in probable order of reading in the codex, as depicted in the plate, though this of course presupposes an outcome to the following rather speculative argument concerning the orientation of the page in the codex. Nevertheless, every indicator of orientation seems to suggest the order here presupposed, and in any case, for convenience of reference in the following argument, some view on the orientation of the sheet is required. 7 In the plate CMC stands for Cologne Mani Codex. It will be noticed that our papyrus leaf is in fact smaller, though it contains much less writing in a larger script.
GEOFFREY JENKINS
219
9). The papyrus material itself is rather coarse, and page 1 has suffered extensive abrasion. Slots where stitching is expected are present along the gutter. For page 1 approximate dimensions are: superior margin 6mm, left margin (gutter side) 6mm, inferior margin 5mm. It seems possible that the sheet was the outermost of a single-quire codex.
Of the fact that this sheet derives from a codex there can be no doubt, for the writing, which is quite regular on all pages, is continuous from front to back of each leaf. This fact is strikingly clear in the case of the continuity from page 3 to page 4 (iv ooi TE I X ~ i o u p i v ~ vbut ) , ~ is a safe assumption too for page 1 to page 2 (ev pq~ipa [wfis e v ~ r p 6 l - q ~ I T O ~ T O Aeven ~ V )though , there is some difficulty deciphering the final word(s) of 1.9. But which side of the sheet was uppermost in the quirelcodex? This would not seem to be at all an easy question to a n ~ w e rMore .~ or less convinced that the orientation was as shown in the plate, I propose here to argue a case for this view. Since none of the arguments here seems cogent, I suppose that other views might also be suggested. Even so some view should be argued for here, even if the support is cumulative and the individual arguments not particularly strong. Explicitly stated, my view is that this sheet was the outermost of a single quire codex of at least four (but probably more) sheets. 1) Certainly there is little in the content which would suggest the relative order in the codex of the two partially preserved prayers. Within any particular (Manichaean) prayer one would v any third-person expect 60td5w to precede both ~ a ~ a t i w o oand ~Ljv i v aoi S ~ ~ a l o u references to the worshippers (such as 8 A representative search of TLG Disk C gave only T E ~ E L ~ Wand . E ~ E L O Uis ~ ~therefore V W V the obvious compounds thereof matching E L O U ~ T way to reconstruct, and page 3 must join page 4. 9 There is perhaps a hint of the orientation in the present-day tendency of the papyrus to fold along the gutter with pages 2 and 3 together, though this need only be the result of an unnatural fold set in place over fifteen hundred years in the sand! The precise shape the sheet had on discovery is unfortunately unknown.
220
APPENDIX
p~vwv),10but this indicates nothing concerning the orientation unless either all pages belong to the same prayer within the codex (which is inherently unlikely) or page 1 began the (single quire) codex and page 4 completed it. In fact it is precisely this view that I am asserting, but since it is not likely that we are dealing with the remains of one prayer this argument is not cogent." Suffice to conclude that the remains are, in terms of content, at least not inconsistent with the codicological interpretation of the sheet here espoused. 2) Our page 1 begins with an enlarged delta which is of double height and width. AotaCw then demonstrably begins one of the prayers, as comparison with other Manichaean prayers from Kellis in Greek would lead us to expect.'' It is intriguing to ponder the significance of the position of this delta on the page in the first position. Several explanations suggest themselves. It may be that the commencement of a prayer in the codex fell coincidentally at the beginning of a page. This however would be a notable fluke, even though of course the likelihood is increased by smaller pages, such as we have in this case.I3 Nor does it seem very likely that the writer
The structure is: I praise + direct object described + actions narrated + effect of actions on the one(s) praising. This structure is nicely paralleled
10
(though without the imperative) by the Prayer of the Emanations (see R.G. Jenkins, 'The Prayer of the Emanations in Greek from Kellis (T.Kel1. 22)' forthcoming in Le Muston). The eighth prayer (lines 77-84) has the s + actions (pau~ciCov~as structure: GotciCw + objects (Trciv~as9 ~ 0 6 etc.) etc.) + effecting the worshippers (bpvovpivov). Notice especially the shift from first person singular to third person plural which is common in these prayers and offers a close parallel to our present text. 11 A single quire would surely have at least four sheets, in which case one should probably not think in terms of a single prayer. The longest of the prayers of the Emanations (Prayer 10, lines 95-123, which is more than twice their average length) could have been written on about eight pages (= 2 sheets) of this miniature codex. 12 All ten prayers in the Prayer of the Emanations (see n.9) begin with 8oEci[w ~ a land , the initial is usually enlarged. 13 Notionally the chances are one in nine (for nine lines per page) if the process is genuinely random, assuming that the writer chose to begin the
GEOFFREY JENKINS
22 1
would have achieved this result artificially by distending his writing or leaving lines blank. This would be a remarkable practice, when one compares with the Cologne Mani Codex or with other Kellis miniatures and Greek texts. I think it can be discounted. This leads to the conclusion that our page 1 was in fact the first page of the codex, and that the very first (or only?) prayer in it commenced AoEaCw . . . . 3) When all four pages of the sheet are examined synoptically, one is immediately struck by the unequal distribution of .the text. With progress from page 1 to page 4 the letters become smaller, the margins narrower, the lines longer and the leading between lines smaller. The variations in these parameters are reflected in the following values as tabulated:
All of these statistics indicate with more or less certainty the order in which the sheet was inscribed, provided we assume that the scribe is likely to have been writing more tightly as he neared the end of the codex. This is natural (if any discrepancy at all is found) since a
prayer on a new line. It would be an extremely complex task to calculate the probability if one were to allow for lines left blank or occasional use of extra lines on the page, and we would need much more data for the codex than we have (enough probably to determine the question without doing the calculation in the first place!). In any case it seems unlikely that many blank lines would have been left, so about a 10% chance is indicated. 14 If we ignore line 9 (which as the last is exceptionally short), this value is 22.27 15 Ignoring line 9, 0.96.
APPENDIX
recalculation by the scribe will indicate his progress and he may then attempt to squeeze more text onto the page.I6 Attention should be drawn here to the fact that these pages interrelate in such a way that pages 1 and 2 and pages 3 and 4 are similar as pairs. Each of these pairs has the same left and right margins, despite the fact that in the case of each pair one of the pages has the gutter to the right, the other to the left. Thus it is not reasonable to suggest that the presence of the gutter and the difficulty in approaching it with the pen would explain the discrepancy. Though pages 3 and 4 are alike, there are a number of features of page 4 which seem to depart from expectations. Firstly, the scribe has strictly observed a 4rnm margin, only to leave 5mm when he comes to line 9, though in general his margins are fairly consistent.17 Line 9 is in fact the shortest on pages 3 and 4, but more striking still is the fact that line 8 matches the position of line 7 on page 1 across the gutter.'' This means that the scribe had more than enough space to fit two more lines beyond line 7, at least at the rate of leading set for the page, and seems in fact to have deliberately closed up his spaces on the page to facilitate this outcome. Yet when he reaches line 9 he writes an unusually tall rho l9 and leaves an unusually wide lower margin. How is this strangely inconsistent state of affairs to be explained? The most likely explanation would seem to be that o~r€u66v~wv is in fact the end of the prayer,'' or at least was judged by the scribe 16 Of course this may be the other way around, though it is less likely. See the example of the Isocrates from Kellis. 17 Note the creep on page 1, but inwards! 18 This is relevant whether we hold that the scribe could actually have seen page 1 as he wrote page 4 or not. This particular argument of course applies more usefully to the inside pages, where one wonders whether the codex had been assembled before inscription or after (in which latter case page 2 would have been on show as page 3 was written). 19 See for comparison the rho of (vo 1)tpoD in 1:6, whose apex scarcely rises above that of the preceding epsilon. 20 As it could well have been. See eg b p 6 v ~ w vat in T.Kel1. 22:84.
GEOFFREY J
E
~
S
223
a suitable place to conclude the prayer." bccrai fiptis would then be subscriptional, presumably introducing a doxology which the worshippers knew verbatim. As will be clear from the plate with appended era (derived from 3:l) juxtaposed for comparison, the traces following fiptis do not correspond to that letter." In any case these traces can hardly be the first letter of the word following fiptis, since one expects 6.1~6 in this position,23 and since there is sufficient space for another one or two letters following the traces.24 It seems likely then that the traces following ilptis mark an abbreviation, as a siglum meaning er cerera. Relevant evidence in support of this contention would be the use of a similar sign in documentary texts to mark abbreviations, as well as the use of a siglum much like a Hebrew yodh to mark abbreviation in Medinet Madi texts.'' One might suggest wording such as 'Save us, 0 Lord, from evil, both in this world and the world to come, Amen'. Page 3 begins with lOwovvqv, with which the ending of page 2 is not continuous. It should here be observed that such continuities and discontinuities do not indicate the orientation of the sheet in the codex. By convention the page numbers 2 and 3 are assigned here to the uppermost side in the codex, but one may be certain which side This latter case was true for the Kellis Isocrates, which ends middiscourse, though there the scribe had taken considerable trouble to accommodate the three orations within the book, even to the point of inserting an additional board of quite different format. 22 Microscopic examination gives no indication of abrasion to the upper portion of the letter. 23 A vocative is possible in this position, but what might this have been? 24 There are as it happens not a few occasions when the scribe of CMC breaks a word at line's end after just one letter. See also for this phenomenon the list of such breaks for Papyrus 2 at the conclusion of this article and for T.Kell. 22 attached to its publication. 25 See eg Pss 177 where ' recurs frequently. In the plate (S. Giversen, The Manichean Coptic Papyri in the Chester Beatty Library Vol. IV, Psalm Book Part I1 (Genke, 1988) sub 177) one sees that the siglum more closely resembles yodh than eta, but one should presumably make some allowance for the idiosyncracies of particular scribes in this connection. especially since we are here comparing Greek text with Coptic. 21
224
APPENDIX
this was only when one side (but of course not then the other) is continuous across the Nothing in the content of the pages gives any indication of the order in which the two prayers from which these pairs of pages derive may have come.27 The suggestion that the sheet was used as an amulet should be considered, though it should in my view be rejected. That it was not written for this purpose requires no demonstration, for neither of the two prayers it partially preserves is complete.28This would make it virtually useless as an amulet, and so it seems to me doubtful that it was even used as one. A more general argument against such a suggestion is the fact that so many of the literary texts from House Three in Area A have been fragments only-odd sheets, pages or parts of pages, and parts of single wooden boards. These are the few scant remains of what must have been a substantial Manichaean library, but it is remarkable that almost all the fragments left behind derive from the same few sheets of codices. These are not amulets, but the byproduct of a very thorough removal of Manichaean materials from the context (or less likely the introduction of very
26 T-S 12.184, the Cairo Genizah fragment of the Hexapla of the Psalter, is a splendid example of this phenomenon. See on this R.G. Jenkins 'The Hexaplaric Fragment from the Cairo Genizah' in the proceedings of the meeting of the Hexapla Working Group (Rich Seminar, Oxford, 1994), forthcoming. 27 One would need more than one sheet to determine the orientation from the direction of fibres. It is perhaps reasonable to assume a single quire codex (though see further below), but even then it is uncertain that all the sheets would have had the same orientation, and even if so which orientation this would have been. One expects vertical fibres on the outside of the outermost sheet, presumably for added durability of the spine, but many exceptions to this construction are known, and it should be remembered that this codex derives from a relatively early date in the known history of the codex. Of course a cover sheet might have been inscribed on the inside back cover though not on the inside front. 28 Notice especially the enlarged delta occurring at precisely the midpoint of the text!
GEOFFREY JENKINS
225
few such pages into the context, perhaps right at the end of occupation) .29 The consistent Manichaean connection of the literary remains from House Three strongly suggests that the same Manichaean setting should be assumed for our text. In any case, though there is perhaps nothing in this (short!) text which is demonstrably Manichaean, the text is replete with terminology which was in use among Manichaeans, even if it is not restricted to Manichaeans. One -rI;)v ( P w u ~ p w v ,given the need cite only ~ITOUTOXT~, ~b archaeological context of the find, to demonstrate that the texts should be taken as itself a Manichaean composition, not even just a text known to Manichaeans.
Textual commentary Page 1:1 Delta is enlarged. 1:9 This line is quite problematic. See the enlarged and recontrasted display in the plate. Here and under the microscope the text looks as though it may have been corrected or erased, though problems of decipherment seem on reflection to be due rather to accidental abrasion. Given the overall structure of pages 1 and 2, one expects mjv p-q-ripa KTX to stand in parallel to ~ b vr a ~ i p a TOD VOEPOD6vOpCj~ou.Certainly one requires a string of accusative objects after GotdCw, and choa~oXTjvon page 2 shows that this string continues after the problem section. Given that q s Cwqs is certain after -r?p p v ~ i p a ,and that 'the mother of life' is a very common Manichaean e x p r e s ~ i o n ,if~ the text is sound it ought to contain another object of 80EdCw or an adjunct of ~TO(STOX~).
It is noticeable that there was no non-Manichaean literary text found in the context, provided one counts the page of Romans in Achmirnic as Manichaean, as one probably should. 30 See the index of any Manichaean text, and note how many ways Manichaean Coptic finds to express this concept. This variation presumably reflects the origin of the expression in Syriac or Greek, and its inconsistent translation into Coptic.
29
228
APPENDIX
sanctified in you, those preserving sobriety in you, those hastening to you. Deliver us etc. Almost certain is -rq after q s , suggesting Cwqs, G v ?? 1 -rqv ciaouroX~v," and in fact one expects that &.rrooroXfi-like virtually every other entity in the Manichaean schema!-would be qualified in some way.30After the eta the text is badly damaged, but, as will be seen from the plate where qv.rrpw (from 1:2 and 2:4) has been juxtaposed, a somewhat compressed pw looks likely at line's end. I therefore propose to read -njv r p 6 ( q v ~ITOUTOXT~V. Page 3:1 A reasonable reconstruction would be something like ~ a r ar j v f i v dya0wadvqv. Page 4:2-3. The concluding letters of this line are surprisingly problematic. This may be simply the result of the writer's attempt to squeeze too much of the word into too small a space, especially if he is hoping to maximise the text on the page (see the argument above). Even though this minute hand may readily become illegible if cramped, I doubt that cramping is a sufficient explanation of the text as it stands, because neither the preceding aoi nor the final lambda seem pressed for space. Accordingly an explanation involving a correction is desired. Accordingly, the scribe seems likely to have made the predictable slip of writing aM3' for ayaXX. Realising his mistake even before he commenced the next line," he added a gamma after alpha and converted the first lambda into alpha. This explains the odd 31 Gamma (for tau) is not possible, given the distance between the vertical stroke and the sigma. 32 While I have found no suitable parallel with ci-rroa~okfi, ny a p n N a n o c ~ AoO C does occur in Pss, and this would suggest that a 'first apostolate' deriving from the 'first apostle' may also have existed. 33 The characteristic of double lambda, namely the crossover of legs, is clear here, though on the plate this at first gives the impression of an alpha in last position. 34 As must be then the case, since otherwise the text would have read the impossible a M I kopevwv before (later) correction.
GEOFFREY JENKINS
229
'cap' over this alpha. Two aspects are striking. One is the proximity of the vertical stroke of the gamma to the initial alpha-almost to the point of interference-and the other the contact between the horizontal stroke of the gamma and the head of the second alpha. Removal of the gamma, which I have simulated in the plate, leaves a nicely proportioned text reading
35 So common is this combination that one might easily imagine it where ayaM is required.
XII. Bibliography of Acts of John
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
Texts
Lipsius, R.A. and M. Bonnet, Acta Apostolorum Apocrypha I - I1 (Leipzig, 1891-1903, repr. Hildesheim, 1959). Junod, E., & J.-D. Kaestli, Acta Iohannis, 1: Praefatio - Textus; 2: Textus alii - commentarius - indices (CCSA 1-2; Turnhout, 1983). Translations
Elliott, J.K., The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford, 1993). Erbetta, M., Gli Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento, 11: Atti e Leggende (Casale Monferrato, 1966) FestugiBre, A.-J., Les Actes Apocryphes de Jean et de Thomas. Traduction fran~aiseet notes critiques (Cahiers d'orientalisme 6, Genkve, 1983). Klijn, A.F.J., Apolwiefen van het Nieuwe Testament 11 (Karnpen, 1985). Moraldi, L., Apocrifi del Nuovo Testamento 11 (Torino, 1971). Schneemelcher, W., Neutestamentliche Apokryphen I1 (Tiibingen, 1989') idem, New Testament Apocrypha 11, tr. R. McL. Wilson (Cambridge, 1992).
-
Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles in general
B u m s , V., Chastity as Autonomy. Women in the Stories of the Apocryphal Acts (Lewiston and Queenston, 1987).
232
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
Davies, S.L., The Social World of the Apocryphal Acts (Diss. Temple University, 1978). Elliott, J.K., 'The Apocryphal Acts', Expositoly Times 105 (199394) 71-7. Gallagher, E.V., 'Conversion and Salvation in the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles', The Second Centuly 8 (1991) 13-29. Hamman, A., "'Sitz im Leben" des actes apocryphes du Nouveau Testament', Studia Patristica 8 (Berlin, 1966) 62-9. Hennecke, E. (ed), Handbuch zu den Neutestamentlichen Apokryphen (Tubingen, 1904). Jones, F.S., 'Principal Orientations on the Relations between the Apocryphal Acts', in E.H. Lovering (ed), Society of Biblical Literature 1993 Seminar Papers (Atlanta, 1993) 485-505. Junod, E., 'Crkations romanesques et traditions ecclCsiastiques dans les Actes apocryphes des Ap6tres. L'alternative fiction romanesque - vkritk historique: une impasse', Augustinianum 23 (1983) 271-85. Kaestli, J.-D., 'Fiction litttraire et rkalitk sociale: Que peut-on savoir de la place des femmes dans le milieu de production des Actes apocryphes des Apetres?', Apocrypha 1 (1990) 279302. Kampen, L. van, Apostelverhalen. Doe1 en compositie van de oudste apokriefe Handelingen der apostelen (Diss. Utrecht, 1990). Lipsius, R.A., Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und Apostellegenden. Ein Beitrag zur altchristlichen Literaturgeschichte I (Braunschweig, 1883), 11.1 (Braunschweig, 1887). Pervo, R.I., 'Early Christian Fiction', in J.R.Morgan & R. Stoneman (eds), Greek Fiction. The Greek novel in context (London and New York, 1994) 239-54. Plumacher, E., 'Apokryphe Apostelakten', RE, Supplementband 15 (1978) 11-70. Rordorf, W., 'Terra Incognita. Recent Research on Christian Apocryphal Literature, especially on some Acts of Apostles', in his Lex orandi - Lex credendi (Freiburg, 1993) 432-48. Soder, R., Die apokryphen Apostelgeschichten und die romanhafre Literatur der Antike (Stuttgart, 1932).
~
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ACTS OF JOHN
233
Sturhahn, C.L., Die Christologie der ultesten apokryphen Apostelakten. Ein Beitrag zur Friihgeschichte des altkirchlichen Dogmas (typescript diss., Gottingen, 1952). Uytfanghe, M. Van, 'Encratisme en verborgen erotiek in de apocriefe "apostelromans". Omtrent de christelijke problematisering van de sexualiteit', in Handelingen van de Koninklijke Zuidnederlandse Maatschappij voor Taal- en Letterkunde en Geschiedenis 45 (1991) 175-94. Acts of John Beyschlag, K., Die verborgene ~ b e r l i e f e r u nvon ~ Christus (Miinchen and Hamburg, 1969). Brox, N., "'Doketismus" - eine Problemanzeige', Zeitschrift Jirr Kirchengeschichte 95 (1 984) 301-14. Cartlidge, D.R., 'Transfigurations of Metamorphosis Traditions in the Acts of John, Thomas, and Peter', Semeia 38 (1986) 5366. ---, 'Evangelist Leaves Wife, Clings to Christ: An Illustration in the Admont "Anselm" and Its Relevance to a Reconstruction of the Acta Ioannis', in E.H. Lovering (ed), Society of Biblical Literature 1994 Seminar Papers (Atlanta, 1994) 3 76-89. Deeleman, C.F.M., 'Acta Johannis', Geloof en vrijheid 46 (1912) 22-55, 123-54. Dewey, A.J., 'The Hymn in the Acts of John: Dance as Hermeneutic , Semeia 38 (1986) 67-80. Junod, E., 'Ce que I'ktude des Actes apocryphes peut apporter a la connaissance du christianisme des premiers si8cles: le cas des Actes de Jean', in Rapport de gestion de la Socie'te' Suisse des Sciences Humaines 1980 (Beme, 1981) 11.19-26. ---, 'Polymorphie du Dieu Sauveur', in J. Ries (ed), Gnosticisme et Monde Helltnistique. Actes du Colloque de Louvain-la-Neuve (11-14 mars 1980) (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1982) 38-46. Junod, E., & J.-D. Kaestli, 'Les traits caractkristiques de la thCologie des "Actes de Jean"', Revue de The'ologie et de Philosophie 26 (1976) 125-45. 7
234
PIETER J. LALLEMAN
---, L'histoire des Actes apocryphes des apbtres du IIIe au H e si2cle: le cas des Actes de Jean = Cahiers de la Revue de ThCologie et de Philosophie 7 (Genthe, 1982). ---, 'Le dossier des "Actes de Jean"', in W. Haase (ed), Aufstieg und Niedergang der Romischen Welt 11.25.6 (Berlin and New York, 1988) 4293-362. Kaestli, J.-D., 'Le r61e des textes bibliques dans la genkse et le dkveloppement des lkgendes apocryphes: le cas du sort final de IYap6treJean', Augustinianum 23 (1983) 319 -36. ---, 'Le mystbre de la croix de lumibre et le johannisme. Actes de Jean 94-102', Foi et vie 86 = Cahier biblique 26 (1987) 3546. MacDonald, D.R., 'The Acts of Paul and The Acts of John: Which Came First?', in E.H. Lovering (ed), Society of Biblical Literature 1993 Seminar Papers (Atlanta, 1993) 506-10. ---, D.R., 'The Acts of Peter and The Acts of John: Which Came First?', Ibidem, 623-26. Miller, R.H., 'Liturgical Materials in the Acts of John', in E.A. Livingstone (ed), Studia Patristica 13 (Berlin, 1975) 375-81. Pervo, R.I., 'Johannine Trajectories in the Acts of John', Apocrypha 3 (1992) 47-68. Plumacher, E., 'Paignion und Biberfabel', Apocrypha 3 (1992) 69109. ---, 'Apostolische Missionsreise und statthalterliche Assisetour. Eine Interpretation von Acta Iohannis c.37.45 und 55', ZNW 85 (1994) 259-78. Schaferdiek, K., 'Herkunft und Interesse der alten Johannesakten', Z W 74 (1983) 247-67. Schimmelpfeng, G., 'Anmerkungen zu den Johannesakten' in E. Hennecke (ed), Handbuch zu den Neutestamentlichen Apoktyphen (Tubingen, 1904) 494-543. Schneider, P.G., The Mystery of the Acts of John. An Interpretation of the Hymn and the Dance in the Light of the Acts' Theology (San Francisco, 1991). ---, "'A Perfect Fit": The Major Interpolation in the Acts of John' in E.H. Lovering (ed), Society of Biblical Literature 1991 Seminar Papers (Atlanta, 1991) 518-32.
BIBLIOGRAPHY OF ACTS OF JOHN
23 5
Sirker-Wicklaus, G., Untersuchungen zu den Johannes-Akten. Untersuchungen zur Struktur, zur theologischen Tendenz und zum kirchengeschichtlichen Hintergrund der Acta Johannis (Diss. Bonn, 1988). Unnik, W.C.van, 'Johannesakten', in Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart 111 (Tiibingen, 19593)821-2. ---, 'A Note on the Dance of Jesus in the "Acts of John"', VigChr 18 (1964) 1-5, repr. in his Sparsa Collecta 111 (Leiden, 1983) 144-7. Zahn, Th., Acta Joannis unter Benutzung von C. Tischendorf's Nachlass bearbeitet (Erlangen, 1880). ---, 'Die Wanderungen des Apostels Johannes', Neue Kirchliche Zeitschrip 10 (1 899) 191 -2 18.
