You are on page 1of 200

BV 230 .

C47 1891
Chase, F. H. 1853-1925.
The Lord's prayer in the
early church

THE LOED'S PEAYER


IX

THE

EAELY CHUECH

BY

FREDERIC HENRY CHASE

B.D.

PRINCIPAL OF THE CLEKffY TRAINING SCHOOL


CA.Mnr.IDGE

CAMBRIDGE
AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS
1891
[All Rights reserved]

PRINTED BY

C. J.

CLAY, M.A. AND SONS,

AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS.

TO

JOHN PEILE

LiTT.D.

MASTER OF CHEIST'S COLLEGE

WITH

THE RESPECTFUL AFFECTION AND GRATITUDE


OF
A FORMER PUPIL.

C.

PREFACE.

TN

the following Essay I have treated the Lord's Prayer simply


from the point of view of criticism. Of the sacredness of the
Prayer, both because Christ taught it to His disciples and because
His disciples have used it 'from the first day until now/ I am
-*-

deeply conscious.
outside

the

But

I believe

that no subject however sacred

of the critic who regards


reverence and the endeavour after accuracy as elementary duties.
lies

rightful

province

Besides those obligations to others which are noted in the Essay


from time to time, I gladly avail myself of this opportunity to
thank Professor Robertson Smith for answering several questions
as to the exact translation of the Arabic version of Tatian's Dia-

tessaron as to which I have no first-hand knowledge; also the


Rev. R. H. Kennett, Fellow of Queens' College, for valuable criticism in connexion with my references to the Syriac Versions and
for rescuing

portion of
for

my

'

me

from some of the perils which are the proverbial


learning '; he is however in no way responsible

little

arguments, conclusions and mistakes.

have given

Several other friends

me

the kindest help in the revision of the proof-sheets;


to them too my hearty thanks are due.

To one other debt

of a wholly different kind I must briefly


In the discussion of the petitions for Daily Bread and
for Deliverance I have treated of subjects previously handled by
allude.

Bishop Lightfoot.
fields of Biblical

For many generations to come workers in those


and Patristic literature, which he had made his

own, will recognise with reverent gratitude two characteristics of


his writings, their suggestiveness and their power of inspiration.

PREFACE.

Viii

the one hand they supply both a fiim foundation and a plan
on the other hand they quicken and invigorate
for future work
It is vain to try to formulate in a brief statement
the worker.

On

the manifold debt which the younger generation of students owes


But I venture to hope that this Essay may be an
to the Bishop.
illustration

which

however unworthy of

have

tlie

suggestiveness of his work to

referred.

have only to add that this Essay was accepted by the


Divinity Professors as an exercise for the degree of B.D., and that
I

have to thank the Regius Professor for giving me permission to


make a few slight additions and alterations before publication.
I

Christ's College, Cajibridge,


July, 1891.

TABLE OF CONTENTS.
PAr.F.S

Introduction: The Church and the Synagogue.

14

The Synagogue-system adopted by

the Church [1, 2]. Evidence


Synagogue [3, 4]. Hellenistic as
well as Hebrew Synagogues of the Christians [5, 6]. Light thrown
by this on Acts vi. xv. [6, 7]. Bearing on (1) the origin of the
of the Christian use of the term

Synoptic Gospels
the

Church and

[8

its

the position of the Lord's Prayer in

10], (2)

form

original

public Prayers from the

first,

adapted for liturgical use [11

first

taught by Christ, used in

translated from Aramaic into Greek,

14].

Note on the Hellenistic Synagogues.

A.

Probability of Hellenistic

Synagogues

bearing on the persecutions under Nero and Domitian


bility that Christian Liturgies are

19

14

(Christian)

Rome;

at

Proba-

[15].

based on Greek Jewish Prayers

[1519].

Note on the Pauline Epistles and the Synoptic Gospels.

B.

I.

Our Father which


(1)

The

19

art in heaven.

longer form in St Matthew:

references to

Synoptic Gospels: the reading in the Bidache

[22, 23].

shorter form in St Luke: probable reference to

it

in

it

21

22

24

2.5

36

in the

(2)

The

Ahha Father

(Mc. Gal. Eom.) [23, 24].

II.

Hallowed be thy name.


(1)

Thy kingdom come

Thy kingdom
the reading

come.

iXdhu

to irvevna. crov k.t.X.

evidence of Cod. Ev. 604, Gregory of Nyssa, Maximus, Tertullian


[25
This prayer traced back through the Invocation in the
28].

Liturgies and 'Confirmation' Offices to the Apostohc Laying on of

Hands [2831].

Vw

in Cod.

(2)

Hallowed be thy name:


(Lc. xi. 2) [31].

the

addition

of

Similar phrases in LXX.,


Jewish Prayers, Liturgies, Agathangelus, Bidache, Patristic glosses
i<f>'

[31

35].

Probably a Baptismal prayer [35,

36].

TABLE OF CONTEXTS.
for the

Note on Acta Thomae : evidence as to ancient prayers


Holy Spirit in Baptismal Offices.

A.

B.

Note on some Syrian Baptismal Prayers.

C.

Note on Agathangelus.

Thy

III.

Reminiscences

(1)

Aramaic

'And-let-there-be
earth, as

Give us

IV.

this

The

(1)

variations

N.T.

in

original

thy-wills'

it is

37, 38

(2)

[39,40].

3941

in heaven.

variations

[39J.

yev^aOu,

{yvr]0Tiru,

The Old Syriac reading


The connexion of 'in
(3)

two preceding petitions

in heaven' with the

it is

[40, 41].

42

day our daily bread.

variations

a-qfiepov,

56s,

8i8ov:

Kad'

to

^'^

38

will be done, in earth, as

yiv^adio):

3*^

Aramaic word

Titxipav

[4244].

[42].
(3)

(2)

53

The

The word

The original form of


position in the Prayer [44].
This petition
to-us'
give
[45].
of-the-day
'Om--bread
the petition
adapted for morning and for evening use in Hebrew and in
Hellenistic Synagogues [45, 46]. Through such adaptation eTrtoJcrios
its

Triov<yio%;

represents

Evidence

'

[47_49], Ephrem

And

[49

General result

[52, 53].

V.

which

of-the-day,'

is

also translated by

for this supposed original


51],

Syriac Versions [51,

forgive us our debts, as

Syriac word 'debt'

the Didache

Kal

[55].

Jerome

we

54

forgive our debtors.

57

aiirol

[55].

and Greek words

The reading

(2)

'forgive '[54, 55];

rijc 6(pei\-!ji> ^ixQv

in

The variations 'our debtors,' 'every one


d<plo,aei',
[56].
(4) The variations ws Kal v/xeh
probable original form 'and we also will

(3)

indebted to us'

is

yap

remit'

52],

'Our debts' (Matt.) the original phrase rather than 'our

(1)

that

47].

in Jas.ii. 15

[53].

sins' (Lc): evidence of (a) Syriac


(6)

trrifiepov [46,

form of the petition

aiplosxiv

evidence for this

[56, 57].

Note on Syriac Versions of this clause.


Evidence of Aphraates, compared with that of Tertullian

57

59

[58, 59].

Prof. Marshall's explanation of variation (4) [59].

"VI.

And

60

bring us not into temptation.

The Sj-riac Versions


As to the words

[60].

suggest a possible original 'temptations'


/iij

dffeviyKT]^:

(I)

the Syriac equivalent

and-do-not make-us-to-enter' connects this prayer with Matt. xxvi.


(H) Two
41, Ac: the elasticity of 'causative' voice [6163].
the Old Latin texts: (1) ne nos patiaris induci in temptapassages from Augustine a starting point: [a) this gloss

glo.sses in

tionem:

found in Arnobius and Cj-prian (h) also in several MSS. (c) its
temporigin in devotional use implied by Tertullian [6366]. (2) in
;

69

TABLE OF CONTENTS.

tationem quani ferre non possttmus

XI

passages from Hilary, Chro-

matius, Jerome, Augustine, Pseudo-Augustine [66

Traces of

68].

the former gloss in Dionysius Alex, and Agathangelus [68].


glosses to be traced to liturgical adaptation

from Liturgies of

tion

Note on the form

VII.
1.

But
The

Both

by quota-

this she\vii

different families [68, 69].

of this clause in the King's

Book.

70

deliver us from the evil one.

prepositions

and

cltto

71

167
71

iK after pvecrdai.

85

The LXX. constructions


after pvea-dai: the constructions of 7^3 and of equivalents iu LXX.
In parallel clauses diro and iK interchanged [75, 76].
[73
75].
Conclusions [76, 77]. (2) pOeaSai and kindred verbs in N.T.

[77

priori distinction

[71,

72].

(1)

General conclusion, viz. that dwo and iK are generally

83].

interchangeable, differing only iu shade of meaning [84, 85].


2.

The

and use of 6 irovt)p6$ as applied to Satan.


Growth of conception expressed by the term O.T., exile,
Jewish literature, N.T. [85 89]. (b) meaning of the term 6
origin

(a)

later

85

101

irovrjpos:

in N.T.

LXX.

origin of word: classical use: in

meaning

of corresponding Ai-amaic

equivalent of yi:

word and use

of Greek
Jewish writings used of supernatural powers of evil
[8994]. General conclusion [94, 95]. Use of the term in (1) N.T.
(a) Matt., (b) Pauline Epistles, (c) St John (Gospel and Epistle),

word

(d)

itself: in

other passages in some texts [95

Literature

Barnabas,

97].

Letter of Vienne

(2)

Early Christian

and Lyons, Clem. Horn.,

Clement Alex. [98101].


Note on the Yetser ha Ra,

The
the

extent of personification

Is

(i)

especially Lc. xxii.


(ii)

103

103

167

103

112

112

123

tico impulses.

ciTro Tou -irofrjpou masculine or neuter?


Evidence derived from the Gospels.
The Baptism and the Temptation [103105].
(a)
Lord's Prayer [105107]. (c) The Ministry and the

3.

101
the relation of the two ways to

2846, John

xvii.

The

(b)

Passion,

[107112].

Evidence derived from the Epistles.


2 Thess.

iii.

ff.,

2 Cor.

xii.

distinction between an ideal


1 Jn. V. 18

f..

Gal.

i.

and an actual

f..

Col.

state), 2

i.

Tim.

12
iv.

ff.

(the

16

ff.,

f.

locality in which the Lord's Prayer was given. [J. A. R.]


Evidence derived from early Christian literature.
The twofold value of such evidence [125]. Didache [126, 127],

Note on the

123

(iii)

125

Ep. Clement

[127, 128],

The Ancient Homily,

the relation of Christians to Satan [128


Letter of Vienne and

TertuUian

[133-130],

Lyons

[132],

Cyprian

the Patristic view of

131], Hernias [131, 132],

Clementine Homilies

[136138],

Origen

[138,

[133],

139],

125
146

TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Dionysius [130, 140], Peter of Alexandria [140, 141], 'Clementine'
Liturgy [141144], Cyril of Jerusalem [144, 145]. Summary of
this evidence [146].

Note on the 'Songs' in St Luke's Gospel in relation

A.

to aucient

147151

Jewish Prayers.
B.

Note on the bearing of some of the Offices and Liturgies on the

interpretation of djr6 rod


(iv)

1^1

Trovrjpov.

^'^*

154166

Evidence derived from the Early Versions.


The Syriac Versions [154156]. (b) The Latin Versions
(a)
N.T. classification of MSS.
(2)
O.T. Deut., Job [156158].

(1)

of Gospels [158]

[160162].

inali(jnus [162

Summary

passages in the Gospels [159, 160], in the Epistles

Keview of this evidence and discussion of the word

166].

of the

166, 167

whole discussion.

168176

The Doxology.

VIIT.

The addition

of the

Doxology an instance of

liturgical adapta-

a starting point [168]. Four


elements in doxology, their simplest form [169]. Variation and
elaboration of these elements; ways in which the ancient formula
tion

[168].

Chron.

was Christianised
doxologies

[171,

xxix.

[170, 171].
172].

10

f.

Variation as to

The doxology used

at

commencement
close

of

of

prayers,

evidence of Polycarp's
in the Eucharistic service:
Rfartyrdom, Clement, Didache [172, 173]. Variation in the doxThe familiar
ologies attached to the Lord's Prayer [174, 175].
Matt. [175].
of
text
'Syrian'
the
into
received
conflation
form a

especially

The form

of the Prayer in Matt, from its greater fulness in

liturgical use

176].

common

hence addition of doxology to this form alone [175,

Summary

[176].

INTRODUCTION.

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.


Christianity, absolutely new in its central ideas and aims,
In
employed time-honoured machinery for their furtherance.
itself the most revolutionary force which the world has ever
seen, it effected the greatest upheavals of political, social, and

by conservative methods. It inherited the powers


which were inherent in, or had been won by, Judaism and it
made Judaism a thing of the past.

religious life

special instance of this general characteristic of Christianity

found in the relation of the Church to the Synagogue. To


the Synagogue system, speaking from a human point of view,
the Church owes it that she outlived the days of her immaturity
and weakness. Here was an organization ready to hand, which
is

she could use and gradually mould after her


of

life.

Here was a network

own higher type

encircling within

its

meshes the

Roman

Empire, by which the Church could draw Gentile


A purely secular historian would not
as well as Jew to herself\
be far wrong were he to trace both the survival and the spread of

whole

the Church, at least during the


to

first

half

century of her

life,

her close alliance with the Synagogue.


Of this system Jerusalem was the centre.

notices exaggerate ^

we may

Even if extant
number of
In some of these

well conclude that the

Synagogues in the Holy City was great.


numerous congregations the Brethren^' after they had learned
'

Gentiles seem to have frequented the Synagogues (Acts xiii. 44, xiv. 1, xviii, 4).
Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah i. p. 119, gives the
references.
The Synagogues in Jerusalem are said to have been upwards of 400.
3 "It is significant that the first title given to the body of believers after the
Ascension is 'the brethren' (Acts i, 15 true text)": Bp Westcott The Epistles of
1

C.

,'

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

to believe in Jesus as the Christ would retain their membership.


That 'the Brethren' did not sever themselves from the Syna,till forced to do so, is plain from
gogues of the Dispersion
'

'

repeated notices in the Acts

(xiii.

44, xviii. 4, 26

f.,

xix. 8).

But, sometimes in consequence of a violent disruption, some-

times because of a sense of growing needs and

powers, union
would gradually give way to an era of modified imitation. If the
number of those who joined the Church as recorded from time
to time in the Acts is even approximately correct, we feel
that it would be necessary, apart from external influences, to
organise some separate system of worship and fellowship.
How
else could so large a multitude be welded together ?
In the

main outline the course of events


the repetition of what had

St Paul

at Corinth

the worship of the Jewish Synagogue.

which made separation necessary.

met

At length a

Henceforth

in a private house close to the Synagogue.

was,

At Corinth

some considerable time took a prominent part

for

of St Paul

was probably only

occurred elsewhere \

'

crisis

in

came

the Brethren

But the presence

and of Crispus, the chief ruler of the Synagogue,

we may

suppose, a sufficient guarantee that the worship in

the house of Titius Justus would be modelled after the ancient

This natural conjecture finds considerable confirmation

pattern.

when we turn

to the picture of Christian worship at Corinth

drawn by St Paul in his First Epistle to that Church.


Hence there would arise at Jerusalem in very early times
Synagogues of the Brethren \' The wealthier converts, such as
'

St John p. 126. See especially Acts xv. 23, ivhere Mr Page's correction of R.V.
('The Apostles and Elders, brethren to the brethren...') is obviously necessary;

and the use of the word (pi.\a5\(pia. I have therefore used the
term to denote the Christians in the early Apostolic times.
But it is important to notice that even this phrase is a witness to the Jewish associations
Comp. Matt. v. 47, Acts xxii. 5 (even after his conversion
of the early Church.
1 Cor. V. 11, ix. 5,

St Paul can say ^TrtoroXdy de^d/xevos


xxviii. 21,
1

It

Eom.

iiropivS/jirjif)

would but seldom happen that a whole Synagogue, as apparently at

Beroea (Acts
2

irpos tovs d5e\<povs eij Aa/jLacrKhv

ix. 3.

xvii.

10

f.),

became Christianised.

Since writing this, I have noticed with relief that this was

"As soon

Bp

Lightfoot's

Church rendered
some organization necessary, it would form a 'synagogue' of its own." He too
appeals to traces of the Christian use of the word ffvvayuyyri.
view (Philippiam p. 190):

as the expansion of the

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.

Mary the mother

of

John Mark, would

naturally offer their

homes

as the places of meeting.

The

lingering traces of the Christian use of the word a-vva-

appeal to one line of evidence alone, attest this early

'ywyrj, to

We

stage of the Church's development.

geographical position would

James

(ii.

is

fif.)

find

old associations or

be likely to retain the term.

expressly appealing to those

of our Lord Jesus Christ,'

them, as we should

who through

expect, in the writings of those

when he draws

'

who

the contrasted pictures

of the gay dandy and the squalid beggar coming


gogue.'
9)

iii.

St

hold the faith

'

into your syna-

somewhat later date, St John (Apoc. ii. 9,


inveighs against the Synagogue of Satan,' it is surely

When,

at a

'

that he wishes to disparage the term


His phrase 'the throne of Satan' (ii. 13)

a mistake to conclude

Synagogue in

itself

does not preclude him from speaking of the throne of God.' If


he condemns 'the deep things of Satan' (ii. 24), another Apostle
of the divine riches of
dwells on the thought of
the depth
wisdom and knowledge (Rom. xi. 33, 1 Cor. ii. 10; so Ep. Clem. 11
ra ^dOr] rrj'^ 6eia<i jvooaecofi).
The Synagogue of Satan is a
spurious imitation of a true Synagogue on the part of spurious
Jews, 'which say that they are Jews, and they are not, but do
'

'

'

'

'

The parody implies the

lie.'

original.

the great Syrian martyr writes to


'yw'^ai

Early in the next century

Polycarp TrvKvorepov <xvva-

'yiveaOwaav (Ignatius Ep. ad Polycarpum

Late in the

4).

.same century another teacher of Antioch, Theophilus, uses the

same term^.

In Benjamin's prophecy of St Paul in the Testaments

of the Twelve Patriarchs


ea-rat

iv

avvaycoyat^

it

iOvcov^.

said

is

The

version supplies a proof that at a

On

Cf. Iren.

the other
^

iii.

vi.

hand note

De

Theophilus ad Autol.

ii.

rwv alwvwv

Jerusalem Syriac
later time among Catholic

so-called

much

Hi autem sunt Ecclesia.


Tert.

avvre\ia<i

eitu?

Haec enim

est

synagoga Dei.

Spectac. xxv, (de ecclesia Dei in diaholi ecclesiam).

14 (diduKev 6 Oeos

But

rip Kba/n^ KVfiaLi'o/j.^v(i}...Ta,i crvva-

remembered that Theophilus


addressing a heathen friend and that the word avvaydjyrj was used of the
religious assemblies of the Pagans (see Harnack's note on Hermas Mand. xi. 9,
ycoyds, Xeyo/j^va^ d^ eKKXrjfflas ayla^).

it is

to be

is

a note which contains a large collection of passages).


In Levi 11, Ben. 11 {5i8ovi ry (rwayor/y tQv kQvdv) the reference is rather to
0. T. usage (e.g. Ex. xii. 3, 6, 47; Gen. xxviii. 3, xxxv. 11).
On the Testaments
''

see below p. 87.

12

''

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

Christians in the neighbourhood of Palestine the word Synagogue

In regard to the Ebionites we have the express


(xxx. 18), a-wa'yoi'yrjv ovtoi KaXovcriv
Epiphanius
statement of
rrjv eavTcov iicKKTjcrLav koX ou%l eKKXTjcriav^.

was

still

in use\

The
But
inscriptions have now
Unlike the Jews at

From the East we turn to the capital of


number of the Jews in Rome is a commonplace

the West.

of history.

and the study of


and colour to the picture.
Alexandria who formed a political corporation, the Jews in Rome
were divided into many separate religious communities [avvaywyai), taking their name sometimes from distinguished patrons
archaeological researches

added

detail

Synagogue of the Augustesians,' sometimes from the


Hence
locality as 'the Synagogue of the Siburesians' (Subura)^
a special importance attaches to the use of the word Synagogue
'the

as

by two Christian writers of the second century, who speak to us


from Rome. Justin (Dial. 287 b) uses the phrase, toU ek avrov
TTiarevovaiv, w? ovai fiid "^v^f) kul fiia avvaywyy /cat fxia

Hermas (Mand.

iKK\T](Tia.

orav ovv ekOrj


yooyriv

6 avOpwiro'i 6

xi.

corap.

9,

14) writes

13,

e^cov ro irvevfia to detov

el<i

thus,
crvva-

BLKaLa)v...Kal evTV^L<; yevrjTai Trpo? rov Oedv rrj^

dvhpwv

avvaycoyrji; rcov avhpu)V eKeivonv k.t.X.

Thus among Catholic Christians


sectaries widely scattered, in the

century,

among Ebionite

in Syria,

Roman Church

we have evidence that the word

of the second

avvaytoyij survived

witness to an almost forgotten stage of Christian

to

and

life

worship.

The Church then

in the earliest

days of the

faith, as far

as

concerned her discipline and her worship, may be described as


an association of Synagogues, gradually multiplying as she gained

new

territory for her Master,

'

setzt.

So wird auch im Ev. Hier. eKKX-qaia dureh ^<^t^'^JD d. h. Sijnagoge UberDas Buch finden wir ira Gebrauch katholischer Christen Ostpalastinas

(Zahn Forschungen, Tatian^s Diatessaron


-

div.

Comp.
ii.

vol.

p. 335).

the inscriptions given in Schiirer The Jeicish


ii.

pp.

6-t,

People Eng. Trans,

Subsequent references to Schiirer, unless

69.

it is

otherwise

stated, are to this volume.


3

div.

p.

Schiirer p. 247
i.

379

vol.
f.

i.

p. 32

f.

f. ;

for

Jewish cemeteries at or near

Compare Merivale Hist, of

the

Rome

Romans

see p. 240, also

vi.

p.

428

f.,

vii.

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.


But

at this point there comes into light a fact of far-reaching

Of the Jews at Jerusalem there were two classes, the


Hebrews and the Hellenists (Acts ix. 29 avue^rjret 7rp6<; rov'i
'E\\r)VL(TTa<i).
The former would naturally constitute the larger
body.
Among the latter would be numbered Jews of the Dispersion, who either were visiting the Mother City at the time of the
importance.

Festivals (Acts

ii.

ff), or, like

Saul of Tarsus, had some reason

Book of the Acts (vi. 9), conhere by independent authority, informs us that
the Hellenists had Synagogues of their own at Jerusalem \ It is
for settling there.

firmed as

Further, the

is

it

natural that no special mention should be made of 'the Synagogues of the Hebrews at Jerusalem, for there they were necessarily the prevailing type.
At Rome, on the other hand, where
'

Hellenists would vastly preponderate, a notice

is

preserved of a

Synagogue of Hebrews' (a-vvaycoyrj Al^picovy.


Over and above a general divergence of tone which would
separate the two classes of worshippers, a special point of difference
would be the use of Greek in the Synagogues of the Hellenists
"R. Levi Bar Chajothah went to Caesarea and heard them
'

pnD^;3lbX ]^^^
Greeky."

pnp

reciting their

'Shemaa

Hellenisticallij

[i.e.

in

suppose that a custom which prevailed among the Hellenists elsewhere would be abjured by those
at Jerusalem, where the presence of pilgrims from the Dispersion
in all parts of the world would render it most necessary. There is,
It

is

difficult to

1 Lightfoot [Horae Hebr. on Acts vi.


9) quotes the Hieros. Megilla (fol. 73. 4)
as speaking of the Synagogue of the Alexandrians at Jerusalem.
Commentators

differ

gogue

number

as to the

commentators
is

(e.g.

meant

are referred to

of synagogues implied in Acts vi. 9.

Calvin, Beza),

Meyer,

Wendt

Mr

Some

of the older

later Wieseler, hold that but

like Vitringa (p. 253)

and Schiirer

one Syna-

thinks that five


and Niisgen hold that the language requires but two, that

of the Libertines, Cyrenians

Asia.

and

Page, separating

(p. 57),

and Alexandrians, and that of those of Cilicia and


the Libertines, supposes that three Synagogues are

off

Nosgen in loc. refers to talmudische Angaben uber


Synagogen unter den 480 Jerusalems {Meglll. E. 73, 4 u. 6.).'

mentioned.

'

drei hellenistische

Corp. Inscr. Graec. 9909 referred to by Schiirer, p. 248.


Lightfoot Horae Hebr. on Lc. x. 27.
On the use of Greek in the worship
of the Dispersion see Schiirer, p. 283 with reff., Edersheim Life and Times i.
pp.
Schiirer (p. 284) writes, 'The Rabbinical authorities in Palestine ex30, 446.
pressly sanctioned the use of any language whatever in repeating the Shemah,
the
2

Shemoneh Esreh and the


p. 50.

grace at meals.'

Comp. Neubauer

in Studia Biblica

THE lord's PUAYER

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IX

however, so far as I know, no direct evidence as to the usage in


this matter of the Hellenistic Synagogues at Jerusalem.

But if this twofold division of Synagogues existed at Jerusalem


among the Jews, would not a similar division reappear among
Would there not spring up Synagogues of the
the Brethren ?
Hellenistic, as well as Synagogues of the Hebrew 'Brethren'? To
'

'

the latter there would naturally join themselves the 'great company of the priests' who became 'obedient to the faith' (Acts vi. 7),

and those

'

of the sect of the Pharisees

the former, those

who were

who

believed

'

(xv. 5)

to

attracted by the teaching of St Stephen,

and at a later time the converts of Barnabas and Saul of Tarsus,


as well as some of those ancient disciples who were won on the
day of Pentecost.

Church at Jerusalem a hypothetical


Directly the Church began to expand, 'there arose a murone.
muring of the Hellenists against the Hebrews' (Acts vi. 1).
Almsgiving was specially connected with the Synagogue system',
and to suppose that 'the daily ministration' was a part of
that system as it had been transplanted and as it developed

Nor

among
ture.

is

this picture of the

'the Brethren' would be no violently improbable conjecBut however that may be, the whole tone of the history

was no private quarrel, but a public


dispute which threatened a disruption of the Church. All becomes
intelligible at once if in the disputants we recognise two congregations or two groups of congregations, each with a home and an

makes

it

clear that this

organization of
rising

spirit

its

own.

of disunion.

The Apostles dealt boldly with


They 'called the multitude of

disciples (to rrXr]do<; tcov nadrjTwv) unto them,'

all,

that

is,

this

the

with-

out distinction of party.


It is probably true that

th

line of

cleavage between 'the

'the lliethren' of the Hellenistic Syna-

Brethren' of the Hebrew and


gogues does not exactly coincide with that which separated those
that were 'of the circumcision' from the more liberal section of the
Jewish Christians, but the two lines cannot have been far apart.
211 f.,
Lightfoot Horae Hebr. on Matt. vi. 1 f., Vitringa de Synagoga pp.
of alms
Scbiirer p. 66 (' It was in the Synagogues that the collection
made by at least
took place. According to the Mishna the coUection was to be
1

809

ff.,

two, the distribution by three per.sons').

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.


The two

probable throws

much

am

to,

on the disputes and the


and were connected with, the

It explains individual expressions in the

Conference at Jerusalem.

irav to ttX^^o? (xv. 12, comp.

TrapeyivovTo ol Trpea-^vrepoi), crvv oXrj


accounts, as

it

the

endeavouring to make

light, as I believe,

tangled negotiations which led up

vi. 2,

rfj

18

xxi.

eKKXtjaia

7rdvTe<; re

22).

{v.

It

seems to me, for the reference to the Mosaic law in

the condensed report of St James' speech.


of the Pharisaic party (xv. 5) was,

The twofold demand

It is needful to circumcise

To

them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses.'

demand St James had a

fold

And

principles of classification are closely related.

view of the Apostolic Church which I

narrative

twofold answer.

On

this two-

the one hand,

circumcision was not to be insisted on, though the Gentiles should

On

be asked to make certain reasonable concessions.


hand,

all

the other

that was valuable in their requirements as to the Mosaic

Moses was not likely to be


For Moses from generations of old hath in every city
neglected.
them that preach him, being read in the Synagogues [i.e. in the
law was substantially secured already.
'

public worship of the Jews and the Christians alike} every sabbath

Again,

(xv. 21).

names

if

a conclusion can be safely drawn from the

of the envoys (xv. 22), Judas

surnamed Barsabbas repre-

sented the Hebrews, Silas the Hellenists.


the organized influence of

was enlisted on

'

men bound

this side or

on that

Lastly, the fact that

together by

made

common

worship

this crisis in a doctrinal

dispute a matter of grave difficulty and danger, as at an earlier

time

had embittered a question of administration.


may look for an explanation of the
that in the first century relations of our Lord were chosen as
it

In the same direction we


fact

Bishops of the Church at Jerusalem. The claim to reverence


which these men had rose above any title to authority which was
based on pre-eminence either among the Hebrews or the Hellenists.
Such an appointment was a victory for neither section of
the Church'.

The

Hellenistic (Christian) Synagogues, fortified

St Paul and by the alliance


^

Hegesippus (Eus. U. E.

Kvpiov Sevrepov.

(Eus.

H. E.

iii.

iv. 22),

Compare what
20).

the

first

by the work of
Jews of the

of the Christian

d.ve\j/ibv

6vTa toO

same writer says of the grandsons

of Jude

'Zv^uwv...tv irpoldevTO iravres

prayer

TFIE lord's

IN

THE EARLY CHURCH.

Dispersion and then of Gentile converts, gradually

From

selves the supremacy.

the very

won

first theirs, it

to themwould seem,

had been the greater enlightenment and vigour. And as time


went'on and the old things of worship and of organization passed

away and became new, they were merged in the life of the Catholic
Church of the second century, for which they had prepared the
way'.

The main elements


adhesion, that

its

among

is,

in this

to the

the Christian

'

view of the early Apostolic Church,

Synagogue system and the

Brethren,' as

among

and of Hellenistic Synagogues, may, I venture


as historically certain.

existence'

the Jews, of
to think,

Hebrew

be taken

I pass on to indicate the bearing of these

on the question of the origin of the Synoptic


Gospels, and secondly on the problem of the original form of the

conclusions

first

Lord's Prayer.
1.

In the Synagogues of 'the Brethren' the personal followers

of Christ, and especially the Apostles, would bear their witness to

His Resurrection and would


teaching and His

tell

what they remembered of His

This personal testimony would at least

life.

form an important part of each X0709 irapaKkrjaewi (Acts xiii. 15,


note especially Hebr. xiii. 22). The lessons from the Law and the
Prophets must have had an honoured place in the Christian as in
the Jewish Synagogues, and

the exhortation would often be


upon
some
prophetic
saying
or some ancient type"''.
The
based
analogy of the apostolic speeches and sermons preserved in sub'

'

stance in the Acts bears out these statements.

To

these Xoyoi, irapaKKrjcreoj'i in the Christian Synagogues

must look

for

the

first

beginnings of the Gospels.

we

In them the

sayings of the Lord would be brought together for the purposes of

immediate
Passion,

at the

See note

Such surely

Antioch

The

edification.

history of His birth, His work. His

His Resurrection, would be linked with the ancient

is

6 dio% rod

end of the Chapter.

the explanation of the opening words of St Paul's speech at

\aou tovtov

the section of the Prophets

{v.

(xiii. 17).

The tovtov must refer to some words in


Compare Luke iv. 1821. To take

15) just read.

TOVTOV as deictic (Page) or as referring back to avSpa ^la-parfKhai (Wendt) gives a

very poor sense.

The point

credibility of the Acts.

is

important in

its

bearing on the souixes

and the

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.

prophecies.
And as among the Jews the Synagogues were closely
connected with the Schools of the Scribes, so among the early disciples the more public teaching of the assembly would be repeated
and brought home in catechetical instruction. Thus in the very
first

days of the Church different types of an oral Gospel would be

in process of formation.

But

in

two other ways the needs created by

this

system of

Christian Synagogues tended, I cannot doubt, to the growth of


the Gospels as we have them now.

In the first place translation would be necessary.


In the
Synagogues of the Hebrew Disciples the recital of the Lord's
words and the story of His life would be in Aramaic. But when
transplanted to the Hellenistic Synagogues, the same recital and
the same story would have to assume a Greek dress. And the
obvious desirability of making the one version a substantial

equivalent of the other would tend to generate in both languages


fixed types of apostolic tradition.
At the same time it is quite
possible that through this necessary intercourse with the Hellenists the Hebrew Apostles and teachers may have
gained that
power over the Greek language which surprises us, for example, in
the Epistle of St James.
In the second place, may not the origin of written Gospels be

at least in part traceable to the

same set of circumstances ? When


a decree of the Mother Church, and when Apostolic letters, were
read in the Christian assemblies, when further the Apostles and
the earliest witnesses became scattered and it might therefore seem
wise to compensate for their absence by some representation
of
many would take in hand to draw up a narrative
concerning those things which had been fulfilled.' In this
their teaching,

'

way

the story of Christ's

and teaching would pass from the \0709


irapaickr]aw<; to find a place alongside the lessons from
the Law
and the Prophets, and thus would gradually, even in the lifetime
of the Apostles, attain to something of scriptural authority\
Here
Comp. Acts

{if

\(ry(i>

XX. 35 {/ivrj/iove^eiv re tQiv \3yuv tou Kvpiov

Kvpiov),

SUra^eu), 1

Tim.

1 Cor. vii.
v.

...eis

10 {oCx eyw

18 (\4yei yap

ipydTr]^ Tov ixLudov avTov).


IMivov

life

t]

ypa4>r]

aWA

6 Kvpio^),

'Ii]<toO),

1 Thess. iv. 15

1 Cor. ix.

BoOv aXo^ura ov

^t/iticrety,

14

(5

K^pios

kuI 'A^ios 6

In Eom. xvi. 25 f. {Kara d.TroKdXvi'iy fiviTrrjplov... (reffcyr,.


tpavepud^TOi d^ vvv did re ypacpQv Trpo(prjnKQi> Kar' iTriTayvf
tov alwlov deoD
vdvTa TO. m-q yvupKTdivTos) I cannot but think that the
reference is to the

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

10

we get a side light on portions of the Apostolic Epistles. As


Clement of Rome incorporates in his letter to the Corinthian
Church a prayer which a comparison of his language with that of
too

the ancient liturgies shews to be the substance of a form which


as the presiding elder he used in the worship of the Church, so
there

is

much

Synagogue

striking characteristic of this Epistle

What

KvpiaKa.

St James preserves for us


And a most
addresses.

to lead us to think that

in his Epistle portions of his

is

is

true of this Epistle

Such

other Apostolic Epistles.

that

it is

built

rio-orous

of Xo'yia

references, or possible references,

in the Epistles to the Lord's words need careful

examination before any

up

true in a less degree of

is

and

collection

real progress can be

made towards

the solution of the Synoptic question \


The adoption of the Synagogue system in the early Church
has an intimate connexion with the composition of the written

But it is not of itself a sufficient explanation. It is but


Gospels.
one among many influences. In truth a key of many wards is
needed to fit the complicated lock of the Synoptic problem. We
shall probably be moving along the lines which will lead to a
settlement of the question, so far as a settlement is possible, when
we recognise the converging forces of both Aramaic and Greek
oral tradition, of Aramaic and Greek written memoranda, and of
these as they would find a place in the Synagogues of the
Brethren,' in catechetical instruction, and in missionary activity^
'

all

For compare

writings of Christian Prophets.


e9vCov...Ka.Ta oiiroKaXvypiv iyvupl(r0r)
TTjv aiivealv /xov iv

tQ

/j,oi

to

(1)

ixvffT-l]pi.ov

Eph.

ill.

..Mvaade

19

(vTr^p vfiuv

avayi.vdj<TKOvTe^

tQv

vorjirai

toO x/^ictoD, 6...vvv direKa\v(p9r] rois aylois diroffroXoLS


rt'j i) oiKovopla tov pivcT-qplov rod

fivffTrjplq)

airrov Kal irpo4>rfraL% iv irvvixaTL...<pUTlaai. [Trdi'TOs]


dTTOKiKpviJiiJ^i'ov K.T.X.)

(2) Tit.

iv KrjpvyiMaTi 5 iin(XTevdr]v

iyw

i.

/car'

f.

(77V

eTrr)yyd\aTo...e(pavipu)(xeu 8i...Tbv

iiriTayrjv toO (TUTrjpoi

r)/xu3v

6eoO).

Uyov

Such a

avrov
refer-

ence would be especially in point at the close of the Roman Epistle.


1 See note B at the end of the Chapter.
' Mr A. Wright's singularly fresh and independent though incomplete essay

{The Composition of the Four Gospels, 1890) emphasises one important factor,
catechetical instruction.

To what strange

results a one-sided theory

may

viz.

lead

is

seen in the results attained by Eesch in his articles Der Quellenbcricht ilber die
ff., 75 ff.).
avdXvi^ii des Herrn (Zeitschrift fiir kirchliche Wissenschaft 1889 pp. 18

Here

is

his

iS^D^'h

'

Hebraischer Urtext,*
nc'?.i

in'N

nVsrn

Such a theory may be


(The

Common

Tradition p.

-"in^aN-bssi vn'ViX-^^

safely left to

xi.).

:^:w^ ^T??

pair with

D'.^?^ ^^-1

Dr Abbott's telegram theory

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.

From

2.

11

the larger problem of the Synoptic Gospels I turn

to another question, closely connected yet not identical with


viz.,

it,

the position of the Lord's Prayer in the Apostolic Church and

the bearing of this upon

its original

The two Evangelists who

form.

record the Prayer connect

different occasions in our Lord's ministry.

it

with

St Matthew represents

our Lord as Himself of His own accord teaching this form of


prayer to His disciples in the audience of the crowds (Matt.
vii.

28

f.).

St Luke

us that the Lord gave

tells

it

to

privately in answer to the request of one of them,

His
*

vi. 9,

disciples

Lord, teach

us to pray, even as John also taught his disciples.'


general questions, there seems in this case to
tially

Apart from
be nothing essen-

improbable in the repetition of the same form'.

evidence confirms the report of the Evangelists.

St

Internal

Luke

(v.

33)

preserves a notice which has the support of the other Synoptists


(Matt.

Mc.

ix. 14,

ii.

18)

oi /xaOrjTal ^Icodvov vriarevovaLV TrvKva

Here then lay the point of the disciples'


request.
But the Lord had no esoteric elaborate teaching on
He gave His disciples privately the same simple
this matter.
form which He had already given them in the audience of the
Kol Setjaea iroiovvjai.

crowds*.

As the

occasions described by the two Evangelists

differ, so

do also the versions of the Prayer which they respectively give.


That contained in St Luke's Gospel diverges from that contained
in St Matthew's both in regard to the length of the Prayer
and in the wording of the clauses which are common to both
Gospels.
1 Our Lord thus would be simply following the usual custom of Jewish teachers.
The Prophets, the Pauline Epistles, and the Apocalypse supply many instances

of such repetitions.
^

Mr Page on

the other

hand

{Critical Notes on the Lord'it Prayer, Expositor,

a single prayer delivered by Jesus to


His disciples may be related by two historians in two different shapes and as
delivered under different circumstances.' His arguments are, I think, met by the
remarks in the text above. At the same time I believe that it would be contrary
to analogy to suppose that the longer and the shorter forms belong respectively
Both the Evangelists record how the Lord's Prayer was
to the two occasions.
both give a form current when they wrote. On the
delivered to the Disciples
question whether St Luke has inserted in the Prayer phraseology of his own,

3rd Series, vol.

vii. p.

433

ff.)

see below, pp. 42

ff.

thinks that

'

THE lord's prayer

12

When we come

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IN

what the original form of the


Prayer was, it is needful to remember that the term original is
here relative rather than absolute. For in the period which
enquire

to

intervened between the occasion when our Lord first taught the
Prayer and the time when the Evangelists gave it a place in the
Gospels,

it

and had already entered


On the one hand it is
day of Pentecost the
before
the
that
suppose

had passed through one

upon the second stage of


unreasonable to

Apostles did not use

when the number

it

its

stage,

history.

privately

among

of the Disciples began to increase,

over into the Synagogue worship of the Church.


eludes our grasp.

On the

themselves.

It

is

The

it

other,

passed

first

stage

the second only that our investigation

can touch.

In connexion with the use of

the

Lord's

Prayer

in

the

Christian Synagogues the following points must be noticed.

Our Lord

(1)

the

first

(Matt.

left

three

commands which would mould from

the worship of the Church:

vi. 9),

ovTco<;...'7rpocrv)(^6a-9e

v/jli<;

Xa/Sere, (})dyere...'7rieTe i^ avrov Trdpref; (Matt. xxvi.

We

28), fia6r)TevaaT...^a7rrL^ovT(; (Matt, xxviii. 19).

the last two were obeyed.

Converts were baptised

know

that

the Eucharist

was celebrated. The indications that the other injunction was


observed from the earliest days are less obvious and direct, but
when brought together they are very cogent. For over and above
the a priori probability, that if the Disciples met for Synagogue
worship, they would use the Prayer which their Master had
bequeathed to them, there

are, as I

the several clauses of the Prayer,

hope to shew in dealing with

many

allusions to its petitions in

the Apostolic writings, allusions which become quite intelligible if


we assume that the Prayer was in constant public use. Again, the

hypothesis of this early liturgical use explains various points in


the language both of the Prayer as
additions to

it

we have

it

which have been preserved.

and of certain
this view

Lastly,

In the

exactly harmonises with the evidence of the Didache.

Pray ye
but as the Lord
as the hypocrites
not,' it is said (ch. viii.),
commanded in His Gospel, so pray ye.' The Lord's Prayer is
then given in the fuller form recorded by St Matthew, with two

Didache the Lord's Prayer holds a prominent

position.

'

'

variations

of text

and with the addition of a doxology.

The

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.


direction

appended

is

'

Thrice a day in this

last direction links the Lord's

13

way pray

This

ye.'

Prayer with the Jewish hours of

prayer, morning, afternoon, and evening; hours which were observed

by

religious

Jews

in private and, at least

on certain days,

in the

That the Apostles kept the


hours of prayer we know from the Acts (iii. 1, x. 9). Moreover
the Didachd (eh. x.) preserves to us a remarkable eucharistic
formula which is closely connected with certain clauses of the
Lord's Prayer. Such a reference to the Lord's Prayer implies that
it had been itself for some time an essential part of the Church's
public worship of the Synagogue^

liturgy.

It

(2)

may,

I think,

favour of this view.

be taken for^ceriain that the Prayer was

originally in Aramaic.

'priori probabilities are

two forms found

especially in the tenses used in the

and in probable

allusions to the

'J'he

New

details of this evidence

appear in the discussion of the several

Aramaic form was the

in the Gospels

Prayer in other parts of the

Testament, find an easy explanation.


will

very strongly in

Further, on this supposition the variations,

original,

the

clauses.

existence

of

But

if

the

Hellenistic

congregations among the Disciples at Jerusalem would necessitate

from the very

Synagogues of
is

first

a translation

'

the Prayer into

of

Prayer would have

Further, the

the Brethren' both

liturgical

Hebrew and

clear then that the Prayer holds a position of

reference to the circumstances of

its

history

Greek.
in

Hellenistic.
its

the
It

own, and in

transmission stands apart

from the rest of the matter contained in the Synoptic Gospels.


One other point under this head remains. It is this. From the
earliest days after Pentecost the faith would be planted in places

more or
1

"Thus

and on

less distant

by missionaries and others coming from the

the regular Synagogue-services would gradually arise ;

feast- or fast-days, then

first,

on Sabbaths

same hours as, and with


the worship of the Temple. The services on

on ordinary days,

at the

a sort of internal correspondence to,


Mondays and Thursdays were special, these being the ordinary market-days, when
the country-people came into the towns.... Accordingly, Monday and Thursday

were called 'the days of congregation' or 'Synagogue' (^Yom ha-Kenisah)" (Eders-

heim Life and Times i. p. 432). On the Jewish hours of prayer and their early
date comp. Lightfoot Horae Hebr. on Acts iii. 1, Vitringa de Synagoga Vetere
pp. 42

f.,

1062

S.,

on the Didache

Schurer

viii. 3.

p. 85.

For early Christian custom

see Harnack's note

THE lord's prayer

14

IN

THE EARLY CHURCH.

These teachers would bring with them the


Lord's Prayer in the form which it had reached at the time of
Afterwards liturgical
their departure from the Mother Church.
changes might be made in the Prayer both in the Mother Church

Church at Jerusalem.

and in the daughter Churches. But this at least is plain, that


when at a later time a version of the Gospels was made in the
language of a daughter Church, the Lord's Prayer would stand

There would be a current

outside the simple work of translation.

form already sanctioned by long devotional use, a form which the


translator could not neglect or forget,

subject

it

to a literary revision

translation of the Gospels.

Thus

may yield

criticism of a Version

though of course he might

when he incorporated
it

is

it

in his

always possible that the

evidence as to the original form of

the Lord's Prayer.

The Disciples would only be following Synagogue usage if


a fixed prayer for use on particular occasions, either
adapted
they
by alteration, or by addition*. This principle of adaptation, as it
will appear, I trust, in the succeeding investigation, was applied in
(3)

three directions.

By means

(i)

of substituted or added clauses the Prayer was

adapted for use at the Laying on of hands and perhaps at Baptism.


By alterations in the petition for daily bread the Prayer
(ii)

was made suitable


(iii)

was

By

for

morning and evening

use.

the accretion of varying forms of Doxology the Prayer

fitted especially for Eucharistic use.

Note on the Hellenistic Synagogues

A.

(see p. 8).

We have speaking evidence

not only for the Jewish parentage of Christian


but also in reference to the operation of translation and
adaptation, in the sections of the Didache which deal with worship (see
liturgical forms,

1 'We have
much personal

evidence that, in the time of our Lord, and even later, there was
liberty left

for,

not only was

much

in the services

determined by

the usage of each place, but the leader of the devotions might preface the regular
service

by

free prayer, or

beim Life and Times

i.

msert such between certain parts of the liturgy' (Eders438 with ref. to Zunz Gottesd. Vortr. d, Jud. p. 368 f.,

p.

liitus des gyn. Gottesd. p. 2

f.).

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE,


Dr Taylor The

15

Teaching of the Twelve Apostles, Lecture li.) and in the


The intimate acquaintance

Epistle of Clement of Rome, especially 58

fi".

with the Lxx. shewn in this Epistle proves the writer to be a Hellenist

; the
worship of the Chiu*ch over which he presides is in Greek, but it is based on
Jewish prayers and benedictions (see Bp Lightfoot Clement, 1890, i. p. 392 flf.).
The Church at Rome, the very early date of whose foundation is implied
by its size and importance when St Paul wrote his Roman Epistle, and
which was at first predominantly Jewish, had not as yet wholly passed beyond
the stage in which the Christian Brethren formed a Hellenistic Synagogue,
or group of Synagogues (on the Jewish Synagogues at Rome see Schurer
'

'

If the Church at least to some extent still pre247 see above p. 4).
sented this aspect to the Pagan world of Rome, we have perhaps the clue
p.

and Jews in Tacitus' account of the


Neronian persecution {Ann. xv. 44). The first batch of those arrested, who
gave information which led to the arrest of the multitude ingens,' may well
have been Jews (comp. Merivale History of the Romans vi. 448 f.). These, if
the Christians formed a schismatic Synagogue, would naturally have full
knowledge about them, and would be ready enough to implicate them. "With
this Clement's insistence on jealousy as the cause of the persecution
harmonises (c. 6). Further, of this 'great company' Tacitus says, 'baud
to the partial confusion of Christians

'

peiinde in crimine incendii

quam

omnes

alios

Again,

if

humani

odio

what he says elsewhere


hostile odium' (comp. Juv.

this is exactly

we turn

generis convicti simt.'

But

{Hist. v. 5) of the Jews, 'adversus


xiv.

103 with Prof Mayor's note).

to Domitian's onslaught, during, or

immediately after,
which Clement's letter was written, we have a similar notice. How natural
does Dion Cassius' account of the emperor's cruelty towards Flavins Clemens,
Domitilla and others become (Ixvii. 14 iirrjvfx^r] Se a^K^oiv tyKkrjfxa ddeoTtjros,
rjs

v(f>

if

Kcii

aXXot (s ra tu>v

we suppose

lovSaicov edrj e^oKeXKotn-fs TroXXot kut eh iKa<T Brier av),

this charge of

adopting Jewish customs to be connected with

the Synagogue worship of the Church at

Rome*

Still

further, in the

Hellenistic associations of its earliest days (and old associations in the

matter of worship are tenacious and wide in their influence), we may see in
part the reason why the primitive Church of Rome was mainly Greek, and
why its literature remained Greek till the third century. There is indeed an
interesting parallel between the relations of Christian Hebrew and Hellenistic
Synagogues at Jerusalem and on the other hand the presence of Greek and
Latin elements in the Roman Church, the gradual transition of a Greek into
a Latin Church, and the survival of liturgical relics of the former, e.g. in the

Kyrie

eleison^.

There
1

is

a question of considerable interest which seems to

Compare Sueton.

Doiait. 12,

Ad quem

me

to be

deferebantur, qui vel inprofessi Judaicam

viverent vitam.
2

Doubtless originally a Greek Jewish liturgical formula based on the

Is. xxxiii. 2, Ps. cxxii. 3, vi. 3, ix. 14,

&c.

i^xx.

of

:;

THE lord's prayer

16

IN

THE EARLY CHURCH.

suggested by the liturgical element in Clement's Epistle, when it is viewed in


connexion with the theory which I have put forward of the Christian Syna-

gogue worship of the Church at Rome and elsewhere. Bp Lightfoot {Clement i.


394 f.) points out a series of parallels between the letter of Clement and
the first two and the last two of the eighteen Jewish benedictions, the Shemoneh Esreh. Now it seems clear that the language employed by the Jews at
Rome in their worship was commonly Greek, the Rabbinical authorities in
Palestine expressly sanctioning the use of any language whatever in repeating
the Shemah, the Shemoneh Esreh' (see Schlirer p. 283 f). Is Clement's
Greek representation of the Hebrew formulas his own or that of the Christian congregation at Rome, or on the other hand is it based on the Greek
version of the Hebrew liturgy current in the Jewish (Hellenistic) Synagogues
p.

'

Rome,

based on the Lxx. 1 Bishop Lightfoot does not hint


seems to follow necessarily on the results of his investiPossibly a mintite examination of the points of resemblance between
gation.
/SClement and the early Liturgies might reveal their common origin in Greek
Such a comparison, however, would require a critical textual
ft Jewish Prayers.
'
study of the Litiu-gies. But can anything be gained from a comparison of
Clement with the Didache ? The two documents seem to be quite independent
at

itself largely

at the question, but

it

A comparison is difficult, partly because the liturgical fragments

of each other.

though distinct, are scanty; partly because the liturgical element


Didache is mainly eucharistic, that in Clement mainly intercessory. The
two documents, if they draw from the same stream, draw from it at different
in the Didachd,

in the

points of
(1)

The following resemblances, however,

its course.

Compare Didachd

Clem. 61 6

fxovos

in reference to

4 Trpo iravroiv

x.

hwaros

God

is

jvoifj<jai,ravTa...cro\

Ps. xxiv. 8, Zeph.


(2)

Compare

17

iii.

Did.

Does the Didachd give the

to be noted.

phrase which Clement adapts


(

The word

= 113!!);

is

so used in Lc.

Ps. Ixxxix. 9

= |''Dn)

. .

.blbas rois

Kpdrap $f6s occurs in Clem.

59 TO

2,

tSiv

v'loli

32, 62

croi...VTrfp

TOV dylov ovojxaTos

Clem. 58

viraKov(Ta>p.ev ovv

vaxT(tip.fv TrtTToidoTfs fVi

is

liturgical

(o

dvdpaTTav

(tov,

orv,

k.t.X.

Clement

(3)

With

60 av,

The phrase o navro-

Did.

x.

comp. 64

2 (vxapicrTovfifv

ov KaTfaKijvcoa-as iv Tois Kapbiais

rw navayio)

(a)

bicnroTa, eSoJKa?. ..trv

6 TravTeTroTrrrjs beanoTrjs in 55,

dp)(fy6t'ov nacrrjs KTicrfas ovofid aov.

impression given

i.

3 av, bia-rroTa -navroKpaTop, eKTiaas ra iravra heKa tov

x.

Kvpif, T^v olKovp.vr]v (KTiaas,.. .vai, SfcrnoTa, (Tri(})avov. -61

(b)

49

^waros)
comp. Job xxxvi. 5.

ovofiaros aov, Tpo(f)^v re Ka\ ttotov eddxas rols dvdpcoTTois with

yap, heoTTora inovpavu

are worth noting.

on hwarhs et (rv with


i^o^o\oyovyi(6a. The use of Swaros

ev)(api(TTovfj.(v aoi

^p-cov

with

koi eVSo^o) ovofiari avTov.. tva Karaa-Kt]-

Here the

TO ocnaTaTov r^r p.(yaK(x}(Tvvr]i avTov ovop.a.

that Clement has in his

mind some liturgical phrase which

he adapts and amplifies. If so, the phrase given in the Didacht^ and implied
in Clement may be derived from a common source in (a) a Jewish formula,

O) a Jewish formula
checked in deciding
aov [Did.
TOV

fj-y.

Christianised, (y) a purely Christian formula.

for (a)

ix. 2, 3, x. 2, (3)]

n.

by a comparison

with Sia tov

aov (Clem. 59)

.so

of the phrase 8id

ijyanrjfifvov

'I?jo-oC

We

naibos avrov 'L Xp., 8ih

Mart. Po/i/c. 14 'L X.

dyaTrrjTov

are

tov iraiSos
*I.

Xp.

aov naiboi.

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.


Lastly

(4)

ovv,

Tjntis

take the tangled question of the quotation in Clem. 34 koi


ofJLOVoiq eVi to avTo
(rvvax^$(VTs tj) crvvdSj^crfi, us e^ fvbs

(V

OTOfiaros

^orjaeofxev

/xf-ynXcuj/

Koi eVSo^cui'

OVK

ovs

17

fVt

Cor.

to

(Is

ovk

dudpconov

ii.

^^as yfvecrdai

fifTo^ovs

X/yet yap 'O0^aX/iOf

avrov.

Kaph'iav

Comp.

vTTOfxivova-iv avTov.

fKrtucis

eVayyeXttoi/

Ka\

TjKOvcrev,

avrov

irpos

Bp

9.

avi^rj,

ocra

rfrolfiacrev

Lightfoot {Clement

Ka\

toIs

390

p.

i.

t(ov

dStv

ovk

n.)

was not wholly satisfied with the explanation which is content with tracing
these words to Is. Ixiv. 4, Ixv. 16, 17.
'Still the phenomenon in St
Clement,' so he wrote, 'suggests that in one form or other

had a place

it

in early liturgical services, for indeed its liturgical appropriateness

suggest

its

introduction

and, considering

its

would
connexion as quoted by Clement

here, it is probiible that he himself so used it.'


May not a solution of the
question be found in the supposition that the quotation in St Paul, Clement,
and others is from some Greeh (Jewish) Liturgical formula? The difficulty

method

of St Paul's

of citation is not great, for the yiypanrai

by

is justified

the oblique reference to Isaiah, on which indeed the liturgical formula,

if it

be

be remembered that in one and the same


Epistle St Paul introduces alike a passage of Scriptm-e and a Christian Hymn
with the formula X/yet (Eph. iv. 8, v. 14 comp. Hebr. i. 7). Again, a reference
such,

Further,

based.

is

will

it

to Isaiah hardly explains the language of

Cor.

ii.

and

for the a...

ocra...

have the appearance of lieing the rough edges of a direct quotation torn from
its context (comp. 1 Tim. iii. 16 S? e^avepadr)...), rough edges which elsewhere
(e.g. in Clement) are smoothed down.
It remains to state briefly some arguments which appear to support the theory of a Greek (Jewish) liturgical
origin,

The quotation

(i)

Agrapha
traditions

and

Mart. Polyc.
tate (18)

icith

variations occurs very widely (see Resch

pp. 102, 281), often in writings in which there are traces of Jewish
associations, e.g. in Ep. Clement,

2,

Apostolic Constitutions

'The Ancient Homily' 11 (14),


Pseudo-Athan. de Virgini-

(vii. 32),

(i. 9) and Acta Thomae


what Gnostic sect Hegesippus

to this list Ep. Pseudo-Clem, de Virginitate

(36) should

perhaps be added.

It is not clear

The

(see Phot. Bibl. 232) refers to as using these words.

to

have had Jewish

affinities,

heretic Justin seems

Valentinus to have had considerable knowledge

both of these heretics, if we are to believe Hippolytus


these words i. (ii) The notion of the kingdom
thus Clem. Protrept. x. 94
is in several references linked with the words
after the word avf^rj adds koi xapija'avrai eVt Tjj /SacrtXfi'a rov Kvpiov avTciv els
of Jewish opinions
{Refut. v. 24, 26, 27

vi. 24), vised

Toiis aloivaf dp.i^v.

XapijaovToi iv

ttj

Apost. Constit.
jSatrtXeta

tov deov

vii.
.

32 after

to'is

Agathangelus

gives the closing words of a confessor's prayer thus


arjv

^aaiXdav

r]v

7rpot]Toip.a(Tas ft? rfjv i^fiertpav

o(f)daXpos OVK etSec, koi ovs ovk 7]kov(T(v, Ka\

eV?fyaye? au ^^'iv Ka\

bo^av npo tov

eTrl

adds Ka\
below pp. 32, 38),

ayairaxriv avTov

(31, see

tov

^v

Kapdlav dvOpcimov ovk dve^rj,

tjv

^ If Dr
Salmon's theory in his art. on the Cross-references in
phumena' (Hermathena v. p. 389) be true, Hippolytus' evidence

the
is

'

Philoso-

probably

worthless.

C.

ttiv

Kucrp-ov,

etVat

THE lord's prayer IX THE EARLY CHURCH.

18

Ka\ vvv dwafis, bfanora, rols i^yaTrrjKoaiv to navayiov crov ovofxa Koi rfjv irapovaiav
Toil

(Tov

fiovoyevovt

2 Tim.

(cf.

iv.

Such prayers, as I shall have


embedded in them ancient

18).

8,

occasion to notice later on, sometimes have

Probably

liturgical fragments.

it is

so here.

It is

worth noticing in passing

that both in Clement and in Agathaugelus in the previous contest the

mention of the Divine


we turn to the Didache

(x. 5),

(Tvva^ov^ avTrji>

(Tov...Ka.\

^adiXfinv

riv

dno

we have

of angels

the prayer

is

prominent.

When

t^s eKKkrja-ias

fiurjadTjTi, Kvpie,

tuiv rfacrapoiv avefiuv, ttjv ar^iacrdficrav (Is ttjv afjv

Here

aCrj].

i^Toifiacras

agrees with the

and of the hosts

will

will be noticed that the last clause

it

clause of the excerpt from Agathangelus and contains

first

which is common
words of the Didache
and of Agathangelus are to be traced to Matt. xxv. 34 K\T}povofj.j]aaT rqv
But it is perhaps more probable that the
i^Toip.a(Tp.vr]v vplv ^aaikdav.
wording in this latter case as well as in the two former passages is to be

kingdom' the key- word

in connexion with 'the

to several of these passages

referred to

some

-.

liturgical phrase,

The
7,

latter is suggested

Lament,

by

(o 8e aTi(f>avos eaTai rot j vTrop.(vov(n).

(the

life

'

Compare Did.

TT)v ay]v

iravTa%
Sia

kingdom) ov

^aaiXelav,
i]/J.5.s

7rai5ox

ix.

Is, Ixiv.

(rot?

The former

but also in Jas.

(17

j) 7r;jyyciXaro to'is dyaTircocnv

9,

4 oifrw <TvvaxOT)TU3 aov

elaayayeTv [ev] ry avrov


'iva

-rj

eKKKijaia

(see above) a-waxO^vres,


X'^P'''"'

'''''

i.

'I.

14

vi.

avruv,

the crown of
compare 2 Tim. iv.

1 2, ii.

awb tQv

'

-n-eparuv r^s 755^

Mart. Pohjc. 20 tw

Scopeq. els ttjv iwcvpai'ioi'

ffwayayr] 6 Kvpios

/cd/xe

Zech.

dyanaaiv qvtov) occurs in

{to7s

Cor.

ii.

vnopivovanv fXeov), also by

vrropevova-iv avTov),

Ep. Clem. 34

avrov, 22

well be that both were sanc-

that in fact they were alternative

25 (dyados Kvpios toU

iii.

the N. T. not only in

may

It

tioned by Hellenistic liturgical usage

Ps. Ixviii.

Lastly, there are the expressions toIj

(iii)

ayoTiuxTiv avrov, toIs vTronevovaif avrou.

phrases.

r/roi'/xaa-as-,

It is possible that the

X. p-era

rCov

eU

5e Swajxiixj

avrov ^acriKeiaf

K\eKr(Lv

avrov,

(Hammond p. 22) iravTas ijp^as eTT{.<xvvayayi eh rr^v rwv ovpaviZv


^aaCKeiav, Lit. of St James (Hammond p. 26, Swaiuson p. 218), and (Hammond p.
46 = Syriac p. 76, Swainson p. 301 = Syriac p. 342) tTrKTwdyuv tjp.S.s vird tovs irodas
Ttav eK\Kr(2u aov. Lit. of St Basil (Hammond p. 120, Swainson pp. 84, 164) roin
Clementine Liturgy

The source

iaKopiriap-ivovs iiri<rvmyay.

of the Eighteen Benedictions,


i(s

together

'

from the four corners of

gatherest the outcasts of

Thy

of these prayers

is

the earth.

Blessed art Thou,

passages in the Lxx. as Deut. xxx. 4 edf y

et's

tj

Siaawopa aov

tQv reaadpojv imp'uyojv t^s 7^?,

rbv rbirov tu e^\e^a/j.r]v KaraaKijvij a at to

double coincidence with Did.

Lord,

who

But the Greek representation thus


the Hellenistic Synagogues, founded on such
dir^

aKpov rod ovpavov sKeWev avva^ei ae 6 Kvpios, Ps. cvi. 47, cxlvii.

elad^w avroi/s

and gather

people Israel.'

widely spread must be that current in

airapp.ivov% 'Io(55a avva^et ck

doubtless the tenth

Set up a standard to collect our captives,

ix. x.),

Zech.

ii.

e/c

aKpov roO ovpavov ?ws


2, Is. xi.

12 rovs Su-

xlix. 5, Iii. 12,


ovofia. fiov

Neh.

fVei (note

i.

the

ruv reaaapwn avipnov tov ovpavov

Compare Matt. xxiv. 31, John xi. 52, 2 Thess. ii. 1.


- For this connexion compare e.g. 1 Sam. xiii. 13, 1 Chron. xvii. 11, 2 Chron.
The word occurs also (though in a somewhat different conxii. 1, Is. xxx. 33.
nexion) iu Marl. Pulgc. 14, which is clearly a valuable liturgical fragment.
avva^w

v/xas,

2 Mace.

i.

27,

ii.

18.

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.


8 (nacTiv Tols

context in

rjyaTrrjKoai.

all

on the 0.

T.,

Ps.

20;

cxlv.

t^v ini^avaav avrov, comp. Agath. quoted above).

these passages

would explain

all

9 6

vii.

comp. Ps.

common

very similar, and a

is

the phenomena.

Deut.

19

This phrase also would be ultimately based

(fiv\acrcra>u...T\fos

cxix.

The

liturgical source

165,

cxxii.

dyanucriv avrov (V3nX7),

ro'ts

If the

6.

original

setting resembled the First of the Eighteen benedictions,

'

liturgical

Blessed art Thou,

Lord our God and the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of
rememberest the good deeds of the fathers and sendest a redeemer unto their sons' sons,' the phrase might be a reminiscence of Isaiah
Jacob... who

xli.

8 ('3nX
I

am

Dm^X,

content

if

LXX. 'A^paajji ov

probable that patient investigation


forms^, and

litiu-gical

TjyaTTrja-a),

somewhat lengthy

this

me

gives

if it

may

2 Chron. XX.

discussion

7.

makes

it

in

any degree

disinter fragments of Greel- Jewish

the opportunity of expressing the belief

that the residts of such an investigation would throw an unexpected light

New

on many passages of the

Testament, and on the literature and

of

life

the Early Church (compare below p. 147).

Note on the Pauline Epistles and the Synoptic

B.

Gospels

(see p. 10).

Marshall of Manchester (Expositor, July, 1890) points out 'six well


cases in which St Ptiul directly or indirectly quotes from
words of the Lord Jesus which are contained in our present Gospels.'
Prof.

established

'

In three of the six instances,' he maintains,

the variation between St


capable of explanation on the hypothesis that
translation of a common original, written in the

Paul and the Evangelist


they give

a variant

'

is

Palestine.'
The article, which the writer has followed up
with others on the Aramaic Gospel, is most suggestive.
As the matter is closely connected with the subject of this Essay,
1 add the following coincidences with the text of our Gospels in the

language of

Pauline Epistles-:
1

(1)

Thess.

Comp.

nytov.

i.

Lc.

yfvoiifvrjs 8e dXi-^ecos
1

(2)
1

1 Jn.

Thess.

8(^dfJ.ei>oi

13

viii.

ii.

|i

Mc.
15

f.

rbv \6yov (V

/xera

Iv. 17.

rau

dXlylrei

'lovSaicov,

tQ>v

Comp. Dr Swainson The Greek Liturgies


ii.

2,

noXK^

fiera x^P^^s TTPfVfiaTos

x^P^^ 8exoin-ai rov \('>yov. Matt.


Also comp. 1 Thess. ii. 13 with Lc.
tov

kui

Kvpiov

xiii.

21

viii. 11.

airoKTeivavrav

Dr Westcott, in a note on
has quoted a remarkable passage from Philo De Monarchia ii. 6, which
p. xl.,

'

suggests that the prayers virep evKpaala's dipwv, o/x^pwu eifnjviKQv k.t.X. (St Chrys.
p. Ill, St James pp. 251, 287) may have originated in Jewish usage.'
But the

prayers in the Alexandrian Synagogues would be in Greek.


reference becomes a hint

which may prove

fruitful.

Hence Dr Swainson's

liturgical scholar familiar

with Philo might very probably recover large portions of the Greek Jewish Prayers.
Compare the discussion below of the doxology at the close of the Lord's Prayer.
-

Davidson, Introduction (Ed. 2, 1882) p. 441, has a somewhat similar table of


which however I have not consulted.

parallels,

22

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

20
Koi

'irjaovu

xxiii.

32

(v.

7rXr;pcocrerf)

1.

rav

Thess.

(3)

(Apoc.

(fiov(v(TavT<i)v

rovs

(h

opyr]

i;

TTpo(f)i]Tas

npos

Comp. Matt.

t(\os.

vfxds liKrjpaaare

koi

orro

<^i'^r;rf

Kpidfua

rrji

Vfiat 7rpo(p']Tas. .f^ avTutv anoKT(U(7T(...Kai Siw^fTf.


.

2 otSarf oti Tjp.(pa Kvpiov <os KXenTrji iv vvktl ovrcof ep)(eTai

V.

2 Pet.

3,

iii.

avroiii

to p.(Tpov rav iraTipav vp.a)v...nun

TTji yffi/i/Tjr;. ..dTrofjreXXoj

to avaTT^rjpaxrai avrcov

eK8io}^avTO}v...fi.s

^fias

de (ir

f(f)dacrfi/

viol eVrt

flf.

Koi

7rpo0rfraj

Toiii

ras ofiaprias iravTOTf.

Comp. Matt.

10).

iii.

xxiv. 42

ovk

nola vi^fpa

otSare

n KVpios vp.a)V tpT(Tai. .yivcocrKTf oti el j]8i...Trolq (pvXax^ o AcXeVTijf epxefai.


.

9 TKva

(f)(M)T6i).

The.s.s.

(5)

Comp.

v/xe'is

vio\ (^mtos eVrf koi viol rjpLtpai (E])h.

Lc. xvi. 8 toih vloi/s tov (^wroy (Jn.

Comp. Mc.

14 tlpijvevfTe iv favTo7s.

V.

xii. 36).

50

ix.

(IprjufvfTf

dW^Xoii.

Thess.

(6)
1

yap

The.ss. V. 5 Trdvres

(4)
V.

Pet.

2 Thess.

(7)

Lc. XX. 35

15 opart p^ Tit kukov dvT\ kokov

V.

Comp. Matt.

9).

iii.

ft:,

Lc.

vi.

ds to KaTa^KodfjvaL

i.

44

v.

27

(Rom.

tiv\ nTToSoi

Xll.

v/ids ttjs ^acriKtlai tov dtov.

Comp.

tov aluivoi (Kelvov tvx^Iv Ka\ r^y avn<TTa(Tfa>s

01 KUTa^toiQivTei

1<,

ft".

ttjs

fK vfKpav.

Cor.

(8)

Comp.

Lc.

34

vii.

39

X.

tw

pfpippa....(VTrdp(8pou

f.

Kvpla

dntpia-ndaTUiS.

napaKadeaBda-a npos tovs nodas tov Kvpinv...nepi.nvdTO..,

f.

fiepipvas.

fvBev

Cor.

(9)

Matt.

eK(~i

Cor.

V.

xi.

20

X.

Gal.

(13)

Km

Qt/ia

Rom.

15

f.

vi.

ship in the context

Rom.

Comp.
VTTfp

Lc.

Tav

(17)

Xoyo)

vi.

Se

;(a(poi/Tes,

cos

tttcoxoI
i]pas.

ttoWovs

Comp.

\pi(TTOv.
Comp.
Note the Syriac Versions.
dTrocrTrj ajr epoi:
Comp. Lc. iv. 13

v'lov

avTov iv

Comp. Matt.

xvi.

17 (rap^

11 o Se

(Gal. v. 18).

(16)

Comp.

TOVTm Mern/Sa

oTf be fv86Kr]crfv [6 6f6s'\...d7roKa\v\lrai tov

npoa-avediprjv

Rom. viii.
Comp.

(15)

Kap8la

(jj,

navrfs yap avra

^oivTOiv'

opi

Koi eVifiKt'ny tov

rrpavTTjTos

TTJS

Kai Taneivos tjj

arapKi

OVK dneKoKv^fv aoi dXX' o

(14)

ak\a

i.

ov

pfdicrTavdv.

tw

an avTov.

6 8d/3oXos' diTi(TT-q

(fiol.. tv6fcos

del

oprj

ipt'iTe

Note the Syriac Version.

xi. 23).

7 f ayyeXos ^aTavd.'.iva

xii.

(SoTf

f.

Bta

29 Trpais dpi
2 Cor.

(12)

vi.

Cor.

(11)

Matt.

Mc.

XvTrovpevoi

<os

ttlcttiv

kokkov (TLvdntoiS,

6 6 TrapaKoXatv tovs Taneivovs napfKoKfo-fv

vii.

Lc.

ft".,

10

vi.

5f TrXovTl^ovTis.

Matt.

ex*/^^ ttIcttiv ojs

Koi peTa^qaeTai (xxi. 21,

(10)

t^a ndcrav r^f

2 kov

xiii.

20 eav

xvii.

xii.

Ka\

alpuTi.

Trarrjp p.ov 6 iv toIs ovpavols.

f^ Tc3 6e^.

Lc. XX. 38 debs 8e ovk eariv vfKpcov

^cicriv.

yap nvevpaTi 6(ov

14

ocroi

Lc.

iv. 1 rjyfTo

iv

ayovTai, ovtoi vto\ 6(ov

rw nvtvpaTi.

dcrlv

Note the thought of son-

22, iv. 3, 9).

(iii.

14 fvXoydTe

roiis

biuKovTas, (vXoyf'iTf

28 evXoydTe tovs Karapcopivovs vpds.

Matt.

Ka\
V.

prj

KaTapdadt.

44 TvpoaevxecrBe

8icok6vt(ov vpds.

Rom.

TovTco

xiii.

ft.

yap dymrwv tov (Tepov, vopov

dvaKf(paXaiovTai,

Comp. Matt.

xxii.

37

ft",

TTenXijpu)K(v...iv

tw

dyani^aas Kipiov...

dyanrjaeis tov nXrjalov aov...iv rnvTais Ta7s 8v(t\v tfToXals oXos o vopos KpipaTai
Ka\ 01 7rpo(prJTai.

THE CHURCH AND THE SYNAGOGUE.


There are coincidences of thought, and
18 ff., and 1 Cor. vi. 13, viii. 13, Rom.

(18)

in Mc.

vii,

Phil.

(19)

Comp. Matt,
xviii.

8 iraneivuxTev (a\jTov...bLo

ii.

xxiii.

12 oartr ranuvdafi, iavrov

to

some extent of expression,

xiv. 15

flF.

avrov

d(6s

Koi

21

vnep\r\r<ji(T(v.

Lc. xiv, 11,

(xviii, 4,

vyl/^coOrja-fTai

14).

Phil.

(20)

core TO

15 ^aiVco-^e us

ii.

Phil. iv. 6

(21)

Comp. Matt.

(f)o)aTrjpfs iv Koa-fia.

14 vnds

V.

rov Kocrpov.

(pcis

Comp. Matt.

[Mfpifivare.

fiT}8ei/

25

vi.

pepifivarf

/xi)

rj}

yj^vxu vfiav (vv. 31, 34).

Tim.

(22)
avTols, ov

yap

Tim.

(23)

i.

13

on dyvoav

ij\fi]dqu

Comp.

inolrjaa.

Lc. Xxiii. 34 a<^6y

oXbacriv ri Tro(,ov(Tiu.

18

iv.

unique in St Paul.

avrov

/Sao-tXeiac

ttjv

inovpaviov.

t^i/

Equally with St Matthew's

>;

^aa.

The phrase

is

ovpavav

it

tv>v

would represent the Aramaic phrase.

The following coincidences come under a


2 Cor.

(1)

avrav

iii.

15

Comp.

Kf'irai.

diflferent

category

av avayivcianrjTai Mavarji KaXvp.fxa eni

rjvlKa

Lc. xxiv. 32 (Western reading,

and

Kaphlav

rfju

d) ov^t n fopSt'a

K(KaKvp,p(vq...<>)i Sirjvoiyev rjpiv ras ypa(}>as;

t]v Tjp,S)V

Rom.

(2)

v.

There

is

Tit.

irvfifiaros aylov.

iii.

tov

Col.

ayiov

pov (Acts

Kriad.

tji

Hebr.

{(TatTTjpia),

3f.

rJTis

Tav aKovtravTav

tls

With

nXovalas.

pera to XaX^crai

17), i^fx^^"
x.

..tov

i.

3,

Test.

Ktjpvx&^^TOS

xii.

iv

this coincidence,

avTo'is

ij

28,

ii.

Stopta tov

Patriar. Jud. 24.


Tvacrrj

/cricrei

irrro

rfi

compare the following

i^pas i^e^aiwdrj, (rvvcmpapTvpovvTos

avvfpyovvTos

(v. 33),

the account of the 'Gentile

45,

Barn.

tovto

dpx^v Xa^ovcra XaXdcrdai. 8ia tov Kvpiov,

Ka\ Tepaa-iv xal noiKiKais Swapfcriv,

TOV Kvplov

Kapdiais iqfiav 8ia rov

xvi. 15 n-optvdivrfs els tov Kocrpov .anavra Krjpv^are

TO (vayyiXiov iraarj
ii.

2, 46,

23 TOV (vayy(\iov

i.

ii.

(Acts

fKKfxvTai

Comp. [Mc]

TOV ovpavov.

deoii (icKi)(VTai iv rali

Trvevp,aTos dylov, ov (^)(f(v e^' ijpas

Comp. Ep. Clem.

Pentecost').
(3)

here a reference to the Pentecostal keyword from Joel

(Kx^fa OTTO TOV TTvevp-aTos

nvfvpaTos

tov

ayonrr}

and [Mc]

dv(\i]p(f)dr}...iK(lvoi
/cat

xvi. 19

8e

f.

tov

6eov

vtto

cnjpfiois

6 pev ovv Kvpios

rt

\^lT]crovs^

i^fXdovres iKqpv^av "TravTaxov,

tov \6yov ^(^aiovvros 8ia tuv irraKoXovdovvrav

(rqpfiav.

must be added those which a study of


Testament reveals (see Resch Agrapha pp.
A rigorous and minute examination of all the coincidences thus
248, 252 f.).
brought together, in connexion with the Syriac Versions and especially with
what is known of Palestinian Aramaic, would be the next necessary step.
Apart from such an investigation no conclusions can be safely drawn. But a
study of the evidence thus collected and sifted would, I cannot but believe,

To

these coincidences there

the other Books of the

New

bring the Synoptic question sensibly nearer to a solution than


present.

it

is

at

I.

nATCp HMOON

eN

nAxep

There

oypANOIC (St Matthew).

Tolc

(St Luke).

some independent grounds

are

for

thinking that the

longer and the shorter forms of this clause were both current in

the Apostolic age.

The frequent occurrence

In regard to the longer form.

(1)

in the Synoptists of the phrases o TraTrjp vfxcov 6 ovpdvco'; (Matt.


V.

48, vi. 14, 26, 32,

comp.

xxiii. 9), 6 irarrip /jlov 6 ovpdvLo<;

XV. 13, xviii. 35), 6 irarrjp [6] e^


6 iv Tot9 ovpavoc<; (Matt. vii.
xvi. 17, xviii.

ovpavov (Lc.

21, x. 32, 33, xii.

10 (eV ovpavols), 19

iv Tot9 ovpavols (Matt. v. 16, 45,

(Matt.

xi. 13), o irarijp fiou

50 {iv

ovpavols:),

{iv ovpavol<i), 6 iraTrjp vpicov 6

11,

vi. 1, vii.

shew that such a form of words was

Mc.

specially

Disciples, while the fact that the type o iv (tol<;)

xi.

25) seems to

endeared to the

ovpavoU

is

com-

moner than the type 6 ovpdvio^ is an indication that in St Matthew


we have the original Greek form of the first clause of the Prayer \

Among
vi.

the passages referred to above, the following,

14, xviii. 35,

6 TTUTrjp
vficov),

Mc.

xi.

25 (a^tere

vfiwv 6 iv T0t9

et tl

ovpavol<i

eyere Kara

d^fi

vfilv

Matt,

Xva koX

ra TrapaTTTCo/JLara

are of special importance, for they refer to the petition for

The two phrases

6 ovpauio^

D*DB'2K' and the Syriac

.Vo

and
-~i

6 ev ro?s

ovpavoh equally represent the

The remarks

extent be discounted in view of the fact that both

The

Heavenly Father.

forgiveness as well as to the appeal to the


'

viz.

rLvo<i,

in the text above

IVDK

alone

and

must

Hebrew
some

to

D*05i'3C' 13^3^^ are

found in 'the Jews' Prayer Books' (Dr Taylor Smjimjs of the Jewish Fathers
p. 138).

23

'OUR FATHER WHICH ART IN HEAVEN.'

quoted is the only passage in St Mark in which this name of


God, the Father in Heaven, the Heavenly Father, is found; and
consequently its witness is strongly in favour of the form 6 ev roh

last

ovpavol<; being the current

Greek form of the

clause of the

first

Lord's Prayer.

The Didache (viii.) is, so far as I know, ihe only authority


which preserves a different wording of this form. In place of 6 iv
Toi<; ovpavol^ it has o iv to3 ovpavw.
The variation is slight. In
view of other passages in the Synoptic Gospels \

we have here
original.
The

it is

probable that

Aramaic

a trace of divergent translations of an

fact that iv ovpavot occurs later on in the Prayer

iv rS ovpavw the more obvious expression in


and thus to shew that iv toI<; ovpavoh, as being
obvious, has a better claim to be the original Hellenistic

would seem
the

to

make

first clause,

less

But whatever may be the explanation of the variawhen the Didache was drawn up
the Greek form of the Prayer was not absolutely and finally fixed.
translation.

tion, its existence indicates that

In regard

(2)

Three passages must be

form^

to the shorter

here considered.

aXXa

Kal eXeyev 'AyS/Sa o 7raTTJp...dW^ ov ri iy(o 0e\(o

St Mark

(TV.

tl

xiv. 36.

i^airearetXev 6 ^eo? to irvevpa rov viov avrov et? Td<; Kapoia^


rjp.oov,

Kpd^ov 'A^^d 6 TruT^p.

iXd^CTe
viii.

Gal.

irvevfia viodeala^;, iv

u>

iv. 6.

15.

In each of these passages I believe there


first
1

V.

Comp.

(1)
II

Matt.

Lc.

16

xviii.

Mc.

xi.

i.

10

22 (plur.)

Mc.

f.

(plur.)

Matt.

(3)

||

it

vii.

Mc.

vi. 41,

In the lxx. the plur.

do not think that

In Lc.

f.,

23 (sing.),

e.g. (1) Matt. xiv. 9,

xiv. 62 (plur.).

where.

iii.

vi.

Matt. xix. 21, Lc.

agreement,

Mc.

is

a reference to the

clause of the Lord's Prayer.

12 (plur.)

(4)

Rom.

Kpd^ofiev 'A/8y3a o iraTrjp.

||

Lc.
11

iii.

21

(plur.)

f.

21

(sing.).

ix.

16 (sing.);

common

xi.

(2)

(2)

2 the Old Latin MSS., a,

i,

ff,

in the Psalms, rare else-

have Pater sancte

Compare John
reading must be traced to a liturgical expansion such as we have
where we read irarep ayu. Compare the Christmas preface to
in the Gallican Liturgy

(Hammond

Baptismal prayer below

p. 37.

is

Matt. xxvi. 64,

occurs in the 0. T. as equivalent to the late

vulgate text) has Pater sancte sanctificetur

Matt.

13 (sing.),

Sometimes there

x.

Lc.
is

(sing.),

Lc.

||

qui...;

mm

(a

Such a
the Didache (x),

xvii.

in

Hebrew

11.

the Lord's Prayer

p. 343, see also pp. Ixxxii, 290),

and the Syrian

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

24

As

to the first of

them two points

call for

notice,

St

(a)

Mark, 'the interpreter' of St Peter, records elsewhere Aramaic


expressions used by Christ raXeiOd Kovfi, '6 icriv fieOepjxrjvevoKop^dv, o icm Awpov
fievov To KopdiTtov, col Xiyco, eyetpe (v. 41)
In
(vii. 11); Xeyec aura) ^K<f><j)add, '6 icrTiv Aiavol^dijTi (vii. 34).
;

these cases St

Mark

connects the Aramaic word and the Greek

equivalent by the phrases, which

The absence
for

by

its

may be

is,

ivhich is being interpreted.

of such a phrase in xiv. 36

may

indeed be accounted

incongruity with the solemnity of the context

but

it

better explained by the familiarity of the words 'AyS/3a 6

Trar^p.

The Evangelists seem

(b)

to wish their readers to find in

our Lord's words in the Garden of Gethsemane coincidences with


note
the language of the Lord's Prayer [see pp. 61 f., 108 ff.
Does not
especially jevrjO^Tco to Oekruxd aov (Matt. xxvi. 42)].
;

St Mark's use of the words 'A/3/3a 6 irarrjp harmonise with this


undercurrent of thought

The two Pauline passages confirm this suggestion. In neither


of them does the Apostle seem to have the solemn scene in Gethsemane in his thoughts. In both the context breathes a spirit of
Hence this combination occurring independently in
exaltation.
St Mark and in St Paul must be derived from a common source.
Now, if the Lord's Prayer were current in the shorter form, what
more likely than that the initial word of the Prayer as used by the
Hebrew Christians should be coupled with the initial word of a
Hellenistic rendering

initial

words which, like Pater noster, might

be used as a name for the Prayer itself? Further, if we substitute


in St Paul the two words which recall to us the Lord's Prayer
'

God

sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, crying,

Our

we

cry,

Father,'

'Ye received the

Spirit

of adoption, whereby

Our Father,' the words of the Apostle at once gain, I venture to


They are no longer abstract but
think, new point and vigour.
concrete.

In discussing the next clause I

shall

give another

reason for thinking that the Lord's Prayer was at this point in St
Paul's mind.
It only

remains to point out that in

this case the

word Abba

implies the shorter form as given by St Luke, and cannot be the

word of the longer form; for in a Semitic language the


possessive pronoun Our, if inserted, becomes part of the noun.
initial

II.

AriACyHT(0 TO ONOMA COY,


eAOATCio H

BACiAeiA coy.

It will be convenient to consider these two clauses together.

In both of them there occurs a remarkable, though but slightly


attested, variation of reading.

and

cognate,
clauses

way

variations of reading arc

as the evidence in regard to the latter of the two

the consideration of this latter will prepare the

is clearer,

for

As these

a discussion of the former clause.

In a cursive MS. of the Gospels, of which Mr. Hoskier has


full account, the text of which is very remark-

published (1800) a

opening clauses of the Lord's Prayer in St Luke's Gospel


Trdrep' d<yiaa6^ra) to ovofid aov 'EX^erw to Tri/evjxd

able, the

run thus
(Tov

TO djiov

e</)'

i^fidq

KoX KadaptaaTQ)

jj/xa?-

<yvr]6rjT(o k.t.X.

Mr.

Hoskier calls this MS. Cod. Ev. 604 (= 700 Gregory)


Of the petition for the coming of the kingdom Gregory of
'

'

Nyssa de Oratione Dominica


r]

Ta^a

Kada)<; Tjfilv vrro

(ed.

Krabinger

tov AovKa to auTO

p.

GO) writes thus

vorjfxa

aa^eoTepov

^aaiXeiav iXdelv d^iojv Trjv tov dyiov irveviTTL^oaTat.


ovtw ^dp ev eVetVw tu> euayjeXto)

ep/xrjveveTat, 6 ttjv
/j,aT0<i

avfx/xa-^lav

?) ^acnXela aov, 'EXdeTco, (f)r]a-L, to dytov


aov e<^' ijP'd^ kol KaOaptadTco rj^id^. A few lines lower
down he adds, o yap AovKd<; p.ev irvevfxa dyiov Xiyei, ^luTdato'i

^rjcrlv,

uvtX tov 'EX^eVco

TTvev/jid

1
Mr. Hoskier gives a photograph of the page of the MS. containing Lc. xi. 1 f.
This important piece of evidence would have escaped my notice but for Dr Hort's

kindness.

THE lord's prayer

26

8e ^acTiXeiav covo/iaaev k.t.X.

He

be consulted.

IX

THE EARLY CHURCH.

Krabiuger's uote

mentions a variant, to

irvevfid

141) should

(p,

aov ro

liyiov, in

the former passage, as having some support.

Maximus, a champion of the orthodox party against the Monocomments thus on


the clause (Mignc P. G. 90 p. 884 f): o yap ivravda ^lardaio'^
thelites in the first half of the seventh century,

<f)y]<7t

^aatXeiav,

aWa-^ov

tcov evayyeXtaTcov erepo^ Trveu/xa KeKXr]-

K6V aycov, <pdaK03v 'EA-^eroj aov to Trvevfxa to ciyiov Kol KadaptadTco

?;/ia?

and lower down, ^KXOeTco

TO TTvevfia TO ciycov,
vaoTroii]delcn
iraiKTO),

dXX^

tS
rj

17877

6eu) Bid

iirl

tm t^9
tov

rj

^aaiXeia

irpaoTrjTO'i

eVt TLva ydp

7rv6VfiaT0<;.

top irpdov k.t.X.

crov,

TovTeaTt

Xoyo) re Kal Tpoirw

It thus

(^rjai

KuTa-

appears likely that

Maximus knew of the words e^' ^//ia?, but perhaps by accident did
not give them a place in the petition itself
This evidence, so far as

it

goes,

is

clear to the effect that

a prayer for the Holy Spirit took the place of the petition for the

coming of the kingdom,

A passage, however, from Tertullian (adv. Marc. iv. 26), which


must next be considered, implies that that writer found at any
rate in the text used by Marcion (for otherwise his argument is
pointless), probably in the text common to himself and Marcion,
Cui dicara.
a petition for the Holy Spirit in the Lord's Prayer.
Pater 1 ei qui me omnino non fecit, a quo originem non traho,
an ei qui me faciundo et instruendo generavit? A quo spiritum
sanctum postulem ? A quo muudialis spiritus praestatur, an a quo
'

fiunt

etiam angeli spiritus, cujus et in primordio spiritus super

aquas ferebatur

regem

Ejus regnum optabo venire quem nunquam


an in cujus manu etiam corda sunt regum ?

gloriae audivi,

Quis dabit mihi j^anem quotidianumV

Thus

Tertullian, or pos-

one with Cod. 604, with Gregory and Maximus


in witnessing to a petition for the Holy Spirit in the Prayer
but it is substituted for the petition
as given by St Luke
sibly Marcion, is at

Hallowed be Thy name V and the prayer for the coming of the
kingdom is retained. Moreover Tertullian gives no evidence as

'

1 Ronsch
{Dan Neiie Test. Tert. p. 640) thinks that the words sanctijicetur
vomen tutim may have had a pLace in the copy from which Tert. quotes, but that
he does not notice them because they give him no handle against his opponent.
But Tert. was too good a debater not to find a controversial use for whatever lay

before him.

THY KIXGDO^[

'HALLOWED BE THY NAME.


to the precise wording of the clause.

works (de Oratione

But another passage

the

in his

4) suggests perplexing questions as to his

He

collocation of the earlier clauses in the Prayer.

arranges

27

COME.'

clauses

thus,

'

Sanctificetur

quite expressly

nomen tuum, Fiat

voluntas tua in coelis et in terra, Veniat regnuni tuum'.'

know

not

that there

of the petitions, and


is

do

any other authority for this arrangement


is hard not to feel that, though Tertullian

is
it

here quoting the fuller form of St Matthew's Gospel, this order

connected with the reading which he records

is

At

against Marcion.
to little

But

first

in

the treatise

sight this evidence appears to point

more than a general unsettlement

of the earlier petitions.

further examination reveals, I think, an explanation Avhich

least possible'^

some

Tertullian lays

(or, to anticipate,

stress

is

at

on the interpretation

a possible relic of an addition to the text)

'

ut

With the clause so interpreted he connects


the petition which in his text follows, and on which he gives a similar
gloss,
ut in nobis fiat voluntas Dei in terris.' These two clauses
sanctificetur in nobis.'

'

Sanctijicetai'. .and Fiat voluntas... as explained by Tertullian


on the one hand, and on the other the prayer for the Holy Spirit,
would come to be regarded as very closely allied. Hence the two
former petitions would replace the petition for the Holy Spirit. If

then

this interpretation of the evidence of the de Oratione

is

right, it

appears to favour the view that the clause about the Holy Spirit

had a place
1

He

Fiat. ..4.

in

the

expressly says
(6)

MSS. used both by

et dei

Secundum hanc formara subjungimus:


tuum ad id pertinet, quo et Fiat voluntas

(a) Sanctificetur...

Veniat quoque regnum

tua, in nobis scilicet... 5.

tem

regnum... 6.

(c)

(d)

oblatio obseqnii in voluntate,

The Lord's Prayer

Tertullian and by Marcion,

as

Post coelestia, id

est,

Dei honor in Patre,

commemoratio

a whole,

gether, stands thus in the de Oratione

when
:

'

post dei uomeu, dei voluntafidei

testimonium in nomine,

spei in regno... 9.

the detached clauses are brought to-

Pater qui in coelis

es,

Sanctificetur

nomen

tuum, Fiat voluntas tua in coelis et in terra, Veniat regnum tuum, Panem nostrum
quotidianum da nobis hodie, Dimitte nobis debita nostra... Ne nos inducas in
temptationem. Sed devehe nos a male' The omitted clause is implied in the
comment, remittere nos quoque profitemur debitoribus nostris.' See below p. 58.
- The explanation given by Nitzsch, Studien niid Kritiken,
1830, 4 Heft, ji.
846 ff. (quoted by Eonsch iJas Xeue Test. Tert. p. 599), is different. He supposes
that the collocation of clauses, to which Tertullian witnesses, arose for the purpose
of improving in the way partly of purifying, partly of amplifying, a text of St Luke
which Nitzsch represents thus: 'Geheiligt werde dein Name. Zu uns komme
dein heil. Geist und reinige uns. Zu uns komme dein Reich.'
'

THE lord's prayer

28
while

IX

THE EARLY CHURCH.

coiDcides with the evidence of the adversiis Marciuuein as

it

to the position of the clause.

To sum up

we get evidence

in favour of the insertion in the

Lord's Prayer of a petition for the Holy Spirit from at least four

MS. of the Gospels, from Gregory a Bishop


Cappadocia (from whom perhaps Maximus bon'owed his information), from Tertullian of Carthage, from Marcion who seems to
have travelled much, and the sources of whose information it is

quarters, from a cursive


in

But the witnesses do not agree as to the


it either for 'Thy kingdom
come or for Hallowed be Thy name.'
To pass from the form to the occasion of this prayer, we shall
impossible to trace.

position of the petition, substituting


'

be able,

'

I think, to trace it back,

through the forms of invocation

connected with the Consecration of the Eucharist, the Anointing,


and the Imposition of hands, to the passages of the Acts which

speak of the Laying on of the Apostles' hands. Indeed the archaic


simplicity of this added clause is best seen when it is compared with
the passages in the Acts, and

when on the other hand

it is

con-

trasted with the formulas in use at a later time, which are, as I

developments of it.
That such a prayer was in use in connexion with the Laying on
of hands is, I think, clear from the following passages, to which
Ordo Romanus (Hitothers of similar import might be added
believe,

torp

de Divinis Cath. Ecclesiae OJiciis, 1568,

veniens ad infantes elevataet imposita

dat orationem super eos

Then

cum

manu

p.

76)

Pontifex

super capita omnium,

invocatione septiformis gratiae Spiri-

which the prayer before the


Order of Confirmation' is
Augustine de Trinitate xv. 26 (Migne P. L. 42 p. 1093)
based.
Orabant [Apostoli] ut veniret in eos quibus manus imponebant,
non ipsi eum dabant. Quem morem in suis praepositis etiam nunc
tus Sancti.

follows a prayer on

imposition of hands in the English

'

Pseudo- Ambrose de Sacram.

servat ecclesia.

iii.

43-i) Post fontem superest ut perfectio fiat

16 p.
catiunem sacerdotis Spiritus Sanctus infunditur.
vii.

44 iav yap

ei/aeySou?

jMr)

tepea)?

et?

2 (Migne F. L.
quando ad invoConstit. Apost.

eKacrrov tovtcov iTTCKXTjcra jevTjrat viro rov

Tocavrrj t4?,

et?

vScop

fxovov KaTafia'i,vet...fieTa

Baptism as taught by the Western


Dr Mason The Relation of Confirmation
Fathers gives the fullest collection of passages; see especially the Appendix on
1

Ancient Western Baptismal Prayers.

to

THY KINGDOM

'HALLOWED BE THY NAME.


TOVTO

ecTT&j? 7rpo(Tvx^ecrd(o rrjv

eu^^f,

Dionysius Alex, (apud Eus. H. E.


Koro's

eOovi

aeco<;

evxv-

cTrt

twu toiovtq)v

iSiSa^ev

o Kvpio's.

T]/j.n<;

2) TraXaiov ye toc KeKpar-q-

vii.

[lovr]

r/v

29

COME.'

y^prjadai

Sid

rfj

'X^eipaiv iiride-

Cyprian Ep. ad Juhaiamtm Quod nunc quo([ue apud

nos geritur, ut qui in ecclesia baptizantur, praepositis ecclesiae

manus impositionein SpiriSanctum consequantur et signaculo dominico consummentur.


Tert. de Bapt. 8 Dehinc manus imponitur per benedictionem ad-

offerantur, et per nostram orationem ac

tiim

vocans et invitans Spiritum Sanctum.

It will

be noticed that most

of these quotations are from Fathers of the Latin Church, where the

Apostolic custom of the Laying on of hands maintained


It

is

remarkable that the Greek

for

offices

its place.

Baptism and

Yet there

Anointing do not supply any close parallels\

are the

prayers (1) for the sanctification of the water: avTb<; ovv


OpcoTTe

^aaCKev

Trapecro Kal vvv hid Trjq

dyiaaov to vScop tovto: (2)

(jov irvev^aTO'i /cat

for

the sanctification

of the chrism: avro<; evXoyrjcrov Kal tovto to eXaiov

Kal ivepyeia Kal

iiTL(^oLTr}crei

Codex Liturgicus

ii.

tov dylov

pp. 136, 140).

Thus

more obvious resemblances.

ttj

crov 7rvev/j.aTo<;

Bvvd/jLei

(Assemani

In the Latin services there are


Tu, Domine, inmitte

Spiritum Sanctum tuum Paracletum

formem Spiritum tuum

(})t\dv-

rov dyi'ov

7ri(f)otT}]cr(o<;

in eos

again, Emitte in eos Septi-

and again, Spiritus Sanctus superveniat


cu.stodiat vos (Assemani
It is however in the Eucharistic offices

vos, et virtus Altissimi .sine peccato

in

Cod. Lit.
that

we

iii. pp. 2, 3, 5).


trace most clearly the expansion of the Apostolic prayer.

Thus, compare

St

Lit.

James (Hammond

p, 38,

Swainson

p.

260)

nvTiKaTaTre/x^p-ov rjjMv Trjv %a/Jiy [add Kal Trjv hwpedv, Swainson]

TOV TravayLov crov

^Xe-^ov i<f

Swainson

109)

p.

dXr]deia<;

Kal \yai,

irvevixaTo^;.

k.tX.

rjfid<i

Lit.

^aaiKev

6eo<;

(Hammond

p.

ovpdvie, TrapdKXrjTe, to irvevfia

iXOe Kal aKrjvoiaov ev

7rdcn]<; kt]X18o<;,

Swamson]

of Constantinople
^)ixlv,

Kal KaOdpi.aov

Kal crwaov, dyade, ra? -v^y^^a?

yjfxaiu.

r}p.d<;

eiri-

90,
t/;<?

diro

The probable

lateness of this Liturgy does not affect the importance of the

coincidence with both parts of the petition in Cod. 604.

Similar forms are frequent in the

(Hammond
'

On

p.

42

f.,

Swainson

p.

iTTLKXrja-L^, e.g. Lit.

276 f ) i^airlcTTeiXov

a passage from Acta Thomae see note A,

Prayers see note B,

p. 37.

p.

3G

St

James

f^' rjixdq Kal

on some Syrian Baptismal

THE lord's prayer

30

IN

THE EARLY CHURCH.

Bwpa raura

ro Trvevfid aov ro Travayiov to


avTO TO TTvevfid aov TO iravayiov kutu7rfi\Jrov, Sea-TTOTa, i(f r)fj,d<i Koi eVl to, TrpoKeifieva ayia Scopa tuvtu
Xva iTTLcfyoLTqcrav ttj dyia koI dyadfj koX ivBo^w avTOv irapovaia

eVi

irpoKeifieva ayia

TO.

Kvptov Koi ^cooTTOiov

Similar formulas will be found in

dyidar) k.tX.

Hammond

pp. 28,

48, 104, 111, 114, 178, 187.

of a similar form in the Mozarabic Liturgy

The occurrence

(Hammond

311, Veni Sancte Spiritus, sanctificator, sanctifica

p.

hoc sacrificium de manibus meis


parallel in the Gallican Liturgy

tibi

praeparatum), and of one very

(Hammond p.

315), seems to prove

the antiquity of this prayer for the Spirit in the Eucharistic office

2nd Pfaffian frag, of Irenaeus, Harvey ii. p. 502). Cyril of


Jerusalem (Migne P. G. 33 p. 1089), closely connecting the eVi(cf.

the

Kkrjo-i';

in the Eucharist with that in the rite of Anointing, shews

easily a prayer originally used in the rite of 'Confirmation'

how

might pass into the Liturgy proper.


The following passages must be compared
Ep. Clem. 46
TTvevfia

XpiaTw; See
Barn.

1.

to eK')(ydlv

'^dptro<i

Tr]<;

eva l^piaTov koX ev

also

i(f>'

rjixd<i

koI

fjuia

Kkrjcr(,<i

ev

c. 2.

^Xeiru) ev vfitv eKKe'^vfievov aTTO tou irXovaiov t^9

Kupiov Trvevfia e^'

dyd7rr}<;

ov'yi eva deov e;^o/iei' koI

rj

The words

v^d'i.

e'^'

after ev

vfj.d'i

They seem to slip in


vfilv imply an allusion to a familiar phrase.
Trvev/Ma.
word
the
with
Matt. iii. 16 Trvevfia 6eov...ipxof^^vov eV avTov (comp. Me. i.
10, Lc.

22, Jn.

iii.

Acts

viii.

i.

yap

TiOea-av Ta^ yetpa?


X.

i.

15 Trpoaijv^avTO

ciyioV ovBeTTCo

Acts

33; Lc.

44

rjv

e'vr'

eV

35, iv. 18).

avTCov ottw?

irepl

Xd^waiv

ovhevX avTU>v eimreirToiKo';

Trvevfia

TOTe

eire-

avTOV^ Ka\ iXdfi^avov irvev^a aytov.

eTreireaev to

Trvevfia to

dycov eVt

7rdvTa<i

Tou<i

aKovovTa'i tov \oyov.

Acts XV, 8
Ka6u)<i

Kol

f.

^eo9 efiapTvpijaev at/rot? Sou<i to vvev/xa to dyiov

7]fiiv

Trj

iricTTei

KaOapLcra^

Ta^

Kaphiwi

avTwv.

Here the coincidence with both parts of the formula given by


Gregory
Acts

will

be noticed.

xix. G Kal eTTidevTO'i avTOL<;

tov TlavXov

')(elpa<i

rjXOev to

TTvevfia TO dyiov eir avTov^.


1

Thess.

iv.

8 ivaXeaev

5/i9

6 0e6<;

ev dyia<Tfia>

tov

THV KINGDOM

'HALLOWED BE THY NAME.

Oeov Tov BiSovTa to irvevfia avrov to aytou t9

XXX vii. 14
Gal.

BaxTQ) irvevfia

iv.

fiov et? V[xa<;

COME.'

31

(comp. Ezek,

vfjbo.'i

kol ^rjaecrOe).

6 i^aTrecTTeiXei' 6 ^eo? to irvevixa tov vlov avrov et? ra'^

KapSia<; rj^oov, Kpa^ov 'A/9/3a o 7raT)]p.

Rom.

viii.

15 iXd^eTe irvev^a

vloOecrla'^, iv

Kpd^o/xev 'A^/3a'

Traryjp.

The probable connexion

of the last two passages

Lord's Prayer has been already pointed out, see above

Titus

5 7rvVfiaT0<; dyiov ov e'^e^^eey

iii.

Peter

Compare
change

in

vfidq are

Barn.

1,

Is.

14

xi.

2 dvairaverai

to

tov 6eov Truevfia

avTov

iir

e'^'

p.

TrXovaLw?.
dvairaveTai.

i5/z.a?

tov Oeov.

Tri'evfia

the

f.

The

order by which in the Epistle the words rrvevfia

icf)"

brought together should be taken into account: comp.


quoted above p. 30.

Compare
13, 2

iv.

e'^' jj/ia?

with

23

Tim.

i.

also 1 Cor.

16, 2 Cor.

iii.

i.

22,

Rom.

viii.

ff.,

Eph.

i.

14.

We pass to the other clause, Hallowed he Thy mime. In


Luke xi. 2 Codex Bezae reads d'^iaaQi^Tw ovo/xd aov ij) 7]/j,d<;.
The corresponding Latin Version has, 'super nos.' There is no
other evidence that I know of to be derived from any MSS.
The petition thus read is a conflation of two types of phrases
St

found in the Prophets.


8l

ifxe dyidcrovcTL

fiov TO fxeya

on the other

ahv KK\7](Teco
iraTTjp

eV

7]fi(av...av

bvofxa

aov e(f

Vp^a<;

rjfioiv

On

to 6vo/xd

T^/xa?

Kvpie

rifjbd<i

the one hand


fxov,
Is.

iv.

eaTC...

Is.

xxix. 23

1 (cf. Jer. xiv. 9) to ovofia to

Cl^7y---t<"lp^),

iraT-tjp

we compare

Ezek. xxxvi. 23 d<yi,daw to ovofid

t^/jLcov

Ixiii.

pvaat

vp-d<i,

iyevS/xeda w? to

ovSe eKXrjOr] to ovofid aov

e</)'

16,

^V

7]fj,d<i.

19
avr'

<xv

ynp

el

p;^^9 to

dp^TJ^;,

ore ovk

In the latter

passage the coincidence with three leading thoughts of the Lord's


Prayer Our Father, Thy name, deliver us is remarkable. The

language of the Old Testament passed into the Synagogue


Prayers and into the Christian Liturgies. Thus in the MorninoService of a modern Jewish Prayer Book, we find the words,
:

lySy Nnpp hmri

^^^

'^

)^;iv)

!):;in

)::hf2 ^J^ax

and the following remarkable coincidence with the Lord's Prayer,

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

32

In the last passage the occurrence of the two prepositions

should be noticed

in parallel clauses

7^

a reason which will

Similar phrases are found in the Christian

appear later on'.


Liturgies,

for

3 ^nd

Compare the

'

(Hammond

Clementine' Liturgy

TO ovofia rod )^pi(TTov crov iTrLtceKkr^rai

e'^' T^/io?.

p.

22)

similar phrase

has a marked connexion with other clauses of the Lord's Prayer in


the Embolismus of the Liturgy of St James (Hammond p.
Swainson p. 307), ^la to ovofia aov to ayiov, to eTriKXijOev eirl

4cS,

rrju

rjfxeTepav Taireivcoaiv.

Some

passages in early Christian literature bear on this form

of the petition.

There

is

such a passage in Agathangelus' history of the Con-

Agathangelus, the secretary of Tiridates

version of Armenia-.

king of Armenia, relates at length the story

was at

first

the

the apostle of Armenia in the

how

his

ma.ster

then the patron of Gregory

persecutor and
first

quarter of the fourth century.

Incidentally the book records the history of a body of religious

women who

Rome

from

fled

to

rescue

one of their number

Rhipsima from the foul designs of Diocletian. They fly to


Armenia and there build a nunnery. The fame however of
the beauty of Rhipsima reaches Tiridates and he sends for her
In the prayer which Agathangelus puts into
to the palace.
her mouth at this point of the history
occur the

following

words

Trj<;

fj,ov

eTnKeKXrjrai

fjiov,

Koi irdXiv otl

TraytSo^ rov
vfia<;,

i(j>^

To

8iBa^a<i

arofxaTL

Tov'i X6701/9 crov iv T&)

acoOrjuai airo

i^ficop,

e')(dpov,

Kal

i5/x.et?

(c.

73

koX
I'va

ed.

Lagarde) there

'rraiSevcra'?

ev

Koi elirwv otl

eare

ovofid fxou dyidaerai

koL

Bov<;

tovtol^ SvvTjOwfxev

va6<;

[sic]

To

ovo/xd

t^9 ^eoTT^ro?

iv Tat<; KUpSiai^;

These extracts are taken from the Authorised Daily Prayer Book. ..Published
Chief Rabbi Dr Nathan Marcus Adler, 1890, pp. CO, 9; comp.
I cannot think that these clauses are modern.
But I
pp. 37, 45, 59, 61, 75.
have not traced the words in the different groups of the Jewish Prayer Books. The
^

binder the sanction of

intricacy of the subject

may

be seen from Dr Schiller-Szincssy's article Mah-.or in

the Encyclopaedia Britannica.


-

See detached note

C on

p. 38.

THY KINGDOM

'HALLOWED BE THY NAME.


v/Mwv

Kol

Xojou iv

eBcoKaii

rut

arofiaTi

33

COME.'

ani^cracrdai Kat

tjijlwv

Xeyeiv 'AyiaadrjTco to ovofid aov, vvv tovto alrovfxeda irapa aov.


ISov (Tvvq-^drj
rjjj.d'i

KaKcov, fiidvat to iravdyiov ovofia

7r\rjdo<;

KoX Tov vabv rov ovofiaro'? aov.

Ka\ raireLvai vTrdp^ofiei',


aTTo

aKaOaprov

Tfj<i

rjiMV

el

yap kuI

TrXrjv avTo<i (f)u\a^ov

are, it

suspicion.

ecf)

Ta9 i/ry^a?

rjixcov

ttj

Bwd/xec.

afj

ay)

koI viKijaei to aov ovofxa.

vIkt]

rj

aov

da6evel<i

aTCfiiWi, (fnXavOpcoTre aoorep, 6 idaa<; eTrekOelv

TOV Tretpaafiov tovtov' So? rjpZv vlktjv

ydp iaTiv
There

r}p,ei<;

will

be seen, in this story two grounds for

Rome more

though Diocletian was in

First,

than once

in the early years of the fourth century, yet the representation

him suggested by Agathangelus has every appearance of being


Secondly, a nunnery in Rome, well established by
apocryphal.
of

the beginning of the fourth

But the importance


question

of the

century,

a plain anachronism.

is

of the passage for our purpose

independent

is

In martyrologies the prayers of the

of date.

saints are always worth careful inspection from the point of view

of criticism, for there

is

prayer

the

is

may

always the probability that they

In this case

contain relics of ancient formulas.

based on liturgical

forms \

It

is

it

is

clear that

the setting

to

of the petition of the Lord's Prayer that I would call attention.

In the Didache we have a very early witness carrying back the


evidence

the confines

to

of the

The form

Apostolic age.

of

thanksgiving which

is

Eucharist

the resultant of two converging forces, the

(x.

1 f)

is

be said after the reception of the

to

Prayers of the Synagogue and the Lord's Prayer.


for daily

bread and

are paraphrased in the later part.


aoL, irdTep

ptaTovfiiv

KaTaKr]v(oaa<i iv

The

e.g.
ri]v

(1)

liturgical

Tat'i

virep

dyie^,

KaphiaL<;

Emperor

vUas, dpriviKo.
dpuire is very
'

in

The form begins


tov dylov

r)/u,cov,

Koi inrep

tt}<;

(ppove'iv

common

irpbi ^/iSj,

iirl rijv

petitions

one)

evil

thus, ei);^a-

ovofiaTo'i

aov,

when we compare
6

elSths

iirrjpelas Kal fiedodelai

aiToO

p. 48),

rjneT^pav Tatrdvucnv, (2) the prayer

Mark (Hammond

p.

172), 56s

Kal Trpbs Tb ovofid crov Tb dyiov.

ainu,

The word

debs,

(piXdv-

in the Liturgies.

The reading Pater

sancte

in

some old Latin MSS.

.should be

compared

see p. 23.
c.

ov

yvcoaeax; koI

(Hammond

tov irovy}pov...iraar]s

the Lit. of St

The

(or the

character of the prayer becomes clear

5td t6 ovofid aov rb dyiof, to iTriKXijO^v

the

evil

the EmboUsimis of the Liturgy of St James

acrdivetCLv r]fj.uv...pva'ai ^yuas d7r6

for

from

for deliverance

THE lord's prayer

34

Koi d6avaa-La<;,

7rt<TTe&)9

aoV

<To\

The
of a

Bo^a

T)

779

the early church.

in

iyvcopiaa';

hia

rj^ilv

tov

'It^ctoi)

iraibo'i

et9 rov<; alwva's.

latter part of this thanksgiving is substantially a repetition

formula used in an earlier passage

(ix.

and

3),

should

be compared with the second and fourth of the Jewish Eighteen


We may disregard it, for at most it vaguely correBenedictions.'
sponds with the clauses about the Divine Kingdom and Will.
'

But the earlier portion clearly refers to a petition immediately


succeeding the opening words of the Prayer. At first sight the
Our first impression
word 6v6/j,aTO<; is a stumbling block.
is

that

To

must have taken the place of an original irvevixaro^.


latter word, side by side with KaTaK^vo)aa<i iv TaU

it

this

many

Kaphla'i r)jxwv,

Hermas Mand.
in

x.

2,

1,

once suggest themselves, e.g.


Sim. v. 6. 5, passages which

at

parallels

1, v.

iii.

2,

turn are based on James

their

correction either of the text of the

iv.

But

5.

DidacM

against

this

or of the Didachist's

report of his original there are at least three objections,

(a)

The

Neither the Didachist himself nor


under
any temptation to change an easy
would
be
the copyists
correction

obvious.

too

is

word into a hard

one.

LXX., iv ^T]ka>, ov

The

(6)

actual phrase

Pr\^2^\ ro

KareaKrjvcoaa

is

found in the

opofici

fiov

eKel

efiTTpocrOev (Jer. vii. 12), tov toitov ov i^eXe^dfirjv KaracrKrjvcocrai,

ovofid fiov eKel (Neh.

(]3^7) ro
xvi.

6,

11,

xvi.

is

ovofxa

the Tiuelve Apostles p.

*^^^)>

73

6v6fi.aT6<; (TOV

^^-

In Deut.

xii,

11, xiv. 23,

all

these

places

by
the

(see Dr Taylor The Teaching of


Compare also Ezek. xliii. 7 iv oh

f.).

^xxiv.

C^^^~\2'^'t2)

In

eKel.

KaTacTKTqvwar) to ovofid fiov iv

(U^'\^^^

9).

translators represent DK^ ')t2^ |5Si^7

the

avTov
to the Sanctuary
to

eTTCKXrjOrjvac

reference

i.

fiecra)

8
(c)

oXkov

IcrparfK

tov alcova

i^e^rjXcoaav to

aK^vw/xa tov

The phrase

stands in the

as

it

Didache has remarkable points of contact with the passage in


Agathangelus to ovofid fiov iTrtKeKXrjTat i(p^ vfia^ koL vfiel<; iaTe
to Travdycov ovofid crov

va6<;

T^9

fffid'i

Kol TOV vabv tov ovofiaTo^ aov.

deoTrjTO'i

fiov

fiidvat

fi-qOijcreTac Be irrl tu> ovofiaTi

Kvpiov

ivB6^Q)<i olKohofirjO)].

Kvpiov.
ttcu?;

Compare Barn. 16
jrpoae'x^eTe, 'iva

finOeTe.

i(f>'

oIkoBo-

vad<;

tov

Xa^ovTe<i ti)v a(f>eaLv

afiapnoov KaX eKiriaavre'i

Toiv

iraXiv i^
6

THY KINGDOM

HALLOWED BE THY NAME.

'

^eo? KaroiKel iv

iirl

Of the

icf

i^fia<;

opofui

Kaivoc,

iyevofieOa

KaTOLKr^rripiw

i^fiojv

a\i}0w<i

In the last passage the reference

vfiiv.

Baptism (comp. Hernias

clearly to

to

rw

8i6 iv

KTi^ofievoc.

dp'y^T]<;

35

COME.'

of Cod.

Vis.

iii.

3.

is

5)^

a faint traced I think, survives in

the gloss 'in nobis,' iv ^fiiv (compare ^,


Thus,
p. 32).
7J^,
Tertullian f?e OrafiOAie iii.
Cumdicimus: Sanctificetur

nomen

tiium, id petimus, ut sanctificetur in nobis, qui

sumus,

simul et in

in

illo

quos adhuc gratia dei expectat, ut et huic

ceteris,

praecepto pareamus, orando pro omnibus, etiam

pro

inimicis

Ideoque suspensa enuntiationc non dicentes, Sanctificetur


in nobis, in omnibus dicimus.
Cyprian de Orat. Dominica. Sanctificetur nomen tuum. Non
quod optemus Deo ut sanctificetur orationibus nostris, sed quod
nostris.

petamus ab eo ut nomen

ejus sanctificetur in nobis.

Cyril Catech. Mystag.

v.

ei/^o/ie^a iv

rjfilv

dyLaadrjvai, to ovofxa

Tov 0eov'

ov-^^

on

aW

tj/jlIv

aytov ylverat, ayia^o/xevoc'; Koi d^ia rov dycacr/xov

OTL iv

iK rov

ixt)

eivai

dyiov

iirl

ro

epx^Tcii'

elvai,

TTOiovaiv.

Such
able

to

is

the evidence as to this clause, so far as I have been

collect

it.

appears to accept

of Cod.

of iXdiro)

Dr Hort (Notes on Select Readings p. 60)


Dr Sanday's suggestion that the i<f r]p,a<;

in the petition about the Divine

djcov

TO

Trvev/xd

aov

i(f

Name 'may

r]fid<i

k.t.X.'

be a trace

The

fresh

evidence however here discussed tends, I think, to shew that the

two clauses are

separate,

though very cognate, developments of

petitions in the Lord's Prayer.

The analogy

of the petition for the

Holy

Spirit discussed

above and a study of the passages in the New Testament which


speak of the Divine Name in reference to Baptism suggest that
this

e(/)'

7;/i,a? is

for use at

Acts

connected with an adaptation of the Lord's Prayer

Baptism.

xxii.

The

following passages should be compared

16 Pdirriaai koX diroXovaac

rd<i d[iapria<i crov iirt-

Ka\ecrdfi6vo<i ro ovop.a avrov.


1

The language

in several passages in

^aiTiKelav rov deov ovdels fijeXevcrfrai, ei

Hermas should be compared,

/xrj

e.g.

ei'j

XdjSoi rb ofo/xa toO vlov avrod (Sim.

rr]v

ix.

12. 4, 8).
2 It is

curious that the English version of the Lord's Prayer in the BisJiops'

Book (1537) has Thy

kiiujilom

come unto

its.

32

THE lord's prayer

36
Jas.

12

f.,

rjixat;

ecfi'

xxii. 4), also

2 Thess.

i.

Compare the imagery

koXov ovojxa ro eVt-

^\aa(f)i]fiovat,v ro

7 ovK avroi

ii.

Kkr^Okv

the early church.

in

Apocalypse

of the

(iii.

Ep. Clem. 64.

12 ottw? iuBo^aadfj to ovofia rov Kvpiov

The addition
iv
Kal vfMel'i iv avrw.
when this passage is compared with Is. Ixvi.
V/J.CV

tj/ioov 'Itjo-ov

of eV v/xiu

is

striking

5 iva to ovofui Kvpiov

ho^aadfj.

The idea

of the Baptismal formula (et? to ovofia...) lies at the

The Divine Name

root of these expressions.

man who

baptized,

is

and he

So he becomes a 'sanctuary'
(TKeva

iK\o'yrj<i...Tov

in

c.

Name

27 (Ed. Bonnet

see above p. 29).

Thomae

Karax^ias

eVi

avrap koi

K<pa\^s

Trjs

27

c.

77

me

Koi

v\l/'i<TTOv

p^TTjp

(vairXayxvio.

T]

77

^piaas avrovs rjp^aro

koi

aXetx/^aj

(\de

bvvapis

i]

eXdi to )(api(Tpa to vyp-iaTov'

reXei'a'

the

\a^u>v be 6 anoaroXoi tXaiov

X/yftv 'EX^ to dyiov ovopa rov p^ptoroi) ro vrrep nav ovofia'

Tov

dwells, a

ovofia (Acts ix. 15)

have to thank the Editor of this series for pointing out to

following passage in the Acta


Koi

which the Divine

^aaTaaai to

Note on Acta Thomae,

A.

invoked upon the

is

brought into union with the Name.

is

IKOe

(v(nrXay\vos...fKd to ayiov rrvevfia koi KaOapicrov tovs v((f>povs avTcov

T]

Koi TTju Kap8iav, Koi iniaf^payiaov avToi/s

ovofia iraTpos

els

vlov koI

Koi

ayiov

We

have here a Gnostic formula based on the Prayers of the


Church (see below n. 1). The following points are to be noticed (a) the
prayer (\6e t6 ayiov rrvtvpa k.t.X. is here clearly seen to be connected
with the Chrism
(b) the prayer iXde to ayiou ovop.a k.t.\. confirms the
TTvtvpaTos.

suggestion that the i(f ^p.as of Cod. D is an addition to the Lord's Prayer
closely parallel to the prayer for the Holy Spirit ; (c) the prayer eXdt 17
8vpap.ii

on

TOV

vy\fla-Tov

(Lc.

i.

35)

illustrates

the

Latin form quoted above

p. 29.

The

following passages of these Acts, clearly derived from formulas of the

Church, are worth notice as illustrating the petitions under discussion


Baptismal prayers: ikOeTa aov ^ (Iprpn) Ka\ aKTjvcoadTa ep avrolr, onas
(rt)
:

dno

Kadapiadciarip

t<op

TrpoTepcov avrcip Trpa^eap (p.

35

comp.

enidels

aurolr

x^'P" enrev Ecrrai e(}) vfids t) elpr]vq tov Kvpiov, p. 48), eXde Ka\ aKJJpoxrop e'p
Tols v8aai TovToii, iva to \api(Tfj.a tov dyiov nvevpaTos T(\ei(os e'p avTo7s TeXeioidfj
TTjp

I'p.

37), 'iva...Ka\ 8e^opai

j)

dvpofxis

in

many

a-ov

'

xayw ac^paylba

i8pvp$i]To>

eVt

Compare the prominence

describes,

of

tt)p

'

the

koi yev(t>p.ai vaos ayiot (p. 56), (XdeWo)

8ov\t]p

Name

'

crov

MvyBopiap ^

eXevdepia

in the strange Gnostic Baptismal rite,

points clearly a parody of the Church's service, which Irenaeus

and

especially the words,

Compare note A ou

this page.

avTrj

eip-qvri iraaiv, e(p'

(i.

14. 2)

oOs t6 ovofia tovto eiravairaveTai.

'HALLOWED BE THY NAME.


ayiaaov avroi'S

(p.

68),

aov

Trv(vfji.aTot (p.

TO

(Tov

Koi

8f]

inro^oyprjcrai

Kal

8a>p(a

ayiov

(7Tt(})r]p.i((TaC

89

cotmexion (comp. pp.

56,

fvptdfj)

po\va-fj.co

fif)

thangelus quoted above,


i8ov

KaTaro\p,u>nfv

(K6f

TCI

dnoKpvtpoi

Tw

eVi

as

is

Kul
to.

t]

TrepiCTTfpa

vaovs

Kara^Loxrov tovtco

fKaio)

The
aov

fie

ds

use of vaos in this

ovoiia...lva

vaos a-ov

compared with the words of AgaEiicharistic prayer:


eniKXrjcreas Toii

'irja-ov

Xpia-re...

aylov crou ovop.aTOi...

anoKpvcfia fKcfyaivovcra koi to dnopprjTa

tovs StSu/xour veocraovs

t]

aylov

roii

ivibpvav tovto

8vvafiti,

i\de

yevvQicra,

iJ.i]Tqp...f\6 Ka\ icoivwvrjcrov rfplv ev TavTjj rrj ev^apicTTia tjv 7roiovfj.ev

aov

6z/6/xari

also

Upa

t<u

82).

6 fjujvvcras

(b)

37

COME.'

rois ixQpoli avrov p.(f)va-^(ras (Is rd

(p.

to be

is

(TTrXdyxva ra TfX(ia...(\6(
rj

ovop.a
ei

<tv

32.

[h

r]s

axirovs

avrov

viktjtikt]

tj

8t*

fvx^apLaTLns

rrji

(pavfpa KadicTTuxraf
Tj

ov6fjLaTi...iToiri(Tov

fVtSr^/xiycrat

(Troir]a'as...Ka\

a^ios

fv

(tw

tu>

81), eXdfrw, 'Ij^ctoC,

TO fKaiov...f\d(Tu>
OTricrai

tv

THY KINGDOM

The Gnostic character

k.t.X.

the fact that

is

it

of this passage

is

clear,

a parody of the Church's Eucharistic eVi-

K\r]a-is.

Note on some Syrian Baptismal Prayers

B.

(see p. 29).

I append some prayers from the Latin translation of a Syriac Book of


Baptismal Offices
D. Severi Alexaudrini quondam Patriarchae de ritibus
baptismi... liber... Guidone Fabricio Boderiano Exscriptore et Interprete,
Antverpiae...l572' (see Resch Agrapha pp. 361 fi'.). The date of the Book in
'

its

present form must be late

for in

what

is

substantially the

'

Constantino-

a Filio procedit occur. In the title there is


probal:)ly a confusion Avith Severus Patriarch of Antioch early in the sixth
century (Resch p. 372). The prayers to which I wish to call attention are
politau' Creed the words

et

these
(1)

p.

'Velis

63.

Spiritum Sanctum

igitur

praepiu-ga et sanctifica eos,


(2) p. 65.

eos immittere tuum ilium


omnium eorum membra ac
;

Trinitas, ita ut adaequentiu" sanctae unctioui...'

manus Apostolorum sanctorum dedisti


Nunc autem cum etiam

Pater Sancte, qui per

'

Spiritum Sanctum tuum


in

Domine super

inhabita et scrutare

et

illis

qui baptizabantur

umbra manuum mearum familiarem

super eos qui baptizandi sunt, et

te exhibeas, mitte Spiritum

cum

repleti

fuerint

illo,

Sanctum

afierant

tibi

fructum trigesimum...'
(3)

p.

'0

13.

unicum Filium tuum Deum verbum, duni


Sanctum ilium Spiritum tuum misisti
Jordanides undas sanctificavit nunc etiam, Domine

qui super

in terra baptismi ordinationem faceret,

in specie columbae, qui

mi, velis ut Spiritus

operiat, eosque perfice

sancto lavacro
(4) p. 92.

Sanctus tuus hosce servos tuos qui baptizantur


ac domos Christi tui eos constitue, expurgans cos

ille

tuo.'
'

Immitte super eos

illius spiritus tui vivificantis

gratiam, et

eos imple ipsius sanctitate.'

In referring to the Latin forms (see above

p. 30) I

omitted to notice

THE lord's prayer

38

that through these we

may

the early church.

in

back to the apparently apostolic formula


hymns of the Western
Chm-ch
Voii, supenie Spiritm ; Veni, Creator Spiritus (Newman Hi/mni
Ecdesiae pp. 91, 94). From the same source arc probably derived the words
(\d(T<o TO dyiov

trace

k.t.X,,

TT^'eD/io,

the great Pentecostal

of the Collect (familiar to us in

Sancti Spiritus cogitjitiones cordis

English dress)

For the reference


It

is

to

edited

Purifica per infusionem

iiostri.

Note ox Agathangelus

C.

443, 450.

its

(see above p. 32).

Agathangelus I am indebted to Resch Agrapha pp.


by Lagardc 'aus dem funfunddrcissigsten Bande der

Abhandlungen der koniglicheu Gescllschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingcn,'


1887.
I gather into a note some points of interest.
(1) Lagarde bases his
opinion (a) that the Greek is a translation, on the barbarous character of the
language; (6) that it is a translation from an Armenian original, on an
investigation of the quot^itions from the New Testament (pp. 134, 129 ff.).
Some passages of the New Testament are taken, Lagarde allows, from the
original Greek.

This he says would be natural

the translator would

know

the Greek of passiiges occurring frequently in the worship of the Church at

Byzantium
{a)

(p.

The following points however

134).

are worthy of note,

the translator knew the Greek of 2 Peter; for he speaks

Prophets

o\ kui iyivovTo (fxoa-Tfjpfs iv T<a

paronomasia occurs
'Piylrifir],

(c.

Kara to ovofia

aoii

Tov ox^ov.

compare

Koi Tjnovcrav

32) of the
19)

{h)

which could not be a translation, d Se /xoAtora,


dXj^das (^eppiff))]^ ac.t.X.: the words of course may be
;

(c)

the translator was apparently acquainted

with the Martyrdom of Polycarp in Greek,


p. 281,

i.

75)

an interpolation of the translator

Resch

(c.

avxfJ^^p^ totto) (2 Pet.

C.

for,

besides the passage given by

75 Ka\ iyivero cr(pu8poTaTri

(pcoviii

^poirrrj cSarf eVc^o/Seio-^at

Xfyovarjs npos avras 'AvSpl^ecrde kol dapcr f'lre

with Mart. Pohjc. ix. (2) As to the clauses of the Prayer other than that
about the hallowing of the Divine Name (a) to the words quoted above
:

(p.

32) OTTO

T7]% 7rayl8os

tov i^Qpoii,

add

C.

62

Iva

viKija-confv

tqs

8(ivas TOV e)(6pox) nayidas, Koi to ovofid crov, dfcrnoTa, So^aadrj k.t.X.,
TTOvqpoi apLa T(a avvfpyu) avToxi, as nairroTf, koi vvv eWparrr/crfrai

gloss (quoted p. 33) o iacai eVf X^etf

ayiov eiiayyiXiov Kara

Trji Kf(f>aXfjs

C.

(6)

87 o Se

note the

comp. p. 68. (3) There is an account


by Leontius at Caesarea (c. 139) to Se

k.t.X.

of Gregory's consecration as Bishop

BoXlas Koi

avTov

Kovtj^icravTts entdr^Kav ra? ^flpas k.t.X.

In the account of the baptism of the king, &c., there is a reminiscence of


the fire kindled in the Jordan at our Lord's baptism (^w? o-cpoSpoTaTov (f)aveu
(4)

vdaTov tov norafiov, tv6a i^anTiIn Phipsima's prayer quoted above (p. 32 f.), with vaos Tfjs
TOV vaov TOV ovoparos aov, compare the Syrian Bai)tismal

Ka6^ 6p.0Lwp.a CTTvXov (fi(OTO(idovs eon] eVi tcov


(ovTo.

(5)

deoTTjTos p-ov
rite of

Severus (see above

p.

37)

'domos Christi

tui eos constitue.'

cannot

help thinking that Agathangelus would well repay more careful examination

by some competent

liturgical scholar.

III.

reNH9HT00 TO BeAHMA COY,


cioc

Three

points here

eN oypANO) kai ni rnc (St Matthew).

demand

notice.

(1)

There are clear remi-

niscences of the petition in the N. T.: Matt. xxvi. 42 yevrjdiJTa) to

42

39, Mc. xiv. 36), Lc. xxii.

to

6eXT)fj,d

aov (comp.

OeKrjiia.

fiov aXXd to aov yLveado) (the reading yvecr6(o has very

v.

14 tov Kvpiov to

slight attestation), Acts xxi,

(where there
Polyc.

vii.

some

is

21, xii. 50, xviii. 14,

vii.

Mc.

iii.

in these passages {yevrjOrjTw, lyevea-OcOy yLviaOo))

we assume an Aramaic

for if

(2)

iv.

35.
is

15

<ytvicr6(o).

The

easily

variation

accounted
inde-

Vulgate Syriac has "|oau in

Acts

10, xxvi. 42, Lc. xxii. 42,

vi.

<yi,via6co

original, which would be

The

terminate in regard to tense.


Matt.

deXTjfia

fir)

slight authority for yevia-Oco); com-p. Mart.

TO Oekrjfia tov 0eov yeveaOco (Eus. H. E.

Comp. Matt.

irXrjv

xxi.

14

The Old Syriac has j^j_L-*^^ ^octuo (and-let-there-be


The plural to, OiKrjixaTa is used of the divine will

thy- wills) ^

in Ps. XV. 3,

cii.

7,

ex. 2,

Is.

xliv.

28 (quoted

in

Acts

22).

xiii.

In the N. T. in Mc. iii. 35 09 dv ttol^ctt] to Bekrj^a tov Oeov


(Matt. xii. 50 tov iraTpo'^ fMov tov iv ovpavoZ<i), ovto<; d8X(f)6<i k.t.X.
Cod. B, supported by a quotation given by Epiphanius {Haer.
^

The Syriac Versions may be taken

to represent

approximately the original

Aramaic form of our Lord's sayings. 'Although Josephus says that the Jews
could understand the Syrians, the Jewish Aramaic was nevertheless a distinct
dialect in some respects, as may be seen from the words Xa^a (Matt, xxvii. 46, in
Syriac lemaua), Boavepyts (Mc. iii. 17, in Syriac bene ra'ma)': Neubauer in
Studia Biblica i. p. 53. In the case of the Lord's Prayer, which in the earliest
Syriac Version

is

the result not so

much

of later translation as of continuous

tradition reaching back to the earliest Apostolic times, probably the

in this Version
-

We may

is

practically identical with the

Aramaic

form given

original.

compare the phrase which forms a very common beginning of Jewish

prayers, e.g. The Authorised Prayer

But the Hebrew N. T.

of Delitzsch

Book

p.

and that

69

of Salkinson-Ginsburg both have

In this connexion a passive voice of HEJ'y seems less natural than the Qal
latter occurs e.g. in the Eabbinic saying {Pirqe Aboth v. 30)

'

In Lc.

xxii.

42

it

has the singular.

nbr;
;

the

THE lord's prayer

40

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IN

XXX. 14) from an Ebionite Gospel, has rd OeXr^fiara.

Matt.

vii.

21

ovpavoU Cod.

has rd OeXruxaTa.

In Eph.

passage of the N. T. where the plural occurs,


the manifoldness of unsatisfied lust (comp.

ii.

3,

the only other

seems to point to

it

13, Jer. xxiii.

Is. Iviii. 8,

There appears to be no other authority

26).

Again, in

OeXTjfxa rov iraTpo^ fiou tov iv roi?

ttolwv to

for this reading in

the Lord's Prayer^

Bengel in his note on the petition quotes the following


(3)
words from the Catechismus Romanus put forth by the Council of
Trent"'*: 'Pastoris erunt partes monere fidelem populum verba ilia
Sicut in coelo et in terra ad singulas referri posse siugularum
(triuni) primarum postulationum, ut, Sauctificetur nomen tuum,
Itein

sicut in coelo et in terra.

Similiter Fiat voluntas tua, sicut in coelo et in

coelo et in terra.

terra.'

For

which
Rome, there

this interpretation,

teachers by the Church of

For

Adveniat regnum tuum, sicut in


is

thus enjoined upon her

is

much

to be said.

in the first place this interpretation harmonises

both with

the twofold division of the petitions of the Prayer and with the

invocation wdth which

His sons on earth

it

He

opens
is

God

is

our Father, the Father of

in Heaven.

It

is

natural that this

thought should exercise a continuous influence on the petitions


which immediately follow, rather than that it should at once
fall

into the background to reappear at a later point

Prayer.

In the second place,

the Prayer as given by St

we have an

explanation

adaptation,

of

r)[jbd'i

i.e.

if this

Matthew was

why

of the

connexion of the petitions in


recognised in early times,

the additions made for the purpose

the prayer for the Holy Spirit and the e^'

of Codex Bezae, attach themselves to the Prayer as given

St Luke, where the words

Further confirmation
several clauses,

a;? ev
is

(a) Little

ovpavai koI

e-rrl yrj<i

by

do not occur.

derived from a consideration of the

need be said

of the petition to

which

We

the words as in heaven so on earth are immediately joined.

should however compare Ps. cxxxiv.

{iravra

iiroLijaeu 6 Kvpio<; ev tu> ovpavu) koI iv ttj yfj)

and

oaa
1

TJdiXrja-ev

Mace.

iii.

GO

^
Tlie reading of the Old Syriac (plural verb and noun) is reproduced, as Prof.
Bensly has kindly pointed out to me, in the Syriac Acts of Judas Thomas (ed.
Wright, vol. i. p. v-^u-t^ vol. ii. p. 279, Eng. Tr.).
;

Pars

IV. c. X.

qu.

iii.

'THY WILL BE DONE, AS IN HEAVEN, SO ON EARTH.'


8'

(a;9

av y

(b)
No less
iv ovpavw ovt(o TTOu'^aei).
words connect themselves with the petition

6i\T]fia

naturally do

the

Thy kingdom

come^.

iv TO)

by

ovpavw Koi

Compare

cttI

connexion

this

41

is

Chron. xxix. 11

aii

rwv

Trdvrcov

t^? 7^9 Seo-TTo^et?. The thought conveyed


indeed implied in all the very numerous

passages which speak of the coming of the kingdom of Heaven


or of God, e.g. Dan. ii. 44, vii. 14, Matt. iii. 2, xvi. 28, Lc. xi. 20,
xvii. 20, xxi.

31, Apoc.

xi.

15.

harmonises with what

It

at

is

least a probable reading of the Angelic song which prefaces the


history of our Lord's life in St Luke's Gospel (ii. 14) Bo^a iv

6ew Koi iirX 7)79', and with the words of our Lord which
Matthew's Gospel (xxviii. 18) ihoOr) jxoi iraaa i^ovaia
ovpavw Kol iirl [t^9] 7^9. If it be objected that this arrange-

v-^i<jToi<;

close St
iv

ment

of the

clauses

introduces

the idea of the coining of the

kingdom of God in Heaven, it is sufficient to reply that such


an objection overlooks a common idiom the coming of the kingdom
on earth answers to its existence in heaven. Further, we may compare Col. i. 20 {airoKaraXka^at ra Travta eU avr6v...iT6 tu iirl rfj<i
:

7^9 etre ra iv Tot9 ovpavoh), Eph. i. 10, iii. 15. (c) The sequence
Halloiued be Thy name, as in heaven, so on earth presents no difficulty and
viii.

commends

2 Kupte

rfi <y^'

itself

by

Compare

its intrinsic fitness.

Kvpto<; rjixwv, w<i Oavfxacrrov ro ovofid

OTL iirrjpOrj

rj

rwv ovpavSv.

fieyaXoTrpeTTia <70V vTrepdvo)

the Authorised Daily Prayer Book I find

Ps.

crov iv iraa-r)

comp.

(p. 45,

In

37) the

p.

prayer
:

n^^

DiiD *^:^3 inix u'pnpt^^

This formula, part of the n\^)1p,

is

&?m

'^jp^Tiw^

tr":npj

probably of ancient originl

Compare Cyprian de Oratione Dominica, Bene autem regnum Dei petimus, id


regnum caeleste, quia est et terrestre regnum.
- Dr Hort Introduction, Notes on Select Readings p. 56.
2 When if tols ovpavoh of the first clause of the Prayer is compared with
In the second case the article is
iv ovpavQ, we notice a double contrast.
(1)
heaven as compared with earth
wanting.
Its absence emphasises character
(comp. 2 Cor. xii. 2). (2) The plural is used in the first, the singular in the later
^

est,

clause.

In the N. T. the plural [ovpavoi) expresses the idea of majesty through the

notion of vastness,
especially

Eph.

iv.

e.g.

Phil.

iii.

20,

Hebr.

vii.

10 {irayTuv tuv ovpavQv), Hebr.

commonly used when heaven

as one place

is

26,

viii.

1,

iv. 14, vii.

23,

xii.

26.

The

25.

Note

singular

contrasted with earth, e.g. Matt.

25, xxviii. 18, 1 Cor. viii. 5, Jas. v. 12; yet see Matt. xvi. 19,

Eph.

i.

10,

iii.

15.

is

xi.

IV.
TON AproN HMCJON TON enioyciON

AOC HmTn CHMepoN (St Matthew).


TON (\pTON HMOON TON eniOyCION
AiAoy hmTn to ka9' HwepAN (St Luke).

There

SlBov,

809,

(1)

are two points here in which the two Go.spels differ,

variations

(2)

demand a

cTJjfjLepov,

TO

Both

Kad^ rj^epav.

brief notice before

we

these

of

enter upon (3) the dis-

cussion of the main problem suggested by this clause.

The Old and

(1)

Gospels

2(n.

the Vulgate Syriac versions have in both

This word, like the

terminate in regard to tense.

Hebrew

(H^n),

\T\

inde-

is

was originally
Greek

If the Prayer then

in Aramaic, the original for 'give' could be represented in

equally well by the aorist and by the present imperative.

So?

would naturally be used in the Greek form in which ar^ixepov had


a place, Zihov as naturally in the form in which to KaO' ruiepav
occurred ^
(2)

Mr

T. E.

But what of the variations a-^/xepou, to Ka& r]p,epav ?


Page {Expositor, Third Series, vol. vii. p. 436), arguing

from the use in both Gospels of the solecism iiriovaio'i that the
whether Avritten or oral^which the Avriters employed
tradition
was, as regards these particular words, expressed in Greek,' goes on
'

to say,

(2)
(3)

23

'

the phrase to Kad^ rjiiepav occurs only three times in the

Compare the

Matt. xiv. 19

following variations: (1) Matt.


(iSuiKtv)

\\

Mc.

Matt. xxiv. 45 (5oCmt), Lc.


(iSi^ovv).

vi.

xii.

42 (MbvaCj,

(4)

42

v.

41, Lc. ix. 16

[56s)

{i5i5ov),

\\

Lc.

Jn.

Matt, xsvii. 34

vi.

vi.

30

[bloov),

11 (pUSwKiv),

[iSuiKav),

Mc.

xv.

43

GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD.'

'

New

Testament, namely here and Luke xix. 47, Acts xvii. 11 *; so


it is certainly Luke's own {dcht Lukanisch, Weiss), and
therefore the aij/xepov of Matthew is much more likely to be
that

There are strong reasons

original.'

for

thinking that the Prayer

existed originally in an Aramaic form, and I hope presently to

Mr Page

dispose of the argument which

Further, assuming that of-the-day was the original

iTTCovaio';.

word

founds on the use of

in this clause, there

much

is

probability in the assumption

that day-hy-day was a primitive variation (see below

Mr

however

in this case

Even

p. 45).

new

Page's question only takes a

form.

he might ask, that the phrase rb Kaff -qixepav


is peculiar to St Luke among the writers of the New Testament
go far to shew that St Luke, instead of simply incorporating
in his Gospel a form of the Lord's Prayer current among the
Hellenistic Disciples, interweaves into that current form phrases

Does not the

own

of his

fact,

An

answer to this important question

supplied

is

fact that to KaO' rjfikpav, in itself a classical phrase (e.g.

by the

Aristoph. Eq. 1126),

may

somewhat clumsy phrase

be regarded as a shortened form of a

also

of the LXX.; a phrase which, occurring in

the account of the giving of the Manna, would very naturally be


used by the Hellenists in their translation of the Lord's Prayer, but

which at the same time in

The presence then

use=.
1

In the latter passage,

(including

Mc.

NADEg
Lc.

xiv. 49,

dbf ev

r(f)

iepi^,

Ex.

ix. 23, xxii. 53,

should be noticed, there


Acts

ii.

For

r6.

46 {Kad'

Cor. xv. 31, 2 Cor.

xi. 28,

is

Kad'

ijfxepau re

KXQvTis re kut oIkov aprov, fjiereXan^avov

5 5 iav

xvi.

of this phrase in St

13 61) for the omission of

(xvii. 17), xix, 9, 1


-

it

form was unfit

its full

Hebr.

<rvvaydyu(n to Kad^ rjfjJpav

vii.

for liturgical

Luke becomes

considerable authority
see Matt. xxvi. 55,

ij/j-ipav

npoaKaprepovvris ofModv^a-

Tpo<pTJs k.t.\.),

ii.

7]iJ.ipas

iv

T3

Txi v/x^pg),

vfiipq. avrov),

5 (Theodot. to t^j
14, ix. 24.

'

V^pas

Lev.

Ezra
Kad'

The occurrence

xxiii. 37,
iii.

Kings

eis 7]fj.^pa.v=

34 (lxx.

4, Jer. Hi.

comp.

rj/xepai');

viii.

47,

iii.

2,

27, x. 11.

DV DV ^^Pf.

Comp. ver, 4 rb rrjs r)nipat ds 7)iJ.ipav (1 Chron. xvi. 37) = 10^3 D1''"~I5'^..
Hebrew phrase occurs in Ex. v. 13 (lxx. to. ipya rd KadriKovra Kad'
19 (to KadiJKov

to

"1^'^..

This

last
v.

rinipav),

59, 2 Kings xxv. 30 (\6yov


e| 7)ixipa%

Chron.

ei's

xvi. 37, 2

i]nipav),

Chron.

of several allusions (Ps. Ixxviii. 24; cv. 40;

Dan.
viii.

Nehem.

i.

13,
ix.

15; Sap. Sol. xvi. 20; &c.) to the corn, or bread, of heaven makes it sufficiently
probable a priori that the Lord's Prayer also should have some reference to the
giving of the
3.
i.e.

manna' (Dr Taylor Sayings

In the AiUhorised Daily P. B.

Ex.

119.

xvi.

436, has

(p. 92),

a place in the

p. 139).

the

'

Compare John

section of the

vi. 32,

manna

Morning Service by the

'

1 Cor. x.

(pn nCIS),

side of

Gen.

xxii.

THE lord's prayer

44

IX

THE EARLY CHURCH.

some extent an indication that he preserved a form of the Lord's


Prayer which was in actual use in the worship of the Disciples.

From

(3)

these easier questions I turn at once to the difficult

problem which the clause suggests,


origin of the

word

the meaning and the

viz.,

iiriovcno^.

If Ave could put ourselves in the position of one reading this


for the first time, after

clause

at the appearance of a stranger

sense of bewilderment

first

unique function in the Prayer.


Prayer, for the phrase o iv
fall

under

this

category.

There

is

stranger

is

roh ovpauoU can hardly be said


The language of each clause is

unique function does not seem to justify


If iTTLovaio^

has

no other epithet in the

characterised by the brevity of severe simplicity.

useful.

we

heretofore in Greek,

be impressed with the fact that this

should

to

our

unknown

Further, this
necessary or

itself as

to be connected, as

seems certain

it

it

with ^ i-mova-a^, and to be taken to mean of tlie coming


day, the word is exposed to the charge of introducing tautology

must

be,

into the Prayer as well

as

of being alien to its simplicity of

This becomes clear at once if the translation is given


and bald form Give us to-day (day-by-day) our bread
This poverty of meaning has been used as a
of the coming day.'
powerful argument in favour of what I venture to consider an
language.

iu a literal

'

impossible mystical interpretation of the word.

Mr

M'^Clellan asks

concise

Bp

vision,

{New Testament

p. 645),

'Is it conceivable,*

'that in this inimitably

and sublime prayer there could have been perpetrated

so

Lightfoot's conclusion as to the meaning of ^ttioiVios [On a Fresh Be-

Appendix),

it

will be seen, I absolutely accept,

though

it

is

only

fair to

venture to interpret some of the evidence on which he bases it in a


different way.
I am indebted to that Appendix for a large part of the material

add that
I

have used in the investigation which follows. On the other hand Mr M'^Clellan
Testament p. 632 ff.) argues fervently for the meaning future. His con-

{Xeic

clusion

life

may

be stated iu his

crastifws, that

come."'
its

own words

which shall be perfected and

The

italics

i.e.

are his.
If so

many

The statement

'As the food given for nourishin<j


future world,
of this view

layers of meaning,

spiritual food in

it is ^ttioiVios,

IPID,

future,

is,

i.e.

it

seems to me,

pertaining to the

the present in preparation for the future,

could be wrapped up in one single word,


strain.

tlte

oikho^ tov etnhvTos or ytiAXocros oiwvos, ^'proper to the world to

is,

best refutation.

future world,

(p. 646),

enduriiirj in

human language

could not bear the

'GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD.'

45

and mean a tautology as this, "Our bread which is daily


I admit the cogency of the reasoning so vigorously
expressed, but I think it points to a conclusion different from that
diffuse

give us daily?'"

which the writer maintains.


I hazard then the conjecture, as a working hypothesis, that the
original form of the clause might be represented thus in Syriac

to-us

This Syriac form

39

of-the-day

our-bread

based on the Old Syriac Version which

we can hardly doubt, the original Aramaic (see above


Looking at Luke xi. 3 in the same version we may

reproduces,
p.

is

give

n.).

first two variations.


was current as well as our-bread; of-every-

further suppose that there were from the

The-hread (]!kiJi)

day

(JaOO

No?)

as well as of-the-day^.

We

have already seen how the two clauses Hallowed be thy


name, Thy kingdom come were in all probability adapted for
These adaptations, being only needed for special
liturgical use.
occasions,

have

left

The word

but slight traces behind.

i-rrtovaco'i

I believe, a similar adaptation, but, being in daily use

is,

the Greek-speaking Christians of the earliest days,

it

among

has won

for

a permanent place in the Prayer.


There seems to be evidence that considerable latitude was
allowed as to the insertion in the Synagogue prayers of petitions

itself

suitable to the season or the day*.


At least equal freedom would
be claimed in the assemblies of 'the Brethren.' Thus it is no

(D1*

Compare the prayer (Berakoth 60

b)

'And

give

me

^22) DVn) to grace &c.' (Dr Taylor Sayings &c.

Tj diaKovia ry

KaOrj/jLepivrj

(Syr.

xO O

over this day and every day

p. 142).

Comp. Acts

^O ?, Hieron. cotidiano

vi. 1

tv

comp. the Old

and the Old Latin of the Lord's Prayer). The StaKovia. of the
Sia/cocta of the Church on earth.
We
may perhaps suppose that St Luke's record of the custom of the Church is
shaped by a remembrance of the Prayer. As to the custom itself, it may well
have been connected with the Synagogue system of the Brethren (see p. 6),
and, if so, with the petition of the chief Prayer. Comp. Chrys. (viii. p. 257) rov
Syr. of Lc. xi. 3

Father in Heaven must be reflected in the

iprov Tov iiriovaiov, Tovricm, rov KaO-qnepivov.

Cf.

Judith

'

xii.

15

TTjf

Ka6ri[xepivT]v

Slcurav.
2

For the prayers used in the morning and the evening


Synagoga Vetere p. 1054 for the original
these see Zunz Die Gottesd. Vortriige p. 369.

See above p.

recitation of the

form of

14.

Shema

see Vitringa de

THE lord's prayer

46

the early church.

in

violently improbable hypothesis

we suppose

if

that

when the

Lord's

Prayer was used in the morning or in the evening Prayers' of the


Hebrew Brethren and of the Hellenistic Brethren/ at first at
'

'

'

Jerusalem and later in Northern Syria, it became customary to


adapt the one clause which speaks of time to the particular hour
of prayer.

Among

Hebrew and Syrian

the

Christians the phrase as

it

would be appropriate for the morning


Prayer.
Of this form, as one very familiar to them, Ephrem
reminds his readers (see below p. 49 f.). When however the
Prayer was used in the evening, a slight adaptation would be
necessary and such an adaptation we actually find in the word
Our-hread

stood,

of-the-daij,

Mahar

(Syr.

according to

The

r---^),

which Jerome quotes from


(see below p. 52)^

case of the Hellenistic

Brethren

'

there was need of translation.


translation

'the

Gospel

the Hebrews*

And

and of adaptation were

'

was

different.

Here

the requirements both of

satisfied

when,

rj

eiriovaa being

adopted in place of P^Q-*, the word eTrLova-io<i was coined to repreThis rendering would have a double advantage. It
sent ]iDQ_ij.

would be appropriate when the Prayer was used in the morning


our bread for the coming day : it would be equally appropriate
Thus the petition would assume this form rov
in the eveuingl

aprov

rov iirtovaLov So?

Comp. DidacM

out

rjfiwv

viii.

It is at least possible that the

rj^lv.

The

3 [rpU t^s v/x^pa^ oiku) Trpoo-ei/xfc^e)-

writer through-

giving rules for public, not private, devotion.

is

seems to survive in
Our bread of to-morrow give it to us to-day. On
which Version two remarks (a) I take this as an example of a version preserving a clause of the Lord's Prayer as it was brought by the earliest converts
and missionaries of the Apostolic age (see p. 13 f.): (^3) The clause as it stands is
-

trace of this adaptation of the petition for evening use

the Memphitic Version (Matt.)


:

the product of a literary revision, the strength of devotional conservatism maintaining of to-morrow
^

that
T]

Mr Wratislaw
7)

(TTiouffa is

(irtov<Ta

xxi.

T}

to-day had been added to represent

a-qtiepov.

Churchman (July 1888) shews conclusively


used of the day already begun. But it should be noticed that

could always be substituted for

hold: comp. Acts

far

when

in an article in The

vii.

^^

though the converse does not


which see Mr Wratislaw's remarks),

avpiov,

26, xvi. 11, xx. 15 (on

Hence I am not sure that Mr Wratislaw does not carry his point too
18.
when he claims Prov. xxvii. 1 (firj Kavx^ to. eJy avpiov, ov yap yivwoKeL^ ri rd^erai
an illustration
some confirmation to

iiriovaa) as

gives

iiriov(Ta,

in his favour.

my

It

seems

to

me

that the last passage

theory in regard to the Lord's Prayer.

not found elsewhere in the lxx., here translates DV.

For

ij

'GIVE US THIS DAY

OUR DAILY

47

BREAD.'

apparent analogy of Treptovaio^, occurring in a group of passages


(Ex. xix, 5, Deut. vii. 6, xiv, 2, xxvi, IS) which we know to have
occupied an important place in Apostolic teaching
Pet.

9; comp. Acts xx. 28, Eph.

ii.

i.

14),

may have

facilitated this representation of the original

(Tit.

14, 1

ii.

suggested or

Aramaic word.

Liturgical forms soon get the sanction of usage.

The

instincts

of devotion are singularly tenacious of a familiar word, even

become

when

meaning and origin have


And thus before the time when the first and

(perhaps even in proportion as)


obscure.

its

third Gospels in their present form were composed, the epithet


iirtovato'i

No

had

firmly attached itself to the substantive.

doubt,

Hebrew and

The
morning Prayers
ambiguous.
the

original

becoming

ignorance

our

in

the

Hellenistic

of the

relations

'Brethren,'

between the

much must remain

living witness of the Apostles as well

as the

Hebrews would be sufficient to prevent


phrase (PiDQ_.j) and the alternative (V^n V-^^)
of the

>

forgotten.

When

the Lord's Prayer assumes a literary

shape in the Gospels according to St Matthew and St Luke, the


well-known liturgical formula is preserved, but side by side with
it there appears in the one Gospel the original of-the-day in
the natural adverbial form to-day, in the other the very early,

if

not original, alternative day-hy-day.

In this petition then, owing


to the influence of devotional conservatism combined with reverence
for any remembered word of Christ, there meets us a double
rendering of the original

word, a

phenomenon

to

which most

chapters of the LXX. will supply a parallel.

So

far I

have endeavoured to reconstruct the history of this

The results may be


taken as confirming to some extent the working hypothesis (p. 45)
from which we started. But is there any independent support
clause as

it

stands in our present Gospels.

of the conjecture that the original form of the clause was Our-

hread of-the-day give to-usi I venture to think that there


evidence worth consideration,
(1)

There

a passage in the Epistle of St James

is

which, I believe, bears on this problem


iav

dSe\(f)6<;

i(f>r}iJ.pov

rj

Tpo(f)t]<i,

is

(ii.

some

15

ff.),

dSeX^r] yvfivol vrrdp'^coai kol XetTrofievot t?;?


eiTTT)

Se Ti? avToi<i e^ vfiwv 'Tirdyere iv

elpijprj,

THE lord's prayer

48

depfiatvea-de koX yopra^eade,


aa)fJ.aro<;,

tl

in

the early church.


Score Be

firj

avroU

iinTTJBeia rov

to.

6<f)e\o'i

James is a mosaic of \6yia KvpiuKa, among


which have a place in the Synoptists' record
Someof the Sennon on the Mount are especially numerous.
sometimes
obvious;
teaching
are
times these references to Christ's

The

Epistle of St

which those

'

oracles

'

beneath the surface; sometimes they have become so


assimilated to the context in which they are embedded that they
they

lie

must be

It

to attract attention\

fail

sufficient to refer to the

Introduction to any of the Commentaries on the Epistle for a


But no tabulated
list of the more patent of these coincidences.

can give any idea of the living connexion which, even


with our fragmentary knowledge of the Lord's discourses, we feel
to exist between the letter of the Disciple and the words of his

statistics

Master.

In the passage from St James quoted above

very probable

it is

that he has in his mind the words of Christ recorded in Matt. xxv.
35 4.5. But it appears to me still more likely that in the phrase

7;

(pri/Mepo<i Tpo<^r)

we have

a reminiscence of the petition for

'

the

bread of the day'; and further that in the succeeding words ra


iTTirrjSeia

rov

we have a very

cru)p,aTo<i

early

comment on

the

scope of the petition

Such a conjecture

incapable

is

of

The phrase

proof.

r]

not in itself a remarkable one^ neither indeed

i<bi]fiepo<i Tpo<f)ri is

the phrase which I suppose it to recall, the bread of the day.'


The probability allowed to the suggestion will vary in proportion
'

is

iv.

Compare

James

e.g.

21

i.

(tV

15 (rov \byov rov iuirapfiivov

See also Barn.

X(S7o>').

irpavTr]Ti
aiirovs),

els

d^^acrde rhv i/j.(pvTov \670f)

Lc.

viii.

13

(/jLera

with Mc.

S^ovrat rbf

x^-P^-^

ix. 9.

Based perhaps on Matt. vi. 32 {oldeu yap 6 irarrip tjhuv 6 ovpavios on XPV^^'^^
Compare the probable reference in Didache x. [Tpo<pyiv re Kal
TovTCJv airam-wv).
-

iroTOv ?5w/cos dvOpwiroii...r]/jui> 5^ ixo-pio'O) irvevfj.aTtKTji' rpocpriv Kal iroTbv).


2

Wetstein quotes

Aristid.

Tpo<prji

diropQi', Kal /SX^ttwv

iK

otVtoy...a5ouXos airopo^,

TTJs

To

rpo(pr]v iiray6/j.voi.
p.

677 B oXX'

fxh

et's

T.
/3

S<rir6T-r]s crov

ovde Trjv

Kal ijXiov

also Eur. El. 429 t^j

nXovaios fxaWou tov

ftr

p.

398

6/3oXoi/s

avros
:

i<f>r)fipou

npocraLTuiv,

Kal

Dion. Hal. Ant.


6 dvffTrjvos eK

t^j

viii.

icprjfiipov

41 dTr^X^e;'

rCv iavrou XP^I^'^'^"

these Field {Otium Non'icense, Pars Tertia) adds Chrys. ix.

dvd^ioy avTov Kpiveis, which however

compare

ii.

/cot

ijfUpai'

avn^ avariWei, av Si Kal ttjs e<prjij.ipov Tpocpijs


be a reminiscence of St James. We may

may

f(p'

i'x*"'''*''

ri^ipav ^opds,

Herod,

(5X^tuiTf/)6s ecrrt.

i.

32

01'

yap

toi 6 fxiya

'

'GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD.'

49

as the general indebtedness of the Apostle to the Lord's teaching


is

admitted.

becomes very strong

It

of Christ form the woof and

That the phrase

rj

web

if

we recognise

that the words

of the language of the Epistle.


rpocfjrj

<f)ij/j-po'i

comes very

close to the

wording of the Prayer is clear from the Latin versions and from
Chrysostom's comments on the petition.

The Old Latin

'panis quotidianus,' retained by Jerome in his

version of St Luke, finds a close parallel in the earliest extant

Latin version of St James

(ii.

which Jerome preserves.

Again, Chrysostom in dealing with the

clause as

i(f)r']fipov...8lTac

In another place

Kaia<;.

aprov

tov

says, tl

yap

[ij

tov aprov

ia-ri,

^vat<;] rpo(f)rj^

r]fj,iv

crtjfiepov,

dvrX tov,

ttjv

however when we take into consideration the Syriac

versions that the importance of the passage in St Jarnes

In the Syriac Vulgate

seen.

by the words

James
for

'

t?;?

a phrase in which he stumbles into a curiously

representation of the original Aramaic.

It is

dai/,

t6i>

dvay-

rrj'i

530) he uses similar language, riv

(iv.

tov eTTLOVcnov So?

TjjuLoSv

T^fiepa^ Tpo(j)^v,
literal

Matthew

stands in St

it

tTTCovaiov

15) 'victus quotidianus^', a rendering

t?;? i(f>T}fiepou Tpo<f>fj'i

U;n.fr)

l^DQ-.?

is

is

fully

represented

(the-food of-the-day)'.

Thus St

gives the natural Greek translation of the Aramaic of-the-

and

his

bread,'

is

whole phrase, excepting the substitution of food


the very form which we assumed just now as the
'

original of the petition,

'

the-(or our-)bread of-the-day.'

Bp Lightfoot (On a Fresh Revision


might
"that
I
find
this
petition quoted in the works of
p. 217),
one of the earlier Syriac writers, Aphraates or Ephrem, but my
(2)

"I had also hoped," wrote

search has not been attended with success.

Ephrem

in

Cod.

(Oj).

vi.

Corbeiensis has

quotidianus.'

'

An

indirect reference

642) omits the word in question.

p.

sive

Jerome's version

frater

is 'Si

sive soror

autem

nudi sint

et

desit

'The

eis

victus

frater aut soror nudi siut et indigeant

TertuUian nor Cyprian supply evidence

victu quotidiano.'

Thie writings of neither

as to the text of St

James (Bp. Westcott Canon,

ed. 5, pp. 258, 373,

Eonsch Das N.

T.

TertuUian' s p. 572).

The

Liddell and Scott are sufiQcient to shew that


mistaken in supposing that in later Greek e^Tj/xe/jos always means
lasting but a day.'
Such was doubtless the classical sense of the word, a use
which lasted on side by side with the meaning 'daily' (see Suicer Thes. sub voce).
The words icf>y}ij.epia and etprifjifpls both illustrate the meaning daily.
2

Mr

references given in

^PClellan

is

'

c.

THE lord's prayer

50

bread of the day

pii>>A) shall

(}!:OQ_.5

learnt in the Prayer

At

'.

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IN

thou hast

suffice thee, as

same time Ephrem agrees with

the

the Curetonian against the Peshito in jkJQ-.?, so that

The

probable that he used the Curetonian Version."

Ephrem

'

it

seems

fact that

omits the word in question,' constitutes, I believe, the

importance of the reference.

For in the

first

place

Ephrem

refers to

some popular

the Lord's Prayer, a part of catechetical instruction

learned in the Prayer

And

('

').

have been

in the second place this popular version cannot

the Old Syriac.

version of

as thou hast

For had

it

been, his citation would have at once

recalled to his hearers (for the reference occurs in a

Fasting) the whole clause as

it

sermon on

stood in the Old Syriac (and-our-

to-us), and the word continual


would have refuted the lesson which he wished to draw.
We learn then from an examination of Ephrem's evidence that
there was some popular version of the Lord's Prayer still in use
among the Syrian Christians of the Fourth Century, and that in
this traditional version, on which the Old Syriac itself was based, the
form of the petition under discussion was the-bread of-tJie-day.'
The conclusion to which a cross-examination of Ephrem leads
us is confirmed by the clear testimony of another witness. The
Arabic version of Tatian's Diatessaron published by Ciasca iu 188S
gives what is to all appearance the whole of the matter contained

bread continual of-the-day give

'

But the Syriac

in Tatian's work.
is

Vulgate Syriac

All the more emphatic

text'.

support of an earlier Syriac

The
'

text on Avhich the Arabic version

based seems to have been brought into conformity with the

literal translation of

daily bread

'

( IX.) is

'

text,

therefore

whenever such support

is

is

the Arabic version of the petition

Give us the bread of our day

'

(i.e.

its

given.
for

the day

which we now are). The epithet 'continual' which has a place


the Old Syriac, and the epithet of-our-necessity which is
given in the Vulgate Syriac, are alike absent. Thus the preCuretonian form has the support of an unwilling witness. We are
not only confirmed as to the main conclusion which we drew from
Ephrem's evidence, but we are able to identify the popular version

in
in

'

'

Hemphill

p. xxix,

Eendel Harris

p. 5.

'GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD.'


of the Lord's Prayer to which he refers in his

51

Sermon with the

form contained in Tatian's Diatessaron'.

Thus St James, Tatian, and Ephrem, who probably repeats


after a long interval the witness of Tatian,

combine

to attest the

shorter form of the clause, 'Give us the bread of the day.'

Does the Old Syriac version

(3)

itself

throw any light on the

matter?

In Matt.

vi.

11 this version has:

to-us

In Luke

xi.

Now

continual

the-bread

and-our-bread

and-give

to-us

about the Syriac word continual two remarks

In the

first

place

it is difficult

probable meaning of the Greek

Cureton in his note (referred


that the word continual

the

continual

of-every-day

made.

of-the-day

give

is

to

to see that

i7riovaio<;.

Hebrew H^H^ \h^ n^ttnn DhSi

version by the words loOTJ .->(jio\s

is

this clause of the Lord's

from

p.

215) remarks

Numb.

iv. 7,

where

translated in the Syriac


PiQ>,Jlo (and-the-

A^f.l. i..So|

bread continually let-it-be thereupon).

be

In the second place

by Bp Lightfoot

in fact derived

may

represents any

it

The Old

Syriac then of

Prayer appears to be a literary revision of

the popular version current since the Gospel was brought to Syria

from the Church at Jerusalem

in the earliest

days of the

faith,

which represented the seemingly unintelligible iiriovaLO'i,


which had meantime come into the Prayer, by a classical phrase
about bread in the Old Testament slightly changed, much as
Delitzsch in his Hebrew translation of the N. T. uses for the same
revision

purpose another

DH?) derived

classical phrase of the O. T. {^'^pT\

from Prov. xxx. 8

(^pT\

DH?)^

This conclusion receives some additional confirmation from the


fact that in the revision of the

Old Syriac (the Vulgate

Syriac) the epithet ^jlQJOIDj (of-our-necessity)


1

is

is

That the Diateasaron was the form of the Gospels used


from the Doctrine of Addui c. xxxv, Thdt. de Fab. Haer.

clear

or Peshito

substituted for
in public worship
i,

20.

12

THE loud's prayer in the early church.

52
]i

.V^

though the

(continual), as

immemorial

were not sanctioned by

latter

usage*.

position of these Syrian Christians in the third century

The

was in fact very parallel to our own.


England to-day would say Pray God to
as we forgive them that trespass against

Christian preacher in

forgive us our trespasses,

'

us, as

thou hast learned in

the Prayer,' regardless of the fact that the Authorised Version has
'Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors', and that the Revised
Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our

Version has

'

Literary revisions are powerless against ancient formulas.

debtors.'

Lastly, there is the notice of the clause in the Gospel

(4)

Hebreius preserved by Jerome (on Matt. vi. 11):


appellatur secundum Hebraeos, pro supersubquod
In evangelio,
stantiali pane reperi Mahar, quod dicitur crastinum, ut sit sensus
Panem nostrum crastinum, id est futurum, da nobis hodie.'
according

to the

'

Here,

it

will

be noticed, Jerome does not profess to give us the

precise words of the whole clause which he found in the

He

Gospel.

is

adds his own conclusion as to the general meaning (ut

Of

Hebrew

content to quote the single word Mahar, and then

Bp

this alteration

Lightfoot says

(p. 215),

'

This

is

sit sensus).

only one of the

many

instances where the Peshito betrays the influences of the fourth century whether
This explanation may be the right
in the text or in the interpretation.'

one.

But on the one hand the word

essential

with

in

ovaia.

of-our-necessitij does not represent

the later interpretation of emova-ios referred

On

the other

hand

ii.

16

(to.

(iri.TTiSeia

Version in St James

rod cru/xaTos) to be.

ii.

16

viz.

its

what

is

connexion

the notion of necessary would seem to have a

place in the earliest expositions of the clause;


Jas.

to,

(l^-yv-S?

OlZo

such an exposition

for

It is

I believe

worth noting that the Syriac


1

CO ) answers

to

this revised

Jas. ii. 16 might itself be based on Mat. vi. 32, if the


translation of iiriova-ios.
gloss were not so natural (corap. Ex. xvi. 22 rot dOPTa = Un?, Prov. xxx. 8 to.

So Tert. de Oratione vi. (Panem enim peti


TO. avTdpKy]-''\>Vt DH?).
mandat, quod solum fidelibus neccssurium est cetera enim nationes requirunt),
and the familiar words 'AH things that be needful both for our souls and bodies.'
In the Peshito then may we not have the substitution of a familiar gloss for the
unsatisfa^ory word of the Old Syriac, a substitution which would be in harmony,
as the Old Syriac rendering was at variance, with the form of the clause in
common use as preserved to us by Ephrem (see above p. 49 f.)? We have the
somewhat similar case of a well-known gloss derived from a phrase of the N. T.
gaining a place in the text in the African Latin Version of Matt. vi. 13 (e.g. Cod.
Bobiensis, ne passus fucris induci nos in temptationem). Here Tertullian preserves
the gloss which has become part of the text in Cyprian's time. See p. 6-1 f.

MovTo. Kol

'

'GIVE US THIS DAY OUR DAILY BREAD.'


It

53

seems impossible that the two words to-morrow and to-day

could have stood side by side in the clause \ and Jerome disguises

the contradiction lurking in his fusion of quotation and

by the gloss which he

The evidence taken together


from the nature of the
witnesses as
sistentl}''

we

case.

is no doubt scanty
it must be so
But when we cross-question such
;

have, their testimony appears to

and unanimously

in favour of the

bread of the

me

to be con-

theory that the original

form of the clause in the Lord's Prayer ran thus


{or the)

comment

slips in {crastinum, id est futurum).

'
:

Give us our

day.'

In reviewing the evidence we must remember that in such a


reconstruction of the history of a phrase as I have attempted, there

must necessarily be many hypotheses whose only support is mutual


agreement and inherent likelihood. Further, the general result
does not depend on the minute accuracy of each step of the
reconstruction.
To pretend to recall stages of change and revision
which were bound up with the manifold life of the Church of
the First Days, liturgical custom among Christian Hebrews aud
Christian Hellenists, the influence of oral tradition and written

memoranda both

in

Aramaic and Greek, catechetical

instruction,

the teaching of Missionaries and other converts leaving the Mother

Church at
tion in the

absurdity.

and of translaChurches which they founded, would be a palpable


An approximation to such a work is all we can hope for.

different times, the influence of usage

The general
(1)

(3)

The
The

is

due to

(2)

and

(4)

result

is

this:

This petition of the Prayer refers to bodily needs^


epithet

is

temporal, not qualitative.

epithet

is

not part of the original form of the petition,

liturgical use.

All the

phenomena may be reasonably explained if we


for which there is some independent

assume, an assumption

evidence, that the clause originally was

'

Give us our {or the) bread

of the day.'
1

Ou

In Didache

the Memphitic Version see note on p. 46.


x.

2,

where we practically have the

Lord's Prayer, the reference to actual food comes

first:

earliest exposition

^KTiffai TCL TravTO. ivcKa rod oi'dfj.aTol ffov, Tpo(p7}v re koL ttotov ?5^)^as
els dirdXavaLi',
/cat

IVa

croi

evxa.pi-<Trr](TU<Tii', r]p.iv

^wriv aidiviov 5id toO 7rai56s aov.

5k

exo-piffij}

of the

av, 8^(TT0Ta iravTOKparop,

irvevfuaTLKT^v

to?? (wdpihiroi'i

Tpo<p'iji'

Kal ttotov

HM?N TA

KAI A4)eC

HMeTc A(I)HKAMeN TO?C U(})eiA6T!MC HMOON (St MatthEW).

COC

KAI

KAI

A(fGC

KAI

r<^P

Four
forms

HMOON,

6(})6|Ah'M(\TA

HM?N TAC AMApTIAC HMOON,


nANTI d(|)eiAONTI HM?N (St Luke).

A(})I0MN

Ay'toI

problems are suggested by the variations

the two

in

of this petition.

Which

(1)

Matthew, or the

more

the

is

the

original,

Ta(; afiapria<i

of St

Luke

of St

o^eiX'qfJ.ara

to.

In the discussion of

assume that the Old Syriac may be taken

this question I again

as representing approximately the original Aramaic.

Do

(a)

and the Greek words meaning

the Syriac

throw any light on the question

The
Syriac,

Syriac

*QOn

m,

The

'

the word

not decisive.

is

forgive

late

in the

Vulgate

Hebrew word pl^ (=

to leave

in the

Old and

23; comp. Matt, xxvii. 46) is used


(see Gesenius Thesaurus) in the Targums as an equivalent to
ri/D and K^J (= to forgive), words, which are not, I think,
The Syriac word is used both
applied to the remission of a debt.

or

Dan.

desert,

12, 20,

iv.

of the remission of a debt (Matt, xviii. 32, Lc.

forgiveness of sins (Rom.

The

Greek

case of the

word indeed

xi.

27, 2 Cor.
d(f)ievai

1,

2),

but

it

also

is

the

words meaning to 'forgive

Ex.

xxxii.
this

Ps.

32,

sense

latter

prayers (Gen.

1.

avTa>v, Ex. xxxii.


d(f><;,

Kal

Numb.

a(f)<i

is

42) and of the

vii.

10).

somewhat

This

different.

used in the LXX. to represent \Df2^ (to remit a

is

debt, Dcut, xv.

In

ii.

xiv.

xxv.

the

vhti

18),

imperative

17 ac^e? avToi<i

32

el

19 a^e?

sins,'

fiev

Tr}v

d(f)L<i

the
i.e.

common

N^j

(e.g.
a(f>e<i

Lev.
is

iv.

very

dhiKiav koI

avTot<i

rrjv

equivalent of

(e.g.

Gen.
20,

17,

1.

v.

10).

common

rrjv

dp.apriav

avratv

Trjv d/j,apTiav toJ \aa> tovto), Ps. xxiv.

TTacra? Td<i dfiapr[a<i

fiou).

Compare

in

dfiapTiav

18

Ecclus. xxviii. 2

'

'FORGIVE US OUR DEBTS.'


a^e? ciBiKTjfia T(o
aou XvOrja-ovTai.

55

irXr^aiov crou, Kal rore SerjOevTOf; crov

Hence a

would be under the temptation

But

the

dfiapria';.

Ta.<i

there any ambiguity in the original word

is

LXX.,

to strain a point in translation

that he might secure the familiar sequence a^e?


(6)

a/xapriai

at,

with

familiar

Hellenist,

meaning

'debt' to minimise the unfaithfulness of such a translation

The word both in the Old and in the Vulgate Syriac is ^^^cu^.
The verb *^Q_kj (= IIH, In Targg. persaepe pro hebr. U^i^,
^^D^^/ Ges. Thes), properly meaning 'impar, baud capax, fuit
(see Payne Smith Thes. Syr.), is frequently used in connexion
'

with sin

Hex., 1 Cor.

vi.

signifies

reum

'

and defeat

(e.g.

2 Kings xiv. 12

It occurs also in the derived sense 'debuit,'

7).

Rom.

10,
'

fecit,'

in Deut. xxv.

e.g.

22, 27),

iv.

Deut. xxiv.

in

e.g.

Lev.

(e.g.

Kings

1, 1

the causative

Further,

8.

xiii.

condemnavit,' without any idea of debt,


viii.

32, Matt.

41, Lc.

xii.

vi.

More-

37.

over the substantive used in the Lord's Prayer, though occurring


in

the phrase 1oq_kj

Sam.

xxii. 25, 1
'

sins

(Dan.

'

ix.

20

'

my

the context gives

any thought

the sense of

it

(,^
'

It

is

easy therefore

dfiapTia'i intruding

to

'

that

'

Mr

ii.

14

yet used without

is

Hence, although in the


the meaning, the word

fix

ra'^ afiapTia<; rjfjLwv.

account for this Greek phrase ra?

'

and thus

am

by quite another

led

Page's conclusion {Expositor, 3rd Series,

we seem

precise

the equivalent of the original Aramaic

itself as

word here meaning debts


road to

Greek by

in

The

').

though in Col.

our-debts,'

of debt in Ex. xxxiv. 9.

might be translated

my people

OQ-^),

Lord's Prayer the words 'our debtors'


itself

Ex.

creditor;

i.e.

yet in the plural means simply

sins. .the sins of

in the Lord's Prayer

word used

of-the-debt,

(lord

"j^lD

xxii. 2, Lc. vii. 41),

vol. vii. p.

437)

Matthew a more accurate reproduction

to have... in

of the original.'

The Didachd has

(2)

6(f)eL\rjfiaTa

rjfiwv.

t^jv

o^eiXrjv

in

rj/xSv

place

of

to.

sufficient explanation of the variation in

the Didache might perhaps be found in Matt,


rrjv 6(f>i\r]v eKeivqv djtrJKa croi.

But the

xviii.

32 iraaav

variation may, I think,

be better explained as reflecting a slightly different reading of


the original Aramaic.

and

oa>j

The

(our-debts)

is

difference between

very small.

^Q-k

(our-debt)

THE lord's prayer

56

The phrase

(o)

pared with that in

in

Luke
St Matthew
in St

the early CEIURCH.


ttuvtI ocpelXovrc

rj^iwv,

0(/>eiXTat<?

rol<i

com-

as

rj^ilv,

has the

appearance of a paraphrastic rendering.

We

that the terse _*.:ia-K>.\ (our-debtors)

more

likely to be the

\Sn\ (to-every-one

who-is-indebted

than ^-^ n

original

kj>

is

can hardly doubt

to-us).

There remains still the more perplexing variation, w? kol


(St Matthew), kul yap avrol dcfyiofxev (St Luke).
In St Matthew the Old Syriac has,
(4)

7]fiL^ dcfirjicafiei'

will- (or

we

may-) remit

as (or in-order-that)

also

Li St Luke,
we

will- remit

The Old
Gospels

in

is

it

will be noticed, has the

is

future

'

in

both

therefore strong ^reason to believe that the

the original form.

the d^LOfiev of St

'

Gospels the Vulgate Syriac substitutes the

both

There

'perfect.'

'future'

Syriac,

and- also

This supposition

Luke and the

this be so, is not the original

dc^Uixev of the

is

supported by

Didachd

But

if

connexion between the two parts of

the petition the simple form preserved by the Old Syriac of Lc.

'remit to us and we also luill remit '^? The whole petition


becomes thus a prayer and a promise, a prayer for forgiveness, and
This interpretation
a promise that the suppliant luill forgive.
xi. 4,

has very strong support in the parable of the unmerciful servant


(Matt, xviii. 23

Here the

ff.).

represented as the model


13,

of,

divine forgiveness precedes, and

human

forgiveness (comp. Col.

is
iii.

The servant is forgiven, but lacks the grace


32),
The remission of the debt which he owed becomes
when he refuses remission to another.

Eph.

iv.

to forgive.

invalid,
It is

Prayer

is

remarkable that

this

view of the petition in the Lord's

supported by what I believe

the words in Christian literature.


(c.

6)

Polycarp writes,

o^etXofiev Kal

T^fiL<i

the Lord's Prayer

is
'

el

is

the earliest reference to

In his letter to the Philippians

ovv ZeofieOa rov Kvpiov Xva ri^lv

d(f)fj,

That Polycarp is here referring to


put beyond (hspute by the fact that he refers
ncpcevai.

See the additional note on

p. 57.

'FORGIVE US OUR DEBTS.'

57

the following chapter to the next clause of the Lord's Prayer,


and by the mode in which this reference is introduced: Se^aea-cv
in

aLTOVfievoi rov TravreTroTrTrjv 0e6v

The evidence

T)fj,a<; el<;

iretpaafiov.

derived from Tertullian, the earliest witness to the

Latin text of the


It is

eia-eveyKeiu

f^rj

New

Testament,

at one with that of Polycarp.

is

given in the additional note at the end of this section

One

point more in this connexion remains.

and Mc.

vi.

(p. 58).

14,

15

25 seem somewhat out of place where they stand, the

xi.

former passage singling out

Prayer

Matt.

for

emphasis one petition of the Lord's

at the close of the section of the

Sermon on

the

Mount

which deals with prayer, the latter following the lesson of faith
drawn from the withered fig-tree. Is it rash to suggest that they
are re-settings of the words in which the Lord sums up the
lesson of the parable, ovTa)<i koI 6 Trc^-qp fxov 6 ovpdpto<; iroii^aei

Vfuv eav

firj

d(^rJTe

e/cacrTO? rco

dSe\<f>o)^

In that case the eav ydp

vpLwvl
irarrjp

v/j,cov

of St

Matthew

(vi.

14,

avTOV dirb rwv KapStwv


kol

acprjre. ..acfirjcrec

cf.

Lc.

ira Kol 6 iraTrjp vficov...d(pr/ v[xiv of St

vpA,v

37) and the d^Ure...

vi.

Mark

(xi.

25) will refer, in

accordance with the teaching of the parable, to the continuance

and consummation of the divine forgiveness; though the language


has perhaps been slightly altered in accordance with the Hellenistic
translation of the Lord's Prayer, w? kuX

Clem. 13, Ep. Polyc.

d^-qKafiev (comp. Ep.

rjixei'i

2).

me

In this part of the petition St Luke seems to


form nearer to the original as far as the verb

to preserve a

(dcpiofiev) is

con-

Neither Gospel very exactly reproduces what appears to


be the original connexion of the clauses.

cerned.

Note on Syriac Versions of


I

am

traditional form-,

the

all
1

ff.);
-

It is

2,

not here a translation of the Greek, as

Contrast the Peshito

i->-ii

3 [rhv aXKbrpkov awaLT-qcreis Sera eav y

*^

(2)

croi

wap' auri^,

The
the Lord's whole teaching gave a new meaning

ToD a8\(f>ov) acpeaiv

ironjcrei^

deepened, by the addition of

toO xP^^v^

airo ruiv

ffov).

Kap8iwv

old

(.

(ii)

ti^ S^

it

omits

Though

in uncials?

aSeX^^'

command

is

"'"'^

(1)

to brotherhood (Lc. x.

v/xuiv.

No argument

can be founded on the fact that the Arabic of Ciasca's Tatian


as we have forgiven,' for it seems certain that this text has been

has the perfect,


largely modernised.
'

56).

p.

Luke represents the

In Westcott and Hort's text should not ry dSeX^y be printed

widened, for
27

(i)

important yap.

See Deut. xv.


(Cod.

this Clause (see

inclined to think that the Old Syriac of St

See Harris 2'he Diatessaron nf Tatian

p. 5.

THE lord's prayer

58
Ephrora

(iii.

641) has

p.

what

twice quotes the petition as

is

in

the early churcfl

substantially the Vulgate Syriac, Aphraates

it is

are worth quoting in

Horn.

2,

Matthew, except

in the Old Syriac of St

that the connecting word between the clauses

is (vSJJj)

The passages

kSJO.

Homilies of Aphraates ed. Wright p. V^,


the Lord taught His disciples the Prayer, He

(a)

full,

'Again when
shall ye pray, Forgive us our debts and also we

14.

Thus

said to them,

will

And again He said, If thou


*^l<2) t'*ir debtors.
bring thy gift to the altar
(Matt. v. 23, 24), lest when any one praym

*~>

forgive (<)0

'^>

eth. Forgive us our debts and also we will forgive our debtors, he be
caught out of his own mouth, and it be said to him by Him who receiveth

him who beareth up,

(or,

(Aj

*^,

who

Ajj) him

(j

Thou dost not

Gabriel) his prayer,

i.e.

how

indebted to thee,

is

forgive

shall they forgive

(^i.n*n ) thee? And so thy prayer shall remain on the earth.' (6) p. p.,
Hom. 4, 7. 'Forgive us our debts that also we may forgive (^J->>- ^1?

DQ-CUlJ': but

there

that thou

whether thou forgivest


not

lie to

God and say

.on

forgive (Aj"|

prayer. Forgive

it

.should be forgiven thee,

forgive (Ajj

do.st (or wilt)

J_kkJ| ^|0 = 'and

another reading

is

Thou prayest that

debtors

*n,0

Think

l).

then profess that thou dost

do

(or will) forgive

[Matt.

).

me and

do

v.

23 f.

is

(p

first

profe.^^sest

within thy mind

For do

(or wilt) forgive.

*lij j),

then quoted]

(or will) forgive ((J

also we') our

and thou

when thou dost not


If

ri *^

He

finds in thy

O), then shall

it

be

him that prayeth by him that beareth up the prayer (i.e. Gabriel),
forgive thy debtor, then will I also bear up thy prayer before thy

said to
First

do thou forgive a hundred pence according to thy poverty


(i.e. God)
and thy creditor will forgive thee a thousand talents according to His greatcreditor

In these passages Aphraates seems to treat

ness.'

*Q0*^ m

as a present,

but the thought of the present seems to


merge into that of the future in several clauses. But however Aphraates
interprets the words himself, his evidence as to the current form of the
using the participle to represent

clause

is clear,

for in the

and not '^|?.


participle

It

second passage the context seems to require v2) (o,

should be added in reference to Aphraates' use of the


paraphrases that the Jerusalem Syriac

his

in

it;

has the

plural

O *^

in the second clause of the petition.


The Old Syriac and Aphraates' comments on it find a curious parallel in
TertuUian's reference to the Latin Version of the clause. Tertullian does not

participle

quote, so

f;ir

'

This

is

as

know, the second clause of the petition

the reading in the form of the Lord's Prayer found in the Syriac Acts

of Judas Thomas (ed. Wright, vol.

whole clause

is

remarkable,

give our debtors.'


reference.

for forgiveness.

have

'

i.

p.

-.

Forgive us our
to

>;

di'hts

vol.

ii.

thank Prof. Bensly

p.

279 Eng.

Tr.).

we

too

for pointing out

to

and our

sins, that

may
me

The
for-

this

forgive us our debts.'


Neither in de Oratione
exact words.

nor in adv. Marcionem

vii.

iv.

59
26 does he give

In the former passage however he gives the following gloss

iis
'

the

Quod

idem serwis a domino liberatus non perinde parcit debitori suo ac propterea
tortori delegatur
eo competit, quod remittere nos quoque profitemur

Jam

debitorihus nostris.

et alibi ex hac specie orationis, Remittite, inquit, et

Again, in the tract de Pudicitia

remittetur vobis.'

autem, ut dimittatur

non deum admiserit.

tibi

a deo.

ii.

he writes,

'

Dimittis

Delicta niundantur quae quis in fratrem,

Dehitoribus denique dimissuros nos in oratione profite-

This latter passage (dimissuros) certainly appears to suggest that in


some Old Latin copies the reading in the Prayer was dimittemxis. I do
not know that there is any MS. authority for such a reading. Cyprian's text
and comment {de Oratione Dom.) seem clearly in favour of the common
mur.^

reading and interpretation

Scientes impetrari non posse quod pro peccatis


petimus, nisi et ipsi circa debitores nostros paria fecerimus.'

As

'

these sheets are passing through the press, I notice that Prof. Marshall

in his article

on

the

Aramaic Gospel

in

the current

number

of the Expositor

His remarks confirm what


It seems to me howanaprlas.

(April, 1891) discusses this petition of the Prayer.


I

have said on the variation o^ftXr^VaTa

^i^d

ever that his method of accounting for the variation as koL i^/xus (Matt.) and
Ka\ yap avroi (Lc.) is open to criticism.
He writes thus 'The [Aramaic] word
:

The equivalent of "for" in this connexion is X03^


"in eo," "quatenus," "seeing that." The diflference in Aramaic is therefore
merely that of two letters very much alike and easily confounded.' But in

for "as," "sicut" is

the

first

N03.

place this suggestion, ingenious as

it

is,

neglects the evidence of the

Syriac Versions as a guide to the original Aramaic (see above


in the second place yap does not

p.

39

n.).

And

seem to me so obvious an equivalent of ND3,

the meaning of which Buxtorf (Lex. Chald.) gives as in quantum, quatenus,


eo, de eo, as to lead one to think that it would expel the word ws ( = NDD)

in

already familiar; in fact oj? would be nearer to ND2 than yap would be. If
such a confusion of Aramaic words alike in sound is to be postulated to account for the variation, it would be simpler to suppose that the Aramaic
words were "^^N ("^^H) and ^3. I think however that the Old Syriac of Lc.
xi.

4 preserves the original connexion of the two parts of this petition.

the version given

by St Matthew

of the petitions in the earlier part of the Prayer (p. 40

Gospel

human

In

this petition is modelled after the type


f.)

as preserved in his

must correspond to (tor) divine forgiveness, just


as the earthly doing of the Will, the coming of the Kingdom, and the hallowing the Name should correspond to (a5s) the heavenly. St Luke gives a
forgiveness

version of the clause (current perhaps in the Apostolic Churches of Macedonia

and Greece) which aims at a more idiomatic Greek rendering. Here however,
we want a knowledge of the text of the Diatessaron.

as so often,

VI.

MH eicENerKHc HMAc

KAi

The

neipACM()N.

eic

word of the clause suggests a question of interest


with which it will be convenient to deal at once. The Syriac
last

versions have a word which, as

may be

to its vocalization

or plural ("jm

Vm

either singular

n
It

mi my
is

Luke

28

(.

...

10

is

*
i

.mi

temptation)

the

same ambiguity

my

temptations, or

temptation).

therefore at least possible that the original form of the

petition was

would be

'

in

Bring us not into temptations,' and such a form

harmony with the circumstances

temptation {iravra
iroiKiXoi

xxii.

(]ir>

There

temptations).
..

in regard to St

obvious to remark, according

it is

irecpaa-juLov

ireipaa-fioL

which

is

Lc.

iv.

13),

common

to

of

our

Lord's

and with the phrase


St James (i. 2) and

St Peter (1 Pet. i. 6)'. The Old Syriac, it may be added, reads in


St Luke xxii. 40 Pray that ye enter not among temptations (see
below p. 62 n.), where the preposition shews that the noun is plural.
'

'

Further, in this form the petition would perhaps present less


difficulty when viewed from a theological and religious standpoint.

The evidence however does not seem

than the suggestion of the possibility that

to

this

warrant more

may have been

the earliest form.

The words

fi^ elaeviyKj)^ invite

discussion in

more

directions

than one.
'

In 2 Pet.

ii.

9 (olSev

Kupios (vffe^fU iK

ireipafffiov

possibly a reminiscence of the Lord's Prayer, thtre


the plural irnpacr^nov.

is

pveaOai),

which

is

very

considerable authority for

'

'BRING US NOT INTO TEMPTATION.*

The Syriac

I.

Gl

versions, as probably representir)g the original

The Old Syriac

in St

Luke

The Vulgate Syriac in both Gospels adopts these words^


Old Syriac of St Matthew has ^A_.Z (make-us-to-come).

The
The

Aramaic, are of special interest here.


has
tjo

mi \

^\\Z

]]o
and-do-not

make-us-to-enter

into-temptation(s?)

that the Vulgate Syriac has in both Gospels the

fact

phrase

make-us-to-enter tends to shew that this was the current traditional

Other reasons

form.

which

also,

the conclusion that this word

'

will

appear immediately, point to

make-us-to-enter

'

is

the original.

In discussing the interpretation of the words dirb rod irovqpov


I shall have to point out the close connexion between the Lord's
Prayer and the sayings of the Lord on the night of the betrayal

below

(see

p.

108

Fresh links come into view when we turn to

f).

the Syriac versions.

The Old

Syriac rendering of St

Luke

xxii. 40,

46

is

happily

preserved in the Curetonian fragments.


V.

40

nrpocrev'^ecrOe

ixr)

among

temptations
V.

46

elaekOelv et? ireipac fxov.

iva

'Trpo(Tev')((j6e

p,rj

into-temptation(s?)

that-not

ye-euter

elcreXOrjTe

ye-enter

ei<?

that- not

pray-ye

ireipaafiov.

pray-ye

The Syriac Vulgate has in both places the words which the
Old Syriac has in v. 46.
In St Matthew xxvi. 41 (Trpoa-eux^crde Xva ixrj eia-eXOTjTe et?
Treipaa/Mov) and in St Mark xiv. 38 {7rpoaev')(^eade "va firj eKOrjre
et? irecpaap.ov), verses

which are wanting in what remains

to us of

the Old Syriac, the Syriac Vulgate has the same words as
in the

two passages just

cited

has

comparison of these passages in the Syriac versions suggests

the following conclusions

Peal in St Matthew
1

it

from St Luke.

The

(1)

The same verb which is used in


Mark xiv. 38, St Luke xxii.

xxvi. 41, St

>>S Z. in the Vg. Syr. of St Luke

Arabic of Ciasca's Tatian has

'

make us not

is

only a difference of form.

to enter.

the
40,

The

THE lord's prayer

62
46

is

used in the Aphel in the Lord's Prayer as the clause

by both versions

The

the early church.

in

in

is

given

St Luke, and by the Vulgate in St Matthew.

close relation therefore

between the Lord's Prayer and the

the evening of the betrayal, which a study of the

history of

Greek Gospels suggests,

is

strongly confirmed.

So

(2)

far as a

single case can be urged, the revelation of a harmony, so natural

and

between the Lord's words spoken at different times,

so simple,

supports the theory that our Lord spoke in Aramaic and that

His sayings were current in that language.


such, however ancient, I suppose

St Luke

xxii.

40

'

interpretation of

to

being the

indication

(orav

has ]jo

is

I.

m \
T

^ \s Z

common

(4) Lastly

one*.

This

(make-us-to-enter).

In St James

(a)

i.

Vulgate Syriac

the

TTot/c/Xot?)

TrepLTriaijre

^\sZ.

in

to point to the plural

confirmed in two directions,

7reipa(rfjLol<;

gloss (for

Old Syriac

have a clear indication that the verb

the petition originally was,

in

(JO

The

(3)

to be) in the

among temptations' seems

we seem

"and chiefly

it

Here there

(ye-enter into-temptations).

is

no attempt to represent the somewhat remarkable word irepta word which, it may be noted in passing, seems to
irearjTe
:

suggest that St James had some such phrase in his mind as that

which

Luke

represented by the Old Syriac of St

is

among

Of the other passages

temptations').

where the word

occurs,

one (Acts

from our present passage

XTjaraU

irepLerrreaev),

xxvii. 41)

in the

in the
is

40 ('enter

somewhat
St

other, viz.

xxii.

New Testament

Luke

different

x.

30 [kuI

the two great Syriac versions endeavour to

give an adequate rendering of the word, the Old Syriac having 'he
into the hands of robbers,' the Vulgate

fell

'

there

fell

upon him

In St James however it seems as if the Syriac translator


enter,'
could not help reproducing the familiar juxtaposition,

robbers.'

'

'

temptation

^'

(6)

The word

ela(^epiv

is

the

equivalent of such an Aramaic word as ^^|.

The

Matt.

7, xxviii. 15,

"

We

Acts

ii.

Mc.

ii.

3, 23,

Lc.

i.

25,

vi. 1, viii.

Greek

Except in

plural appears regularly to follow the preposition ^lj_C5

xiii.

xi. 54, xxi. 23,

vi.

natural

five

= among):

43, xvi. 15,

John

x.

see
39,

9, vii. 2.

1 Tim.
But here the literal rendering is
by the metaphor which follows and by the need of conformity with

might have expected a similar turn in the Syriac translation of

(f/iJTtTrroi/o-ii'

accounted for

ets

neipaa/xw Kal Trayida).

the translation of the cognate phrases

els Kpljxa

i/j-Tr.

rod 5ia^6Xoi/

(iii. 6), ets oyfiSi<rfi6i>

'BRING US NOT INTO TEMPTATION.'


passages

out of the eighty in which

ela<^epiv

is

frequently

the translation of N''^n, a

it

63

found in the LXX.,

is

Hebrew word which very

represented in the Syriac by the Aphel form ^^1.

is

If this account of the original phrase

is

and

true,

we may

if

look to the Syriac word rather than to the Greek as a guide to the

meaning of the

true

petition, light is

which have often been found in


elasticity

thrown on the

There

this prayer.

So

it

may

a certain

They sometimes

about the so-called causative voices.

approach a permissive sense.

difficulties
is

be here.

Certainly the

notion of deliberate guidance has no necessary place in the Syriac


word.

The

fact that this idea of

when

especially

la-(f)6pLv,

equivalents of

it

guidance

is

is

contrasted

not prominent in

with

the

other

the LXX. viz., ajetv, eladyeiv, and more


X^^H
may have been the reason why the Hellenistic
in

rarely Trpoadyetv,
'

Brethren

'

chose this word to stand in the Lord's Prayer rather

than the other possible renderings of the Aramaic.


II.

to pass

way

The

last subject

touched on makes

into certain forms of the

(1)

it

an easy transition

from the Syriac versions to two glosses which found their

Old Latin

version.

In two passages Augustine deals with an interesting

form of this clause found in some Old Latin authorities.


In the first, de Sermone Domini (Migne P. L. 34

1282),

p.

he writes thus
'

Et ne nos inferas in temptationeni.

inducas, quod

tantumdem

NonnuUi

codices habent

nam

ex uno Graeco

valere arbitror

quod dictum est elo-eveyKrj'i utrumque translatum est. Multi


autem precando ita dicunt, ne nos patiaris induci in teniptationem,
exponentes videlicet quomodo dictum

sit

inducas.'

Sabatier,

referring to this passage, notes that Augustine himself


sistent in the use of

inferas

'

Again, in de Dona Perseverantiae

Augustine writes as follows

'Unde
sic

sic

con-

vi.

(Migne P. L. 45

p.

1000)

orant nonnulli et legitur in codicibus plurimis et hoc

posuit beatissimus Cyprianus

eixw. Kal Trayl8a

is

in this clause.

tov Slu^oXov

(iii.

in connexion with temptation.

ne patiaris nos induci in temp-

The word X"'3n appears in Jewish prayers


The Jews' Morning Prayer (cf. Berakoth 60 b) has

7).
'

the petition, \VD: n>'?...13.N"'nn ^X1

'

(Dr Taylor Sayinijs p. 141

f.).

THE lord's prayer

64

in

the early church.

In Evangelic tamen Graeco nusquam inveni

tationem.

nisi

tie

nos in/eras in temptationeni.'

In these two passages Augustine makes three assertions, which


we may consider in the following order, giving to the first of them
a somewhat larger scope.

The words

(a)

ne nos patiaris indtici in temptationeni are

found in some Latin writings, and

The

commonly

occur in Cyprian.

first

Arnobius Junior (Migne P.L. 53),


the inferior limit of whose date is the Eutychian controversy, in
the dialogue called de Deo Tnno et Uno (Lib. ii. ch. xxx.) assumes
writer

called

this as the true reading.

'Qui autem orat et

patiaris in teviptationeni,

non utique

id

orat

ut

dicit,

id orat ut

ne nos induci

homo

sit...neque

habeat liberum arbitrium,...neque orat peccatorum


mandatum. Orat ut non

reniissionem...sed orat plane ut faciat


peccet, hoc est, ne quid faciat mali.'

The same form

of the clause

is

given in a Sermon (Ixxxiv.)

printed in the Appendix to Augustine's Sermons.


is

quoted below

The passage

p.

67

The passage

f.

in Cyprian (de Oratione Doni.)

is clear,

and

is

as

follows
'

Illud

monet Doniinus

quoque necessarie

ut

oratione

in

dicamus Et ne patiaris nos induci in temptationeni. Qua in parte


ostenditur nihil contra nos adversarium posse, nisi Deus ante
permiserit, ut omnis timer noster et devotio atque observatio ad

Deum

convertatur, quando in temptationibus nostris nihil malo

liceat, nisi

potestas inde trihuatur!

have italicised the words in which Cyprian dwells on the


peculiar form of the clause as he accepts it.
It should further be noticed that Hartel, whose text is followI

ed above, records two variations of reading in Cyprian's quotation

from the Lord's Prayer:


fueris for patiaris,

(ii)

(i)

Cod. Veronensis substitutes passus

Cod. Sangallensis and Cod. Veronensis have

induci nos.
(b)

The reading has found

its

way

into several MSS.

(1)

'The

Bp

close affinity of Cod. Bobiensis (k) with Cyprian,' so writes

Wordsworth (Old-Latin Biblical Texts, No. i. p. Ixvii), is the first


and surest clue that we have to guide us through the maze of
'

'

the questions connected with the early history of the Old Latin

"

'BRING US NOT INTO TEMPTATION.'

65

This MS. reads ne passus fueris induci nos in temptatione.

Version.

(2) Cod. Colbertimis (c), which gives (see below p. 1.58) a 'mixed'
Latin text, has ne passus nos fueris induci in temptationem.

Sabatier gives ne patiaris nos induci as the reading of (3) Cod.


Sangermanensis {g"), and of (4) gat., a MS. of the Hieronyniian text

To these must be added two

of the Gospels at St Gatien's, Tours.

MSS. referred to in the critical note on Matt.

worth and

Mr

vi.

13 in Bp. Words-

White's edition of the Vulgate text of St Matthew,

'Cod. Dublinensis olim Armachanus (Book of Armagh),'

viz. (5)

(6) " Cod. Evang. Rushworthianus vel

Both of these

The

'

Gospels of 3Iac Regol'

MSS. read ne patiaris nos induci.

evidence derived from the MSS., taken with that of the

Latin writers quoted above, shews

one form

that

(ii)

it

(i)

that the gloss took more than

appears in the text at almost the earliest

date at which we have evidence in regard to the African Version,

and that

it

was widely known, though not commonly adopted into

the text of the Gospel.


(c)

'

Sic orant nonnulli,'

'

multi precando

ita dicunt,'

such

is

Augustine's account of the form of the petition which we are considering.

It

was common in devotional use

hence

it

gained

currency.

Three passages of TertuUian are instructive


I will

De

quote them
Oratione

in the

viii.

in this connexion.

probable order of date.

'ne nos inducas in temptationem, id est, ne nos

patiaris induci ab eo utique qui temptat.'

De Fuga

ii.

'

Erue nos a

rnaligno, id est, ne nos induxeris in

temptationem permittendo nos maligno.


Tunc enim eruimur
diaboli manibus, cum illi non tradimur in temptationem.'
Adv. Marcionem iv. 26 Quis non sinet nos deduci in temptationem ? Quem poterit temptator non timere, an qui a primordio
temptatorem angelum praedamnavit?'
'

The thought
tion

is

of the divine permission in the matter of

tempta-

the turning point of Tertullian's interpretation of the last

two clauses of the Prayer, as later on (see p. 134 f ) will appear


more clearly. In these passages we see the words in which that
thought found expression in the very act, as it were, of securing a
place for themselves in the text.

the thought
C.

is

clearly expressed

In the passage from de Fuga


in the earlier passage from de
5

THE lord's prayer

66

the early church.

in

Oratione the form which in Cyprian

is

part of the prayer itself

given as the proper expansion of the petition

is

in the treatise

must needs be included


Thus the gloss is already

against Marcion, the thought of permission

hasty reference to the clause.

in a

laying aside

There

is

its

no need

He

this scholium.
tion,

guise and boldly assuming a higher place.

is

to suppose that Tertullian is the author of

probably only repeating a devotional adapta-

already current, of a hard saying.

due to

That

this adaptation

when the

liturgical usage will appear presently,

of the other kindred gloss on this petition has cleared the

an investigation into their


sufficient to

common

now under

notice that the gloss

which seemed

petition.

to offer

The Pauline passage

Cyprian however {Testimonia

1 Cor.

an authoritative explanation of

iii.

is

not

it

is

x.

this

by Tertullian.

quoted

91) represents

vos non occiipabit nisi humana.

for

it is

consideration

ultimately to be traced back to the words of St Paul in


12, 13,

way

For the present

origin.

is

discussion

thus, 'Temptatio

autem Deus, qui non

Fidelis

patietur vos temptari super quod potestis, sed faciet

cum

tempta-

tions etiam evadendi facultatem, ut possitis tolerare\'

The passage

(2)

soften

of St Paul

by Latin writers

service

down

in

however was pressed into the


It had helped them to

another way.

the difficult ne nos indiicas.

limitation of temptatio.

It

also suggested

This gloss appears to be later than the

it hung about the actual text, but has not, so far as I


know, been found in any MS.
I quote in full, as they are instructive in many ways, the

former;

passages referred to by Sabatier.

Hilary in Ps.

cxviii.

(Migne P. L. 9

510)

p.

'

Scientes qui-

dera frequenter nos ab eo ob temptationes derelinqui, ut per eas

Verumtamen secundum Prophetam


ait enim, Non me
derelinquas usquequaque nimis. Quod et in dominicae orationis
fides nostra probabilis fiat.

ne nos penitus dereliuquat deprecandus est

quote Hartel's

saec. vii.)

text.

He

ventiim facultatis

in

A = Cod. biblioth. Sessorianae,


= Cod. Wiirzeburgensis) has pro-

notices that (1) Cod.

has quod ferre potestis;

(2)

place of evad.

'Temptatio vos nou adprehendat

nisi

Cod.

The Vulgate (Cod. Amiatinus) has


humana. Fidelis autem Deus est, qui non

facitlt.

patietur vos temptari super id quod potestis, sed faciet

ventnm, ut possitis sustinere.'

cum temptatione

etiam pro-

'BRING US NOT INTO TEMPTATION.'

cum

ordine continetnr,

dicitur

quarn ferre non possimus.

temptandum

Non

derelinquas nos^ in temptatione

Scit

Apostolus derelinqui nos ad

mensuram

sed novit et

(57

infirraitatis

nostrae

Deuai

nosse, dicens Fidelis est Deus, qui non permittat nos temptari super

Job Deus temptationi permittens a iure diaboli


potestatera animae eius excerpsit.'
Chromatius Bp of Aquileia, a contemporary and supporter of
Chrysostom, a friend of Ambrose, Jerome, and Rufinus (Migne
P. L. 20 p. 362) Dehinc ait Et ne nos inducas in temptationem,
qiiam possumiis.

'

sed libera nos a 7?iaZo....Non ergo ne in toto tentemur oramus, sed

ne supra quam virtus

ipsum

in

alio libro

Sermon on the Mount


scriptum est Et ne nos
possumus.
est,

fidei

patitur temptationi tradamur; quod

Evangelii [he
in

here commenting on the

is

St Matthew] ostensum est:

in/eras in temptationem,

quam

enim

sic

sufferre

Apostolus quoque, ut id ipsum ostenderet,

non

ita testatus

dicendo Fidelis autem Deus, qui non patitur temptari super id

quod

potestis, sed faciei

possitis tolerare.

cum

temptatione etiam transgressum, ut

Et ideo non illam temptationem a nobis

auferri,

quae esse potest utilis, deprecamur, sed illam, quae ad fidei nostrae
eversionem modum infirmitatis excedit. Et idcirco congrue et
necessario in fine orationis etiam liberari nos postulamus a mala,
qui fidem nostram diversis temptationibus quotidie expugnare non
desinit, a qua nos non immerito quotidiana oratione deprecamur,
ne immissionibus ipsius impediti praecepta divina minime possimus
The masculine interpretation of a malo is to be noticed.

implere.'

Jerome in Ezek.

xlviii.

16 (Migne P. L. 25

recesserimus ab aquilone, vento

frigidi.=isimo,

p.

484)

'

Curaque

transimus ad meri-

diem, et post ortum in nobis lumen scientiae, occasum fortitudinum


formidamus, nequaquam praeterita sed futura considerantes, nee

habentes certam virtutis possessionem sed quotidie in oratione


dicentes,

Ne inducas

nos in temptationem

Augustine De Serin. Dom.

ii.

'

quam ferre non

Aliud

onem, aliud temptari... Inducimur enim


fen^e non possumus.'

This passage

is

si

Et nepatians nos induci


1

Here

cxviii. 8

is

(non

in temptationem

another Scriptural gloss making

me

quas

tales acciderint

not noticed in Sabatier.

Pseudo- Augustine Serm. Ixxxiv. (Migne P. L. 39


'

possumus.'

est induci in temptati-

its

derelinquas usquequaque), xxvi.

p.

1909)

quam ferre non possumus,


way

into the text.

Comp.

9, xxxvii. 22, Ixx. 9.

52

Pa.

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

68

Vide quid dicat quam ferre non possumus

noa

dicit,

non inducas

nos in temptationem; sed quasi atbleta talem vult temptationeni

quam

ferre possit

humana

conditio, et unusquisque ut

ab inimico et a peccato, Uhevetur.

est,

a malo, hoc

Potens est autem Dominus

qui abstulit peccatura vestrum, et delicta vestra donavit, tueri et

adversum

custodire vos

malo again should be

interpretation of a

non vobis

diaboli adversantis insidias, ut

obrepat inimicus, qui culpam generare consuevit'.'

The masculine

noticed.

Hitherto we have confined our attention to Latin writers in reference to both these glosses.

It

in Latin writers that they both

is

attach themselves to the text of the Prayer, though

it is

only the

them which has gained a place in extant Latin copies


the N.T.
But it is important to remark that the first gloss
first

of

of
is

found in a fragment of Dionysius of Alexandria (Migne P. G. 10


1601, see below

p.

Treipaa/jbov'

where

Tim.

p.

rovreart,,
vi.

140) koX 8^ koi


firj

is

elaeviyKT}!;

Cor.

et9

13,

x.

rjfjLciq

et?

neipacrfiov,

Further, a

a prayer has been already quoted

in

33) from Agathangelus, 6

(p.

/xt]

efiTreaeiv

Vfid'i

combined with

embedded

similar phrase

iaarj^

e'ao-a?

iireXdelv

rifjuv

top Treipaa/xov

have pointed out that there appears to be a large


liturgical element in Agathangelu.s, and this fact at once suggests
that we have only partially followed up the clue given in AugusTovTov.

tine's

words

dicunt.'
dicentes.'

(p.

orant

63), 'sic

nonnuUi,' 'multi

Compare Jerome (above p. 67)


The true origin of these allied

when we turn

firj

p. 6)

ov vTveveyKtcp ov Svudfieda.

same Liturgy (Swainson


Kvpie,

in

ita

oratione

glosses appears at once

to the following passages from the Liturgies "^

Liturgy of Alexandria (Swainson


-rrecpaa/jLov,

precando

'quotidie

p.

62

f.,

et(TeveyKr]<;...7rovr]pov.

cniKay-^via, ore ov

This whole passage

Dr Hort has

fir)

Hammond
olSev

yap

BvvdfieOa vireveyKUv hid


is

el<7eviyKT]<; rjna'^ el^

The EmhoUsvius
p.
r]

iroWr]

rrjv

aov ev-

iroWrjv

also found in Pseudo-Ambrose de Sacramentis

already suggested this explanation.

of the

189) vol Kvpie,

rjfiwv

v. 4. 29.

After speaking of the

doxology, he adds {Notes on Select Readings p. 9), 'Another apparently hturgical


interpolation occurs in several Latin Fathers, the addition of quam ferre (stifferre) non

the Gospel

possumus to temptationem
itself.'

He

it is

does not notice the

not

known

first gloss.

to exist in

any Latin

ms. of

'BRING US NOT INTO TEMPTATION.'

aadevetav dXka
Bvvaa-daL

'^fia<;

tw

Troirjaov <jvv

Trecpaa/xo) koI rrjv eK^aaiv, rov

vireve'yKelv.

Liturgy of St James (Swainson


airoaTrjcrrf^

rinerepa^

69

a^' rjiiwv

rrjv

iraihua^; iiraya'^rj'i

8vvdjj,0)<;

the same

Liturgy (Swainson

eca-evejKTj'i

rjfxa^

eh

225

p.

^orjOetav,

(7r)v

p.

ireipaafiov,

306

Hammond

f,

T^/jLd<;...ij,r]

^apvrepw; t^?

The Emholismns

rjixlv.

Kvpie,

pvaaL

f.)

fiTjBe

Kvpce rdov

VTrevejKeiv ou Svvdfieda, 6 etSw? rrjv daOiveiav

p.

48)

Zvvdfiewv,

^/xoov,

nWd

of
pLrj

ov

pvaai

K.T.X.

The
p.

Syriac Liturgy of St

James (Swainson

p.

348,

Hammond

78) has, 'Domine, Deus noster, ne inducas nos in temptationem,

quam

virtute destituti sustinere

non possimus,

[sed fac etiam

tentatione proventum, ut possimus sustinere,] et

The Emholismns

cum

libera....

(Hammond

of the Coptic Liturgy

p. 223) ne
nos inducas in temptationem, neque perriiittas ullam iniquitatem

in nos dominari.

consideration of this liturgical evidence, of the passages

from Tertullian and Cyprian (above pp. 64, 65), of the fact that
neither of these two glosses occurs in any known Greek text of
the N.T., and that only one of them

is

found

in

any known Latin

text of the N.T., and lastly of the analogy of other additions to

and adaptations

made

of the Prayer,

seems to me

to prove that

they

way from the Liturgies into (or towards) the text of


the N.T., and not vice versa.
The further fact that these glosses
occur in writers who are separated from each other in time and
their

in circumstance,

and that they are found

in Liturgies

to different families, shews very clearly that they

belonging

must be due

to

very early liturgical usage.

Note on an English Version of

this clause in the King's

Book

(1543).

The

Institution of

has on the clause

And

a Christian Man, 1537, often


leade

its

called the Bishops' Bool;

not into temptation the following

For the more playne declaration of the sixth petition we thinke


that all byshops and preachers shall instructe and teache the
'

our Savior

Je.sus Christ teacheth

it

comment
convenient

people... that

us not in this sixth peticion, to praye unto

70

THE lord's prayer

IN

THE EARLY CHT^RCH.

god our father, that we shulde be clerely without al temptation, but that he
wol not suffre us to be led into temptation.... Sayncte Paiile sayth, The
trewe and faythfuU god wol not suflfre us to be tempted above that we maye
but he wol tiu-ne temptation to oiu* profit, that we maye susteyn it
and overcome it.' This exposition is substantially repeated in the Necessary
Erudition of any Christian Man, 1543, often called the King's Book. But
here the petition in the Prayer itself is And lette us not he ledde into temptation.
The history of the clause in Tertullian and Cyprian cviriously repeats
itself, though the explanation of the history may be quite different in the two
epochs.
I do not know that this gloss is found in any other English Version
beare,

of the Prayer.

VII.

aAAa

pyCAi

HMAC And toy nONHpoy

In a discussion of the interpretation of


questions require investigation

(1)

(St Matthew).

this clause three distinct

the meaning of the prepo-

and e/c after pveadac and kindred verbs; (2) the origin,
meaning and use of the term 6 irovr^po^ (3) the evidence as to

sitions aTTo

the gender of diro rov irovr^pov to be derived from


(ii)

the Epistles,

(i)

the Gospels,

early Christian literature, (iv) the earliest

(iii)

Versions.

Frequent reference will be made to the friendly controversy


two great scholars, who have since then passed away. It was
opened by Canon Cook's Protest against the change in the last
of

petition of the Lord's Prayer. ..a letter to the Bishop of London,

dated four days after the publication on

Revised Version of the

New

Testament.

May

17, 1881, of the

Bishop Lightfoot's three

answer to Canon Cook appeared in the Guardian on the


and 21st of the following September'. Canon Cook

letters in

7th, 14th,

replied

by a

full

statement of his case in a Second Letter dated

26 November, 1881 ^

It

would be indeed unbecoming

the learning of the two disputants

more than once

to criticise

to praise

but, as I shall have occasion

Canon Cook's arguments,

may perhaps

be allowed to pay a respectful tribute to the chastened and almost


pathetic earnestness with which the veteran scholar pleaded his
cause.

ears for

Yet even such masters of the


humbler gleaners to gather.

1.

When
'

While

The prepositions
used with

full

airo

accuracy

reaper's craft have left a few

and ex
diro,

the correlative of

this is passing through the press I learn that

Bp

7rp6<i,

Lightfoot's three

volume On a Fresh Revision.


Canon Cook's protest had the enthusiastic support of Dean Burgon, The

letters are being reprinted in the third edition of his


2

after pvecrdat.

Eevision Revised, p. 214

ft'.

THE lord's prayer

72

the early church.

in

denotes motioa from, emphasising the idea of direction ; eV, the


correlative of et?, denotes motion out of, emphasising the idea of
Thus, for example, the

emergence.

two prepositions are used

correctly in the following verse of the Apocalypse (xxi. 2): koX

aytav ^YepovadXr]^ Kucvijv elBov Kara^aivovaav k

TTJv ttoXlv tt)v

Tov ovpavov

meaning

When

rov 6eovK

oLTTo

deliverance,

then diro

used with a verb

is

properly implies nothing more than that

it

been averted. A person has been


in the neighbourhood of peril, and has been withdrawn unharmed.
The preposition ex following a verb of this class properly expresses
the threatened danger has

the further notion that the person delivered has been brought out
of the very area of danger

are

e/c

iradcov

Instances of this

itself.

20 (lxx.) vroXXat al

Ps. xxxiii.

avTwv (Hebr.

^A.t-\|rei9

full

twv

and again,

pva-erai avrov'i'^:

Dx3to^)

meaning

BiKaicov, koI

acocra<;.
But as a matter
commonly observed in the
LXX. and in the New Testament ? The answer with regard to
the usage of the former is of primary importance. It must
however be remarked that statistics as to the phenomena of the

Jude

5 Kvpto'i Xaov

of fact

is

e/c

7^9 AlyvTrrov

this distinction invariably or

LXX., in the present condition of the text and of the available

apparatus, can only be looked


It

is

upon

as approximate and provisional.

probably due to a sense of the distinction pointed out

above that the translators of the LXX. and the writers of the N.T.
alike avoid the construction (pvXdaaeLv gk, and, with the single
exception of Ps. cxxxix
preposition otto I

5,

always associate with this verb the

Avoidance

of,

not emergence out

The

the essential idea of this word.


preposition

is

But the
1

Comp. Lc.

{eKS-qixov/jLev dirb

danger

of,

is

choice therefore of this

a natural one.

case
ii.

rod

4,

is

Jn.

different
i.

when we

take the ambiguous verb

44, 45, 46, vii. 17, xi.

Kvplov...iKdr]fji.TJffc^i

1, 1

Thess.

6,

ii.

eK tov aujxaTos), Apoc. xvi. 17.

2 Cor. v. 6, 8

The contrast

between airb veKpQv (Lc. xvi. 30, Matt. xiv. 2, xxvii. 64) and e/c veKpQv (Lc. xvi. 31
and always elsewhere) is very instructive. The (k impHes a certain relation to the
other dead: it hints at the thought of an dirapxv-

Comp. Ps. cxxiii. 7.


The passages are (a) Dent,

Jer. ix. 4, Mic.


Sir.

xii.

vii.

11, xxii. 13, 26, xxxv.

1 Jn. V. 21.

xxiii. 9,

Josh.

vi.

18, Ps. xvii. 24, exx. 7, cxl. 9,

5 (in all these places the Hebr. verb


22,

xxxvii.

8;

{b)

Lc.

is "IDL"'),
xii.

15,

Ezek. xxxiii.
2 Thess.

iii.

8,

3,

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

Here taking

pveaOai, to deliver.

the occurrences of pveadai,

all

without distinguishing them according


represented, the verb

Twv x^ipwv) 20 times

iK

(or

Hebrew word

the

to

followed by ck 30 times

is

73

by

e'/c

x^'^P^'^^

while only 10 instances of aTro

are found'^.

more exact view of the


constructions

various

Hophal), and

WIH,

Hebrew verbs 65^5,

vSn,

7^0

are

The

in-

several

occurs about

t:*pK)), it

lo'^tt,

80 times as the translation of parts of

LXX.,

represent

to

the

if

Hiphil,

Piel,

the

in

used

is

gained

(Niphal,

75^^

equivalents

pueaOai

while

For,

vestigated.

verb

the

of

several

their

facts of the case is

results attained

are as follows.

"3 1*^

1.

Of

(1)

Gen. xxxii. 12*, xxxvii. 21*, 22*, Ex.

K x^cpo^.

(a)

living creatures, chiefly persons^

8*, xviii. 9*, 10*, Deut. xxv. 11*, xxxii, 39*, Josh.
31, xxiv. 10*,

14

Judg.

vi.

xviii.

48*,

29*, 33, 34*, 35*, 2 Chron. xxxii. 13

xxxvi. 18, 19, 20,

7*

11

xlii.

(Theod.), Hos.
2

K.

(6)

ii.

26*,

8*,

iv.

Ezek.

xiii.

12*, Zech.

Kings

(adoaai., so vv. 14, 15),

10, cxliv, 76, 11*, Is,

4, xcvii.

Dan.

xxii.

viii.

4*,

6*.

39*, Prov.

xvii.

3*,

vii.

2 King.=

xii. 7,

21, 23, xxxiv, 27*,


xi.

iii.

xxii.

13*, Jer. xv. 21*, xx. 13*, xxi. 12*,

xliii.

{(Tco^eiv),

Sam.

37*, 2 Sam.

xvii.

17*, Ps. xxii. 216, xxxi. 16, Ixxxii.

3*,

17, 1

9, viii. 34, ix.

{a(j>ei\ovTo), xii. 11*, xiv.

ix.

vi.

{aco^j}-.

but the LXX.

diverges from the Hebrew).


aTTo.

(c)

Job

(xi.

have noticed

xxxiii.

v.l.),

Ex.

dirb

Numb.

19,

ii.

xxxv. 25*, Dan.

x^'po^ only iu 2 Esdr. viii. 31 (eppiaaro

when

23, 1

Mace.

a verb other than pueadai

In the prayer of Esther


petition pucrai

i7/xas

e/c

of the prayer,

to the Lord's

Prayer

is

(iv. 16),

x^'P^s

resemblance

'''^'

/Me, Kijpie,

7]/j.ai

airo x^'po?

is

is

is

used.

In

all otiier

noted.

pvaai

/xe

ix tov cpdjiov

/xoi'.

The

perhaps based on some Greek Jewish formula,


Fritzsche (Libri Aporri/phi p. 51) gives besides

pOcrai

ck x"/>6s tov <pb^ov fiov.

f^tXaTo...e/c x^'P^y Trovr)pVOfiii'(j}u).

used, the verb

which only exists in the Greek, there occurs the


is

to be noted.

12,

ii.

xii. 15.

'Tovqpevopi.ivujv Kai

which

the above the following reading


e^eXoO

7 (lxx.).

17, Ps. xvi. 13, xvii. 30, 49, xxxviii. 9, xlii. 1, cxix. 2, Prov.

Ezek. xxxvii.

In passages marked with an asterisk the verb e^atpeiffdai

cases

viii.

r]/j.as

sk xf'P^y

Comp.

tuji'

TrovTjpevo/j.^i'uiv

{(/>'

i]/j.a.^

Kal

Jer. xx. 13 D^yi.D ^iP?'^^ (lxx.

THE lord's prayer

74

Of

{2)

the early church.

in

things

Is. xlvii.

eK.

Compare Job

14*.

20,

v.

m
T

n'b
nnn
e t

pvaeTac

ck 6avaTou...K

ere

"3 ft3^

2.

iK

(a)

2 Kings XX. 6

Of

(1)

T^ficov,

ere.

16, xxii.

2 Esdr.
^

(= Ezra)

Sam.

^:it9'p?

1* (=

Ps. xviii. 1).

(o-wo-et). Is. xxxviii. 6.


viii.

31.

xix. 10,

Nini

^:inNs

5|5t:

)h'^n ^hf^n

k ^e^po? avro iravroiv

rjfia'^

Kul ai/TO? i^elXaro 'qfia^

e'/c

rwv

%ft/309 d\\o(j)v\(ov.

Of things:

(2)

Hab.

ii.

9.

yi fj^D S^JhS

Tov eKcnraadTJvai

"3

3.

xiv.

AauelS epvaaro

6 ^aaiXev'i

ixOpoov

Sam.

2 Chron. xxxii. 11

D^ri^S^ 5|5D

r^Si

living creatures

(o-two-w),

eK x^^P^ ^"^^^

(c)

aiSijpou Xvaei

')(^6ipo<;

xef/)09.

aTTo x6t/)09.

(6)

Of

(1)

e'/t

')(^eip6<;

kukwp.

living creatures

35 (i^ia-rraaa e/c tov arofiaro^: avrov),


2 Sam. xxii. 18, 49, 1 Chron. xvi. 35*, Ps. xviii. 18, xxxi. 16, lix. 2*,
tov
3, Ixix. 156, cxlii. 7, cxliii. 9*, Ezek. xxxiv. 10 {i^eKovfiaL...eK
e'/c aTOfiaTO'i
iroLin)v
eKa-iracrr)
6
(otuv
iii.
12
Amos
avTQJv),
aT6fj,aT0<i
(a)

TOV

er.

\eoi/TO<?

(b)

Sam.

Svo

xvii.

a-KeXr]),

(iTTo.

Mic.

v. 5.

Ps. xviii. 496, Prov.

ii.

12 (ha pvarjTai ae diro


Prov. ii. 16

oZov KaK>)<i Kol diro dvBp6<i XaXovfTot firjBev ircaTov).


is

altogether transformed in the LXX.


(c)

iK %ei/309.
:

nps

i^eCXaTO

Ps. xxxiv. 18.

Comp. Ex.

xviii. 4,

nnnXD ):h^')

p.e

iic

^etpo? ^apaco

1 The phrase however has probably arisen from a misreading


and a subsequent conflation of the two readings.

In Gen. xxxi. 10

a change

(^v dcpeiXaro 6 dibi tov

of constniction (Hebr. IJ'axp).

warpos

vfj-wf),

of eiDD as "?30,

the simple genitive involves

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

Of

(2)

(a)

things

Ex.

eV.

19, xxxiv.

75

vi. 6,

5, 18, 20,

Josh.

16,

li.

13*, 1 Sam. xxvi. 24*, Ps. xxxiii.

ii.

14, Ixxxvi. 13, xci. 3 (pvaerai

liv. 9, Ivi.

iraytBo'; OrjpevTutv, Kol airo Xoyov Tapd^a)8ov<i),

43

(7rpa\r}<;),

i^eXov

Prov.

plcov),
II

kuI pvaai

fie

Zech.

x. 2,

jxe

Amos

'^eipo'i

6,

cxix,

':h'^n

dWoT-

vlwv

11 {i^cr7raafiivo<;

iv.

Ps. xxii. 21a, xxxix. 9, Ixix.

aTTo,

2,

Prov.

pvaerai diro Oavdrov

12a

ii.

KaKwv avTov) the Lxx.

"3 03D

5.

''3

W^p

Is.

XX.

Deut.

is

In Jon.

irvpo'?,

e'/c

6,

xxiii.

{crwa-ov), xci.

36

4 {Bikulo-

not in B), Ezek. xxxiv. 12


iv.

6 {aKia^etv avrw diro

clearly connected

which occurs in the earlier part of the


4.

15a

(see above, 3(6)), xi.

the clause

(a7re\a<7&)...a7ro iravro'i tottov).

Tcov

cvii.

u'p^

u'^i

i^ vSarcov ttoWcov, eK

xxiii. 14,

(see just above), cxx.


auvrj

Tp

':^

n^;)

(t

2).

iii.

(6)

cxiiv.

7*5^n7

with

75^

verse.

TjSd ^J3D h^^^rh

16 (the wording

changed

is

aoid^vat nirh

in the

LXX.).
6.

To
e'/c

are

1^

"D

nnnD

Ex.

xviii.

10 (omitted in the lxx.).

pass to another important point, the prepositions diro and


often

interchanged

the

in

parallel

clauses

of

poetical

Thus, for example,

passages.
Ps. xxi.

(Heb.

xxii.) 21,

pvaai diro pofi^aLa<;


KoX eK

')(eipo<i

22

{'2ir[J2)

("1*^) Kvv6<i

rrjv "^v^riv fiov,

Tqv

fjLovoyevTJ

fiov

acocrov fie eK aT6fjLaT0<; (*3G) Xeovrof,

Kai diro Kepdrcov


Ps. xxxiv.

{'^TV^f^i)

fiovoKepcoTOJv rrjv raTrelvuicriv fiou.

(Heb. xxxv.) 10

pv6fiV0<i 7rTO))(^6v eK

^etpo? aTepeoiripcov avrou (13QD pTH/b),


V

Kol TTTWXOV KOL TTePTJTU r/Vo TCOV tiapTTa^OVTWV aVTOV

T T

(l/TilJiS).

THE lord's prayer IX THE EARLY CHURCH.

76

Ps. Ixviii. (Heb. Ixix.) 15

awaov

airo irrfKov (tO^tSD),

fie

rwv

pvaOelriv k

Kal

'^va

fx^

fiio-ovvTcov fie

ivTrayco'

(^XJSJ'tt)

Tov ^cidov^ roov v^droju (D**^ \'^ttyS/b).


~

e'/c

I"

Ps. cxxxix. (Heb. cxl.) 1

e^eXov

Kvpce, i^ dvOpcorrov

fie,

(D"Ti^^) irovrfpov,

drro dvBp6<i (CJ'^Ntt) dhiKov pvaai

Corap. xvii. 49,

Further, diro

xc. 3, cxiv. 8, Sir.

is

whelming

5.

sometimes used where reference

deliverance from some

fiov

li.

fie.

adverse

Thus

its victim.

(''y^3"73^) pvaai

power which

Jer. xlix.

(xlii.

aTreXda-o)

("Tl/^^m)

Bcea-Trdprjaav

iraacov

Ezek. xxxiv.

avrov^.

e'/cet.

made

aura diro

KaKwv (Hyin
T
T

^iiUtt)
"

dvo^Lwv

roirov

wv

iyco

7)

koI

12 (comp. Zech.

iravro'^

to a

over-

Heb.) 17 ovk ea-rac


T

eir

is

already

Ps. xxxviii. 9 diro iraacov tcop

fie.

avTcov ovSel^ aco^ofievo'^ otto tu>v


iirdrfco

is

viii.

(ni^ip^n"73^) ov

xxxvii. 23 Kal pvaofiac (^Dj^S^'im) avrov<i diro

rwv dvofiLwv avrwv (Dn^n^^i^

7'2f2)

(^v

rffidpTOcav iv

avTai<;.

Conversely, iu the phrases

and e^

drrcoXeia'^ (Sir.

be maintained.

It

li.

e/c

2, 12),

seems

in

6avdrov

(e.g. Ps. xxxii. 19, Iv.

14)

the stricter meaning of e cannot

such cases to emphasise either the

extremity and imminence of the danger or the completeness of the


deliverance vouchsafed.

review of the whole investigation seems to justify the

fol-

lowing conclusions
(Ij
In regard to the Hebrew verb 7i*y it is more often
used of deliverance from living creatures than from impersonal
dangers further, the genius of the language, loving simplicity
;

and picturesque statement, explains the fact that the phrase


from the hand of is the favourite complement. As to the Greek

'

equivalents, the literal


X^f-po^

OTTO to

is

e'/c

the most
x^cpo'i, is

translation

of the

Hebrew

phra.;e

iv

common and further eV, being nearer than


most often chosen to render the Hebrew "tf^.
;

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL


It

is

Hebrew and

clear also that the phrases both in


^3/53,

*!*/D

%6t/309,

iic

are used, though in

diro

e/c,

portions which appear in the

and

reference to both persons

The primary

(2)

77

ONE.'

Greek

in

different pro-

of references given above, in

list

things.

between

distinction

e'/c

and

according to

cltto,

which the former applies to dangers already experienced, the


latter to dangers which only threaten, is not observed in the LXX.

An

examination of the passages in which pveaOac and kindred

verbs are used in the N. T. naturally follows an investigation into


the usage of the LXX.

a verb used,

i^aipelv:

should be noticed, upwards of 70

it

times in the LXX. to translate

Kal

irdarj^;

Some Western
'

is

Acts

eV %etp69.

(i)

'HpcoBov

7'*5fn.

11 6 Kvpto<;...e^ei\aT6

xii.

John

The e/c %6i/co<?


irdar]';.
The Apostle was already in the

grasp {eiTe^a\ev...rd<i ^etpa?

vii.

lovoaccov.

authorities add e before

'

here used in its strictest sense.

tyrant's

%etpo9

e/c

fxe

tou \aov rajv

r^? 7rpoaBoKLa<;

30, 44, x. 39

2 Cor.

32

xi.

1,

v.

f.)

iridaa^

comp.

4;

v.

the expectation of the

'

people' already encircled him.


(ii)

Acts

()

e'/c.

10 i^eiXaro avrov [rov

vii.

Compare

Traaaiv roov dXiyfrecov avrov.

The preposition
Comp.
7

i.

f.

Chron.

Guided by

Gal.

i.

To^ TTovTjpov.

discussion of this passage

On

(a)

dvaaTpo<prj<;

manner

rov Xaov Kal


i^fid'i

rcov

e'/c

roov

e'/c

iOvoov.

of life'

the other

i.

men

xi,

25

f.

we

rov alwvo<; rov ivearo)-

See

18 iXvTpooOrjTe

within

hand comp. Hermas

e'/c

reserved.

TraTpoTrapaSorov.

had held

2 Cor.

has very slight support.

e'/c

must be

Pet.

xxiii. 27,

e'/c.

oTTco? i^eXrjTai rjp^d'i

diTo Vd placc of

Xvrpovcrdai.

Acts

e.g.

here also give the full sense to

v/jLcov

e'/c

35 i^eXov

xvi.

(the latter passage throws no light on the question

of construction).

(c)

e'/c

clearly used in its full sense.

Acts XX vi. 17 i^aipov ^iev6<i ae

(b)

eOvwv.
Jer.

is

'I&)cr^<^]

Ps. xxiv. 22, xxxiii. 7, 18.

Vi.->.

p.

e'/c

115
r^?

Here obviously
its

The

ff.

'

/jLaTaia<;

the

vain

grasp\

iv. 1. 7.

At the approach of the beast,

THE lord's prayer

78

Tit.

(6)
r}ixd<i
'

14

ii.

o<?

the early church.

in

eScoKev iavTov inrep rj^wv "va XvTpaxnjrac

kavTW \aov

OTTO 7rdar]<; dvofiLa<i koL KaOapiarj

Iniquity' had been no merely menacing power.

men

subjected

yap

This

to its despotic rule.

dnro therefore

TTore Koi ^/Meh k.t.\.

is

Trepiovcrcov.

had actually

It

clear from

iii.

TJfiev

cannot imply a more or

less

It seems to differ from e in that, laying less


on the power from which deliverance is vouchsafed, it leaves
more room for the thought of the deliverance itself \

distant danger.
stress

pveadai.
eK

')^eLp6<i

(i)

puadeura'i

awTTjpiav e^ i^dpcov

The song

^/xd<i).

To

Judg.

XXX. 16,

ii.

18,

34, 1

viii.

y^tp6<;

up on O.

built

is

74 rov Bovvat

i.

Xarpeueiv

koi k

rjfxooi/

Sam.

Iviii. 2, Ixiii. 2, cv.

iv.

d^o^wi

^fiiu

(Comp. v. 71
iravTcov twv fiiaovvrav
avrw.

T. thoughts and expressions.

many parallels may be found

this phrase in particular

e.g.

Luke

yeipo'i.

e'/c

i')(^dpu)v

3, xii.

10, cxlii. 9.

in the O.T.

10, Ps. xvii. 18, 21, 49,

The whole context shews

that 'the enemies' were tyrannous powers under which the Israel
of

God

actually mourned.

(ii) e/c.
Rom. vii. 24 tl<; fie pvcreraL Ik rov aa)fiaTo<; rov
(a)
davdrov tovtov; The thought is of a captivity (al^fjiaXwTi^ovTd
fxe V. 23) and a slavery (Bov\evio...v6fjLq} d/jLapria'i v. 25) of which
the body of this death (comp. the body of sin vi. G) is the
'

'

'

The

sphere.
(b)

preposition ck has

2 Cor.

The

pvaerai.

'

its full force.

10 o? ck rrfkiKovrov Oavdrou ipvaaro

i.

eV points to the nearness of the

iv kavTol<i TO aTTOKpcfia rov davdrov ia-x^jKUfMev


(c)

Col.

i.

13 0? ipvcraro

The

fierea-rrjaev K.r.X.

(d)
rfj<;

Thess.

ipxofiivTj'i.

i.

eK

sense of

is
'

e/c is

final

Syrian

outpouring of

koi

avrol

{v. 9).

clear.
r]iid<;

e'/c

tt}?

6pyf}<i

an apparently 'Western' reading which


'

text.

We

find in St Paul's writings

a double conception of the Divine wrath.

and

i^ovaia<i rov CKorov^ koX

Tfj<;

10 ^Irjaovv rov pvofievov

diro

passed over into the

full

vfid<i

i^fxds

enemy

it.

Thus Rom.

ii.

There
5, v.

will

be a future

9 {awdr)a6fie6a hC

the type of the great tribulation which should be, rip^an-nv epurciv rov Kvpiov tva
Deliverance from any experience of the monster's power
XvTpw<rr]Tat i^ avrov.

jj-e

is

obviously the point of the request.


^

Contrast Ps. cxxix. 8 Kai oJtos XuTpwa-erai rov

avTov.

'lcrpa-^\ k iracwv

tQv

avofj.i.u>v

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


avTov OTTO T^9
cn)<;

Thus Rom.
Toi)? viov<;

avTov<;

6pyfj(;)

There

6p<yrj<;,
i.

18,

is

5, xii.

Eph.

19,

6 (ep;^Tat

v.

1 Thess.

6,

iii.

ri

ii.

/xeWov-

manifestation.

opyt)

rov deov eVt

16 {e(f)6aav Be

himself supplies the connecting link

Orjaavpi^ea creavro) opyrjv

(Rom.

iv rjfiepa opyrj^ Koi d'iroKa\.vy^eu><i hLKaioKpiaia^ Toi) deov


ii.

The deliverance

5).

is

the nature of the danger

a present reality

Thess.

the full revelation of

The general

subject

the second coming of Christ

2 Thess.

v. 2,

the future'.

lies in

of these Epistles to Thessalonica

(note especially

eir

Between the two conceptions St Paul

r\o<;).

et<?

7 (f)vyeiv otto TTJq

iii.

also a present anticipatory

aTreiOla^), Col.

Tfj<;

opyrj

7]

iii.

coinp. Matt.

79

i.

10,

ii.

8),

the special

immediate context to this great expectation


{dvafievetv^ tov vlov avrov e'/c tSv ovpavwv) seem together to
shew that 77 opyrj 77 ipxo/jLevrj is the future exhibition of wrath
against sin.
In this case e'/c may most naturally be taken to point
reference

in

the

to the completeness of the deliverance.

He

brings us clean out

of the reach of future judgment^'


2 Tim.

(e)

iii.

11 koI e irdvTwv

The

epvcraro 6 Kvpio<;.

fie

enumeration of dangers actually experienced which precedes these


words indicates the force of the
2 Tim.

(f)
pvcrerai

17,

18

e/c.

Kal

u Kvpio'i diro navT6<i

fie

demand

will

iv.

epvadrjv

eV crrofiaro^ Xeovro'i.

epyou irovTjpov...

fuller notice later on.

The passage

For the present

it

may

sufficient to call attention to the fact that here only in the

are the prepositions eV

The

each other.

eV

and

is

be

N. T.

aTro following pvecrdat contrasted with

used in

its

fullest

meaning, the phrase

being a proverbial expression for extreme and hopeless danger.


It is

an echo of the language of the 0. T.

(Twaov

Taireivwaiv

Dan.

10,

danger
^

fiov.

vi.

in

Comp.

Compare

Ps. xxi. 22,

eK arofiaro^ \eopTo<i, Kal diro Kepdrcov fiovoKepwrcov rrjv

fie

See also

20, 22, 1

Amos

Mace.

ii.

iii.

60.

12, Zech. ix. 7,

The

Ezek. xxxiv.

fierceness of the definite

the past, a wonderful deliverance out of which had

6 Kal TTJs fieWovcrris diroKoXinrTecOai 5o^j;s kolvuvos (I Pet. v. 1).

There

is

a present participation in that which shall hereafter be revealed.


*

dvafiheiv a oTra^ Xey. in the N.T.

to

await a final consummation

is

best

by Aesch. Eum. 243 dva/ufvu reXos S^kt;?.


' Comp. the Ancient Homily (the so called 2nd Ep. of Clement), ch. vi. ttoiovvres yap rh deXrjiJM, tov "KpuxTov evpn^ffofj-ev dvairaviTii' el de fJ-riye, ovdev rifiRs pvaerai

illustrated

'

fK tt}! aiojflov AcoXacews.

THE lord's prayer

80

IX

THE EARLY CHURCH.

been vouchsafed, inspires St Paul with trust for the future. But
when the reference is to unknown evils which the future may
For
bring, the clear and pointed e/c naturally gives place to aTro.
here it is not so much the possible dangers on which the Apostle's

mind dwells

as on the certainty of deliverance.

ii. 9 olSev Ki/pio? euae/Seh i/c Treipaa/xov pveaOai.


reading
Trecpaafiwv has some support (X, with some cursives
The
and versions). The reference to the history of Lot shews that the

2 Pet,

(g)

full

sense here attaches to the preposition.


aTTO.

(iii)

Rom.

(6)

ev

raU

XV.

13 pvaai -qixm air 6 rov

irovripov.

80 f irapaKoXw he vfia^ .avvaycoviaacrOal fioL


tov Oeov, Xva pvcr9u> a-no rwv
.

St Paul asks for his friends' intercesJerusalem, which he hopes soon to make
not fall into the hands of his Jewish enemies. The

sion that in the

may

25) he

use of diro
(c)

is

'lovSala.

rfj

visit to

therefore obviously natural.

2 Thess.

pvcrdwpev
is

vi.

7rpocr6u;^ai9 virep ifiov tt/jo?

aTreiOovvTcov ev

(v.

Matt.

{a)

d-rro

1,

iii.

rwv

2 Trpoaevx^crOe, dBe\(f)ol, irepl ruiwv

droTrcov Kal irovrjpwv dvOpcoTrcov.

Xva

This passage

an exact parallel to that discussed immediately above.


2 Tim. iv. 18 quoted and commented on above.
{d)
aco^ecv.

(i)

John

(a)

e/c.

dWd

xii.

27 irdrep, awa-ov

/xe

eK

rfj'?

&pav ravrrjv. At first


wpav seem to imply that
the Lord speaks of Himself as having already entered upon the
Such an
hour,' and that He asks to be brought safely through it.
The
key to
unnatural.
appears
context
such
a
interpretation in
implies
a
contrast
dWd
The
the meaning lies in dWd hid rovro.
between the prayer awaov e/c r/j? wpa? ravrij^; and the conscious-

wpa?

ravr7}<;.

sight the words

e'/c

hid rovro r]\6ov

r?;? wpa<i

and

et<?

rr)v

et? rr]v

ness of a purpose (hcd rovro).

context
{v.

24).

it

The

hid rovro

is

explained by the

points back to the thought of the fruitfulness of death

The remembrance

corrects the prayer.

This

is

of the purpose, if

tion in loco, ovrco rerdpaKrai

BtaSvyeXv.

ravra t^9

we may

&;<?

Kal diraXXay/jv

dvOpcoTrivyj'i

<f)vae(o<;

ra

e/c

and ek represent the Lord

the shadow of the Cross.

put

it,

^rjreiv, el

The

e'/c

ye

ivfjv

da6evrip,ara...rr}^

rapayfj'i rovro dvayKa^ouai]'? Xeyeiv, ro evavriov Xiyco.

prepositions

so

substantially Chrysostom's interpreta-

Thus the

as just passing within

emphasises the idea of close

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

81

'Rescue me even now from full entrance into the


hour of sorrow and death.' Comp. Matt. xxvi. 39.
proximity.

Hebr.

(6)

7 Se^aeit re koI

v.

iKrripLa<; Trpo?

Here

aoo^eiv avrov k davdrov. .TrpocreviyKWi.


.

rov hvvafievov

too the preposition

e seems to express the nearness of the adverse power.

It should

be remembered that the phrase

i^atpelcr-

dac

K.T.X.

the fuller

Oavdrov with pveadai,

e'/c

had become stereotyped in the LXX., where e'/c, recalling


phrase ex ')^eip6<i, conforms with the Hebrew personificaSee Ps. xxxii. 19, Iv. 14, cxiv. 8, Pro v. x. 2, Job
14 (e'/c ;^6ipo9 aSov pvaofiaL koX eic Oavdrov

tion of Death.

Hos.

xxxiii. 30,

xiii.

The

Xvrpcoao/jLai avrov<i).

parallels from the 0. T.

would not of

themselves require us to reject the interpretation, 'to bring safely

through and out of death'; but what

is in itself the more natural


meaning of the words, seems also to harmonise best with the
unambiguous words of Matt. xxvi. 39.

Jas. V.

(c)
crooaet

20

eTrLaTpe^a<i d/xaprcoXov

avrov

"yjrvx^rjv

e'/c

This

Oavdrov.

e'/c

7r\dv7]<i

oBov avTov

no doubt the

is

common

O. T. use of the phrase ck Oavdrov.


{d}
Jude
meaning of e'/c

5 KvpLO'i

Xaov

e'/c

Alyvirrov

7?;?

The

au)cra<i.

full

here necessary.

is

21 avro'i yap (Twaei rov Xaov avrov


See the note on Tit. ii. 14, p. 78. Here
the personal act of the Saviour is that on which the main emphasis
(a)

diro.

(ii)

d-Ko

rwv

Matt.

i.

dfiaprtcov avrcov.

rests.

Acts

(b)

There

is

ii.

40 acoOrjre diro

rrj<;

an instructive passage in

of the phrase o-coOrjvaL diro.

In

<yeved<;

Numb.

v.

r^? aKoXid<;

xvi.

ravrrj'i.

bearing on the use

21 Jehovah, as

if

He

would

destroy the whole people, bids Moses and Aaron go forth from
their midst
r\^'lT]
-

diroa'^^^iardTjre

myn)
T T

On

e'/c

fieaov^

the other hand,

avvayco'yTj'i ravrrj'i

rrj<i

when

in

("^inD

answer to the interces-

and Aaron Israel is spared and commanded to depart


from the neighbourhood of Korah, the phraseology is changed

sion of Moses

dva-^copi^aare kvkXco diro ("7 !l^^D^) t?/9 (7vvayo)yT]<i K.ope


aTTOcr^/cr^'j^Te
V.

27).

'

c.

dno {7^^)

In the
Comp.

Is. lii.

first

rcuv (TKtjvcov

command

11 (2 Cor.

rwv

dvOpcoirtov

(v.

(v.

24),

26, so

the idea expressed by the preposi-

vi. 17), Jer. Ii. (xxviii.) 6,

45 (Apoc.

xviii. 4).

THE lord's prayer

82

in

tion is that of a disentanglement,

the early church.


an exodus

in the latter that of

In the passage from the Acts, the Greek in itself does


not decide whether those addressed were themselves included in
Certain expressions in the Apostle's speech
the yeved aKoXcd.
removal.

{Trpocnrrj^avTe<i dve'tXare

ia-ravpaicrare

vfiL<i

3G

v.

23;

v.

'yivoncrKeTU) 7rd<i oJko<;

comp.

13

iii.

ff.,

19,

^Japa^\...ov

27 avv Wveaiv

iv.

KoX \aoi<i ^la-parjX) seem to suggest that they were so included.

The

however simply emphasises the idea of removal and escape,


avrov diro t^? 6pyrj<;. Here
V. 9 acodrjcroneda Be

aTTo

Rom.

(c)

the

expresses the thought

rtTTo

See above

78

p.

Jn.

(a)

15 ipwT(jo..."va

xvii.

Apoc.

10

iii.

T179 fieX\.ov(n]<;

KaroLKOvvra<i

eirl

T7]<;

eTrl

tP]<;

24).

e'/c

alone,

avTov<i ck rov irovripov.


(p.

109

ff.).

rrj^ copa<;

rov Treipacr/xov
ireipaaai rov<:

The

7^9.

v.

olKov/j,ev7]<; 0X779,

eK

Kd'yoo ere Trjpijaco

epy^eaOat

(John

by

followed

is

Tr)p-qa-j^<i

ep'^^erai

10.

reserved for discussion later on

The passage must be


(6)

i.

This verb in the N, T.

rrjpelv.

ovk

et? Kpicriv

the note on 1 Thess.

f.

parallel

St John's Gospel

in

(a-waov fie e/c Trj'i (opa<i TavTr]<; xii. 27, see above p. 80) suggests that
the preposition here does not imply any actual participation in this
*

temptation

and

;
'

this

presumption

close similarity between this passage


in

Luke

xxi.

35 f eTreiaeXevaerai, <ydp

BeofjLevoL

rtj'i

Karca^vaTjre

iva

7^9.

when we note the

iirX 7rdvra<; Tov<i KaOrjfievovi

TrpoacoTTOv trdar)';

iiri

increased

is

and the Lord's words recorded

dypvTTvetTe Se iv iravrl Kaipw

ravra irdvra rd fieWovra

eKcpvyeiv

yLveaOaL.

The only

<f>vXdTTiv.
>

preposition which follows this verb

is

aTTO.

(a)

(h).

and warning
=
{^12)^)

In two passages a Hebraistic form of prohibition


is

borrowed from the LXX. (where <^v\a^at,

'^t^p

see Deut. xxiii. 9, Josh.

vi.

d-rro

18, Mic. vii. 5).

In both these places the idea of complete avoidance is conveyed


without any suggestion that the evil has been a dominating

The two passages are


Luke xii. 15 Spare koX (^vXdacrecrde drro 7rd(TJ}<; 7r\eove^ia<;.
1 John V. 21 reKvia, <^v\d^are eavrd diro rwv elScoXcov.

power.

(c)

The

2 Thess.

iii.

Kvpiot

discussion of this passage

.vfid<;

.(fyuXd^ec drro

must be reserved

(p.

rov

112

irovTjpov.

ff.).

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL

The

83

ONE.'

constructions after the following verbs are specially worthy

of note, inasmuch as each

of these

definite state, deliverance out of

verbs in itself implies

which

secured.

is

iXevdepovi^.

Rom.
SovXoi

18, 22 iXeuOepcodevTe^ diro tj;? afiapriw;

vi.

T7J<i

2 T]\u6epa)crev ae

viii.

17

(v.

jjre

dfj.apTia<;).

Tov davdrov

23

(vii.

[/xe]

diro rov vofiov

dfiapria^i koI

t/;<?

al-^^/xaKcoTL^ovTd fie [eV] tco v6/j.(p rfj^ afiap-

Tia<i).

21

viii.

{v.

20

KTiacj iXevdepcoOtjaeTai diro t^? SouXem? t^t

t;

yap

Tjj

/xaratOTT^Ti

t;

Compare
Rom. vii. 3 iXevdepa iarlv dno rov vojjlov {v. 1
1 Cor. ix. 19 iXevOepo'i yap u>v e/c irnvroiv

Had

iSovXcoaa.

(f>dopd<i

ktIcti^ VTrerdyT]).

SeSerat).

rraaiv ifiavTov

the Apostle used the verb (iXevdepcodeU

i/c...),

he would have referred to an emancipation from a previous state

The actual phrase employed {iXeudepof; wv e'/c...)


shews that he wishes to emphasise the completeness of his freedom.
This interpretation is confirmed by the fact that irdcriv (inter-

of bondage.

preted by what follows) shews that irdvToiv


vi.

12

(uTTo TLvo<i), vii.

\veiv.
nTTO T17?

(a)

(1) aTTO.

(2)
rjfioiv.

Luke

xiii.

^ovp avrov...

15, IG ou Xvei top

is

a slightly-supported variant eV

27 XeXva-at aTro yvvaiK6<;;

1 Cor. vii.

eV {a) Apoc. i. 5 Tw...Xv<javTt r]/jbd<; ck twv dfiapTicov


There is however some authority for diro. Cf. Ps. cxxix. 8

XvTpoccreTai. .eV.
.

(6)

Comp.

masculine.

...ovk eSei Xvdfjuai drro tov Sicrfiov tovtov;

(f>drvT]<;;

In the latter clause there


(b)

is

23 {hoiiXoi dvOpamcou).

..

Apoc. XX.

XvOrjcreTai

%aTavd<;

eK

Tr}<;

^fXa/cr;?

avTov.
(1) aTTO.

fiTavoiv.

Acts

viii.

Comp. Hebr.

KaKia<^ (TOV TavTrj'i.

22
vi.

fieTavorjcrov ovv airo


1

fieTavoia<i

d-rro

T7;<?

vcKpwv

epycdv.

(2)

eK.

avTr]<i.

So

(a)

The

Apoc.
ix.

20

f.,

ii.

21 ov OeXet fieTavorja-at eK t^9 7ropveia<i

xvi 11 \

construction of the following verbs also

aw6 Apoc.

xiv. 3, 4 (air6 t^s 7^?...d7ro

is

worth remark

tQv dvdpunrwv).

(h)

iK

(1) dyopdl;'fLi>

Apoc.

v.

62

9 (iK

THE lord's prayer

84

The preceding
one hand
on a

the early church.

On

investigation leads to a clear result.

the

shews that the distinction which has been drawn

it

pHom

in

grounds between airo and

e'/c

after verbs expressing

deliverance, rescue, &c. does not exhaust the matter.

theoretical distinction

is

Indeed this

but the point of departure

for actual

aVo, the more colourless of the

two prepositions,
adverse
or
power, whether
the
danger
simply implies removal from,
the person rescued has or has not been actually within its grasp.
The mind is therefore left more free to dwell on the thought of
differences.

the deliverer. On the other hand eV is used when it is desired to


emphasise the idea that the person rescued has been actually
Further however, through its
within the grasp of the enemy.

meaning

greater sharpness and vividness of

the danger

itself,

and serves

it

directs attention to

prominence

to bring out into special

either the imminent nature of the peril or the completeness of

the deliverance.

The prepositions are therefore in many cases interchangeable.


They express the same thing seen from two somewhat different
As they had been both used in the LXX. to
points of view.
represent

Aramaic

so they both stood ready to translate the

jJb,

preposition (for

we have

seen the strongest reasons for believing

that the Lord's Prayer existed originally in Aramaic) in the clause


of the

The Apostles were

Prayer under discussion.

obliged

by

the conditions of translation into Greek to give one or other of

two slightly differing shades of meaning to what in the language


No
in which the Lord first taught the Prayer was colourless.
doctrinal question is involved in the choice between the prepositions; for, to apply to the particular case the general conclusion

stated above, while diro rov TrovTjpov lays the main stress on the

thought of the deliverer and the fact of deliverance itself, e/c tov
TTovqpov emphasises either the nearness and greatness of the

irdffijj

So f^ayopd^dv Gal.

<t>v\r)i).

13

iii.

t^s Kardpai).

(e/c

abstain) (a) simple genitive Acts xv. 20, 28 (ruf

construction in

always with
ZiKaLo\J<Tdai
i^eadat.

(a)

v.

29

is

dTri

1 Cor. vii. 10,

vi. 7.

Acts

Hebr.

i.

(2)
.

direxfcdai

.elSuiXoOvTuv).

very instructive e$ uv diar-qpovi^es tavrovs.

dn-i 2 Cor. vii. 1,

Kom.

d\i(ryr]/j.aTuv

Heb.

ix. 14, 1

(4) nfraTldeffdai is

4 (dwb

vii. 26.

'lepoff.),

{b) ix

7, 9.

i.

2 {dvo

xviii. 1 {ix

ttjs

tQv

'Pw^t??),
'Ad-qviljy).

= to
The

(3) Kadapli^nv

Comp. Acts

followed by dir6 in Gal.

xviii.

Acts

Jn.

i.

xx. 26.

6.

Kom.

So

(5) x^/jf-

viii.

35, 39,

"'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


danger,

or

the completeness

the

of

deliverance

85
from Satan's

assaults.

The origin and

2,

use of the

term

6 7rovT}p6<; as applied to Satan.

In investigating the origin and the meaning of the term


6 7rovr]p6<; as applied to Satan,

it

will

points as distinct as possible, viz.

conception which
use of the term

An

is

be convenient

to

keep two

(a) the development of the

expressed by the term

(6)

the history and

itself.

adequate discussion of the

first

of these points would pre-

suppose a consistent theory as to the composition and date of the


different

Books

of the

Old Testament, and a comprehensive study

alike of the religious education of Israel as seen in the light of the


religious

thought of other Semitic peoples, and of later Jewish

To such encyclopaedic knowBut though fulness of treatment


altogether out of the question, some light may be thrown on the

literature in its several branches.

ledge I certainly lay no claim.


is

term under consideration by a sketch, however tentative and fragmentary, of the growth of this element in Jewish belief. It must
however be premised that in such an attempt to summarise we
must necessarily neglect any traces of divergences of thought
among different schools, and be content to follow the main stream
of opinion.

The method of divine revelation often lies in the absorption of


some popular belief which is afterwards purified and spiritualised
by a process of coordination. Within the confines of the Old
Testament we can watch the growth of the conception of God,
and we do not fear to admit that there were prehistoric elements
out of which the religion of Israel came'.

Still

less

need we

hesitate to allow that, in the gradual working out of the conception

of evil, Israel both in early and in later times borrowed largely

from the ideas current among neighbours and conquerors, and


learned both slowly and partially to harmonise these conceptions
with the growing knowledge of a righteous, all-sovereign, spiritual

God.
1

Mr Aubrey

Moore's Essay on The Christian idea of God in Lttx Mitiuli

p. 71.

THE lord's prayer IX THE EARLY CHURCH.

86

The

human powers
riddle of

There

is

Old Testament on the subject of super-

reserve of the

of evil

There

the mysterious

is

Day

of

Atonement.

the conception of creatures half animal, half supernatural,

haunting desolate places


14),

remarkable ^

is

Azazel' in the ceremonies of the

(D''"l*yJ'n

Lev. xvii.

T\ww

7,

Is.

xxxiv.

with which the Arabian Jinn should perhaps be compared^

Again, there
earthly

the bold

is

drawn from the

figure

associations of

monarchy, according to which Jehovah

surrounded by His court (Isaiah

described as

is

a court Avhich has

vi.),

its

Doeg

as well as its David, its treacherous spies as well as its faithful

retainers (1 Kings xxii. 19

fF., Jobi.; comp. Ps. Ixxviii. 49, 1 Chron.


There
is
the
narrative of the Fall in Gen. iii., a nar1).
rative which stands alone, and on which the possible allusions to

xxi.

Books of the Old Testament (Job xxxi. 33, Hos. vi. 7,


Such are in the main the Old
Testament ideas on the subject of super-human powers of evil.
it

in other

Is.

It

xliii.

is

27(?)) throw no light.

sufficient for

our present purpose to note the absence in the

Old Testament of any attempt to give them unity or cohesion.


Here as elsewhere the period of the exile had a lasting
induence on Jewish thought.

demonology

left

its

traces

On

on the

other, the Persian conception' of the

and

evil

one hand, Babylonian

the

Jews.

belief of the

two

On

the

empires of good

rival

doubtless helped forward the process by which something

of coordination and even of unity was given

the divergent

to

ideas of Israel as to adverse spiritual powers.


I give

some indications from

latter tendency.

later

Jewish literature of this

In the Book of Enoch,

for

example, which was

composed, roughly speaking, in the century before the Gospel

though

in

its

present form

date, the angelology


stress is laid

is

it

may

very complicated.

In the

on the sin of the angels (Gen.

Comp. Oehler Theology of

useful hints in an article by C.

the 0. T., Eng.


H. Toy on Evil

era,

incorporate sections of later

Tr.,

ii.

p.

first

vi.

288 S.

part great

f.)

and the

have found some

Spirits in the Bible in the

of Biblical Literature, Andover, Mass., Vol. ix. 1890 Pt.


2 Prof. Robertson Smith The Religion
of the Semites

Journal

1.

p.

ILS

ff.

Compare DrLiddon's Sermon on titc Ins2)iratioit of Selection 'Its later literature may betray affinities, however we explain them, with Persian modes of
3

thought.'

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL

men which

corruption of

though Semjazu

is

Among

followed.

called their chief (cc.

6,

87

ONE.'

these fallen spirits,

Azazel has the

10),

most conspicuous place as the depraver of mankind (c. 8), and


afterwards (cc. 54, 55) appears as he who with all his hosts shall
be judged by the Elect One of God. Further,
in the 'Parables' of a later part of the

remarkable that

it is

Book the problem

is

carried

a stage further back, and behind the fallen angels there are seen

tempters who led them astray.

spiritual

Wisdom (ii. 23 f.) the unity of evil in the


personal enemy of God is emphasised.
God created man for
incorruption (eV d^dapaia), and made him the image of His
nevertheless
own Person (t^? tSta? iSioTrjTO'^, v.
dlScoTrjTO'i)
In the Book of

'

1.

through envy of the devil

who

world, and they

into the

eKeivov fiepiho'^ ovre'^)

Be

{<f)96vo)

make

on the

are

proof of

Bta^oXou) death entered


devil's side

t^?

(ot

it.'

Again, in what appears to be a Jewish portion of the Sibylline


Oracles

(iii.

36

92), the date of

which

is

probably about 30

B.C.',

Beliar appears as the great embodiment of the power of evil,


who leads astray faithful and elect Hebrews and lawless men
and others who have not yet heard the word of God.' But the
flaming vengeance of God burns up Beliar and all the proud
Here Belial (or Beliar) is
ones who put their trust in him.'
'

'

the Antichrist (comp.


SedrjcreTat
TToXefiov,

Test.

Dan

xii.

Patriar.,

ai'ro?

Levi

iroirjcreL

18

7rp6<{

BeXiap

rov Be\tap

Benj. 3 Karapyijaet BeXlap kol rov<; virriperovvra^ avrw,

see below,

taken a

avrov,

vir

p.

still

88 note)^

more

So,

when

the idea of Antichrist had

definite form, Belial

and Antichrist are again

In the Judaeo-Christian writing, the Ascension of


'There shall descend
Belial is the returning Nero.
Berial the mighty angel, king of this world, over which he ruleth
since its creation, and he shall descend from his firmament in the
identified.

Isaiah

(c. iv),

form of a man, of the king of iniquity, the matricide


king of this world
1

and

he

is

the

he shall persecute the plant which the

Friedlieb (p. xxvi), for reasons which seem convdncing, places the date of this
This is the view of the majority of critics

section just before the battle of Actium.

The Jewish People Eng. Trans. Div. ii. Vol. iii. p. 283 f.).
Note 2 Cor. vi. 15 r/s 5^ iTvn(piiivla Xpi<TToO irpoi BeXlap In the Testanients
Belial appears as the tempter of individual men in e.g. Is. 7, Dan 1, 4, Aser 1,
(Schiirer
-

Joseph

7,

Ben.

6, 7.

THE LORDS PRAYER IX THE EARLY CHURCH.

88

One

twelve Apostles of the Chosen

This angel Berial

planted.

form of the king aforesaid shall come, and with him shall
come all the armies of this world, and shall obey him in all things
which he willeth.... He shall act and speak like the Chosen One,
in the

and shall say, 'I am God most high, and before me was there not
any '...And after a thousand three hundred and thirty and two
days the Lord shall come with His Angels and with the armies of
the saints from the seventh heaven, and shall drag Berial into
Gehenna and his armies withaP.' In Antichrist Satan takes flesh
and dwells among men. As this conception becomes more definite
and concrete, it points with increasing clearness to the growth
of the twofold conception of the unity of evil and

its

concentration

in a person.

Again, an approach at any rate to this conception is indicated


by two expressions which meet us in the New Testament. Of
these the first, o ap-^^cov twv haufiovicov (Matt. ix. 34, xii. 24
Mc. iii. 22 Lc. xi. 15), though it has more applications than one
in Jewish writings ^ yet certainly implies the thought of an
;

ordered polity of

evil.

or world' (2 Cor.

iv. 4,

2, vi. 12)', is

ii.

The second, the God


John xii. 31, xiv. 30,

Ascensio Isaiae, ed. Dillmann, p. 18

Lightfoot, Hor. Heir, on Lc.

The
^

xi. 15,

conip.

among
(1)

Eph.

the Jews we may observe


'The Angel of death'...

devil Asmodeus...(3) Beelzebub."

See the commentators on these passages, especially Meyer on 2 Cor.

common

in the Testaments

vfidv effTlu 6 Zaravai


is

f.

notes that "

the articles in Levy Neuhebr. Worterhuch on JCU'


are

xvi. 11

doubtless to be connected with the conception of

three devils called the chief or prince of the devils:


(2)

or Prince of this age

Dan

5.

thus, o S.px'av

integrity of the

Judaeo-Christians (comp.

Schnapp holds that

Bp

rrjs TrXai/?;?

Dan

f.

book and that

iv. 4,

and

Phrases kindred to this

IK'.

Sym.

Notice the terms in which the

described in Lev. 18, Jud. 25,

assuming the

and

2,

Jud. 19

victoi-y of

6 cipx^f

Messiah

In quoting these passages thus I am


it represents the views of some early

Lightfoot Galatians p. 307).

On

the other

hand

an original pre-Christian Jewish document there have been


added (a) apocalyptic passages by a Jewish interpolator, (b) references to the Lord's
Person and work by a Christian interpolator. The effect of this theory would
be rather to throw backward the date of passages which criticism allows to belong to
the Jewish original document and to make them primary evidence for pre-Christian
Jewish beliefs. The Christian interpolations, if such they are, bear in themselves
evidence of an early date. In regard to the general subject of this note it is right
to quote Edersheim's verdict (Life and Times ii. p. 755), We note that with the exception of the word Satan, none of the names given to the great enemy in the New
Testament occurs in Rabbinic writings. More important still, the latter contain 7io
to

'

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

89

Antichrist,

and

that evil

gathered up into the person of a usurping

is

like it witnesses to the existence

of

the belief

spirit.

remains briefly to discuss one remarkable conception of


Jewish teaching, which found expression in the Yetser ha
There were implanted in man at creation, it
of the Rabbis.

It

later

Ra

was held, a good and an


theory are worthy of note

evil impulse.

for

Two

points about this

In the

our present purpose.

first

place there was at least a tendency to personify both these im-

man\

pulses in

Secondly we must distinguish, as

concerned, the conception

For the

it.
'"''

is

in

l^"*"*"))

an

latter

was

artificial

The

i"lb n!!f\ the evil y*1 "1^\

We

earlier date.

find traces of

it

Against the error involved in this

man

The good impulse


much
in the Fourth Book of Esdras^
belief, viz., that God implanted

by Rabbinic

utilised

far as date is

and the formulas which embody


interpretation of Gen. ii. 7 (the two

itself,

much

teachers.

idea itself was probably of

New

Testament teaching on
the subject of evil may be taken as a protest. There the absolute
and eternal antagonism of God and evil is always emphasised, and
the earnestness of this insistence was probably one important factor
in the process which gave currency to the expression 'the evil one.'
evil in

Thus, to

at creation,

sum

of the

Jewish thought, as we catch glimpses of it in


and place, was working towards the

up,

writings separated in time

supreme ethical and spiritual contrast between good and evil,


God and the devil, as well as towards the sure hope of the final
and complete victory of good and of God, to which the Apostles
and the Lord Himself, as His words are preserved for us by the
Apostles, have set their seal.

We
term

pass on to the second point, the proper

The word
suffix -po-.

words as
fore

meaning

of the

o 7rovTjp6<i.
irovTjpo^; is

ro\fMr}-p6-<;,

comparatively

least in

one of a large

class of adjectives

with the

It appears to be formed on the false analogy of such

and

late,

is

clearly a

formation.

word of

artificial,

and there-

Adjectives of this group, at

a large number of instances, correspond with English

mention of a kingdom of Satan. In other words, the power of evil is not contrasted
with that of good, nor Satan with God. The devil is presented rather as the enemy
of

man, than of God and


^

of good.

This marks a fundamental difference.'

See the additional note p. 101.

THE lord's prayer

90

adjectives in -some

When

fearful).

side,

the

(e.g.

IN

THE EARLY CHURCH.


and

toilsome, wearisome),

-fid (e.g. painful,

the root idea has a passive as well as an active

meaning

of the

adjective

Thus

bifurcates.

'fearful' has the sense of (1) timid: in Thuc.

oKvqpo^;

142 oKvr^porepoi

i.

set over against Opaa-vvoPTe<;: (2) terrible


a rarer use: compare
Soph. 0. T. 834 ripftv fiev, wva^, ravT OKvrjpd. The case is the
same with 7rovT)p6<;. The quasi-passive sense (i.e. he who endures
labours ') is seemingly rare, and early fell out of use. Thus in
Hesiod (Frag. 43. 5) Hercules is called Trov7]p6raTo<i koI dpiaro^.
is

'

The

active sense

common moral

the

In primitive society
they

causing labour to others)

(i.e.

toil

was of two kinds.

Hence

the ground.

tilled

is

the basis of

signification of the word.

ttovo^ without

Men fought, and


any qualification

to mean 'fighting' (e.g. Hom. II. vi. 77, Herod, iv. 1).
the other hand, when epya (as in the title of Hesiod's poem,
with which it is worth while to compare 1 Cor. iii. 9'), without
further definition, meant farming operations, 7r6vo<; naturally

came

On

signified labour spent on the soil.

The

brightest trait in the dream

of a past golden age was that the soil brought forth fruit of

own

TTov-qpo'i is

and

and needed no

accord,

<yrj

ttoi/o?

to be spent on

its

The word

according to this view primarily an agricultural term,

irovrjpd

would mean

soil

requiring immoderate labour

luorthless soil.

Thus the idea of the word,

history be true,

is

(6)

it.

if

i.e.

this account of its

that of intrinsic, absolute badness.

In later times at Athens the word acquired


a quasi-political sense.
In the social sphere

it

(a) a social,

and

was applied, by lovers of past days,

to

who had lost, or who never possessed, true


patriotism, innovators, who stood to the true breed in the same
relation as counterfeit coin to money rightly stamped and ringinotrue.
This is the sense which the word bears in Aristophanes'
picture of his times: see Ranae 731,
worthless citizens

T0i9 Zk ')(aXKol<i Kol

Kai

TTOvrjpol'i

vardroLfi

KUK

d(f)i'yfiPoicriv,

ovSk (papfiaKOtcnv

Here the notion


^

^ei/oi'i

koI 7rvppiaL<:

TTovTjpcov 669 uTTai/Ta ^pcofxeOa

etKrj

olcriv

t]

iroXfi irpo rov

pahioi<; i-^rjcrar

dv.

is

not of mischief but of irredeemable badness.

Bp

Lightfoot Ordination Atldresses p. 214.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

91

This social sense rapidly passed into a political sense. The


word was used at Athens to denote the utterly worthless knave
'which Strepsiades aspired to become under the lessons of the
sophist,

and which the Aristopbanic Cleon already

(Prof.

is'

Jebb's note on Theophrastus' character of the ^Lkoirovr^pos:).


this sense the

hoKL

elvai

word is used by
Twv dhvvdrcov to
11 Trovqpo^tkov

rovfiev7)v, viii.

Aristotle in the Politics,

In

e.g. vi.

evvo^eladaL...'rro\Lv...'KovripoKpa-

In such a connexion

TvpavvU.

rj

the notion of 'mischievous' 'doing harm' naturally became attached

But the thought

to the word.

an accidental accretion, and

is

sostom
is

among

(v. 419),

ancient Christian writers, says that Trovrjpia

so called because it always brings trouble (irovoviy,

among moderns, Archbishop Trench {Synonyms


6

as 'the active

TTovrjpSii

down the stream

is

Thus when Chry-

not of the essence of the meaning of the word.

worker out of

of usage,

and when,

31G) defines

p.

they start

evil,'

and seem to overlook

its

far

earlier

wanderings ^

With

and these associations the word passed

this history

into

the Greek Bible.

In the LXX.

Hebrew

it

The

is

j;*!.

used as the constant equivalent of the

root ^^"1 signifies

'to

used eight times, and in one of these passages


Vni*^"!)

it

has a passive sense,

'

are broken.'

the intransitive use of the Qal that the

and of the

participial adjective

be bad

vitiated or spoiled,'

'

From

view

this point of

to

it is

yi comes.
'

is

This account
to

It is

16

break

'

3,

but

is

(li?"!^

probably from

commoner sense of yy*l


To be broken,' to be
'

'

a natural and easy gradation.

e.g.

Gen.

how

word
Sam. i.

this

xxi. 12, 1

further confirmed by the use of the Hiphil.

is

Ps. xliv. 3, Ixxiv.

make

viz. Jer. xi.

not hard to see

often used in reference to sorrow

The Qal

break.'

is

8.

In

Jerem. xxxi. 27, the Hiphil means not 'to


'

to

make

to

be broken

'

i.e.,

'

to break.'

Thus y*) exactly answers to 7rovTjp6<i. In the case of the Hebrew


and the Greek word alike the notion of mischief, injuriousness, is
^

Very cognate

is

Chrysostom's comment on Matt.

e/cetvos KaKeiTai, dia rrjv

?x" ^^^ ToXe/uoi'. Here the point


Comp. Origen's definition of Trovijpla quoted p.

offTTovSov Trpos Tj/xas


-

vwfp^o'KTJv rfji KaKla^, Kal iiretdrj


is

vi.

13 Kar

fJLrjdiv

irap

e^oxw

Se oi'Vwj

ijfj.uji'

ddi.Kr]dth

the devil's malice.

139.

THE lord's prayer

92

the early church.

in

often the particular side of evil which

primarily signify

New

In the

iittei',

is

But both

contemplated'.

complete, essential badness.

Testament, so

far at least as

in the Gospels are concerned, the word Troi/T/po?

our Lord's sayings

must be regarded

as the equivalent of the Aramaic adjective which

is

reproduced

*^.
This adjective
by the Syriac Versions in the word
is of special importance, inasmuch as we may say with little short
of certainty that it is the word originally employed by our Lord
Its exact meaning can be ascertained by
in the Lord's Prayer.
a reference on the one hand to some passages of the Hebrew

for us

In Hebrew the verb Ji^Xl

Bible, on the other to Syriac usage.

the Qal

used in

literally of that

which has a

is

vile smell, e.g. Ex.

and Hithpael it refers metaphorically to what is utterly abhorrent, e.g. 1 Sam. xiii. 4, Ex. v.
Two nouns belonging to this root are used
21, 1 Chron. xix. 6.
18, 21

vii.

in the Niphal, Hiphil,

to denote worthless fruit or weeds in

looked that

grapes

it

(D'*2i'X3)

of wheat,

Is. v.

and Job

xxxi.

40 (Let

and cockle (HtJ'X^) instead

thistles

the

vii.

17.

The corresponding

it

forth wild

grow instead
which

of barley), passages

illustrate the use of irovrjpo'i (translating the

Matt.

when

4 (Wherefore

should bring forth grapes, brought

Syriac

*^

in

adjective occurs once only in

Hebrew

lious

Bible, viz, Ezra iv. 12 (They are building the rebeland bad (NHJi'^SS, LXX. Tvovrjpdv) city).
Turning to the
to be
of; in the Aphel it means 'to illtreat,' and is
The adjective
translate kukovu in Acts vii. 19, xii. 1.
characteristically used (see Payne Smith St/r. Thes.) of

Syriac, the verb -l^

is

used impersonally in the sense of

'

evil in the eyes

used to
itself is

Dr Hatch's account

of the word, Essays in Biblical Greek p. 77 ff., differs


Yet he writes at the beginning of his article The connotation of TTovTjpos in Classical Greek is probably best shown by Arist. Eth. N.
7. 11. p. 1152 a, where Aristotle, speaking of the d^poTTjs, says that what he does is
wrong, and that he acts as a free agent, but that he is not wicked in himself,
^

essentially

K<1)V

from mine.

uiffS' T^innrSvrjpoi.
Kai ovk adiKo^'
ii yap irpoaipean tTrieiKJjs"
This appears to me to be important evidence in confirmation of

^ikv . .irovt)po% d' ov'


.

ov yap (Tri^ovXos.^

my

view.

The proper Latin equivalent


There was however a tendency,
p.
(

'

163

f.),

to substitute for malus,

= mali-genus).

of irovrjpos viz. 7)ialus has the


for reasons

when used

which

I shall

of Satan, a

same

significance.

point out later on (see

compound word,

vialignus

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

Thus the Aramaic word,

death, a wound, a metal with alloy.

which

7ropr)p6<;

93

renders in the Gospels, expresses the notion not of

harmfulness but of intrinsic worthlessness and hatefulness.

New

In the
eye (Matt.

perhaps

49

vi.

vii.

Testament the Greek word

23, opposed to aTrXoy?

ff.),

of worthless fruit (Matt.

ol irovrjpoi are parallel to

Matt.

Thus

45 (comp.

V.

ra aairpd (comp.

The KapBla

7rov7)p6<; is

vii.

jrovTjpd air lot ia';

from KapBla KdXrj koX


from

11), xii.

Tim.

iii.

9,

A further

2 Tim.

point

is

Jewish literature

in

natural powers of

i.

TrovTjpo'?

vii. 17).

19, 20) as dya66<;

iii.

xx. 15, xxii. 10,

f.,

12)

iii.

(Lc.

viii.

15);
i.

5, 19, 1 Pet.

Kadapd

iii.

10,

crvvl8r]ai<i

3)\

when we note

reached

that the word

7rnvT]p6<i

specially used in connexion with super-

is

Here no doubt the conception

evil.

of activity

in evil is often included in the associations of the word.

believe that the primary sense of essential badness

Thus the words Trveupa

thought.

xii. 9.

Trovrjpd

(TvvLSr)ai<;

18) and

xiii.

Rom.

extreme pole

at the

is

Tim.

avveiSrjai^; dyaOrj (Acts xxiii. 1, 1

21; once KaXrj avveihrjaL'i Heb.


(1

is

xiii.

frequently the opposite to dyadoi;

34

(Heb.

d'yaOrj

In Matt.

17).

vii.

stands in the same relation to ^av\o<; (Jn.

does to Ka\6<;.

used of the diseased

is

22; the best commentary

v.

is still

employed

irovrjpov are

But

the main
in the

description of Saul's frenzy {irvevpa Kvpiov direaTT} diro 'S.aovX koX


eirviyev

avTOV TTvevpairovqpbv

avrov to irvevpa to

dir

angels

'

(ayyeXoi

(T\'^'yT\T\^ Trapd KvpLou...d(j)tcrTaTO

Trovrjpov (1

irovripoi) are

Sam.

xvi.

14,

ministers of divine vengeance upon apostate Israel.

Tobit
^

(iii.

irovripa.

8)
Ipya

is

is

to

irovrjpoi^

found in Jn.

the deep root of evil deeds

is

Sacpoviov'.

iii.

23).

'Evil

described in Ps. Ixxviii. 49 as the

19, vii. 7, 1 Jn.

contemplated

In the
iii.

12,

Asmodeus

New

CoL

i.

(see especially Jn.

21.
iii.

in

Testament
Commonly
On

19, 20).

hand ayada and koKo. are both used frequently of good works, for the outward attractiveness of such works is often the point (see e.g. 1 Pet. ii. 12, Jn. x.
32). In 1 Thess. v. 21 irav eI5os irovtjpou is opposed to to koXov, where eZ5oj makes all
the difference. The phrase 6(p9a\fj.6s irovripbi (Mc. vii. 22 comp. Deut. xv. 9, Prov.
xxiii. 6, Ecclus. xxxiv. 13, &c.) no doubt implied the baneful glance of en\'y.
But

the other

the phrase 6<p9a\fibs aya96s (Ecclus. xxx. 10 eV dyaOi^ 6(p0a\/xi^ dd^acrov rbv Kvptov, 12)
used of the healthful, cheerful, look of content suggests that the true idea is that of

the sickly, jaundiced eye of envy.


says that 'envy

Sym.
*

is

Comp. Pirqe Aboth

v.

29.

Hebrew wisdom

the rottenness of the bones' (Prov. xiv. 30; comp. Testamenti

3).

Comp. Joseph, de B. Jud.

vii. 6.

to.

yap KaXoufxtva Sai/Mvia, rauTa

Si TrovrjpQv

THE lord's prayer

94

the phrase irvevfiara Trovrjpd


26, Acts

viii. 2, xi.

Eph,

ff.

is

corainoii (Matt. xii. 45, Lc.

corap. ra irvevfiaTiKa

are

5, 18,

now

Aser 6

it

Sermon on the Mount


of these

mouth

(e.g.

37, 39,

(v.

13)

vi.

passages be

St Matthew

6 irovqpo'i.

time either in the

for the first

the masculine in-

or, if

denied, at

least

in

19

xiii.

word of comment or explanation.

{epxeTai. 6 7rovT}p6<;), without a

The use

of the xii Patnarchs

a position to give a reasonable account of the

in

into our Lord's

terpretation

21,

vii.

Trj<i 7rov7]pia<i

&c.).

and meaning of the expression

origin

puts

Levi

4, 6,

We

12

the early church.

12), as it is in the Testaments

vi.

Sym.

xix.

in

of the phrase in the Gospels and in the Epistles leads us

to suppose that

was one on which the Lord

it

set the seal of

His

authority, not a chance expression in the apostolic rendering of

the Lord's words.

and

Further,

was current
by the time the

clear that the phrase

it is

in familiar use, at least in Christian circles,

Gospel according to St Matthew was written.

The

we may venture

expression,

three converging influences.


in Jewish

natural

(1)

(2)

We

reference

in

Once more, our Lord came


unknown before the supreme and
Heaven.

men

to the conception of super-

to

these

TrovT]p6<i

was

spiritual powers'.

to proclaim with a distinctness

perfect goodness of the Father in

In the teaching of Christ and His Apostles the Father

ayad6<i (Matt. xix. 17, Mc.


iii.

possible

the resultant of

is

have seen that the word

(3)

1 Pet.

to say,

have remarked the tendency

thought to ascribe a unity

evil.

characteristically used

is 6

We

x. 18,

Lc. xviii. 19, comp. probably

John v. 20, John xvii. 3). It was now


the development of religious thought that

13), o aXr]6cv6<; (1

and needful

in

should learn that to the All-good

absolutely evil^ It

is

is

the conception which

in St John's writings

opposed the one who


is

iv rfj dXTjOela ovk earrjKeu,

i(TTiv a.vdp{Inro3v irvfvfiara, tols fcDcTiv el(Tdv6iieva k.t.X.

is

emphasised especially

This

is

on

ovk

ecrriv

said to be the only re-

ference to demoniacal possession 'in the later pre-Christian Jewish period' (Toy's
article in the
^

Journal of Biblical Literature

The phrase

6 irovr)p6$ apx^jf

(Barn.

iv.

p. 29).

13) exactly illustrates this stage of the

history.
"

This thought

is

strikingly brought out by Tertullian {de Patientia

Deus optimus, diabolus

e contrario pessimus, ipsa sui diversitate testantur

alteri facere,

ut nobis non magis a malo aliquid boni

editum videri

posait.

quam

v.),

Com

neutrum

a bono aliquid mali

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE,'

avTw

ciXrjOeia iv
iii,

When

8).

(viii.

44);

cltt"

95

John

opx^'i o StaySoXo? afiapTavei (1

the supreme contrast

thus

is

made

plain,

it is

not

hard to see that the impersonal notion of malignity and mischief


satisfies neither the expression itself nor the conditions of the
divine teaching in which

To sum

it lies

embedded
we may

up, while the expression,

believe, first

current in the teaching of Christ and Christianity,

sudden creation: the past


logical conception

The

in respect both of

had prepared the way

have not hesitated

it.

6 irovTjpo^

to include those passages

vertible evidence of accidence


(1)

Neiu Testament.

(a)

Synoptic Gospels
(TT03 he 6

V. .37.

where

is

became

was not a

language and of theo-

for

following are the passages (1) in the

(2) in early Christian literature,

it

New
is

Testament;

used of Satan.

where the incontro-

unattainable.

only St Matthew.

X0709

vfjiiov

vol vai, ov ov' to Be irepicrabv

TOVTcov eK rov irovrjpov eariv.

Chrysostom, taking the words to refer to


masculine interpretation of
V.

39.

e'yai

e'/c

he Xeyo) vfiip

all oaths,

gives the

tov wovrjpov.

firj

dvTiaTfjvai

tS

irovrjpw.

Here again Chrysostom maintains a reference to Satan,


elire

firj

dvTLarrjvai t&>

dSe\(f>a},

eKeivov KivovvTO'i ravra roXfidrai


resist

dWd
(vii.

tc3

234

Trovrjpo)'

E).

ovic

BeiKuvi;

'Sri

It is difficult to

Chrysostom's conclusion, and for these reasons.

The

(1)

use of abstract terms seems alien to the spirit of the Sermon on


the Mount;
^

am

all

there

is

concrete.

Hence

altogether without the knowledge which

the question

how

is

it is

unlikely that

rw

necessary for the discussion of

near Rabbinic teaching approached to this term

6 TrocTjpij.

only

one or two desultory remarks. (1) Bp Lightfoot quotes three passages from
Rabbinic writings in which the name 'the evil one' is applied to Satan. Canon
Cook (Second Letter p. 30) demurs to the force of these quotations for the conclusive
reason that the word in each case is not yi but yjJ'l. (2) In the Hebrew Bible V"1,
offer

like TTo^Tjpiy in the lxx., is

used of adverse spiritual powers.

The phrase

y"in IV^

an important witness to a tendency to specialise the word. (3) In his article on


"iV (Chald. Wort.) Levy refers to a remarkable passage, Sue. 52'^, where it is said that
yin "IV^ has seven names, the first of these being 'the evil one' (VT Gen. viii. 21).
(4) I do not suppose that there is in the Rabbinic writings more than an approximation to the name the evil one.' Comp. Edersheim Life and Times ii. p. 755
quoted above p. 88 n.
is

'

THE lord's prayer IX THE EARLY CHURCH.

96

(2) If

neuter.

TTovrjpo) is

reference

however the gender

probably to Satan

is

is

masculine, the

throughout this discourse

for

Christ uses the language of paradox: He puts truths in their


extreme and absolute form. Further, a\X' ocrrt?... seems to imply
that a different person is spoken of from the one referred to in the
Otherwise idv Bi ere pairi^j] (or the like) would
previous clause.

have been the natural form of the sentence.


(Second Letter

p.

condemns

17)

(3)

Canon Cook

exegesis

Chrysostoin's

as

'

in

He

direct opposition to the plainest injunctions of Scripture.'

probably refers to such words as dvTia-TTjre Be tS 8ia^6\(p


(James iv. 7). But is not the A.V. as unscriptural as Chrysostom ?
For 'the plain injunction of Scripture' is drroaTvyovvre'i to
The fact is that, whether the word is
TTovTjpov (Rom. xii. 9).
masculine or neuter, the reference is to violence and persecution,

and not
ii.

10)

moral

to

Persecution

evil.

the Passion of Christ

Christ's

is

traced to Satan

notably so (see

which supplies the

history of the Passion

words.

is

clearest

Apoc.

(e.g.

It

p. 108).

is

the

comment on the

rebuke of St Peter when he smote the Highwith the last miracle of healing

priest's servant together

is

equally

in point, whether the masculine or the neuter rendering be adopted.

But the words


vfiaiu

which St Luke

of Christ

y oipa Kol

rj

aXV

records,

avrr) iarXv

i^ovcria rov aKorov; (xxii. 53, comp. Col.

the chosen opportunity of treacherous

i.

13,

men and

Acts xxvi.

18),

behind

the tyranny of Satan, seem to strengthen very greatly

it

i.e.

Compare Jude

the case for the masculine rendering.

9.

At

first

it

into

sight this interpretation of the passage seems to bring


collision with

the Gospel

is

1 Pet. v.

(c5

'Do not be

persecution

contradiction therefore
vi.

13 pvaat

xiii.

10

r}ixa<i

ep^erai

is,

stand

is

diro
6

k.t.X.).

But the thought of

careful to withstand Satan's violence';

the thought of the Epistle

through

dvTiarrjTe

'

Satan
firm

will try to

against

make you

the

traitors

tempter.'

The

only verbal.

tov

Trovrjpov.

irovT)p6<;

(=

^aravd'^

Mc,

hid^oXot

Lc).
xiii.

38

TCI

Se ^c^dvid elcnv ol viol tov Trovrjpov.

The masculine interpretation here


66. 2): see p. 160.

is

as old as Irenaeus

(iv.

'

'

DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL

St Paul's

(6)

2 Thess.

Epistles.

i^iXTjTat

The passage

TTovTjpov.

Eph.

4 OTTW?

i.

16 eV

vi.

p.

112

tcIi;

ff.

ck tov alwvo<i tov ivecrTwTO^

discussed below,

Comp.

TreTTvpcofiiva a^iaai.
(c)

is

rjp,d<i

Zvvrja-ecrOe

c5

6 Kvpco^, 09 cTrjpi^eL vfia<; koI

See below,

(pvXd^eL aTTO tov irovqpov.


Gal.

ecmv

3 Triaro? Se

iii.

97

ONE.'

p.

115

ff.

irdvTa Ta ^eXr} tov Trovrjpov [tu]

tov Sca^oXov

fie6oBut<i

11).

[v.

St John's writings.

John xvii. 15 epu)TUi..Ava Tr]p7]ar)<; avToix; e' tov TrovTjpov.


Comp. John xvi. 33
1 John ii. 13, 14 veviKijKaTe tov irovrjpov.
iyco vevLKTjKa tov koc/xov.

John

iii.

12

Kalv eK tov TTovrjpov


Comp. John viii. 44.

Ka6a)<i

01;

TOV dtek^bv avToi) \

John

V.

18

yevvTjdeU

f.

e'/c

rjv

Ka\ ecF^a^ev

tov 6eov Trjpel avTov, koI

6 iro-

tm

ov^ uTTTeTat avTov...o Koafio^ oXo's iv


TrovrjpS KetTai.
There are three passages in which there is evidence that in
some forms of the text the phrase the evil one was introduced.
Matt. xiii. 38 f. The Old Syriac reads: 'The tares are the
children of the evil one (( o?), and the soiuer he is the evil one
vrjpo^

(d)

'

'

Acts
7rdvTa<i

X.

38.

Tov<;

The Vulgate Syriac

translating

in

the

phrase

KaTaSwacrTevofxivovi viro tov Bia^oXov represents

the last words by

*^ ^iD.

For the Syriac Versions see p. 154 ff.


Origen in
Matt. xiii. 28 (e';^^/3o? dv6poiiro<; tovto eTroirjaev).
a Homily on Ps. xxxvi. (Horn. ii. 4), as it is preserved in the
translation of Rufinus, says,
Sed et Dominus in Evangelio
diabolum non dixit peccatorem tantummodo, sed malignum vel
malum, et cum docet in oratione, vel dicit Sed libera nos a malo.
This implies the
Et alibi, nialus homo fecit, sive malignus.'
reading 6 irovTjpo^ or 7rov7]po<; dvOpcoiros. The words however may
'

be a

slip of

memory^

This passage seems

to underlie

vas] rbv 'A/SeX eiiapfCTTOvvTa

ry

6i<^,

Tbeophilus ad Autol.

ii.

29 ^viVa eupa

[6

Zora-

ivepyriaas els rbv d.Se\(l>bv avroO rhv KoKov/xevou

Kaiv eirol7]<Tv aTroKTe^vat. rbv doeXipbv avroD rbv 'A/SeX. This treatise, it will be
remembered, contains the earliest quotation of St John's Gospel by name which
has been preserved' (Bp Westcott Canon p. 228).
^ Compare Esther vii. G dvOpwiros f'x^pos'A/udc 6 irovripbi oDtos.
'

c.

THE lord's prayer

98

in

the early CHURrH.

Early Christian Literature.


Ep. Barnabas ii. 10 iva firj 6 7roi/7?po9

(2)

iv ^fuv eKa^evBovijar)

7rot,r}aa<;

xix.

11

6t9

doubtful.

reXo^

fiiaT^a-ei^;

Documentary

(1)

airo

r)fia<i

rov

r)fiwv.

The reading however

-rrovrjpov.

Of

evidence.

TrapeiaSva-iv irXdvr]^

rrji; ^mrj<;

the

is

two oldest MSS.

Cod. Sinaiticus (X) omits the article; Cod. Gonstantinopolitanvs (C)


has TO. The other Greek MSS., which, as they seem to be

common archetype (Gebhardt Proleg. p. x.), are


by a common symbol (G), have top. The Latin

derived from a

represented
Version* (L)

perpetuum).
pius in veris

is

clear for the masculine (malus odiosus tibi erit in

Gebhardt's general view

quam

haud raro codicum

5<

this passage the

In

On

Tov.

L cum G

in falsis

(p. xxxvii.) is

C consensum postponendum

et

omission in

^<

Multo sae-

'

convenit, ita ut his

ambobus

esse duxerim.'

before ttov- slightly favours

the whole therefore the evidence of the

MSS.

leans

towards rov. (2) Internal evidence, (a) d'ypv'7rvovvTe<;...e7rl to


irovTjpov
TTovTjpov (xx. 2) is, I think, the only certain instance of to
some
gains
neuter
the
hand
(b) On the one
in Barnabas.
Kaipov,
vvv
rov
TrXdvrjv
probability from iv. 1 fiia^aw/J-ev r?)v
iv.

10

irdv

fiia^acofiev Te\ei&)9

ovK

ea-riv

rd epya t^9

dpearov tw 6eS,

7rovT]pd^ oSov, xix. 2 fiiai]crei<i

fiia^aeL<;

But

irdaav viroKptcnv.

on the other hand the antithesis suggested by the words (dyairrjbeginning of the chapter (xix. 2)
o-et? rov iroL-qaavrd ae) at the
Further, while the certain

distinctly favours the masculine rov.

a strong argument, there is nothing


Paul's words
in the context to suggest a reminiscence of St
of evidence
lines
The
xii.
9).
diroarvyovvre^: ro irovrjpov (Rom.
therefore appear to converge in favour of toj^"''.

use of 6 TTovnpo^ in

The date

ii.

10

of this Version

of the Vulgate are wanting.


to Jerome.

Gebhardt

(p. Iv.)

is

is

uncertain.

On

the other

On
it

the one

hand

traces of the influence

does not appear to have been

approves the general conclusion

exitum conscriptam esse credas

'

known

earn ante seculi vii

verisimile vero videtur earn multo antiquiorem

esse.'

Dr Taylor {Expositor, Third Series, vol.


reading t6. But (1) his view that yuto-^o-ets t6
-

iii.

p. 408)

argues in favour of the

an 'abbreviated form' of
(Didachd iv.), a phrase which

irov-qpbv

is

y.iar)CL% iraaav vw6Kpt<ni> Kai irav 6 /xtj apearbv ry Kvpli^


Barnabas (inverting the order of the clauses) has already incoriiorated
seems unnatural (2) he appears to neglect the angelology of Barnabas
passages quoted below p. 99 n.
;

(xix.
;

2),

see the

DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

'

3 iyyv'i

xxi.

Compare The

rj^epa iv

t;

fj

avvairoXelTai iravra tc5 Trovripw.

Canons

Ecclesiastical

99

In

14.

the

passage

tliis

interpretation, as in the passage just discussed, the reading

doubtful.
malo.'

The Latin Version has the equally ambiguous cum


The following considerations favour the masculine. (1)

Just above

it

eKXeyofj.evo'i
is

(2)

of

is

the deeds of 'the evil way')

said, o eKelva (i.e.

fierd

twp

Here there

avrov avvaTTokelraL.

epycov

the same combination of the masculine and the neuter.

common
'

is

'

destruction of the worker and his works

is

spoken

of.

This interpretation of a clause at the end of the description


the evil way con^esponds with the opening definition 77 rov
'

fxeXavo^

6Z6<;^.

There

(3)

would be decisive
iXOcov 6 vi6<; avrov

an

is

(xv. 0) which
beyond dispute; oiav

earlier passage

the reading were

if

Karapytjcrei rov Kaipov rov avofiov Kat Kpivel

dcre^eh koI dWd^et, rov tjXlov koI

rov<;

In

darepa<i K.r.X.

however we

koI rov<i

rrjv ceXrjvrjv

avrov

find

in place of

rov

word being perhaps repeated from 6 vl6<; avrov just


before.
Cod. N provokingly omits the word altogether. L has
tempus iniquitatis.' The rov dvo/xov of C, which was long ago
It
conjectured by Bp Fell, seems to explain the variations.
dvofiov, the

'

is

supported by

rov vvv

xviii.

dvofxia<i,

rr]<i

fiiv

iartv Kvpio<i..,6 he dp-^ojv Kaipov

a passage

which probably suggested the

emendation of L. Compare iv. 9 iv rw dv6fi(p Kalpw.


dvofjLov is thought the best supported reading, it is
conclusive in favour of the masculine interpretation of

If rov

almost

t&j Trovtjpu)^.

^ Happily we are saved from a discussion of gender by the other passage


in
Barnabas where the term occurs, 'iva firj axv Trapuffdvcriv 6 ^uAas (iv. 9). This remarkable name is probably of Hebrew origin (see Harnack's note), but it serves here
elcrlv Terayy^ivoi.
to emphasise the contrast: v 656s toO cpdoros (xix. 1), 0* tj^
It should be considered in connexion with the baptismal
(piorayuyol dyyeXoi Beov.
custom of turning to the west and renouncing Satan compare Cyril of Jerusalem
. . .

Catech. Xix. Myst.


-

4 (diroTacffecrde

The following passages

pCiv KoX
...6

i.

in the Epistle should be noted

avrov rov ivepyovvros (L. contrarius) ^oj'ros

irovt]pbs apx<j}v

Kvpiov (iv. 13)


(xviii.

ri^ (rKoreiix^ iKeivif Kal ^o<f>epi^ apxovTi).

1).

neuter, 4

\ai^v

ttjv

Kad'

tj/j.wi'

e^ovalav

a77eXox irovnphs eelxpi^ev aurous


parallel

Esdras

vi. 27,

can be found
Delebitur enim

in

riixepiJv

rijv ^ov(Tiai'

airuicrrfTai i]fw.s

(ix. 4)

icpt'

ri%

(ii.

dwb
5e

ovv ovaCiiv

ttjs /SocrtXeiai

et

rod

0776X01 toO 'Zarava

Jewish Apocalyptic literature

malum

ttovt)-

1); iva /xi^Trore

to (a) the

extinguetur dolus, a passage found

(iv. 32), the Arabic (malum cor recedet ab iis), the


Armenian Versions; comp. viii. 53; (b) the masculine ; Assumptio Moijseos x. 1, Et
tunc parebit regnum illius in omni creatura illius et tunc Zubulm finem habebit, et

in the Syriac, the Aethiopic

7-2

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

100

Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons (Eus. H. E.

Bwd/ievoi 8id

T7/9

inro^ovrj<i

Trdaav

See below,

iavTov<; eXKvcrac ^

rrjv

opfxrjv

v.

tov Tcovripov

1)
l<:

132.

p.

Clementine Homilies (a) Epist.

Clem,

ad Jac.

tov

eVt

i.

ivearu)TO<i irovripoi) tov iaofievov d<ya66v o\(p toj Koafxcp /xrjvvaa^

See below,

fiaaiXea.
(b)

iv.

ib.

116.

p.

avvevdv/jLTjdrjTt fiot,

SLicaico<;

fia^La<i '^pe'iav e%ei o '^picno';,


vviii(f>T]<;

TToXefiov ijparo,

^aaiXevaec

rj

irore

irovTjpo^

aov t^? avfj.Kara rrj^i avrov

tov iiriovTa ^povov ot

6 IT er/jo?'

dBvvaTov

icrTt

See below,

p.

that the connexion of the word o

with sayings of our Lord in the


'Clementines' (see

p. 133),

last of these passages

rrovrjpo'i

from the

together with the fact that the term

used by St Matthew alone

is

tov

tov TTovrjpov

133.

may be suggested

It

(f)(ovr)v

fjboi

ifiov dpv7']aaadai BtBaa-KaXov, 8i6 koI o/xoXoyco elvai


K.T.X.

viK7]<Ta<i

Horn. xix. 2 Kal

(c)

et9

vvv OTe o

among

the Synoptists and with

the use of the term in the Syriac Versions (see

p. 155),

is

an

indication that this was a usual designation for Satan in the

Aramaic Gospel,

and written, on which were based the


the Hebrews' and our Gospel according to

oral

Gospel according to

'

St Matthew.
Clem. Alex. Paedagogus (a) i. 7 ovto<; (i.e. the angel who
wrestled with Jacob and who was the Paedagogus) rjv 6 dvOpodiro^
6

d'ywv

Kal

(pepcov,

irovrjpov tov daKr]TT]v


tristitia

cum

avyyv/xva^o/xevo^

la/cwyS

Koi

TTTepvi^eiv SiSdaKCOv tov dvTayco-

The latter passage is obviously the


Compare Edersheim Life and Times ii.

eo abducetur.

kutci tov

dXel(f>ci)v

closer parallel to

our present passage.


p. 441, " In the
latter [the renewed earth] neither physical nor moral darkness would any longer
prevail, since the Yetger ha lia, or 'Evil imjDulse,' would be destroyed (Yalkut i.
p.

45

c)."

5ia^6\ov Kal rrj^ aTroKokv^eus ^ludifvov (Eus. II. E.


had been preserved, the usage of an important school would doubtless have
been made clear to us. In the Martyrdom of Folycarp xvii. (6 5e dfTi^rjXos Kal
pdffKavoi Kal vovT]p6s, 6 avriKtifxevos ti2 yiva twc SiKaiuv) there is some slight authority for the omission of /cat before iroi>T]p6s. The following passage from Athenagoras
Supplicatio c. 24 illustrates the meaning of 6 irovrjpov and probably implies its
^

iv.

If Melito's treatise Tcnrepl tov

26)

currency as a

name

for Satan, ovr6^ re 6 r^y C\t;s Kal tQv iv avTy et'Swc a.px<^>'...ovToi

di dyueXijo'as Kal wovrjpos irepl ttjv

aipxuv
K.T.X.

. .

tQv

ireirio'Tev/j.ii'wp yevofJLevo^ SioIkt](Tii'

.6

Se t^s CXtjj

.iyavTia rt^ dyadi^ tov deov iwiTpoireijei Kal 8ioiku...6 di 6ebs reXe/wy dyadic wv

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


It

vLcrrt'jv.

101

possible that the clause of the Lord's Prayer

is

is

in

Clemeut's mind.
(6)

12.

ii.

OVK alcr)(yvovTaL
Be Kol

vvroi

aXXwi

Ta<;

yui^atKa<;

rw

o<f>e(i)<i

cr')(^qfjLaTL

On

rov irXovrov

is

et?

6v6LBo<i'

it apa')(a parr overt, ^rjXovcrai

rrjv re')(yT]V,

the passages of TertuUian where malus

of Satan, see below,


It

'^pvaou^ SeXeari,

koct/j-o^;

i^i/xi]vv et? v^pec;.

KOL rov deov rd Bcoprj/xara direLpoKoXia

rov rrovTjpov

avfi^oXa

Troi>r]pov

rrjv Euai/ o oc^t? riTrdrrjcrev,

kTaipiKW<i

K)(^eovaiv

12.

ii.

w? yap

Trepc/cetfjbevat.

7rpoa'^a>fievo<; rov
(c)

Kol (fjavepcoTara rov

hk

r)hrj

p.

135

is

used as a

name

f.

probable that there are other passages even in the scanty

remains of the Christian literature of the second century which have


to us, in which this name of Satan is used.
It hardly
seems however to have gained a wide currency till the days of
formal New Testament exegesis'. Justin Martyr does not mention

come down

it

either in Apol.

28

i.

(6 dp'^Tjyirrj'i rcov kukoov Batfiovcov

o^t?

KaXelrat koI 'Xaravd<; Kal Bid^oXci) or in Dial. 103*, although in


Dial. 12.5 there

an apparent allusion to the term,

is

avr(p 6 Bid^oXo<i, rovricrnv

name

occurs

it

on

Buvafia

irovrjpo'i ea-ri.

Chald.

On

6(f>t<;

irpoa-rjXOev
KeKXrjfjievr]

KareXvae Kal Karein

which the

use.

Ra

few points in this complicated subject


(1)

Kal

In the passages

Note on the Yetser ha

rj

has every appearance of being a term in recognised,

though not common,

note.

eKelvr]

avr6v...6 Be avrov

Kal ^aravd<;, rreipd^wv

^aXev, iXey^a<i

ij

the Vetser see Levy Chald.

Worterb.

p.

ii.

757

fF.

Weber

(see p. 89).

may

be touched upon in a

Worterhuch

St/stem

i.

p.

342, Neuhehr. u.

der Altsynagogalen

Paliis-

comp. pp. 208 f., 216, 223 f.; Edersheim


The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah i. p. 52, ii. p. 757 fF. Several questions, as it will appear, suggest themselves, a full investigation of which

tinischen Theologie

would throw

light

54

(p.

242

ff.),

on many points of great interest, as, for example, St Paul's


(2) If an amateur in such studies may tnist his super-

doctrine of the Fall.

Thus

for Tas tV^Spaj tov 5ta/36Xou (Ignat. Trail, viii.) the Interpolator in the 4th

century substitutes ras eveSpas tov


^

Comp. Apoc.

xii.

Xos Kal 6 'Zaravds, xx. 2.

ijiXridr] 6

Kovrjpov.

dpaKuv 6 /u^as,

6 6<pis 6 d/3X<'0Si o KokovfiePOi 5ia/3o-

THE lord's prayer

102

observation, the article

ficial

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IN

commonly

is

present in the one case, wanting

was
what we should have
expected, since it would be felt that the good impulse would ultimately flow
It should be noticed that Levy and Weber represent different
from God.
Welche beide Triebe
views as to the personification of these two impulses.
21D

in the other (y"in "IV\

If so, the tendency to personification

IV^).

This

active in regard to the evnl impulse.

more

is

'

latter

the former

personificirt,' writes

Engel

als

runs thus

(p.

228)

'

Auch Levy

The

p. 258).

(ii.

dial. W. D.

i.

gleiche gottwidrige Absicht haben, wirkt dieser durch jenen


;

kann

so

und

es geschehen, dass Eines fur das

AUerdings

ohne dass Beides zusammenfallt.

'

bosen

Sofern der Jezer und der Satan die

Engel,' aber ideutisch sind sie nicht.

bewegende Kraft

criticism of the

342 nennt ihn den

ist die

ihm

ist in

Andere

die

steht,

Neigimg, beide Bcgrifte

Zu Kidzu verschmelzen, in der spateren jiidischen Theologie gewachsen.


duschin (81) bemerkt Raschi Es erschien ihm Satan, welcher der Jezer hara
:

Thus Weber admits a

ist.'

4 Esdras referred to above

mali seminatum est in corde

relative personification.

89) are these

(p.

Adam

ab

iv.

initio, et

(3)

30 Quoniam

quantum

The passages in
granum seminis

impietatis generavit

usque nunc, et generat usque dum veniat area', iii. 21 Cor enim malignum
baiulans primus Adam transgressus et victus est, sed et omnes qui de eo nati
sunt.

(4)

cannot help suspecting that the conception of the two wipidses is


xoai/s, and that the tendency to per-

closely allied to the conception of the two

sonification in the one case is closely akin to a similar tendency in the other
It will be remembered that in the Didache and the documents which
seem directly based on it there is no reference to any connexion between the
two ways' and spiritual powers. In other documents such a reference has the

case.

'

appearance of being a later addition. If

so,

the Didache presents us with 'the

two ways' in a more original form. For these two points viz. (a) the connexion
between the tico impulses and the tico ways, (b) the allied processes of personification, compare the following passages. Test. xii. Patriarch. Jud. 20 Suo nvfvfiara a)(o\a^ov(n. rw dvdpmnco, to Trjs dXr]6(ias Koi to Ttjs nXdvrjs' Koi ^(<tov iari to
Aser 1 8vo odoiis eduxev 6 6eos to'is
TTji crvv(<Tf(os Tov vooi;, oil (CIV 6f\r] kX'ivqi.
vloli

Tav

dvdpcoTTOiv, /cat

8vo Sia^ovXia, Koi 8vo Trpd^eis, koX 8vo tottovs

8vo TfKr]...68o\ 8vo, KaXoii Koi KaKov'

TTOvj), Koi

(dv ovv

(TTfpvois Tjpiov SiaKpivovra avrds.


avTTJi (<tt\v ev 8iicaioavvr},

rj

>|'UXV ^^^J]

Xafji^avfi

p,aTOi ir(TT\i]pcoTai.

Die Lehre

'

KoXoi, ndcra

*'"

kciX

d drjcravpos tov StaySdXou (v.

<i-c.

p.

The Latin

277

1.

r/jd-

npci^is

dncodovpevos to dyaBuv

to

TrpocT-

TTovrjpia

Sta/SouXiou) tov novrjpov nvfv-

Fi'txgment published by

Viae duae sunt in seculo,

1,

cXtVfi

TO KaKov Koi Kvpuvde): vno tov BeXi'ap, Kav ayadov irpd^ei, iv

p(TacrTpi(j)fi....

brarum.

(v.

to 8vo 8taffov\ia iv

kov apapTrj evdvs ptTavofl... edv Se tv TTovrjpa

8ia^ov\iov, ndcra rrpd^is avTrjt (cttiv iv novripla,

avTo

ev ois flal

vit<xe et

Gebhardt

in

Harnack

mortis, lucis et tene-

In his con.stituti sunt angeli duo, unus aequitatis, alter iniquitatis.

Compare

vii. 9'2

primus, quoniam

(part of the

cum

'

Missing Fragment,'

ed. Prof.

labors multo certati sunt ut vincerent

cogitamentum malum, ut nou eas seducat a

vita in

mortem.

Bensly

cum

eis

Ordo
plasmatum

p. 67),

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE,'


Barn,

Hennas Maud.

xviii., xix.

Koi ras dwdfifis avrav, iva

vi.

1.

rii

vo>](rT]s

8iKaia>, rat de

TO 8e aSiKop <jTp(^\r]v...

Dr

apicTKfi fioi,

novrjpias.

croj,

Vl

8iKaia>

brfKixrai.

(^rjirlv,

/cat

e';^ei

/cat

evepyeiav.

dStVta'

crv

ovv

to yap 8iKaiov opdrjv 68ov e^ft,

Kvpu,

(f)r]p.i,

68a

raiiTrj Trj

nopfvfcrQai,.

npos Kvpiov, Tropeutrerat

t'mcrrp\//';

8vO

0'70't) TTf/Jl TTjS TTlOTfCOf*

8tKaio(Tvi]s Ka\ CIS rrjs

ovi>

TTicrTtvcrrji'

fit]

oj av (^ oXrjs Kap8iai

pevcrrjy (pT](r[, Ka\

aKOVf VVV^

aSiKco

vvv deXa

avrav rlva hvva^iv

onrXal yap daii^ al efepyaai avrav' Kflurai


TTicTTeve r&j

aWa

103

rov dvdpCOTTOV,

ilcTlV O-jryeXot p.iTa

The whole passage should be

no-

eV avrrj.
(is TTJS

studied.

(5)

Taylor {Sa>/ings of the Jewish Fathers p. 144) assumes without question


that the teaching about Vetser was current in our Lord's time, and conjectures
C.

that the original form of dno rov novrjpov

dence of the Syriac Versions

may have

been U"in

"IV^D.

The

evi-

to disprove this Utter conjecture.

is sufficient

But the two passages which Dr Taylor quotes from the Targum bring the
phrase into a closer connexion with the word which
actually used

'
:

mine enemy say, I have


the Targum, " Lest Nt^^Q N")V^

" Lest

becomes in
thee up in their hands,
xiii.

5)

stone" (Ps.

suppose that the Lord


"

say, &c."

thou stumble against [Nt^*3

KIV

They

which

him "

(Ps.

shall bear
is like]

xci. 12).'

3.

Is

rov TTovTjpou inascaliiie or neuter

(XTTo

Evidence derived from the Gospels.


The Baptism, and the Temptation.

(i).

(a)

No

lest

])revailcd against

sooner has the Lord been publicly set apart for the ministry

by the heavenly voice and the

the Holy Spirit, than

gift of

He

enters the field of conflict with the devil.

Gathering up humanity
into Himself, 'He gathered up that ancient and primeval quarrel

against the serpent \'

The Temptation was no

dental parenthesis in the Lord's

we may

life

it

was

casual and acci-

essential to its reality

The Temptation was


an epitome of His whole life^
The Lord's Prayer is the Prayer of redeemed humanity taught
We should expect to find reflected
to men by the Son of Man.
here something of what, as He learned by suffering, is most characteristic of human life.
We feel that the remembrance of the
pain endured in this necessary conflict inspires the words.
and, if

Iren.

v.

xxi.

say so, to

its

completeness.

Nou autem Dominus autiquam

serpentem inimicitiam in semetipso recapitulatus


-

oi

Sia/xfuevriKOTes p.T

ifjLov

iv

roh

illam et

fuisset...8i

ireipao'/j.oh /xov

(Luke

ab

primam

adversus

alio venisset patre.

xxii. 28).

THE lord's PKAYER

104

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IN

Every clause of the Prayer, I believe, stands forth with greater


sharpness and clearness of meaning when seen in the light of the
Lord's Temptation.

Our Father which


Heavenly Sonship

art in heaven

The proclamation

of

the

time the preface, and in the subtleties of the spiritual conflict the occasion, of the Temptation.
And lo, a voice out of the heavens, saying, This is my beloved
is

in order of

'

Son, in

whom

command

am

well pleased,'

that these stones

'

become

If

thou art the Son of God,

bread....

If

thou art the Son

of God, cast thyself down.'

Thy kingdom come. The two earliest


seem closely linked with the temptation
which stands last in St Matthew's record. The refusal to fall
down and worship the tempter and the vindication of God's
Halloiued be thy name.

petitions in the Prayer

exclusive right to worship were a complete hallowing of the

The

devil's offer of the possession

Name.

of all the kingdoms of the

world and the glory of them appealed to the desire

for the cessa-

tion of conflict, which inspires the prayer for the coming of the

divine kingdom.

Thy

In the Lord's firm

will he done, as in heaven, so on earth.

resistance of the temptation to claim the letter of a divine pro-

mise, in His recognition of the limits of the divine purpose con-

cerning Him, we can discern a perfect doing of the will of the

Father on earth on the part of Him who 'in the beginning... was
with God.'
'And when he had fasted
Give us this day our daily bread.
And the
forty days and forty nights, he afterward hungered.
tempter came and said unto him, If thou art the Son of God,
command that these stones become bread.' Lack of daily bread

was the

d(f>opfi7]

And

forgive
It is

debtors.

of the
us

tempter in the

our debts,

as

first assault.

lue

also

to need forgiveness.

But

it

is

to

i.

^dTTTia/xa

/j,TavoLa<i

He came

had received what

ei?

dcfjecrtv

dfiapriwv

4).

And
(i.

men was

other

He

our

sin in Christ

worthy of remark that

straight to the conflict with Satan, after

(Mc.

have forgiven

most true that temptation begat no

bring us not into temptation.

The word which St Mark

12) uses to express the action of the Spirit

Kal ev6v<i to Trvevixa

"

'DELIVER US FKOM THE EVIL ONE.'

eK^dWeL

avrov

et? rrju epTjfiov

denotes,

but a constraining influence.

Man

of

'

105

not indeed coinpulsion,

In the days of his flesh

'

the Son

shrank back from the strain and horror of the lonely

He

'suffered being tempted.'


Therefore as He Himself
hour of a severer struggle besought His Father that
'the cup might pass from Him,' He permitted and taught His

conflict.

in the later

pray that their Father

disciples to

Heaven would spare them

in

the perilous honour of temptation.

But

from the
more natural ?

deliver us

renderings

is

evil

one or

Which

evil.

May we

of these two

not ask which necessarily

follows from a consideration of the Prayer regarded from the point


of view of Christ's

Temptation ? It is difficult to imagine that the


analogy between the two breaks down in the last clause, and that
the prominence of the tempter in the history has no counterpart
in the Prayer*.

The Lord's Prayer.

(b)
is

It has

been sometimes urged that

inconceivable that a Prayer which begins with an appeal to

as Father, should

end with a petition

The assumption

devil.

thought of the devil

is

is

for

it

God

deliverance from the

that according to this interpretation the

suddenly and violently dragged into an alien


of the Prayer with the circumstances of

The comparison

context.

the Lord's Temptation will have gone far to break the force of this

argument.

more detailed examination of the clauses of the Prayer


mistake not, shew clearly that underlying the whole there
is the conception of the supreme conflict.
The representation of
the devil in the New Testament is of one who parodies the
character and work of God.
God realises the ideal in all His
As Father, as Guide, as King, He is o cIXtjrelations to men.

will, if I

St

friend has pointed out to

Matthew

parallel
for the

in

Bp

EUicott's

New

me

that

Dean Plumptie

between the facts of the Temptation and the

masculine rendering of

Commentary on
Headers makes the
two clauses an argument
in his

Test. Coiiuneiitanj for EiujUsli

The

dirb rod wovrjpoO.

last

feeling of this analogy under-

a passage of Dionysius of Alexandria quoted below, p. 139 f. The point was


Bp Lightfoot in the second of his three letters to the
Guardian " Nor is it an insignificant fact that only two chapters before the Evan-

lies

indeed touched upon by


:

gelist

has recorded how the Author of

temptation

(iv. 1, 3)

this prayer

and was delivered from the

'

found Himself face to face with

Evil One.'

THE lord's prayer

106
In

6Lv6<i.

THE EARLV CHURCH.

IN

these directions the devil opposes

all

God by imitating

Him'.

Our Father
(Matt.

xiii.

iic

Sia^oXou (Acts

vie

-t-t),

Tci TeKi/a

Contrast oi

tvhich art in heaven.

38), vfieU

rov Trovrjpov

viol

rov Trarpoi; rov Bca^oXov iare (John

So

xiii. 10).

John

rod 6eov koX ra reKva rov Sia^oXov.

our relation to the True Father


habitual authority of the False

10 (f)av6pd iartv

To

realize absolutely

bo

to

is

from

rescued

Beast who

(v.

avrov Kal ro ouofia rov

Thy kingdom
(John

xii.

so al dp^ai,

a'l

Contrast

(Barn,

opposed to

throne {oirou 6

alaiva<i, o

rov laravd

6p6vo<y

ii.

9, iii.

iJ/iet?

the evil one

ii.

ii.

rfj<;

13), just as he has his

i.

mro

dvofjLia<;

(U9

deXere

comp.

will

Pet.

worship

word be allowed, his

Xeyovaiv

ii.

24).

Before the will

lusts of the False will give way.

eV rov Trarpo^ rov hia^oXov icrre Kal

vp.a>u

oneness of the divine

dXXd

Tim.

(1

12), o p,ev icrnv Kvpto^

9) and, if the

True Father and King the

Tov TTar/oo?

vi.

be done, as in heaven, so on earth.

luill

rov alwvo'i

2); 6 de6<i

rwv alwvwv

he dp-)(oyv Kaipov rov vvv

'theology' (rn 0a6ea rov Xaravd,

Compare

ii.

6 ^a<Jt\ev<i

i^ovciat, ol KocrfMOKpdrop<; [contrast 6 iravro-

(a-vvaycoyrj rov 'S.aravd

of the

dp'^wu rov KoafMov rovrov

In the imagery of the Apocalypse Satan has his

xviii.).

Thy

comp. Eph.

Kpdrwp] rov aKorov; rovrov (Eph.


al(vvwv Kal et9 rov<i

1,

7rarp6<; avrov).

come.

iv. 4),

(xiii.

11, xiv. 11 (contrast xiv. 1 ro ovojia

ix.

31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11,

rovrov (2 Cor.
17)

of the

the representative of the Dragon's power

is

Compare Apoc.

xvii. 3).

v. 18).

belonging to the

/SXacrc^T/ynta?

6uo/j,a)

1.

the

7r9 o yeyuv7]fiivo'i ix rov Oeov

ov^ dfiaprdvL...Kal 6 irovrjpo^ ov^ dirrerat avrov (1 John


Hallowed he thy name. Contrast in the symbolism
Apocalypse ovofiara

viii.

iii.

irotelv

(John

viii.

rd<i

eVi^u/ita?

Contrast the

44).

with the mauifoldness of the lusts of


iv.

2 ro /xrjKert dvOpcoTrwv

OeXrjfMarc deov rov eTrlXoLirov iv

aapKL ^tooaac

3 rd 6eXr)fiara rt}<; crapKo^i.


Forgive us our debts. Contrast Apoc.

xii.

dBeX<f>u)v rjfiwv, 6 Karrjyopcov avrov<; ivwiriov

10

eTrcdvfMiat'i

')(^p6vov.

6 Kar/jycop

rov Oeov

Eph.

rwv

rjp.wv T]fiepa<;

Kal vvKr6<i.

Bring us
1

not into temptation, but deliver us

Varie diabolus aemulatus est veritatem.

concutere (Tert. adv. Prax.

i.).

from

the evil one,

Adfectavit illam aliquando defendendo

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

107

These two petitions alone in the Prayer are connected


The key to the interpretation lies in the dWd. The
mutual relation of the two petitions may be presented thus
or

evil.

together.

fjbrj

elcrevi'^KTj'i

puaac

New

In the
1 Thess.
I'va

firj

iii.

fjui]

Tretpd^T]

eh
diro

Testament the
Comp. Matt.

tempter,

the

as

r]/xd<;
T^fin<;

ttco?

v/jbd<i

iireipaaev
6

pared with

iii.

7,

2 Tim.

t>]<;

iv.

ii,

is

irovripov.

consistently represented

Treipd^wv

Apoc.

ii.

Nor

26).

Tim.

does Jas.

i.

Cor.

vii.

^dWeiv

9 (com-

vi.

14 (KaaTo<i 8e

tSta? iTn6vp.ia<;) conflict with this view of the

New

Testament teaching. The Apostle there


vindicate the ways of God to men.
In the matter of

general drift

wishes to

of

temptation he throws the responsibility on the

man's will
nroielv

10 fiiWec

TreipaaOrjre.

'iva

avrw\

elnev

vfid<i 6 ireipd^ayv'^.

'S,aTaud'i.

Std^oXo'i i^ vfiSv et? <f>vXaK7]v

nreipd^erai vtto

devil

Tretpacrfiov

rov

is

(John

the offender
44).

viii,

rd<i ein6vp>ia<;

The

man

himself: the

rov trarpo^

vfjidov

diXere

question of the final source of tempta-

tion lies outside the scope of the passage.

When

then

it is

noticed that the two clauses in each of their

several parts correspond to, and are set over against, each other,

presumption in favour of the masculine rendering of rov


voprjpov becomes very strong; and a review of the Prayer itself

the

confirms the verdict based on the consideration of


the Lord's

own

its

relation to

experience,

The Ministry and the Passion. The Lord's life is the best
(c)
commentary on the Lord's Prayer, St John explains the purpose
of the Incarnation in the words

et?

rovro icpavepcoOr]

Oeov iva Xvarj rd epya rov Sia^oXov (1 John


activities of ministry

its

is

briefly

iii.

8).

u/o?

The

rov

life

in

summarised by St Peter thus:

BirjXOev evepyerSv koI Iwfjievo^ rrdvra<i rov^ KaraSvvacrrevofiivov^

Ipse a diabolo temptatus praesidem et artificem temptationis deuionstravit

Gregory of Nyssa

(Tert. de Oral. viii.).

view when he suggests that ireipaa/Mt


-

OTL

Eesch
deos

(p.

TTctpafet,

thinks that the

Bp

(de Oral. Doin. v.) strangely exaggerates this

one of Satan's names,


233) compares the agraphon in Hom. Clem. iii. 55,
is

ws ai ypa(pul Xiyovaiv,

mode

^(pv,

'fovijpSs

rots 5e oiOfj,4vois

iariv b weipdi^uv.

He

of expression resembles the style of the Synoptic Gospels,

Westcott on the other hand doubts the genuineness of this saying {Introduc-

tion to the Study of the Gospels p. 457 n.).

THE lord's PRAYKU

108
virb rou

Bca^oXov (Acts

IN

THE EARLY CHURCH.

With

x. 38;'.

this general description of

the whole Ministry the Lord's words as to one of His miracles

should be compared: 'Ought not this woman... whom Satan had

bound

(t]v

eBrjaeu 6 '!.arava<;), lo, these eighteen years, to

have been

loosed from this bond {XvOrjvai diro rov heajxov tovtou) on the day
of the sabbath' (Luke

who

so

xiii.

16)

It is not easy to beheve that

remembered the Lord's words and works, and

any

so shaped

the record of that remembrance, would have hesitated as to the

meaning of the disputed clause in the Prayer.


But it is when we turn to the story of the Passion that the
evidence becomes clearest. The visit of Judas to the chief priests
was due to the promptings of Satan (Luke xxii. 3). It was in
obedience to the same inspiration that the traitor rose from the
The Lord
table to head his Master's enemies (John xiii. 2, 27).
Himself interpreted the crisis of redemption in three different
ways as the ineffectual coming, the judgment, the expulsion, of
'the prince of this world' (John

He met

face to face

cTKorovi

Luke

xxii.

'

comp. Col.

53,

14

f.)

His sufferings

repeated by the

is

and powers'

(Col.

ii.

15).

The

this

vanquished

writer to the

Hebrews

unfolds the paradox that through death, the devil's tool,

the Lord brought the devil to nought and set his captives

Two
demand

r?;?

12).

vi.

triumphal car on which the Conqueror exhibits

(ii.

eK

rjfia^

St Paul views the cross of shame as the

Apostolic teachers.

'principalities

i^ouaia rov

{rj

'

13 ipvaaro

i.

i^ouaM<i Tov aKOTOv^, Acts xxvi. 18, Eph.


Christ's interpretation of

Now

31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11).

xii.

the tyranny of darkness

free.

passages however, imbedded in the history of the Passion,


closer investigation.

The view

of the Passion insisted on

above throws light on both of them.


The first passage is from St Luke's Gospel
(i).
are they which have continued with

me

appoint unto you a kingdom, even as

in

my

my

(xxii.),

'Ye

temptations; and I

Father appointed unto

me {vv. 28, 29).... Simon, Simon, behold, Satan asked to have you (o
'Earava'i i^rjrija-aTo vfia<i), that he might sift you as wheat but /
;

made
fail
1

supplication for thee

not

{vv. 31, 32)....

The Syriac Vulgate

See below,

p. 156.

{i'yu)

he iherjdrjv irepl aov), that thy faith

And he came

out,

and went,

here translates rod dia^oXov

by

as his
.

'^

custom

(the-evil-ono).

'

DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.*

109

And when

he was at the

mount

was, unto the

of Olives

he said unto them,

place,

(7rpoav')^eaOe

me

cup from

6e\7)fid fiov

nevertheless not

dWa ro

The

eh

yet there

is

v.

v.

40)

He

will, hut thine, he

vv. 41, 42).

into temptation

kneeled

'

done

this

ro

(/u,?)

...Why sleep ye
(Trpoaevx^o-^^,

rise

'^va fir)

46).

from the upper room to the Garden

it is true, shifts

an

ye enter not into temptation

thou be willing, remove

if"

my

aov ytveaOo)

Treipaafiov,

scene,

39)....

ireLpaajiov

saying, Fathei',

and pray, that ye enter not


elaeXOrjTe

eU

elaeXOelv

/xt]

down and prayed,

{v.

Pi-aij that

irresistible sense of

The

unity about the history.

brief interval of time which separates the first of the words quoted

above from the

The language

does not affect the close nexus of the thoughts.

last

of the Evangelists* seems designed to emphasise the

between the Lord's Prayer and the Lord's teaching on


the evening of the betrayal. This parallel will to many minds
establish beyond a doubt the masculine interpretation of aVo rov

relation

7roi'7]pov.
(ii).

(John

The other passage

xvii. 15): 'I

is

from the true Oratio Dominica

pray not {ovk epcoTco) that thou shouldest take

them from (ha ap77<?...e/c...) the world, but that thou shouldest
keep them from the evil one' (iva TTqprjarj'^ avTov<i Ik tov Trovijpov).
The reference of ix rov irovqpov to the devil seems to be certain
for the following four reasons^ (1) The form of the sentence: ovk
The usage of St John (6
...e'/c rov Koapbov dWd...iK rov 7rov7}pov.
dp')(uiv

TOV KoapLov rovrov

trovqpw Kelrat

T(p

contrast intended

from

31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11, 6 K6ap,o<;

xii.

John

v.

'6\o<i

iv

19) seems to indicate decisively the

the tyrant's power, not from the region

which the tyrant claims as his. (2) The preceding context {vv. 11,
12): 'Holy Father, keep (rriprja-ov) them in thy name which thou
hast given me.... While I was with them, I kept {eT-qpovv) them in
thy name which thou hast given me and I guarded them (e'^t;;

\a^a), and not one of them perished, but the son of perdition
that the scripture might be
^

It

(xxvi.

42

in xi. 2.

is

in the language of

valent respectively to (l<TviyKaL and


-

Canon Cook {Second

neuter interpretation here

The

last clause

is

the

Matthew has the same phrase here


Luke omits this clause
Syria different 'voices' of the same verb are equi-

important to observe that

yevqdTiTti) to deXrjiia cov) as in


(h)

fulfilled.'
(a)

St

the Lord's Prayer: St

elcreXOe'ti'

(see p. 61

f.).

Letter p. 81) points out that Chrysostom gives the


TovriffTLv,

awo t^j KaKias

(x.

6G4

b,

so

viii.

483).

THE lord's prayer

110

EARLY CHURCH.

IX TFIE

connecting link with an earlier passage.


I

know whom

He

have chosen

my

'

speak not of you

all

may be

but that the scripture

up his heel against me....


So when he had dipped the sop, he taketh and giveth it to Judas,
the son of Simon Iscariot. And after the sop, then entered Satan
All the Apostles were safely kept by
into him (xiii. 18, 26 f.).
fulfilled,

that eateth

bread

lifted

'

He

their Master save one.

fell

power.

a victim to the devil's

For the future the Lord prays that those whom He leaves behind
may still be kept from the great enemy, who had made one of

number

their

his

own.

The

(3)

parallels in the Epistle

Gospel.

Epistle.

was with them, / kept


{(TTjpovv) them in thy name... and I
guarded {i^xiXa^a) them, and not one
"While

of

He

perished, but the son of per-

them

dition.

that

y(vvr]6f\5 k tov

him and
not

(d

My

little

the

have given them tht/ word; and


them, because they
are not of the world, even as I am
not of the world. I pray not that

the world hated

them from

the

world, but that thou shouldest keep


the evil one {(< tov novr}-

them from
They
pov).
as

am

evil

one toucheth him

novqphs ovx aTTTtrai aCrov)....


children,

guard

/ have overcome

The

While

xvii.

the world,

12

xvi.

parallel in St

was with them,

them.... I guarded ihcva....!


pa)Ta))...that

from

the icord of

hare overcome the

Love not

noprjpov).

strong,

God abideth

in you,

evil

and
and

one {top

the world, neither

the things that are in the vorld.

ii.

14, 15.

15.

.33.

Luke

xxii. 31,

32
St Luke.

if,

masculine,

kept

pray

{i-

thou shouldest keep them

the evU one.

But

2L

have written unto you, young

St John.
I

((f>v\a^aT)

v. 18,

are not of the world, even

not of the world,

(4)

(o

6fov) keepeth {rrjpfl)

men, because ye are


ye

of God

begotten

vxis

yourselves from idols,

thou shovddest take

as wheat;
(fBeijdrjv)

as these
is it

Simon, Simon, behold Satan asked


to have you, that he might sift you

arguments appear

but 7 made supplication

for thee.

to prove,

e/c

tov rrovrjpov

is

possible to disconnect the prayer which the Lord

taught as the typical Christian prayer from the prayer which He


Himself prayed ? Is not the one the best guide to a true under.standino- of

And indeed, however gi'eat the difference


and form of expression, there are striking points

the other?

as to surroundings

'DELIVER
of contact

ITS

FROM THE EVIL

between the two prayers.

realities lie at

Ill

ONK.'

The same great

spiritual

the root of both.

Our Father which

art in heaven.

Father
Father

1,

11),

21,

5,

Holy

24),

Righteous

Father

25).

{>K

Hallowed be thy name.

{vv.

(v.

manifested thy

name

(i*.

6).

Keep thom...I kept them,

name which thou

hast given

in

thy

me

{rv.

11, 12).
I

Thy kingdom come.

made known unto them thy name


26)1.

(v.

Glorify thy Son, that the Son

thee

glorify

may

even as thou gavest

him authority over

flesh...

all

(rr.

1, 2).

Thy

will 1)6 done, as in heaven, so

I glorified thee on the earth, having


accomplished the work which thou
hast given me to do... the glory which

on earth.

had with thee before the world was

{vr. 4, 5).
I

am

no more in the world, and

these are in the world

{v. 11).

Even as thou. Father, art in me,


and I in thee, that they also may be
in

us

(v.

21).

Bring us not into temptation, hut


deliver us

from the

evil

one

(dn-o

roC

that the world

may

believe...

kept them... I guarded them

{v.

12).

novrjpov).

... I

pray.

. .

that thou shouldest keep

them from the

evil

one

(ex tov ttovt]-

poii) (v. 15).

The above

table indicates

some

of the resemblances.

mechanical arrangement however can lay bare the one


quickens both prayers.

The conjecture might be hazarded that


John we have a Johannine form

Epistle of St

Lord's

Prayer under discussion, in which

(comp. 2 Thess.

'

Comp.

iii.

such

which

Gospel and

of the clause of the

Tijpiia-ov

or <\>v\a^ov

3 (jjvXd^ei diro tov Trovrjpov) takes the place of

irarep, So^aabv crov rb ovofia

the Lord'3 Prayer says

in the

No

spirit

(John

xii. 27).

rb yap, ayiaadTjTO}, tovto

Chrysostom commenting on
250 c).

^a-riv, do^affdriru) (vii.

THE lord's PHAYER IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

112

pvaac, and the preposition eV the place of the diro of the Synoptists \

may

But, however this

Gospels themselves

be,

evidence derived from

the

the

the account of the Temptation, the Lord's

Prayer, the history of the Ministry and especially of the Passion

seems without any shadow of uncertainty to warrant the conclusion that Christ taught His Church in the Lord's Prayer to pray
for deliverance

from the assaults of the devil.

Evidence derived from the Epistles.

(ii).

thinking that

in

the earliest days

Lord's Prayer was in familiar use.

The Apostolic

Reasons have been given

now the
writers who

as

for

would sometimes consciously, sometimes


uncon.sciously, mould their language after the model of its words.

But the

so used

it

indications which suggest frequency of use are also proofs

that as yet the Prayer had no such stereotyped form as

Without

it

as-

warning a slight variation of


sumed a
phrase in the Apostolic writings might throw us off our guard, and
we might pass by unnoticed what is in truth little else than a
little later.

this

quotation of one of the petitions of the Prayer.

We

proceed

discuss

to

certain

possible

references

in-

the

Epistles to the last clause of the Lord's Prayer.


2 Thess.

(1)

r}fX(ov...'iva

vfid<;

ff.

pvcr6(ji}/xu diro

ov yap TrdvTWV

is

iii.

to Xolttov 7rpoaV')(^6a9e,

rwv

iricrTO'^

he iariv 6 KvpLO<i, b? (TTrjpi^ei,

KoX ^vXd^ei aTTo rov irovrjpov

We ask two questions What

rj

iriarL<i.

the interpretation of the last clause

to the Lord's Prayer be considered certain

In regard to the
the evil one

phrase

'

'

ixkva (Eph.
trast

dhe\(f)Oi, Trepl

droirajv koL irovr^pu^v dvdpcoTTCDv,

rd

vi.

16,

first

in

comp.

How

far

may

a reference

question, St Paul certainly uses the

irdvra rd ^iXr] rov irovrjpov rd Treirvpo)rd'^ p,e6oZia<i

rov Sia^oXov

y.

11,

and con-

In the present passage


12).
For here we have
masculine.
the

-TTvevfxartKd rfj^ irovqpia'i v.

the context clearly points to

a good instance of that dovetailing of ideas and phrases familiar


to the student of St Paul

The

investigation into the usage of the Greek Bible (p. 71

these two prepositions are interchangeable.

ff.)

has shewn

tliat

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL


ov yap irdvTcov
ipa

ij

nloTis.

ttkttos St tariv 6 Kvpios.

pwdapfu dno

(mjpi^fi vpat Kal 0vXd^ei dno

Toiv aroTTav Ka\ novrjp^u dudpconcov.

The

tov

men were made

evil

irovTjpov,

would be impaired

correlation of clauses

agency of
pov Rom.

113

ONE.'

if

the personal

to balance abstract evil' {ro ttovt}-

Moreover in St Paul's mind the thought of


9).
lay very near the thought of the evil one, their inspirer
and instigator^ Thus in this Epistle (ii. 9), 'He whose coming is
xii.

men

evil

according to the working of Satan'; again, 'Even Satan fashioneth


himself into an angel of light it is no great thing therefore if his
ministers also fashion themselves as ministers of righteousness'
;

(2 Cor. xi. 14

f.);

The

'

obedience' (Eph.

spirit that

now worketh

in the sons of dis-

Again, the choice of words favours the


2).
masculine interpretation o-T7;ptfet and (f)v\d^t taken together"
ii.

are more appropriate

if

the

drawn from war. Compare

enemy

7rp6<;

is

The metaphor

a person.

to hvvaadai u/za? aTrjvai

7rp6<;

fieOoSiaq TOV Sia^6\ou...iva SvPTjOrJTe dvTicrTr}vaL...(TTrjvaL.

ovv (Eph.

vi. 11, 13, 14), o dvTt8iKo<i

(TTepeol TTJ TTiaTei (1 Pet.

v.

f.),

is

ra?

crTrjTe

Vfiwv 8id^o\o<i...w dvTiaTr]T

dvTiaTrjTe Se r&J Bia^oXw (James

Once more, the position of the phrase in the Epistle is


remarkable. The Apostle begins what he means to be the coniv. 7).

cluding paragraph of the

paragraph,
of the

letter to Thessalonica.

first

thoughts

letter with to Xoiirov (iii. 1).


The
be noticed, corresponds with the closing sentences

it will

(1)

A request

2): so 1 Thess. v. 25.

koXwv

iroceLTe

Se KvpL0<; KaTv6vvai k.t.X.

Tf]<i

elpr)VT]<i

dr^idaai

St Paul starts in

iv^Koypev TjpSis 6

Zaravas

(1

there are four

main

vfjid^).

Kal

(3)

An

TroLrjaeTe.

so 1 Thess.

expression of trust

(4)

benediction

23 ai/Vo? Se o ^eo?
Here then the Apostle had meant, it

i5/xa?.

v. 1

it

(2)

so 1 Thess. V. 24 (Tricrro? o

d TrapayyeWofiev Kal

In

prayer on the Apostle's behalf {vv. 1,


The assurance Trto-ro?
ecTtv 6 Kvpcoq:
for

v.

with the idea of help and hindrance in work.

Thess.

ii.

Comp.

18).

Comp. the Jewish Prayer (Berakoth 16 6): May it be thy will,


Lord
our God. ..to deliver us from the shameless, and from shamelessness ; from the
evil man, and from evil hap, from evil yerer, from evil companion, from evil
neighbour, and from Satan the destroyer' (Dr Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish
Fathers p. 142). For similar prayers in the Christian Liturgies see below, p. 144.
'

^
(ii.

Contrast vapaKa\^a-ai

17

c.

1 Thess.

iii.

iipQv ray KapSla^ Kal ffrrjpi^ai iv wavrl ?pyu) Kal \6yuj ayaOip

2, 13).

THE lord's prayer

114

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IN

would seem, to close. But the reference in a TrapayyeWofiev (v. 4)


may be misunderstood it needs further definition. Hence yet
16 corap. Phil. iii. 1 f., iv. 8).
another paragraph is added (iii. 6
Thus, according to St Paul's intention when he wrote the words,
the assurance <f>v\d^t diro tov Trovrjpov would have stood at
:

the very end of the Epistle.


tion,

we adopt the masculine

If

interpreta-

find a parallel in a similar prophecy of victory over the

we

devil at the close of the greatest Epistle of the next group


^eo<f

TTJ<i

^aravdv

avvrplyp-ec tov

elpr)VT}<i

6 Be

vtto tov<; 7roSa9 Vfiwv iv

rdxet (Rom. xvi. 20). Among the Epistles of the First Captivity
the 'Ephesian' Epistle ends with the picture of the Christian
soldier

equipped in 'the whole armour of God,' able to 'stand

against the wiles of the devils'

But may the words

tov iroviqpov be taken as a

(fyvXa^ei diro

direct reference to the clause of the Lord's Prayer

It

is

hard to

an affirmative answer. If St Paul had written pvcreTai, diro


TOV TTovTjpov, the reference would have been beyond dispute. As
it is, even if we put aside the quite possible supposition that a
current version of the Lord's Prayer had j)vKa^ov in place of
pvaai, we may account for St Paul's substitution of <f>v\d^eL by
the fact that pvaOwfiev had been used just above and that ^vXd^et
refuse

harmonises better than pvaeTat with


2 Cor.

(2)

^aTavd.

.virep

7 f

xii.

iSoOrj

<ttt]pl^i".

aKoXo-yjr^ ttj aapKi,

fxoL

tovtov Tpt9 tov Kvpiov TrapeKciXecra iva

0776X09

aTrocTTTJ air

The remembrance of the Lord's thrice repeated prayer


Gethsemane perhaps inspires the Tph. .irapeKaXeaa. Further,
ip,ov.

New

the

d-TToaTrivaL in

subject of aTTOCTTf]

Testament

is

in
as

only used of persons^ the

dyye\o<; l^uTavd (comp. Matt. xxv. 41, Apoc.

is

Comp. 1 Pet. V. 8 f 1 John v. 18 ff.


The Antiochenes however do not support the masculine. Chrys. passes over
'ab omni discedentes inconvenient! actu.'
the word. Theod. of Mops, paraphrases
3 The passages where the word occurs in the lxx., viz. Numb, xxxiii. 55,
Ezek. xxviii. 24 [aKoXof iriKplas xal aKavda 65vvt)%), Hos. ii. 6, seem to shew that
1

it

bears the later (Alexandrian) sense of thorn (not stake).

Otiuni Norvicense

Lc.

ii.

iii.

37, iv. 13,

xix. 9, xxii. 29, 1

Tim.

viii.

13, xiii. 27,

iv. 1,

Tim.

Vulgate connects together Luke


2 Cor.

xii. 8.

See especially Field

p. 115.

ii.

Acts
19,

iv. 13,

But the Syriac word used

v. 38, xii.

the
is

10

(aTTfVTij 6 a77f\o5), xv. 38,

The rendering of
interpolated clause in Luke

Heb.

iii.

a very

12.

common

one.

the Syriac
xi. 4,

and

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONK'


xii. 7, 9,

Bam.

airea-TT) air

The

xviii. 1).

avrov)

is

Luke

parallel in

115
13

iv.

(o

Scd0oXo<;

remarkable, and we possibly have here one

of the links which connect St Paul's Epistles with the Pauline

However

Gospel.

that

may

St Paul

be,

tells of

deliverance from the power of Satan, and

it

a prayer of his for


a plausible con-

is

jecture that the Lord's Prayer was in his mind.


Gal.

(3)
irepX)

i.

3 f

'Itjo-oO

ruiv dfiapricov

eVecrrcoTO? irovTjpov

Two

Kara to

ivcrT(oTo<i TTovrjpov,

me

and the Prayer are

0776)9 i^eXtjTai

OeXrjixa

'^fid's

tov 6eov Kal

may be given

interpretations

Prayer seems to

XpicrToO, tov 86vto<; kavrov xnrep

rjficov

tov

e'/c

1.

tov

iraTp6<i rjixwv.

of the words tov alwvo^ tov

and in either case a reference to the Lord's


probable.

The

ideas

our Father, the

common

to this passage

from

will, forgiveness, rescue

the evil one).

evil (or

The words may be

(i)

translated,

'

the present age, evil as

TTovqpov being emphatically added to describe

is,'

(v.

at&Ji/o?

a kind of tertiary predicate.

its

When it is remembered that e^eKecrdat

in the

LXX. shares with pvaaaOai the duty of representing

(comp.

p. 73),

and

so

it

character^

T^H

might well be a translation of the Aramaic

word meaning deliver in the last clause of the Lord's Prayer,


and further that 'this age' and 'this world' are represented in
the New Testament as being under the dominion of Satan (2 Cor.
iv. 4, Eph. ii. 2, vi. 12, John xii. 31, xiv. 30, xvi. 11, 1 John v. 19),
the conclusion that here there is an indirect reference to the
The emphatic Trovrjpov finds
Lord's Prayer becomes probable.
thus an explanation, the character of the age corresponds to the
'

'

The general sense will be illusJohn xii. 31, xvi. 11, Col. i. 13, ii. 15, Heb. ii. 14.
But is it not more natural to take the words tov iveaTutTd

character of

its

god, its ruler.

trated by
(ii)

whom

what the age belongs?


kutu tov alwva tov Kotjyuov
TovTov (where the idea of the personal evil power comes out in
the next clause xaTo. tov dp^ovTa k.t.X.), Barnabas xv. 5 i\6o)v 6

irovrjpov together as defining to

For such a genitive compare Eph.

'

ii.

Comp. Eph.

V.

ii.

or to

16 i^ayopa^Sfievoi. rbv KaipSv,

on

oi Tjfiipai Trovtjpai elai,

1 T)fj.pQu ovv ovcrwi> iromjpwv Kal aiiroO tov ivepyovvroi

Contrast Barn.
^/cS^X^^*'-

(laralai

x. 11 6 diKaios xal iv tovt(j)

ry k6<x/ji.(j)
compare

^o'" ^^^ construction in this case

v^Qv

Ix*"'''''"

''"'?''

irepiirareT Kal rbv dytof

1 Pet.

i.

Barn,

is^vaiav, viii. 6.

aiwva

18 (XvrpwdTjre ^k

avacTTpocprji iraTponapaSbTov.

82

ttjs

"

THE lord's prayer

116

IN

THE EARLY CHURCH.

avTov KaTapyrja-ec top Kaipov tov dvo/iov (on the reading see
The converse is found in 2 Cor. iv. 4 o 6ed^ rov alwvo^
p. 99).
Further, it is important to observe that not only in St
TovTov.
uto9

Paul's Epistles but also in the rest of the


believe, in other early Christian

word

the

alcov) of

(0UT09

Testament and, I

writings the literal equivalent

Hebrew phrase HTn D7iyn

is

used; the

have observed, in

does not occur, so far as I

ivea-Tccx:

New

this

connexion.
If this construction of the words be adopted

What

arise, (a)

force of iveaTci)TO<i

What

(a)

the gender of vovrjpov

is

is

(b)

two questions

What

is

the exact

The neuter

the gender of Tov...'Kov'qpovl

is

of

course possible. But there are weighty arguments against it. The
masculine interpretation is implied in a passage of the Clementines,
Epist Clem, ad Jew. i., referred to by Bp Lightfoot on Gal. i. 4,
ouTo? avrb<i

(sc. Ylirpo'i)

Sta rrjv afjLerpov

tt/jo? dv6pco7rov<;

aropyrjv

o-a^w9, ZrjiioaLa, eirl rov evearwro^ 7rovr]pov, rov iaofievov d<ya66v


oXw TcS KoafMO) fir}vv(raL ^aacXia, fiixpi'^ evravOa rfj 'Vcofirj yevofjbevo^ K.T.X.

pretation

is

'

At

all

events/ writes the Bishop,

thus suggested.'

But

'

a possible inter-

venture to think this 'possible

becomes probable in the light of two considerations.


'This age' in the New Testament is never connected with mere
abstract evil, but always with the tyranny of a personal evil spirit.

interpretation'

Such too, at least generally, is the usage of sub-Apostolic writers.


Again, this passage must be taken in connexion with other pasPrayer
sa<^es in St Paul's writings where reference to the Lord's
is

probable.
(b)

Is the probability,

which may be claimed

for the

What

is

the exact force of the word

temporal sense, present

It is

masculine

word ivearwrc^

interpretation, disturbed by the presence of the

commonly taken

in a

Thus Bp Lightfoot says of the passage

" appears to have interpreted


in the Clementines that the writer
.'
the words from the seon, the dominion, of the present evil one
'

The word ivearw^ has, it is true, this meaning but I believe it


the context, as in
is used in a strictly temporal sense only when
Thus Rom.
meaning.
the
defines
the Clementines {tov iaofievov),
Compare
iii.
22.
Cor.
1
fieXXovra),
oure
viii. 38 {ovT iv(TTSTa
rrpoeipT]ydp
refers)
6
Lightfoot
Bp
Polyb. xviii. 38. 5 (to which
;

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

Kara rov irarkpa

fivo<; dvrjp

fiiv,

and the primary thought

e.g.

dyoov (where the addition of vvp


ivaTTjaofiei^ov

2 Mace.

26

44

xii.

7r6\i/j,ov

i.

16

Tov Kvptov, 2 Tim.

iii.

Heb.

1,

ivecrrriicoTO'i

firj

vi.

t^/jlIv,

9 Ti^v iveaTwcrav

l3oT}6eiv rj} iveaTwcrr) dvajKr], 1 Cor.

ivearwcrav dvdyKrjv, 2 Thess.

Bid, TTjv

ivearrjKco'i

to be noticed), Plutarch Lucull.

17 to Kara Kaphiav eVecrro? dXyo^,

iii.

raXanrwpiav, 8 Mace.
vii.

Lycurg. 148. 32 o vvv

is

^vyfj fierd vewv direarakKei, and (in

rf]

Mace.

Kara top

secondary,

is

rather of imminence, often of some

is

Compare

threatening power*.

the Greek Bible)

ert yeo? (ov...6fMoico<; Se

This temporal sense however

ve(TTa)Ta fiaaiXia.

13 ov avTO'i

117

ix. 9;

so Ep.

2 iviaTrjKeu

ii.

?)

r)p,epa

Clem. 55 XoipuKov

rt,vo<i

ivardvTO'i Kaipov.

In the passage under consideration this appears

to be the meaning.

The word points to the imminence of, the besetThe following passages will be the

ment

men

of

by, the evil one.

best commentary, Ps.

Zech.

Eph,

15

2 rov

ii.

Tim.

dTreidia<i, 1
{v.

Bt,d^o\o^ crTrjTco iK Be^iwv aurov,

1 /cat 6 8td^o\o<i elcrTrJKei iK Be^tcov avrou rov uvrcKeladaL

iii.

avTW),

cviii.

v.

14

Compare

John

v.

19

Koapio^ oXo'i ev ru)

also the idea suggested

d'7r6KBv(7dpLvo<; rd<; dp)(^d'i koI

To sum

rrj^

fiTjBefiiau dcpoppurjv BiBovat ra> dvriKeip^evw

rov Xaravd),

oTTia-co

TTovTjpS Kelrai.

rov vvv ivepyovvro'i iv roU vloU

'irvevp,aro<i

by

Col.

ii.

15

ra? i^ova-ia^.

up, in the light of other passages St Paul's meaning

here seems to be that Christ died

who

the evil one

'

to rescue us from the age of

besetteth us'; and, if this be his meaning, his

words are probably a reminiscence of the Lord's Prayer.


Col.

(4)
r]p,d<i

eU

rjpd<i

iK

rf]<i

12

ff.

ev'^apicrrovvre'i

rS

irarpl tc5 cKavaxyavrc

rov KXrjpov ra>v dyiwv iv

ru>

(fxjori,

09 ipucraro

i^ovaia<i rov aKorov^ Kal perearrjarev et? rrjv ^acrtXetau

rov viov T^9


d(f)a-iv

i.

rrju puepiBa

dyaTrrj'i

avrov, iv

<p

e^op,ev rrjv aTroXvrpcocnv, rrjv

r(3v dp,apri(jov.

In this passage four of the leading thoughts of the Lord's


Prayer are found side by side

the
'

Father,'

'

who

delivered us

out of the power of darkness,' 'the kingdom,' 'the forgiveness of

our

sins.'

It

can hardly be urged that this

The Prayer had worked


1

The word

is

Plato Phaedo 77 b

itself into

used of a logical

difficulty

is

a mere coincidence.

the Apostle's mind and habit

which confronts a

(^rt iviar-qK^v 6 vvv Sjj K^/St/s iXeye).

line of

argument in

THE lord's prayer IX THE EARLY CHURCH,

118

of thought, and the reminiscence, even though


is full

it

be unintentional,

of significance.

Two

questions arise

First, is the reference in

the personal power of evil


appear,

is

clearly required

r^

i^ovaia rov aKOTov? necessarily to

Such an interpretation, it would


by the antithesis e r^? i^ovaia<; rov
?

oKOTovi, 619 rrjv ^aatXeiav rov viov.

the companion Epistle


dp-x^d<;, 7r/309

is

Ta9 i^ovaia^,

Further, a passage from

strongly on the same side


tt/^o?

toi)9 Koafj.oKpdTopa<;

77/309

Ta9

rov crKorovi

Compare also Acts xxvi. 18 rov iiriaTpey^ai


12).
eh <f)co^ koI t^? i^ovaia'i rov Maraud cttI rov 6e6v.
These parallels seem to establish a reference to Satan.
Secondly, could St Paul have written, 'He delivered us from
the power of darkness,' if he had understood the Lord's Prayer to
TouTov (Eph.

vi.

dirb (TK6T0V<i

as^'

/or deliverance from Satan?

emancipation

in

For

is

not the assertion of an

the past wholly incompatible with the

remem-

Here we touch upon an


objection which has been most strongly and confidently urged
brance of a petition for deliverance

against the masculine interpretation of the clause in the Prayer.

Such an

interpretation, it is argued, misrepresents the position of

He

the Christian man.

has been rescued, he has been brought

He

clean out of the range of Satan's power.

has no need to ask

what is his already.


The passage of St Paul which we are considering itself shews
that such an argument proves too much. St Paul speaks of the
transference of men into the kingdom as a thing already achieved,
an act of the Father in the past {/jLeriarrja-ev). How then, we
might ask, can Christian men pray 'Thy kingdom come' ?
The answer depends on an appreciation of the difference
between a state which is ideal or potential, and a state which is
actual.
It is possible to conceive of the
consummation of the
ages' {avvre\eia rwv alcovcov) as already attained
it was reached
when the Lord died and rose again (Hebr. ix. 26). On the other
hand the consummation of the age (7 avvriXeta rov aloovo<i) is
still future.
The Lord's return will usher it in (Matt. xiii. 39, 40,
xxiv.
So in one sense the Lord's work is
49,
20).
3, xxviii.
for

'

'

'

complete (rerekearai Jn.


33, Col.

ii.

15,

Heb.

ii.

xix. 30); the victory is

14); the reconciliation of

won
all

(e.g. Jn. xvi.

things to

God

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


is

achieved (Col.

have

the restoration of
xix. 28,

In another sense the results of the victory

20).

i.

be made good

to

still

Acts

iii.

all

(1 Cor. xv.

we

things'

And

21).

119

25

in 'the regeneration,

fif.);

see a goal

unattained (Matt,

still

with this twofold view of the work of the

Redeemer there corresponds a twofold view of the position of the


Christian man. St Paul can say direddvere, yet in the same breath
veKpooaare ovv to. fieXr] rd eVt t^9 7^9 (Col. iii. 3, 5); iawdrjixev
(Rom. viii. 24), yet crcodrjaofieOa (Rom. v. 10) avve^cDoiroLTjaev
;

TO} 'Xpi(TrS...Kal <Jvvrj<yeLpev

iv ^pia-ru)

^Jrjcrov

(Eph.

ii.

veovadai rw TTveufMart rov


dvdpcoTTou (Eph.
ia(f)pajLa-di]Te

And

iv.

koI avveKadia-ev iv
5

vod<;

vfioov,

koI ivZvaaaOai rov Katvov

23); e^ofxeu rrjv diroXvTpwaLv (Eph.

(Eph.

rjp^epav d'iro\vTp(a(7e(o<i

el<;

way

the same

there

are

speaking of the relation of Christian

men

23).

in

example, writes in his Epistle


o 7rovr]p6<i

all

veuiKtj/caTe

ou^ aTnerai avrov

their powers (Eph.

vi.

11

17,

30,

iv.

cf.

7),

yet

Rom.

viii.

i.

two different ways of


St John, for

to Satan.

top Trovrjpop

13, 14),

(ii.

St Paul, speaking from a

(v. 18).

summons men

different point of view,

tax

iTrovpavLot,^

Tol<i

yet iv avrat ihihd^drjre. .dva-

f.),

which

to a conflict

compare

will

Jas. iv. 7, 1 Pet. v.

and encourages them with the hope of God's speedy victory


over the enemy (Rom. xvi. 20).
There is nothing strange then if St Paul translated his
remembrance of the prayer for deliverance into the declaration of
9),

a past emancipation.

The prayer

because the deliverance


2 Tim.

(5)

iv.

16

ideally

is

iv

ff,

for deliverance is only possible

an accomplished

fact.

diroXo'yia ovhei<i p,oi

rfj TrpcoTTj fiou

7rape'yveTo...6 Se KvpL6<i fioi irapicrTT} koI iveSwafMCoaiv


ifiov TO KTjpujixa 7r\ripo^op7]6fi koX

ipvcr6r)v

iic

aTopxLTO^ \kovTo<i.

epyov TTOvrjpov Kol adxjei


u>

Tj

Bo^a

Tov^

et?

aKovacoaLV iravTa ra

pvaeTai

et? Triv

fxe,

yu,e

dp^rjv.

eOvr],

koI

Kvpio<; diro iravrb^

^acrCkelav avTOV

alwiva<; toov alcovcov,

iva Zt

ttjv

Here

iirovpdvcoV
in the close

juxtaposition of dTro Trai/ro? epyov TrovrjpoO and et? tt]v jSaaiXeiav

avTov the reference to two clauses of the Lord's Prayer seems


clear.

But

not the passage equally decisive for the neuter

is

interpretation

whole passage

is

To answer

some discussion

this question

of the

necessary.

ipvaOrjv iK aT6p,aTo<; XiovTo^.

from the Old Testament.

Comp.

The phrase

is

evidently derived

AavirjX. .ippvadr]
.

e'/c

aTo/xaTOf

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

]20

\e6vT(ov (1 Mace.

Amos

ii.

60), crooaov

Ik crTOfxaro^; \eovro<i (Ps. xxi,

fjue

It is possible however that


an expression drawn from this source may have a particular
The absence of the article
application, and may refer to Satan.
the
vague,
but rather tends to
imply
that
danger
was
does not
emphasise its character^ If then this reference be allowed, we
should have a close parallel in 1 Pet. v. 8 6 ai/rtSt/co? i5/x&)i/

22); so

12,

iii.

Dan.

20, 27.

vi.

In this

8ial3oXo<; a;? Xicop (opv6fxevo<i TrepiiraTel ^rjTcop Karairmv.

latter passage the


(v.

words in the context ra aina

oXiyov vaOovTa'i

9),

temptation to

(v.

10,

cf.

i.

shew that

6)

regarded as the

here

sin, is

rutv iraOr^ixdrwv

persecution, not

Two

work.

devil's

Satan as the persecutor of the


Church.
On the one hand the Apostle uses the image of the
unsatisfied savagery of the lion, an image not uncommon in the
figures are employed to describe

Old Testament

On

(Ps. xxi. 14, Jer.

name

the other, using the

which elsewhere

in the

of an 'opponent at

ii.

15, Ezek. xxii. 25, Zeph,

iii.

3).

8ta/3o\o? and the term 6 avriBiKo^;,

New Testament

retains

proper meaning

its

he seems to describe the devil as

law'^,'

prompting false accusations against the Brethren before ruling


Thus the two ideas
powers (comp. ii. 12, iii. 16 ff., iv. 14 ff.).
of savage attack and of accusation before rulers are common to
2 Tim. iv. 16 ff. and 1 Peter v. 8^
'

'

Comp.

Matt.

(Hebr.

e.g. iv vii^

V. 25,

Lc.

xii.

i.

2), iv naOei. aXrjOivf

only in a poetical passage (Aesch. Ag,


TJS' 'AyaiJ.i/j.vwv) that the word seems at

is

its

Eph.

more properly

of a party in a lawsuit, whether the plaintiff or

and even here

(Ignat.

i.).

In Classical Greek the word avridiKos

58, xviii. 3.

-41

is

used

the defendant.

It

Upidfiov /u^Yas avTlSiKos, 2>Uvi\aoi civa^

first

more general

sight to bear a

primary meaning gives force to the passage.

sense,

In the lxx.

it

is

words connected with the root 3^ (I Sam. ii. 10,


In Prov. xviii. 17 it is used to translate yi, but the
Is. xli. 11, Jer. 1. 34, Ii. 36).
metaphor is a judicial one. Thus the usage of the Greek Bible is consistently in
used four times as equivalent

favour of the
*

Comp.

viroxfi-plovi

tJ.vos

strict rendering.

oi <t)av\oi

tQ

yivei,

ii. 1,

Psalms,

is

so Ap.

rCiv diKaiuv

The use
unknown among the
ch. xvii.).

dainoves, ixdpalvovres

...

i.

is

Kai Toi/s toioOtovs Stxacrraj ^x<""'J

5): 6 5^ dvTlj;r]\os kuI pd<XKavos

viri^aXe

...

Ntx^jxTji/

...

Jews.

Tj/J-di

irapaaKev-

/cat irovr]p6s, 6

avTCKd-

ivrvx^iv tw apxovTL {Mart. Polijc.

of the figure of a lion to describe Satan

may

not have been

Justin Martyr, in his exposition of two passages of the

very probably following traditional exegesis, though

in the former of these passages he

103 he

ijfjuv

Kal XarpevovTas, ws ovv dpxovras Sai/xoviQvTai, tpoveveiv

(Justin A]},

dfoi/o-i

to

commenting on the words

is

rather thinking of 1 Pet.

i^voi^av

iir' ifik

it

is

v. 8.

possible that

In Dial, ch.

rb ardfia avrwv ws Xiwv 6 apnd^uv

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL


Persecutiou

121

OXE.'

traced to Satan's working notably in the case of

is

And

our Lord's Passion.

and post-Apostolic times

in Apostolic

the same explanation of persecution prevailed ^


tation be adopted, a fuller force

If this interpre-

given to the words

is

o Kvp(,6<; fioi

Chrysostom characteristically
glides from the interpretation commonly quoted as his (Xeovra t6v
koI iueBwdficoaiv

irapea-TT)

Nepcoi/d

every sin

'

referred

is

dfiapriav

Tr)v

7rp6<;

irepov \eovr6<i iarc pvaacrOai


If Satan

22^) into that which I have sug-

he adds koI yap koI tovto, to hvvqOrivaL /ie;^i9

'

dvTCKaraaTTJvat

aXiMaTO<i

ii.

After explaining 'every evil work' as equivalent

gested as possible.
to

H. E.

so Eus.

<f>T]at:

jxe-.

(v.

koX

as I have suggested, in the earlier

to,

clause, it is quite natural that the reminiscence

in the second

was current

Trpdyfiaro';)

may mean

Psalm

21

{v.

concludes thus
aiTwfj.v

Kvvbs]

is,

f.)

He

rj

Xiovra rbv Cipvofxivov

{a-uxrdv fie

vpbs tj

tVa, i)vLKa rnxus

Tov debv, rbv dwdfievov dTrocrrpi^ai trduTa

irov-qpbv

ayyeXov

XajS^cr^a:

ixij

After saying

avrov eXeye rbv

he explains the words which occur

10.5

of the Lord's Passion

prayed

ctt'

2 Tim.

(cf.

applies the words to the Messiah.

Herod, he adds

Again, in chapter

did^oXov.

Greek Jewish prayers

in

He

upv6fievos (Ps. xxi. 14).

that the lion

the

of the Prayer

Further, there

some evidence that the phrase uTro iravTO'i irov-qpov (epjou,

think,

Kai

should be indirect.

clause

evhovvai,

/xrj

pvadrjvai), rov Sia/SoXov.

1.

7}/j.Qv

e^odiji

later

aTofiaros Xeopros),

toO ^iov yifoneda,


[this

dvai.5TJ

^vxv^-

ttJj

e/c

As

in

and he
avra

to.

refers to eV xe'/>^s

to Rabbinic writers, I

merely transcribe a few words from Edersheim Life and Times

ii.

p.

759

'

In

was to have Satan


After a three days' fast it was granted, and the Yetser ha
delivered to them.
Ra of idolatry, in the shape of a young lion, was delivered up to them,..(Yoma,
the time of Ezra, the object of Israel's prayer {Neh.

69

viii.

6)

b).'
1

Compare Apoc.

ii.

10 and

much

For

of the later chapters of the Book.

later

times see the passages quoted above and the references given in Hagenbach Hist,
of Doctrine,
-

Eng. Trans.,

Compare

p. 200.

i.

ifdufa/xovcrde iv Kvpiup

(Eph.

TOV

(Twcrai

Solomon

iK

xiii.

tujv

Si.u}k6vtui/ ttjv

3 drjpia

eiriSpa/JLOi>

^vxv"

Moi')

and the succeeding context.

10)

vi.

the ordinary interpretation be adopted, Ps.

cviii.
is

31 {napia-^r) e Se^iQv

an apt parallel.

Comp.

If

iriurjTos,

also Pgs.

aurois iroviipd, iv tois obovcrtv avrQv IriXXov aapKas

avTuv, Kal ev toIs ixvXais avruv ^dXuv oaTo.

avruv

Kal eK tovtuv dirdvTuv ippvaaro

ij/ias

KVpLOi.
^

Comp. Esther

XiovTos

(i.e.

direXevdepos
<pT]<Tlv.

iv.

10

(xiv. 13) 56j

Xbyov eijpvdnov

Ahasuerus), Joseph. Antiq.


irvdo/xevos

Ti^epiou

6.

to

els

rb ori/xa

/j.ov

eviliirLov

rod

10 Ma/xn/aj 8e rod 'Ayp'nnrov

rrjv TeXevTi}i>...yXwa'(Tig

These passages, referred

Chrysostom's interpretations.

xviii.

tj 'E^palwv ridvrjKev

by Grinfield, certainly support the

Xiujv

first

of

THE lord's prayer

122

the early church.

In the liturgical portion of the Didache

11).

iii.

in

occur Tov pvaaaOai avrr)v diro

passage

we read

1)

(iii.

diro

(fyevye

Travro'i

phrases are found in the Liturgies;

diroTpoTrrju

et?

32),

p.

the words

in

an earlier

irovTjpov.

Similar

thus in that of St James,

pv6/j,uo<; r}fid<i diro Trai/ro? irovTjpov 7rpdyp.aTo<;

Hammond

{x. 5)

and

7rai/To<? Trovrjpov:

(Swainson

Trovrjpou

7ravT6<i

238

p.

f.,

irpdypLaroq

Such phrases should be


p. 320 f., Hammond p. 52)\
compared with the Hebrew prayers quoted by Dr Taylor, Sayings
of the Jewish Fathers, p. 142 f. and in their Greek form they
(Swainson

appear to be
LXX. as Deut.

Job

1,

i.

liturgical

xxiii.

such passages

adaptations of
oTro

<f)v\d^v

TravTO^;

pT]p,aro^

of

the

TrovrjpoO,

aTre^o/iet'o? diro iravrb'i irovrjpov irpdy/xaTO';, Ps. cxx. 7

ae diro iravro'^ kukov, compare Wisd.

Kvpio<i (fivXd^ei
el 6 pv6fivo<;

xvi.

8 au

If then St Paul weaves into his

eK 7ravTd<; /caKov.

words a well-known liturgical phrase, he gives it a special appliThe Lord has rescued me from the enemy once,' we
cation.
may understand him to mean, He will deliver me, if need be,
'

'

One fieOoBeia 8i,a^6Xov


the help of God all will fail.'

again.

According

words

past; others will follow; through

view the reference to the

to this

the Lord's Prayer

is

last petition of

spread over the two clauses, though the key

is

{pvaeTaL...d'ir6...'irov7]pov)

occur only in the second.

explanation be accepted, the passage as a whole

If this

may be thought

to support the masculine interpretation.

John

(6)

deov ov^
Kol 6

18

d/jLaprdvec,

Trovripb<;

Here

V.

ov-)(^

f.

olSafjiev

dX)C 6

ort tto? o yeyevvrj/Mivo'; eK tov

yevvi]6e\<i

eK rov deov rrjpel avrov,

dirreTai avrov.

The

6 yevvr]dei<i refers to the Eternal Son.

nexion of this passage with Christ's prayer


recorded by St John

(xvii.)

for

close con-

His Apostles

has been already pointed out

This close connexion carries with

it

(p.

110).

the probability of a reference

to the Lord's Prayer.

To sum up

this stage of the discussion

the references to the

clause of the Prayer which I have pointed out in the Epistles

are not
^

all

Comp.

of

them beyond

Test, xii, Patr,

Dan

dispute.

But

in each case probability

6 diaTTjprjcraTe ovv iavrov^

For such phrases in the 'Clementine' Liturgy

.avb iraurbs ^pyov

see below, p. 144.

irofrjpoO,

'

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


I believe, been reached,

has,

and

it

123

must be remembered that

the combined force of several probabilities far exceeds their simple

Each

aggregate.

adds to the number

fresh probability not only

of probabilities, but increases the strength of each of those to

The evidence

added.

is

it

which

therefore derived from the Epistles

confirms that derived from the Gospels and supports the masculine
interpretation of aTro rod irovr^pov.

On the

Locality

in

which the Lord's Prayer was given.

In St Matthew's Gospel the Lord's Prayer is embodied in a carefully


framed discourse, which contains many passages which are found scattered
throiighout the other Synoptic Gospels.
St Luke (xi. 1), on the other hand,
distinctly describes the occasion on which the Prayer was given. With regard
to the locality

He was

pass as

evxofifvov),

pass as

He

or,

It came to
he uses a striking though indefinite expression
praying in a certain place (Jv ra eJvai avrop iv rona tiv\ irpoa-It came to
as it may be perhaps more literally rendered
'

'

'

was in a

certain place praying.'

identifying the locality from the context

The

Is there

any

possibility of

incident recorded in the verses which immediately precede

story of the two sisters, Martha and Mary.

vague term: 'And as they journeyed

He

This

is

is

the

introduced by an equally

entered into a certain village'

(tts

But we know from St John's Gospel (xi. 1) that the actual


residence of Mary and her sister Martha was Bethany^. And Bethany, the
same Gospel teUs us (xi. 18), 'was nigh unto Jerusalem, about fifteen furlongs
The certain village
off.'
It was on the other side of the Mount of Olives.
then, which for some reason St Luke does not name, was one which played an
important part in the Gospel history. It was the scene of the raising of
Lazarus from the dead it was the home of our Lord during the last week
before the Passion it was the spot from which He ascended from earth to
KcofiT]v

two).

'

heaven.

The

Lord was praying just before He gave


and as interesting
although St Luke does not record its name. The context leads us to
'certain place' in which our

His Prayer
a spot,
^

to the Disciples

When we

compare

may

well have been as definite

this passage in St

John, Aafopos

aTro BrjOaviai ck rrj^ kuixtjs

words of the same writer (i. 44),


(i.e. probably Capernaum) 'AvSp^ov Kal

"Maplas Kal yidpdas t^s dde\(pTJ^ auTTJs, with the


^i>

5f 6 'I'lXiTrTros aTro Br)d(rai5a, iK rrji Jr6\ews

Herpou,

we may

perhaps, with

Bp Westcott

{ad loc), regard the prepositions as

contrasting their 'actual residence' with their 'true home.'


seriously affect the argument.
diately afterwards

(xi. 30).

Bethany

itself is called

Ku/J.r]

But

this does not

by St John imme-

THE lord's prayer

124

neighbourhood of Bethany, the Mount of Olives, and Jeru-

in the

look for

it

salem.

May

it

not have been

'

the garden of Gethsemane

The name Gethsemane occurs


6

^fyoMfov

(Is X'^P''"'

'irja-oiis

XOipiov ov TO ovofia Tfdcrrjfiavfi.

John

in the N. T.,

the early church.

in

iv. 5,

Acts

Tt6(Tr]fjLavfi,

The word
i.

'

in Matt. xxvi. 36, t6t( tpxerai fitr

and Mc.

avrau

fpxovrai

xiv. 32, Ka\

els

xutplov occui-s seven times elsewhere

18, 19, iv. 34, v. 3, 8, xxviii. 7

and

in every

has the definite meaning of a parcel or plot of land belonging to a


private owner. We must suppose therefore that Gethsemane was an enclosed
piece of ground to which our Lord and His Disciples had some special right
case

it

This

of entry.

nepav tov

fxadrfToi aiiTOv.

fiera

rav

is

borne out by John

xviii. 1, e^fjXdfv

rav KiSpwp onov

xfifj-appov

r}v

Kfjnoi,

8e Koi 'louSas...roi' tottov, oti

ji^ei

avros

elcrffKOiv

noWaKis

avrov

rols nadrjTais

a-iiv

di ov

icat

oi

(Tvvqxd'] 'irjcrovs CKei

jjLadrjTap avrov.

AVhen we turn to St Luke's account of the Agony we find the same vagueness about the locality as we have seen already in his Gospel Lc. xxii. 39,
:

Koi (^(\6a>v (Tvop(v6r) Kara to fdos

(Is to

"Opos

raiv 'EXaicoi/'

qKo'KovOrjaav 8e

tov tottov (in(i> avTo'is ripoa(vx(0'B( p,rj


to suppose that the very prayer which
He bids them pray was immediately suggested by the associations of the
otov irpoa-dxw^^y
actual locality in which He had said to them before
It has been already pointed out
\y(T(...Mfj fl(T(V(yKTjs ^p-as (Is ndpaa-fiovl
y(v6fi(vos d( (ir\

avTci Koi ot fiadrjTai.

Is

(l(r(\6('iv (Is TTdpaa-fiov.

it

too

much

(see p. 61) that the coincidence is far

more

striking in the Syriac Versions,

which may be taken as representing to us approximately the original form of


the words for in those Versions the two words, (1(T(X6('iv and (la-eviyKrjs, are
V,v/ (Aphel) of the same verb*.
but the two voices, ^a\i2. (Peal) and
:

It has also

Lord's

To

mind

been demonstrated that other words of the Prayer were in our


at this

supreme moment

return to the word

xc^^P^o^.

(see p. 108 ft'.).


In Matt. xxvi. 36 the Latin Versions vary

1 The want of a causative voice in the Greek language to correspond to the


Aphel of the Syriac receives a parallel illustration in the case of the root .n e^ i
to go forth,' e^eXeelv. In the following among many other passages the Aphel of this
to make to go forth,' corresponds to the Greek (K^dWeiv, a word which in
verb,
the light of this correspondence will not bear the stress which is sometimes
Mt. ix. 38 ottws iK^dXr] ipydras ('send forth' A. V., K. V.), xii. 35
laid on it.
iK TOV dyaOov dr)ca.vpov eK^dXKei. to. dyadd ('bringeth forth A. V., B. V.), Mc. i. 12
'

'

'

him' A. V., driveth him forth' R. V.),


avrbv ('sent him away' A. V., 'sent him out' R. V.), Lc.

TO iTfeOyua ai/Tov eKJidWei.


v9us (^i^a\(v

tK^aXuv Sua

Brjvdpia

('putteth forth

'

('

driveth

'

('took out' A. V., E. V.),

A. V.,

'

hath put forth

'

Jn.

x.

to.

tdia

R. V.), Acts xvi. 37 Xddpq.

wdura

rjpids

i.

43

x.

35

eVjSdXj?

(K^dXXova-Li>

ii. 25 iripq. 65y e/c^aXoOcra ('sent


Notably in two of the above instances, Mt. ix. 38 and
Mc. i. 12, commentators have frequently been misled by the apparent strength of
It is worth while to compare with the latter passage
the expression in the Greek.
Mt. iv. 1 dvrjxQT) -^1^0 rod Kvevp.a.roi, and Lc. iv. 1 ^yero fv rif irvev/xaTL, phrases which

('thrust us out' A. V., 'cast us out' R. V.), Jas.

them out' A.

seem

V., R. V.).

to represent

two

efforts to escape

from the harshness of

eAc/3dXX.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

125

between 'uillam' (Vulg.), 'locum' (Brix. =/) and 'agrum' (Bezae = f?). In
Mc. xiv. 32 it is rendered by 'praedium.' It is possible that St Luke purposely chose the vaguer word ronoi both in xi. 1 and in xxii. 40 in preference
to the more definite x<t>piov, which would have involved a further description
of the site.
In this case two alternatives would probably have presented
themselves to his mind either to give the name Gethsemane and follow it
by a translation or simply to say that the name of the place was Oil-press,'
:

'

as in xxiii. 33 he says ort rfKdav

('nl

But

rov rbnov rov \ty6}x(vov Kpaviov.

apparently he considered that he had sufficiently defined the locality by


saying inopevdrj Kara to (dos

name Gethsemane

the

(Is

In the omission of

to "Opos tcjv 'E\aiaiv.

his account is in

harmony with

who

that of St John,

contents himself with saying that the Kijnos was a place where 'Jesus

times assembled
ing)

with His

(a-wijxdr),

disciples.'

suggestion of this kind

of exact proof.

allowed to

make

not capable, with the evidence at our disposal,

is

must remain

It

as a suggestion

but

am

glad to have been

connection with the line of argument which has been

it in

adopted in this essay.

(iii)

[J.

Evidence derived from early Christian

Early Christian exegesis


often suggestive

mistakes.

is

not infallible.

decisive,

to ascertain in

of

is

always devout,
it

of grave

It cannot therefore of itself be taken as decisive on

it

has a twofold value.

archaeological value

many

A. R.]

literature.

It

yet sometimes criticism convicts

such a question as that under consideration.


itself

oft-

a word suggesting gatherings for prayer or teach-

for it

But, though not in

It has an historical or

cannot but be of the highest interest

what sense the early generations of Christians, to


was a spoken language, understood the

whom Greek

disputed clause.

Again, early exegesis, so far

coincides with the conclusion which

is

as

its

verdict

based on a consideration of

the modes of thought and expression current in the time of our


Lord and His Apostles, may be regarded as supplying confirmatory

evidence as to the original meaning of the disputed clause.

The

cogency of the primary evidence which we have already discussed


will be strengthened, if we see that it harmonises with the view

which prevailed
all

at a later date.

the more distinctly

if

What

we bear

in

this view

mind the

was

will

of the allusion to the last petition of the Lord's Prayer in


of the passages

now

to be discussed.

appear

incidental nature

many

THE lord's prayer

126

in

the early church.

Didache x. tt/do Trdvrcov ev'^apicrrovfiiv cot on hwaro^ el


So^a et? rov<; aloova<;. jivqcrOriTL, Kvpce, rrj^ KK\T}<Tia<i
aov Tov pvaaa6ai avrrjv diro Trauro^; irovrjpov koX reXeicocraL avrrjv
iv TTJ dydirr] aov, koI avva^ov avrrjv airo tcov reaaapatv avefLOJV,
TTjv dycaaOelaav el<i rrjv crrjv ^acriXeiav, fjv i]T0L/juiaa<; avrfj' '6tl
(1)

aoi

<xv'

GOV

r)

ecTTLV

Many

rj

great caution
liturgical

kol

Bvvafii<;

86^a

77

el<i

tou?

aioJi/a?,

questions about the Didache must


;

none more

still

be treated with

so than the problem connected with the

As

element in this document.

yet our knowledge of

ancient Synagogue Prayers and of their relation to the earliest


Christian liturgies

is

too slight to warrant anything

In what follows

provisional conclusions.

more than

wish wholly to dis-

claim a desire to dogmatise.

The passage quoted above forms

part

the

of

Eucharistic

formula, which the Didachist incorporates in his manual, and to

have had occasion to refer more than once (see above,


f.).
The whole thanksgiving seems to be the resultant,
have already suggested, of two converging forces, Jewish

which

pp. IG

f.,

as I

33

The

prayers and the Lord's Prayer.

answers (see above,

p.

first

section of this formula

34) to the clauses in the Lord's Prayer

Name and Kingdom

which speak of the divine

second section refers to the petition for 'daily

and Will. The


bread.'
There is

nothing to correspond to the prayer for forgiveness.

And

thus we

two clauses of the Prayer as those to which


thanksgiving {v')(^apLarovp,ev aoi on k.t.X.) and this prayer

are brought to the last


this

(fxvi^adrjTc.

.TTovrjpov) refer.

have already suggested (p. 16) that the word BvpaT6<; thus
applied absolutely to God is borrowed from Greek Jewish prayers.
The whole phrase Suj^aro? el crv (where the emphatic av is to be
I

noted) seems most natural

the thought of victorious conflict

if

with the great spiritual enemy of the Church is implied. This


conclusion is to some extent supported by the comparison of a
petition put into Esther's mouth, but probably based on

IG

liturgical

formula [Esther

cryphi

51]: kuI vvv 8vvaT6<;

p.

aTrrfkiTLafievaiV koX

pvaai

iv,

rjp,d<i

(xiv. 19), see

Fritzsch

irdwa^ elcrdKovaov

wv

lirX

eic

')(eipb<i

some

Libn Apo(jxovrj'i

tcov Trovrjpevofievcov

e<^'

Here the reference is to personal enemies. Further, this


'^fidt.
would
be obviously in harmony with many passages of the
idea

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL

New
10

Testament, such as Apoc.

ff.,

Rom.

22

xvi. 20, Lc. xi.

xii.

(|1

10

Matt.

fif,,

xii.

127

ONE.'

xv. 3

f.,

xix. 1

29, Mc.

f.,

Eph.

vi.

27).

iii.

When however we pass from the thanksgiving to the prayer


which follows it, we find in the diro Travrof irovrjpov a different
interpretation of diro rod Trovrjpov suggested.

The Didachist has already used the same


cf)vy diro iravTO'; irovrjpQV

(iii.

1,

comp.

v.

phrase, reKvov fiov,

2 pvadelrjre, reKva, arro

Probably in both places he

rovTQju dirdvTwv).

is

repeating some

current liturgical formula, either directly borrowed from, or based

The passage

upon, Greek Jewish prayers.

akin to 2 Tim.

iv.

18 (see above,

p.

121 f ).

will

then be closely

Assuming

therefore, in

the present state of our knowledge as to the liturgical sources of


the Didache, that there

is

a reference to the Lord's Prayer in this

we conclude

that, though the Didachist in the


word hvvar6<; appears to hint at the thought of the great spiritual
enemy, yet in the phrase diro ttuvto^; irovrjpov, which is probably
derived from some well-known formula, he gives the neuter in-

Eucharistic form,

terpretation of the last petition of the Lord's Prayer.

Ep. Clement 60.

(2)

aov e(f
X^''P'^

r)[xd<i

(^ov

vai, Zecnrora, eirii^avov to Trpoaayn-ov

eh d>yadd iv

elprjvr],

et?

to aK67raadrjvac

T^ KpaTatd koX pvadrjvai diro

Traarj'i

rjfid^

a^apTLa<i

ttj

tw

't]fid<; diro twv fxicrovvTCOv


quoted by Canon Oook. 'In his
notes on this passage,' he writes {Second Lettei^ p. 57), 'the Bishop
marks distinctly the words taken from the Old Testament but

^pa-^iovi aov
j]fMd<;

dBUco'i.

tw

koI pvaai,

vy^ufK.w'

This passage

is

he does not notice the striking fact that, when these words are
omitted, the petition is in accordance with the closing words of
the Lord's Prayer, the same phrase, pvaat

from" being

human

which

diro, '^deliver its

used at the close; and further, that the power from

which deliverance
of

r]ixa<i

is

craved

is

not that of Satan, but of cdl sin and

enemies: presenting in a comprehensive form the sense

have throughout maintained to be expressed by the words

Tov TTovqpov.' This position would perhaps have appeared stronger


if

Canon Cook had noted some words a few lines

earlier in the

same

chapter of the Epistle which might seem to be a reference to

another petition of the Prayer: ac^e?

ra? d8iKia<; koI tu irapaiTTOiixaTa koX

however

to Tromraius'

rifjuv Td<i

dvo/iLa<i tjficov

irXrjfifieXeia^.

koI

reference

Concordance seems to shew plainly enough

THE lord's prayer

128

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IX

Compare

the ultimate source of Clement's words*.


avTol'i

a(f)<;

aZiKiav koX

rrjv

a(^e9 Traa-a'i to<; dfiaprLaf fiov,

d8LKia<: Kol dfiapria^;:

hvvarwv koX
i-^Opwv
Ixviii.

eK

fiov,

fiov

dvofiiwv

etc

fxicrovvTcov

pvaai

fie,

avrwv

(b) Ps. xvii.

20

xxxvii.

15 pvaOeirjv

'x^eipcov

Numb.

tqjv fiia-ovprajv

iic

1.

17

p,e,

fie

i^ i-x6poov fiov

xxx. 16 pvcral

fiicrovvTcov

(c) Ps. xxxviii.

dvo/XLa<; koI

18 dtpaipcov

xiv.

21 pvaerai

iTrXrjdvvOrja-av

rwv

(a) Gen.

dfiapTiav avrwv, Ps. xxiv. 18

ttjv

ol

fie,

fie

fiidovvrh
cv.

K
fie

%et/30<?

dhUo3^,

10 eacoaev avToi/f

9 dirb Traawv

rwv dvofiiwv

Ezek. xxxvii. 23 pvaofiat avroix; diro rraawv rwv


rjfidpToaav iv avral^.

(ov

These three groups of passages put

it

beyond a doubt that

Clement cannot be claimed as a witness in this discussion.


The Ancient Homily (formerly called the Second Epistle
(3)
of Clement) xviii. kol 'yap avrb<; TravOafiaproiko'i^ wv kol firjirco
rbv ireipaafiov, aXX' eVi

(f)irycbv

hia^okov, aTTOvBd^co

We

(ov ev fiiaoi^

opyavoi<i rov

TOi'i

rrjv ZiKaioavvrfv ^iwKeiv.

have a rhetorical reminiscence of the last


two clauses of the Lord's Prayer', which perhaps had just been

seem here

to

said in the assembly.

Besides the coincidence of ideas, the form of the sentence

There

suggests this conclusion.

words
It

ireipacTfiov,
is

is

the familiar juxtaposition of

dWd.

moreover to be noticed that the preacher very frequently

quotes sayings of our Lord in a form which sometimes agrees

sometimes diverges from, the text of our Gospels. Examples will be found in Chapters ii., iii., iv., v., vi., viii., ix., xiii. If
with, but

remarkable that both in regard to words and thoughts Clement has at


much in common with the Benedictus (Lc. i. 68 ff., see esp. vv. 71, 74,
Note the phrase iv 6(ri.6TT]Tt Kal diKaiojovT] (Lc. i. 75, Clem. 48, GO). St Paul,

It is

this point
79).
it

should be remembered, has the reverse order in a familiar passage (Eph.

iv. 24).

See note A, p. 147.


-

Comp.

Shortly after the publication of

TravOafidprrjTOL

noticed this passage

Did.

V. 2.

and ventured

Bp

Lightfoot's letters

on

airb rov irovrjpoO I

to call the Bishop's attention to

it.

In the

letter,

which with his usual thoughtful kindness he acknowledged the suggestion, he


wrote, 'I am certainly disposed to think that the preacher had the Lord's Prayer in
his mind.' Later I stumbled upon the coincidence with the Lord's Prayer in
the Letter of Vienne and Lyons noted below, and communicated it to the Bishop.
From his reply I gathered that he accepted this reference also. These parts of the
in

discussion therefore have, at least for myself, a special interest.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


there are

129

some quotations from apocryphal sources (iv., v., xii.), one


is introduced by the formula, kuI iripa

phrase from our Gospels


Be 7/3a</)7 Xeyei (ii.)^

Three leading ideas of the Lord's Prayer

Kingdom

Will, the

the preacher,
TO

7rocr)<T(Ofiv

deXrjfia

tou 6eov

and are associated together

(xii.), 7repa)TT)del<;...6

tov

7raTpo<;

passage

not, the

am

rjii.d<;

Thus

his mind.

in

(ch. v.), iroLovvre'^

to

earliest

is

and best

new

(xii.),

rj

/SacrtXeta

TroiovvTe'i to

i^/jlwv (xiv.).

reference to the Lord's Prayer be conceded or


of importance

greatly mistaken,' wrote

say of the

avTov

Kvpco<;...7r6Te rj^ei

/SaaiXeia tov 7raTp6<i fiov

rj

But whether the


I

rov KaX6cravTo<i

6e\r]/j,a

iXevaeTai

deXrj^ia

'

the Fatherhood, the

clearly favourite thoughts with

Tou ^picTTOV evprjaofiev dvaTravcnv (vi.), 7roLr]aavre<i to


tov 7raTp6<; (viii.), iKSex^'f^eda ovv Kad^ copav Trjv ^aa-iXeiav

OeXijfia

(xii.),

God are

of

from another point of view.


if in any of the

Canon Cook^

'

of the Fathers, traces can be found, I will not

interpretation of the petition, but of a condition

of spirit in which Christians of all ages, in every. stage of spiritual


life,

are found praying for deliverance from Satan.'


It is remarkable that the preacher of the

sermon which has come down


He, like St Paul,

is

It

of course

is

to us took a widely different view.

true that the

is

no discharge in that

Fathers not unfrequently

example of St John and, taking an

follow the

Christian

profoundly conscious that he has to contend

against supernatural foes and that 'there


war.'

earliest

view

idealistic

of the Christian man's position, speak of Satan as already con-

quered ^

This

natural to

was perhaps

conception

idealistic

them because they

felt

all

the more

the contrast between the purity

and peace of the persecuted Church and, on the other hand, the
foulness and the inhumanity of the dominant paganism.
Sometimes also for then, as now, piety and exact thought did not
always go hand in hand we find in early Christian literature

teaching on this subject not of the


passages in the 'Shepherd
1

Comp.

A Second

^
i.

p.

xiv.

{to,

^i^Xla Kal

Letter

to the

Bp

oi

'

fall

under

soberest

order.

this category.

Several

Thus, 'Turn

dTricrroXot).

of London p. 61.

See, for example, the passages collected in

Hagenbach

Hist, of Doctrines, E. T.,

204.
c.

THE lord's prayer

130
ye, ye

who walk

THE EARLY CHURCH.

IN

commandments

in the

of the devil, in hard

and

and cruel lasciviousness, and fear not the devil, for in him
For I will be with you, I, the
there is no power against you.
Angel of Repentance, who have dominion over him. The devil
hath nought but fear, and his fear hath no force. Fear him not
therefore, and he will flee from you. ...The threatening of the
for he is without force like the sinew of a
devil fear ye not at all
This strain of teaching runs through
corpse (Mand. xii. 4, 6).
It would howevei- be as unfortunate to take the
the whole book.
bitter

'

'

Shepherd

'

as a standard of the S(iber doctrinal conclusions of

the Church

the Second Century as

in

that the Pilgrim's Progress

is

Both books

Christians in the Seventeenth.


of,

would be to assume

it

an index of the belief of English


alike are illustrations

and tended to perpetuate, certain popular fashions of religious

To what unbalanced

thought.

of the Christian position led

is

expressions

such popular views

seen in the request for baptism

put into the mouth of the heroine of a religious romance current

however generally

in TertuUian's time, which,


its

me

seal,'

the

exclaims Thecla, 'which

and temptation shall not touch me'


(T^paylSa Kai

comp.

inferior, is yet

(i.e.

Baptism),

(fiouov So? /xot rrjv iu XpLo-Tw

a-^^erai fiov irtpaafi6<i

ov')(^

in Christ

is

not

'Only give

points of resemblance to the 'Shepherd.'

without

Acta Paul,

et Thecl. 25,

1 Jn. V. 18).

But there

are not wanting passages in early writers, even in

such a writer as Hernias himself, which shew that the practical

One such passage

instinct of Christian humility asserted itself

from an early Christian sermon has been the starting point of


this

Similarly we read in the Epistle of Barnabas

discussion.

a warning

'

lest

haply, resting as those

we

who have been

called,

fall asleep in our sins, and


assuming his power against us {r-qv Kad' j]fi,cov i^ovalav), thrust
us from the kingdom of the Lord (iv. 13)\ Again, the revelation

so the evil ruler (o irovqpo'i apj^wv),

'

given

Herraas about

to

7roj/7//3ta<?)

servants

is

significant.

of God.

know him by
^

his

When

'

the angel

of

His works are


thei'efore

works... When

evil
evil,

'

(o

a>yy6\o<:

he cometh into thine heart,

anger or bitterness assaileth

Comp. c. ii. (7ifj.pQv ovf ovaCjv irov-qpCov koX aiirov toO fvepyodvToi ^x<"''''<'s
and the passage from Athenagoraa Siipplicatio quoted above p. 100.

i^ovffiap),

r?;?

overthrowing the

rrjv

DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL

'

know thou

thee,

that he

into thine heart,


thee... If a

man

Cometh into
comp.

iv.

inspires

3,

that the angel

of evil

within

is

be very faithful and yet the thought of this angel

man

his heart, that

within thee... When these lusts come

know thou

fF.,

xii.

f.).

or

woman must

sin'

{Mand.

vi.

Hence the anxious humility which

such words as those of Barnabas (ii. 10), We ought,


to be exceeding circumspect {aKpi^eveadai) in the
'

brethren,

matter of our

the evil one should craftily effect

salvation, lest

an entrance issuing
hovrjcrr))

is

131

ONE.'

out of our

in error
life.'

and should hurl us

Two

forth {eKa^ev-

later writers, both of

whom undermay be

stand the petition under discussion to refer to Satan,

taken as the best exponents of the combination of wise fear and


chastened confidence, which was and
istic of

is,

I believe, the character-

On

sober Christian teaching on this subject.

the one

hand

Cyprian, the earliest Doctor of the Western Church, in a passage


{de Oratione Dominica) which will

call

for closer investigation

presently, uses the following words in reference to the closing

clauses

of the

Prayer,

Lord's

'Quando autem rogamus ne

temptationem veniamus, admonemur


nostrae

dum

sic

in

infirmitatis et imbecillitatis

rogamus, ne quis se insolenter extollat, ne quis

superbe atque arroganter aliquid assumat, ne quis sibi aut


confessionis aut passionis gloriam suam ducat... ad versa cuncta

sibi

quae contra nos in hoc mundo molitur inimicus


esse

et firma tutela, si nos

fida

atque implorantibus opem suam

Deus

a quibus potest

liberet, si

praestet^'.

On

deprecantibus

the other

hand

we pray

Cyril of Jerusalem, holding that in the Lord's Prayer

against the assaults of Satan, uses language (Catechesis xvi. 19),

Holy Spirit as the ally and champion sent


from God,' hardly less confident than that of the 'Shepherd':
firj
(f)o^r]$Q)fMv Tov<i 8aLfMova<i /J'J]T top Sid^oXov' jxei^wv yap

when speaking

of the

'

6 r}^(ov vTrepaywvLCTTTq'i' fiouov dvoi^cofiev avTU) Ta^i dupwi.

(4)

e^

0X.779

Hernias Mand.
rfj<i

Comp. the

Kap8ia<;

xii. G.

idv i7naTpa(}ir]T

vfiwv...Kal

BovXevarjTe

intensely practical tract de Aleatoribus 5:

7rp6<;

avTw

rov Kvpiov

Kara

6p6w<i

Quam magna

et larga

domini fidelium, quod in futurum praescius nobis consulat, ne quis frater


SoUicitos esse jussit et provides adque
incautus denuo laqueis diaboli capiatur.
erudites, quoniam hostis ille antiquus circuit pulsans dei servos non uno genere
pietas

temptans.

92

'

THE lord's prayer

132

TO deXrina avrov,

the early church.

in

rot?

laaiv

iroirja-ei

7rpoTpoi<i

v/jlojv

a^aprr)-

/jLaac, KaX e^ere Buvafiiu tov KaraKvpievaai raJv epycov tov BiaComp. ib. 4, iyco yap ea-ofiai fied' vfioov, 6 dyjeXo^; t^?
ySoXoi/.

fieravoia^, 6 KaraKvpievcov avrov.

would be wrong

It

the Lord's

here has

three ideas

of the

dogmatically that the writer

assert

to

Prayer in his mind.

God's

will, forgiveness,

But the agreement


power over Satan

with three petitions of the Lord's Prayer is worth attention.


(5) The letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons (ap. Eus.

H.

". V. 1

avrea-rpaTvyet Be

6).

T^?

Bid

irdaav

v7ro/xovfj<i

ttjv

xapL<i tov Oeov, KaX TOv<i fieu

Be aTvXov<; eBpalov;, Bwa/xevovi

dvTnrapeTaaae

da9evel<i ippveTO'

rj

tov irovripov

opfirjv

et?

eavTov^

eXKvcrai, oi Kal ofxcae i'^^^wpovv [avTtp], irdv elSo? ovecBca/jiov Kai

KoXdaeca

dve')(oixevoi.

reference to the Lord's Prayer seems very probable {ippveTO

But

...TOV TTovTjpov).

doubt

is

ToO

TToyi^/joO

masculiue* ?

Any

remaining

by a study of other passages in


a device of Satan {kot eveBpav

as to this point is dissipated

the letter.

It

was

'

according to

'

TOV ^aTava) that the household servants of certain Christians

invented lying stories against them ( 14). The fury of the


governor and crowd and soldiers was kindled to exceeding frenzy
Satan's ambition {^iXoTLp,ov[ievov tov 'S.aTavd)
it was
some of the blasphemous slanders should be spoken even

because
that

'

'

Christ
In the martyr Sanctus
by the holy martyrs ( 16).
suffered and wrought out His great glory, bringing the adversary
(tov avTiKelfievov, compare 1 Tim. v. 14 f., Zech. iii. 1) to nought
When Biblias had denied Christ, the devil, wishing to
( 23).
'

consummate her condemnation, brought her again


(

When

25).

to

torture

'the blessed ones' stood firm 'the devil invented

At a later stage of the trial Maturus


( 27).
and Sanctus 'endured every torment of the amphitheatre, as
though they had suffered nothing heretofore, but rather had
in many previous conflicts driven back the adversary' (rov dvTifresh tortures'

TraXov, 38).
incited
^

When

all

was

by the Wild Beast

Compare the words

'

over,

{vtto

'

the wild and barbarous tribes

dypiov

of Eusebius [H.E.

ii.

6r)po<>;)

sought to rob the

14) ^ dela Kal inrepovpdyios x-P'-^-The words just above (tJ /xr6\a-

dvawTOfiiv-qv tov irof tj/joO ttjv (p\6ya y tcixos icrivvv.

Xos Koi

rrfs

afdpilnruv iiri^ovXos (roiTr]plai irovqpa. bvva^jn^) define the

meaning.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


Christian of the bodies of the raartyrs
letter the

agency of the devil

133

Throughout the

57).

traced in every detail of the per-

is

and thus the reference in the earlier passage is fixed.


Homilies xix. 2 (Migne P. G. 2 p. 424). Kal
Clementine
(6)
HeTpo'i' dSuvuTov ian ^iol (^uivqv tov ifiou dpvrjaaadai SiSatr-

secution,

KoKou, hio Kal ofjioXoyco

tov irovrjpov, ort 7roWdKi<i avrou

ecvat,

virdp-^eiv o irdura d\r]6U(ra<i eiprjKe St8ao"/<:aXo9...oTt icopuKe rov


TTOuTjpov

&)<?

irdXiv'

fxrj

eiprjKeV

dcnpaTTJ^v

Treaovra

B6t irpoc^acnv

ecrTO}

p.

elpi]iJ.evov

pvaai

'

rou ovpavov i8i]\a}a...Kal

dXXd

Kal avp,^ov\evwv

to vac, vat, Kal to ov, ov'

v/j,oijv

TovTOiv eK TOV TTovrjpov icTTtv.


e^ofiev

e'/c

Trourjpw.

t3

T}p,d<i

dwd
utto

to he irepiaaov

Kal eV ^ TrapiScoKev ev^fj

tov

See

irovrjpov.

above

100.

The
of the

verdict of this passage


petition

questioned

its

the

of

validity.

Lord's

is

Canon Cook, however,

'Those spurious and heretical writings

lay altogether outside the scope of

shrunk from an attempt

clear as to the interpretation

Prayer.

my

argument... I should have

them into any controversy


touching our Lord's teaching or the mind of the primitive Church
{A Second Letter p. 56). The case is materially altered when the
to introduce

'

passage from the Clementines

is viewed in connexion with the


body of evidence from the Apostolic and sub-Apostolic writings

which we have collected and reviewed.

It does not stand alone

as the isolated utterance of misguided separatists.


state explicitly the interpretation

It

does but

which we have found

to

be

implied in writings which are above the suspicion of heterodoxy.

And

further, the one witness outside the

evidence

is

equivocal,

if it

New

Testament, whose

be not adverse to the interpretation

maintained in this essay, becomes here of special importance. The


Didache is a document with strong Jewish affinities. Whether
or no it be an adaptation of a purely Jewish manual or purely

Jewish manuals,

it

speaks with the voice of Jewish Christians,

who, at the time of

its

composition or shortly afterwards, were

regarded as standing upon,


Catholic Church.

if

not outside, the extreme limits of the

Its evidence therefore

shews that the masculine

interpretation of diro tov irovripov was not the characteristic and

proper possession of the Judaising Christians.


(7)

Tertullian.

In

two

treatises,

one of which

is

placed

THE lord's prayer

134

among

his earlier, the other

in

the early church.

among

his later Montanistic writings,

Tertullian discusses the last clause of the Lord's Prayer.


(a)

de Oratione

Ne

viii.

nos iuducas in temptationem, id

ne nos patiaris induci, ab eo utique qui temptat^

est,

absit

ut dominus

Ceterum

temptarc videatur, quasi aut ignoret fidem

cujusque aut deicere

sit

Diaboli est et infirmitas et

gestiens.

malitia...Ipse a diabolo temptatus praesidem et artificem


tationis demonstravit,

Hunc locum
Adeo

dicens, ne temptemini.

teraptati sunt

quia somno potius indulserunt


clausula, interpretans quid

sit,

quam

Ne

temp-

posterioribus confirmat, Orate,

dorainum deserendo,

orationi.

Ergo respondet

nos deducas in temptationem.

Hoc

est enim, Sed devehe nos a malo.


Throughout Tertullian is eager to justify God's ways to men.
To the devil therefore he assigns a double part in regard to
temptation.
He both leads men into temptation (induci ab eo...
artificem temptationis) and he tempts them (qui temptat... praesidem temptationis). It is for this reason (because, that is, the
occasion of the temptation and the temptation itself are to be

traced to Satan, not to God), that the explanatory clause


cording to
(6)

is

added,

malo were neuter, the addition


TertuUian's exegesis would be without points

Sed devehe nos a malo.

If

de Fur/a in Persecutione

dicimus ad Patrem,

Ne

ii.

In legitima oratione,

ac-

cum

nos inducas in temptationem (quae autem

major temptatio quam persecutio ?), ab eo illam profitemur accidere a quo veniam ejus deprecaraur. Hoc est enim quod sequitur,
Sed erue nos a maligno, id est, ne nos induxeris in temptationem

Comp. adv. Marc. iv. 26. Quis non sinet nos deduci in temptationem? Quern
temptator non tiniere, an qui a primordio temptatorem augelum praedamnavit? On the gloss ne nos patiaris i/iduci see above p. 64 ff.
- Canon Cook's interpretation {Second Letter p. 85) of TertuUian's words seems
to me to leave out of sight individual expressions (e.g. qui temptat) and the general
thought which binds together the whole chapter. 'Whether [Tert's.] exegesis is
right or wrong,' he \\Tites, 'it is evident that he understands that prayer to mean.
Let not Satan lead us into a position where we shall be in contact with evil and be
in danger of overthrow and when he adds that the last clause corresponds to this
petition and interprets it, sc. Sed devehe nos a vuilo, his meaning must be, Instead
of suffering us to be led by Satan into such contact, do Thou lead us away from
CL-il, in other words, keep us out of the way of every evil which might imperil our
1

poterit

salvation.'

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

135

Tunc enim eruimur diaboli manibiis,


non tradimur in temptationem.
study of the whole chapter, of which the most important

permittendo nos inaligno.

cum

illi

words are quoted above, shews that Tertullian follows here the
same general line of thought as in the de Oratione. In both
he discusses the relation of temptation to God and to

places

Satan, only in the later treatise he

by circumstances

led

is

regard temptation under the special form of persecution

to

in both

he refers to the illustration of the Disciples in the Garden

in

both places he adopts the same view as to 'ne nos inducas...'

In the

ds

Oratione

in the de

eo';

Fuja

gloss

his
it

is

'

is

ne nos patiaris induci

ab

'ne nos induxeris... permittendo nos

maligned'

Canon Cook indeed, maintaining that


Tertullian

is

a witness on his

side,

finds

the de

in
in

Oratione

conversion to

his

Montanism a special reason for his supposed change of mind.


But in point of fact, had Montanism influenced Tertullian at all
in the matter, it would have influenced him in the opposite

As a Montanist he claimed

direction.

sense
his

be in an especial

to

under the immediate guidance of the Paraclete

were 'spiritual men.'

Had he

would he have hesitated now,

hesitated

before,

he and

still

more

pray for deliverance from the

to

evil one-.

These two passages are


of the
collect

petition

of the

clear as to Tertullian 's interpretation

Lord's

Prayer.

remains however to

It

passages in Tertullian 's writings in which

the oblique

cases

is

used as a

name

'

mains

of Satan.

noticed that such an absolute use of the simple adjective


the Latin idiom, which would rather require

which we find in de Cultu Fein.

ii.

'

malus

'

even in

It should be

ille,'

is

against

a phrase

(Christianus a malo

illo

adjuvabitur in aliquo?) and in Zeno of Verona Tract. 43 (Migne


*

The care and sobriety

noting.

To

of thought which

take a few sentences

mark

'praecedere

the whole chapter are worth

dei voluntatem circa fidei proba-

tionem, quae est ratio persecutionis, sequi autem diaboli iniquitatem ad instrumen-

tum

persecutionis, quae ratio est probationis. ...Nihil Satanae in servos Dei vivi

licebit nisi
2 It

permiserit Dominus.'

will be

remembered that the Catholics of Asia with singular

simplicity

proposed that they should try upon the Moutanists the effects of exorcism, a
proposal which the

M mtanists rejected

(Eus.

H.E.

v. IG,

16).

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

136
p. L.

11

p.

oraues sagittas

496,

The following

mali).

illius

passages seem to be decisive as to Tertullian's usage,


Idololatria
idololatria,

idolo,
'

officiosos

malus

is

'

(a) de

Sed quoniam ita mains circumdedit seculuni


licebit adesse in quibusdam, quae nos homini, non
xvi.

Two

habent.

early

have

editions

The whole scope

(see Oehler).

'

malis

'

for

however

of the passage

in favour of 'malus'; for the universality, not the evil, of the

symbols of idolatry

is

the point (comp. de Patientia

Further, compare

below).

c.

xviii.

Tu

si

diaboli

quicquid ex ea attigeris, id scias esse idololatriam

quem

malus honori idolorum, id

te

annectere.

de Patientia

(6)

v.

est

cum

Porro

nobis

mali

aliquid

c.

ejerasti,

xxi.

per

quaerebat

deus optimus, diabolus

e contrario pessiraus, ipsa sui diversitate testantur


facere, ut

idololatriae,

quoted

x'l.

pompam

neutrum

alteri

non magis a malo aliquid boni quam a bono

editum

possit...Quid

videri

primum

fuerit

ille

angelus perditionis, malus an impatiens, contemno quaerere...


[Mulier] traduce m

[Adam]

ejus,

quod a malo hauserat,

facit

Lata atque diffusa est operatio mali, multiplicia spiritus


incitamenta jaculantis...Certemus igitur quae a malo infliguntur
c.

xi.

sustinere,

ut

hostis

studium aemulatio nostrae aequauimitatis

eludat...Undique igitur adstricti sumus

officio

patientiae adminis-

trandae, quaque ex parte aut erroribus nostris aut mali insidiis

admonitionibus domini intervenimus

Quid ridebat Deus,


ulceris sui redundantiam magna aequanimitate destringeret ? Elsewhere (Apol.
quid dissecabatur

xxii.,

rnaliis,

c. xiv.

cum Job immundam

Animae iii., see Oehler's notes) Tertullian reprecommon pagan exclamation malum as an unconscious
to Satan (cf. adv. Hennog. xi. erit mali finis cum praeses

de Test.

sents the

reference

ejus diabolus abierit in ignem).


ecclesiastical Latin

Thus the usage

of the father of

seems beyond the reach of controversy.

Cyprian de Oratione Dominica.


In the case of Cyprian, as in that of Tertullian (see

(8)

is

p. 27), it

of interest to collect the clauses of the Prayer.

Pater noster qui es in


veniat

caelis, Sanctificetur

regnum tuum. Fiat voluntas tua

Panem nostrum

nomen tuum, Ad-

sicut in caelo et in terra,

da nobis hodie, et dimitte nobis


debita nostra sicut et nos remittimus debitoribus nostris, Et ne
patiaris nos induci in temptationem, sed libera nos a malo.
cottidianum

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


exposition runs

Cyprian's

in temptationem^.

Qua

versariiim posse, nisi

Et ne patiaris nos induci

in parte ostenditur nihil contra nos ad-

Deus ante

temptationibus nihil malo

omnis timor noster

penniserit, ut

atque observatio ad

devotio

et

thus

137

Deum

convertatur, quando

nisi potestas

liceat,

in

inde tribuatur....

Post ista omnia in consummatione orationis venit clausula universal petitiones et preces nostras collecta brevitate concludens.

In novissimo enim ponimus, Sed libera nos a malo, comprehendentes adversa cuncta quae contra nos in hoc

mundo molitur

a quibus potest esse fida et firma tutela,

micus;

deprecantibus atque implorantibus

liberet, si

Quando autem dicimus,


adhuc debeat

libej^a

si

ini-

nos Deus

opem suam

praestet.

nos a malo, nihil remanet quod

quando seme! protectionem Dei


adversus malum petamus
qua irapetrata, contra omnia quae
diabolus et mundus operantur securi stamus et tuti.
Quis enim
vel de seculo metus est cui in seculo Deus tutor est ?
The words which I have italicised put it beyond a doubt that
ultra

postulari,
;

Cyprian's verdict, like Tertullian's,

a malo.

tation of
as a

is

for the

masculine interpre-

In the last sentences indeed he speaks rather

than as a careful interpreter.


But here the
mundus is explained by the in hoc mundo.., inimicus
The closing words are justified by their epigram^.

rhetorician

diabolus

et

just above'^.

The importance of the treatment of the point at


and Cyprian^ is partly literary and partly

Tertullian

On

There

this clause see above p. 64


is

vi.

(seculo renuntiaveramus

jam diabolo renuntiaverat et seculo).


'
Canon Cook, claiming the support
overlooked Cyprian's
stress

on adversa

by

f.

probably a reference to the formula of renunciation at Baptism

Tert. dc Cor. 3 (contestamur nos renuntiare diabolo et

Cyprian Ep.

issue

religious.

comment on

cuncta... a quibus,

cum
of

pompae

comp.

et angelis ejus),

baptizati sumus), de Lapsis 437 (qui

Cyprian as of Tertullian,

(1)

unwittingly

ne patiaris nos induci; (2) laying the whole

he divorced these words from the defining

clause quae molitur inimicus.


*

That Cyprian's exposition was regarded as authoritative

is

clear from the

following passage of Hilary of Poictiers (Migne P. L. 9 p. 943), 'De orationis autem

Sacramento necessitate nos commentandi Cyprianus vir sanctae memoriae liberavit.


Quamquam et TertuUianus hinc volumen aptissimum scripserit; sed consequens
error hominis detraxit scriptis probabilibus auctoritatem.'

where appears to
interpretation

give, as

Hilary himself

else-

do Chromatins and Pseudo-Augustine, the masculine

see above p. 67

f.

138

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

On

one hand, their

the

interpretation of a malo

Testament were

still

evidence

clear

is

when the Latin

as

to

the

current

of the

vei-sions

On

in the process of formation.

New

the other

hand, they give a singularly noble expression to the feelings with


which thoughtful Christian men may regard the prayer for deliver-

ance from the spiritual enemy.


In three passages of his writings, as they are
does Origen give his interpretation of the last

Origen.

(9)

preserved to

us,

clause of the Lord's Prayer.

it

The date

de Omtione 30.

(a)

but

appears to

of the treatise

doubtful,

is

within the Alexandrian period of Origen's

fall

(Bp Westcott in D. G. Biorj. iv. p. 103). 'No


Bp Westcott {D. C. B. iv. p. 124), 'is
from his characteristic ftiults, or more full of beautiful

literary activity

writing of Origen,' says

more

free

thoughts.'

8oKi Be

AovKa^ Std rov

fioL

pacr/jLov, Bvucifiec

KoX eUo'i ye 7rp6^

TOP KvpLou TO

M.r}

lauiyKT}<;

tou fxaOrjTrjf, aTe

fiev

eTTiTOfMCOTepov,

TT^o?

Brj

Be

airo Tov TTOvrjpov, ov)(l oTe ovBajnoo^


Bi

e')(^9pb'^

Br]TroTe

o'loiv

avTov,

0\y]/jLaTo<i

aW'

wj>e\riiJbevoi>,

Toi)?

Tpavorepas BcBaaKa\ia<; to aa^ecTTepov.


6

i^fici'i

et? irei-

BeBLBay^evat koI to 'Pucrac ^fid<; otto tou Trovrjpov.

TrXftoi/a?

pveTat

Be

elprjKivac

Beofxeuovi

r)fia<;

6e6<i

irpoaeKXiv avTiirdkaioiv

rjixlv

eavTov koX virripeTwv tov

fieOoBecwi'

oTe vLKMfxev dvBpel(o<; Icndfievoi,

7rp6<;

to,

avfi/3aiuovTa.
(6)

Origen deals with Psalm xxxvi. in


of these Homilies is circ. 241 A.D.

Selecta in Fsahnos.

The date

a series of Homilies.

(Bp Westcott D.

G. B. iv. p.

They

104).

are only preserved

to

us in the Latin translation of Rufinus, who, as appears from the

language

(e.g.

malignum

vel

malum),

to

some extent paraphrased

the original.
(i)

qui

Hom.

autem

ii.

4.

'

expectant

Quia qui nequiter agunt, exterminabuntur

Dominum,

Apparet quia nequitia

terram.'

praeter cetera peccata.

Unde

ipsi

alia

et hie

quidem

possidebunt

species

mali

est,

sermo divinus alium describit

peccatorem, ct alium nequam, sicut et

cum

haereditate

ibi simili utitur distinctione

Contere brachium peccatoris et maligni, id

est, nequam.
Sed et Dominus in Evangelio diabolum non dixit peccatorem
tantummodo, sed malignum vel malum, et cum docet in oratione,

dicit

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


vel dicit

Sed libera nos a malo.


Definiunt quidam

malignus.

taneam

voluntariam

vel

Et

alibi

Mains homo
Aliud

malitiain.

fecit, sive

nequitiam, spon-

irovrjpiav, id est,

esse

139

est

euirn

per

ignorantiam mala agere, et vinci a malo; aliud est voluatate et

Unde

studio mala facere, et hoc est nequitia.

hoc nomine

7rovT}p6<i, id est,

Horn.

(ii)

V. 7.

mundo exeuntera

hoc

et merito diabolus

malignus vel nequam appellatur.

Venit enim ad imamquamquc animam de


princeps hujus mundi et aereae potestates,

et requirunt si inveniant in ea aliquid suum....Et singula

eorum
et

ad

dixit:

similia
se

invenerint, suae partis

si

eam trahunt

Si vero aliquis imitatus est ilium qui

Ecce veuiet princeps mundi hujus,

quidquam, et

se aliquis ita

si

quaeque

earn defendunt,

est, et sibi

in

et

me non

habet

veniunt quidem

observavit,

isti

peccatores et requirentes in eo quae sua sunt et non invenientes

tentabunt nihilorainus ad suam partem violenter

eum

detorquere,

Dominus eripiet eum a peccatoribus. Et forte propterea


jubemur cum quodam mysterio etiam in oratione petere dicentes
sed

Sed

libera nos a

malo (comp. Justin

Dial. 105, quoted above p. 121).

These passages, belonging as they do

to different periods of

shew that he consistently accepted the masculine


interpretation of the clause.
The theory of Canon Cook (A Second
Letter pp. 30, 62) that Origen was misled here by his love for
mystical expositions,' and that this interpretation was probably
first introduced, as it was certainly first urged upon the Church,
by Origen,' is disproved by the evidence for the general currency
of the masculine interpretation which we have reviewed, and
further by the fact that in the passage from the earlier treatise the
interpretation is introduced by Origen, not as a novelty, but
incidentally and in a matter of fact way.
It is true that in the
Origen's

life,

'

third

passage quoted above

mysterio;
itself,

he uses the phrase cam qaodam

but the mysteHum applies not

but to a particular application of

(10)

The

greatest

of

Origen's

to

the

interpretation

it.

was Dionysius, his

pupils

though not his immediate successor, as head of the


Catechetical School, afterwards Bishop of Alexandria.
In a

successor,

fragment on Luke

xxii.

46 (Migne P.

G.

10

p.

1599) Dionysius

deals thus with the last clause of the Lord's Prayer

Kol Trpoaev'X^ecrOaL 8e ttoXiv iSiSaaKe

firj

efiireaelv

et<i

ireipacr-

THE lord's prayer

140
Koi

fiov'

rovTO

T]v

KaX

hrj

idarf^

fiTJ

r}fid<;

ov TO

vr}vo-)(ev,

Xaco<i

e/MTrecrecu

tJtoi

el<;

fir]

Treipaadrjvai,, pvcrdrjvai he diro

pvaac

elcreXOelv;
firj

fiev

yap

dycoi/t^oiTo,

vtt'

7rvv/j,aT0<;,

VTTO

Tov 8ca^6Xov...Kal avT6<; he

yap

fxev

7rovT]p6<i

7reipaaTrj<; KaKoov'

KaKwv'

yap

hid^oXos

eV

Treipaafiop

toO Trovrjpov

fxev

dvrjxOv yovv

ireipaafMov elcreXdelu,

Treipd^ayv

el<;

ovto^,

dWd

Kvpios eirelpa^ev

(prjcTLV,

6
et?

vtto

Treipaadfjvai

toi)? fiadrjrd'i'

direipaaTO'^ eaTt kukcov'

The passage

7recpaa/iov<i KaOeXKet, ola

Toi/'i

oXedpov cXkcov ^id^eTac,

yvfivd^oov ^eipaycoyel.

ov

p,rjv

6 ^Irjaov'i

6 he de6<; Treopd^cov Trapacpepet cJ?

6e6<;,

koI

eiV Treipaa/xdv elarfkOev

avrov wcnrep a^^et? al-^fidXcoro^'

rov
6

Koi

Be

koX tI 8l-

eh

virepaairi^oL he avTov

eveireae,

Treipaa-fiov elarjXdev tJtol eveireaev.


els

to

r]rTr}de\<i vtto

koX inrofieivwi TreTreipaaraL

ovk

on

rov irovripov,

irovripov'

kuI

Trecpaadfjvai

rovTecm,

Treipaa-fioV

et?

rov

diro

i]/Md<;

to

ept<i,

i/XTreaelu

13]

x.

Treipaafiou ovto^

dvTLa-)(wv

Treipaa/xoV

et?

rifia<;

[1

KUL e<TTiv ev avrd), kuI


Be

THE EARLY CHURCH.

Cor.

{i^TTrjOrjaeTai 8e el
Oeos:),

elaeviyKTj^;

fir)

aWd

irpocredrjKev,

IN

is

he

6e6<i

aTTelpaaro^
6 fxev

yap

eVl acorrjpiav

consistently in favour of

the masculine interpretation. Two points may be noticed. (1) In


an earlier part of this fragment Dionysius gives the neuter interpretation of 1 John
ttuvtI

V. 19, Kal yap dhvvaTov fxaXicrra fiev taoos Kai


dvOpwTTw TO TTavTeXw'i dyev(TT0v 'X^aXeirov tlvo<; hia^Lwvai.

oXo<; ydp,
rjixepoov

(pTjcriv,

6 Kocrfxof; ev tu> TTOvrjpS

tov dvOpcoTTov kottos Kal

KecTaf Kal to irXeov twv

ttovo'; k.t.X.

This interpretation

whatever be the gender of ev tw irovr^pu),


the reference must be to moral evil. (2) In the latter part
of the quotation 7reipaarrj<; KaKwv cannot be, as Canon Cook
is

certainly erroneous,

translates,

'

that KaKwv

for,

a tempter of the wicked.'


is

neuter,

'

The

following clause shews

a tempter to that which

is evil'

It is in

by eV oXedpov in the next sentence.


next witness is Peter, Bishop at the beginning of
The
(11)
Some
the next century of the same great see as Dionysius.
Canons of this Bishop have been preserved to us dealing with the
questions connected with the Lapsi.
They are printed in Routh
Reliquiae Sacrae iv. p. 23
The opening words tell us that
they were drawn up when the persecution, which began in the

fact explained

ft'.

February of 303, had reached the fourth Easter. In the 9th


Canon the Bishop says of those who had courted persecution

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

communion though they had

that they are to he received to

gotten Christ's words

(TK0VT0<;, 7rpoa'ev')(<T0ai

141
for-

/*)

Trpoae^ovcriv avrov to6? XoyoL'i SiSd-

fir}

ciaekOelv

et<?

TretpaafiSv, koI nraXiv iv

^^XV X^y^^v TO) irarpl Kai ^rj elaeveyKT)'^ rjiia.'; et<> Treipaafiov, dWa
pvaac rifia.<; diro rov irovrjpov. The interpretation of this petition is
hinted at in a later passage of the same Canon, where the Bishop

again refers to the warnings of Christ


XiyovTO'i

Kat orav

irepav'

Trjv

v7raaTncrTd<i

StooKcocriv

v/j,d<;

ov yap deXei auTO/ioXeiv


koI

Bopv(f>6pov<;

aXX.'

...

irdXtv dKovo/xev avTov

iv rrj TToXet ravrr], (pevyeTe et?

eKhe-^eadaL

eavToU, yprjyopelv re koX Trpoaev'x^ecrOai, iva


TreLpacTfiov.

Routh

(1)

I.e.

T^9 TTLKpordTrj^

7rp6<;

rbv Tretpd^ovra avrov

Twv

(12)
5

is

15).

is

'iva

irpoa-

25 7roOovvTe<i XvrponOrjvat

rov Bia^oXov.

(3) p.

38

evrj'^ov-

tov virepatpofxevov Kal dvTLKeip,evov...v'irep

iv Tu> aywvt, r^rrrjOevTav viro

asserted,

p.

(2)

al')(^fxaXo3a[a<i

KaTaTToXefifjcrat

vov 8tal36Xov.

'irpoae-)(eLv

His temptation, forty days; after which they


watch unto prayers, Kara/xeXercovTe^ to

Kwqcrri avrw, "Tiraye Zaravd.

fievot

koI

elaiXdcofieu et?

earnestly

Xeyofievov viro rov Kvpiov

d-TTO

fit)

Compare the following passages of these Canons:


p. 24, those who had fallen under torture should fast,

like Christ before

should more

Bia^oXov

irpo^ tov<;

rjp.d<i

The masculine

T7J<;

ttoW^?

interpretation,

/Si'a?

tov

KaKop,rj')(^d-

though not

explicitly

implied by the language of these Canons.

The 'Clementine' Liturgy (Apostolic Constitutions vii.


The date of the other Liturgies and of their several parts

a matter of debate, and the problems connected with their

No

interrelation are complicated.

such difficulties however hamper

the student in an appeal to the 'Clementine' Liturgy.


apart from the rest.

Its integrity

Apostolical Constitutions.

'

is

guaranteed by

its

frequent

and

coincidence

place in the

It represents fairly the pre-Constanti-

nian Liturgy of about the middle of the 3rd century'


Liturgies p. xxxviii),

It stands

it is

(Hammond

probable that portions of

it,

Epistle seems to indicate, reach back to a yet earlier date.

Cook {A Second
which
not

it

Letter

p.

74

fF.)

is

incomplete and

venture to think, from serious misinterpretations.

best course will be to set forth with

which

may with any

Canon

rightly lays stress on the evidence

yields; but his review of this evidence

free, I

as its

with the liturgical element in Clement's

plausibility be

some

is

The

fulness those portions

thought to bear upon the

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

142

interpretation of the last clause of the Lord's Prayer, and then to

draw the deductions which they may seem


have used

Hammond's

The

to warrant.

text

and the references are


to the pages of that book.
I have however compared Hammond's
text witli that in de Lagarde Constitutiones Apostolorum (1862),
and have noted one or two slight variations in the latter text,
designating them by L.
(a)
The Bidding Prayer for the Catechumens' (p. 3 f.). tW...
pvcrrjTai Se aiVoi)? diro 7rda7]<; dae^La<i, Kol fxt] Bw tottov to) oKKoTplcp Kar avTwv.
(i)
'The Bidding Prayer for the Energumens' (p. 5).
(b)
07rei)<;...pv<Tr]Tai toi)<? avTov iKera^ (so L., v. 1. olKira^) diro rfj^ rod
I

is

that in

Liturgies,

'

dWorpiov
Tai<i

iiriTifiijcrr)

tw

Xeyewi^i

twv

Bai/xSvcov

avro^ Kal vvv

tol<s

diroa-rd-

KaraSvvacrTelat;' 6 eTrcTifiijaaf

Kol TO) dp-^eKaKq) Bia^6\(p,

T^9 eiVe/Set'a? kuI pvarjrat rd eavTov vXdap.ara diro t^?

ivepyeiw; avrov (L. avrwv).


for the

same

Comp.
rwv

koX pvcrai rd epya

TTpevfiacrt,,

(h) below,

fxeydXov irarpb'i

(p. 6).

'The

(ii)

Collect'

vie, iiriTLfirjaov rot's irovrjpoi'i

^etpeSy aov k

rov

r?/?

dWo-

rpiov TTvevfiara ivepyeta';.


(c)

'The Bidding Prayer'

for the Penitents (p. 6

rov 1.aravdv viro toi)? 7r68a9 avr(i)V iv

a-vvrp[y{rr)

crrjrai avrov'i diro T179 iraytBo'i

rov Bia^oXov Kal r^?

ottco?,..

f.).

Kal Xvrpco-

rd)(ei,

eirrjpeia<i rcov

Baifxovcov, Kal i^iXrjrat av70v<i diro 7ravr6<; dOefiirov \6yov,


irdcrrj'i

(d)

droirov
'

7rpd^Ci)<i,

Kal 7rovr]pd<;

The Deacon's Litany'

riixwv Ber]6fio/xev' ottco? o K.vpio<i

Kal TTovrjpov 7rpdyfiaro<;.


Kvpto<i
el<i

rrjprjcrrj

ri\o<;,

\ct)i>

(p. 9).

rjfxd'i

(i)

vrrep

rwu irpea^vrepoiv

puarjrat avrov<; diro iravro^ drorrov

(ii)

(L. Biarrjprja-r])

Kal pvarjrat

Koi

ivvoia<i.

vTrep

dWijXwv

BerjOuifxev, orrco^i 6

Kal (pvXd^j}

r)ixd<i

rfj

rov rrovrjpov Kal irdvrcov

avrov
ru>v

-x^dpirt

aKavBd-

ru)V ipya^ofiivcov rrjv dvop,iav.

(e)

'

The Prayer

of the Faithful' (p. 10).

viov <TOV toOto] Trdar]^ dyvoia^ Kal


Toi)? Trdarj'i vocrov

Xvrpwaai

Trovtjpd'; 7rpd^ea)<;.

Kal Trdarj'; fiaXaKia<;, iravro's

\r6 iroifx-

.pvaai av-

iraparrrw fiara,

Kai dTrdrrj's, otto ^o^ov i^Opov K.r.X.


Commemoration of the Work of Redemption'

7rdcrr]<i iirifjpeia'i

(f)

'

dTre6ai'V...Kal

rovrov<i Bt

ird^rj...'iva

rrd6ov<;

olV irapeyevero, Kal pjj^j]

pvarjrai rov^ dvOpcoTTOv^ ck

ri]<i

(p. 17).

Xvar) Kal Oavdrov i^eXrjrai

rd BeafMa rov Bia^oXov, koI

aTrdrr]^ avrov.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


'Invocation'

(g)

OaxTt

Ira ol fieraXa^ovre'i avTov ^e^aio)-

(p. 18).

evai^eiav,

Trpo^

^oXov KoX T^9

irXdv'q'i

143

d(f>aeco<;

avrov

dfiapTij^idTcov

pvcrOooai,

TV')((i)cn,

dyiov

Tri^ei/ /xaro?

rov BiaTrXrjpo)-

6cScnv.

'The Great Intercession' (p. 19). ert irapaKaXovp.ev ere...


Twv ')(eipa^ofiPO)v viro toO dXXorpiov .ottq)^. .Ka9api(Tr]<i ex
(L. om. eV r^?) ivepyeia'; rov irovrjpov.

(h)
virep
ri]<;

(k)

'

The

Benediction'

(p. 23).

evXo'yqaov tov<;

eavTwv au'^eva<; .dyiaaov avTov<;, (ppovprjaov,


Xa^ov, pvaai rov dXXorpiov Kal TravTo^; e')(6pov.

TOi)?

ctol

KeKXiKora^

cTKeiraaov, avri-

. .

review of these excerpts from the Liturgy warrants the

fol-

lowing conclusions.

Prayer

(1)

for deliverance

from Satan

on behalf of those who are not in

full

is

offered, not only

communion with

the

Church, the Catechumens, the Energumens, and the Penitents,


but also on behalf of the Faithful. This appears from the passages
(d)

The occurrence

(g), (k).

(ii),

'Invocation' (g)

is

The term

(2)

implied in (b)

(ii)

of a prayer of this kind in the

especially noteworthy.
o 7rov7]p6<; is

used of Satan \

rot? Trovrjpoh 7rvev/JiaaL...T0v

The name

dXXorplov

is

Trvev-

Further, there can be no doubt as to the use of the term

fiaro'i.

by the scope of the petition and by the


Tov dXXoTpiov'\ and further by the parallels in (b),

in (h), for it is interpreted

words
1

vTTo

necessary to emphasise this point, for Canon Cook (A Secoiid Letter p.


cannot but think it [i.e. 6 aXXorptos] would not have been used here,

It is

76) writes, 'I

had Tou

irourjpoD

been then generally understood as the regular designation of

Satan: that designation does not occur once in this book,'


-

Canon Cook

(p.

i.e.

Apost. Constit.

vii.

76) points out (a) that 6 aWbrpio^, characteristic of this

Liturgy, 'is not, so far as I remember,

common

in other ancient writings'; (h) that

has 'a special force,' representing 'Satan as wholly alien, in the special sense
that he is without place, power, or influence within the region of which Christ is
king.'
He appears to me to be mistaken in the second of these positions. The
word 6 d\\6Tpios is rather equivalent to 6 ixSpb^ which is twice used of Satan
(comp. Lc. X. 19) in this Liturgy (pp. 5, 10, see (e)). This is clear from (k) tov
This meaning, which arose when a foreigner was
aWorpiov Kal iravrbs ex'^pov.
it

regarded as a natural enemy, belongs to the word aXXor/woj in Classical Greek from

Homer onwards.

Comp. Hebrews xi. 34 {irape/x^oXas ?K\t.vav dWoTpluji'). There is


an interesting passage in Justin Martyr Dial. c. 30 which explains the word from
one point of view and which is decisive as to the view which the early Christians
held in regard to the doctrinal question involved in the use of these prayers.

runs thus

on

5^

/cat

airoufiev avrbv

oi

irKXTfvoyTfS eis avrbv,

'iva

airb tCiv

It

aWorpluu,

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

144

where the prayer

is

avTov, CK

dWorpiov

TT}<;

carries with

tov

it (d) (ii), ...kuI

reference to the evil one

This passage

7rvvfjbaTo<; ivpyeia<;^.

pvarjTUL

ijfid<i

tov irovqpov, where the

followed by a reference to evil

is

James (Hammond

in the Liturgy of St

pvaat

Energumens, oVo t^9 ivepyeLWi

also for the

p, 29,

Swainson

men
p.

as

225)

dirb iravTOf TrecpaafjLOv Sta^oXcKov re koI avdpcoiTLVOv-.

r]na<i

The

sense in which the term o 7rovrjp6<; is used in this Liturgy is


perhaps indicated by the epithet dpxeKaKo<; which twice occurs in
it

6 dp'x^eKaKO'; Bid^oXo'i (p. 5), o dp')(eKaKo<i

There are clear references

(3)

6(f)t,<;

(p. 15).

to the last petition of the

Lord's Prayer interpreted as a petition for deliverance from Satan

Only

(i) (ii), (d) (ii), (g), (h), (k).

in (b)
in (c),

(f)

the words Iva

rd Bea/xd

prj^jj

the reference

less clear is

in the last

passage are

This

a comment, at least from one point of view, on pvaat^.


interpretation of diro tov irovrjpov becomes

all

the more note-

worthy if my conjecture (see p. 121 f.) be true that in the Greek


Jewish forms of Prayer such phrases as are found in this Liturgy
itself (p. 9 diro iravTO'i dTOirov koX irovripov irpdy/jiaTO'i, p. 10
TTovrjpd'i irpd^ew'i)

were common.

Cyril uf Jerusalem Cat. xxiii. Myst.

(13)

TovT^ariv oiTb tuv irovqpQv koL irXdvuv

Tuf

p6s

\^7et,
deoO,

iracrt

oh

avTov irKmvovTwv

eii

(pavepov fanv.

yap tQv

Saifxov'ncv,

X070S

t-^s

T]fJ.ai,

ws dffi

pvaat

irpoffilnrov

Trpo(py}Tiias (Ps. xviii.

a eariv dXXorpto

t-^s

14)

deoae^eias tov

iraKai TrpoffeKvvovfKV, rbv deov del 5id 'Iij^oO Xpicrrov avvTr]pr]dT]vai. irapaKoXov-

mode

Justin's

ixiv.

airb

iruev/j.aTd}!', <TvvT7)pri<Tri

crx'^/'^aTOTronjcraj 6

dWd

v. 18.

gests that he

of reference

to

the

petition

[alTovfj-ev,

vapaKoKovfuv)

sug-

quoting a prayer from a very early form of the Liturgy, which

is

is

substantially reproduced in later Liturgies.


^

Compare

Lit. of St

James

Sia^oXiK^s ivepyfiai, Lit. of St

(Hammond

p. 32,

Mark (Hammond

Swainson p. 239), dtrb. irdarji


171, Swainson p. 4) ndaav

p.

aaTaviKTiv ii/ipyeiav Kal dvdpi^wwv irovqpQv iTri^ovXrjv.

Such phrases are common in the Liturgies. A close parallel is found in the
Eniholismus of the Litiinjia Coptitarum S. Cyrilli (Swainson p. 63), libera nos a
malo

actiones diabolicas a nobis remove: insidias per consilia

num omnes

improborum homi-

Similar petitions will be found in Swainson pp. 21, 47


(Satanam...deprime sub pedibus nostris velociter: scandala et eorum autores
inutiles effice.

compesce), 363.
^

The construction

Liturgy.

It

of pvaaadan. with a simple genitive is characteristic of this

occurs in the

comment

of

Gregory of Nyssa on

this clause (p. 174)

words of Chrys. quoted above p. 121. Comp. Xirpuaai avroiis t^s TraXaiSs
I have
irXdvr)^ (Swainson p. 180), Thv...\ahv iXevdepilxra^ aKadapala.^ (id. p. 184).
noticed it also in the newly recovered Greek text of the Apology of Aristides c, xii.,

and

in

evv6pr}<Tf puaao'dai iavrov rod davdrov.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


77/ia9 aTTO

Tov irovrjpov.

pvadfjvac

ev-^^o/xeda.

irovvpof Be o avTt,Keifievo<i Batficov, o^' ov

Cyril

in its place in the Liturgy

Living and the Dead

is

here expounding the Lord's Prayer

between the Great Intercession for the


elra fierd ravra rrjv ev')^r]v Xiyofiev

ff.,

eKeivTiv, rjv 6 aoirrjp TrapeScoKe roc'i oIklol<;

and the

call of the

Further, he

is

In the

ance.

Bishop (or Priest,

explaining

Thus

instruction.

first

145

it

uvtov

11)

in the regular course of catechetical

his evidence

is

of special interest and import-

place catechetical instruction

traditional lines of thought

fj,a6r]Tat<;

rd ayia roU dyioa.

o ipv<;),

and of

exegesis.

commonly followed

In the second place

an exposition of the Lord's Prayer as used in the Liturgy could


hardly be at variance with the general tone of the actual Liturgy

We

itself.

are therefore enabled to judge

of the Liturgy in use at

Jerusalem

what was the teaching

in the

middle of the fourth

century on the relation of the faithful to the temptations of the


for it is to the

devil;

faithful that this petition of the Lord's

Communion must refer.


we must connect on the one hand the
'Embolismus' in the Liturgy of St James (p. 153), which seems in
some form to have been in use at a later time in Palestine (Hammond p. xliii), and on the other hand the evidence derived from
the 'Clementine' Liturgy. The coincidence of two distinct lines of
Prayer when

With

used just before the actual

this evidence of Cyril

liturgical evidence, the

'

Clementine' Liturgy and the exposition of

seems to afford a

Cyril,

of thought

fair indication

what was the tendency


and to

in a very early archetypal form of Liturgy,

enable us to discern what interpretation the devotional instinct of


the early generations of Christians gave to the words diro tov
TTovripov^.

This

is

a convenient point at which to break off this catena of

early expositions of and references to the last petition of the Lord's

Prayer.

To

follow the stream further

would necessitate the disand would thus in-

cussion of Augustine's position as an exegete

troduce us into a fresh region of Church History, that of later


'

Latin Christianity.'

We have

examined

thirteen witnesses.

Some

of these, Clement, Hermas, the Clementine Homilies, Tertullian,

Cyprian, Origen, Dionysius and Peter of Alexandria, the


'

On

c.

'

Clemen-

further evidence to be derived from Liturgies see note B, on p. 151.

10

THE lord's prayer

146
tine'

in

the early church.

Liturgy, Cyril of Jerusalem, have

indeed given evidence

but have been dismissed before the whole truth had been
elicited from them.
The rest, viz. the Didachd, the Ancient
Homily, the Letter of the Churches of Vienne and Lyons, have, so

before,

far as I

know, spoken now

Their evidence
is

the DidachS,

in this essay;

is

may be

for the first

time^

thus summarised.

One

witness, that

doubtful, if not adverse to the view maintained

some explanation however


The evidence

of the adverse part of this

of one witness, who has


been brought forward on the other side, that is Clement, is now
seen to be irrelevant.
One witness, viz. Hermas, is not consistent,
but perhaps on the whole favours the view here taken.
The
remaining ten give clear and ample testimony to the interpretation
which we have already arrived at from a study of the New Testament. They represent different parts of Christendom.
The
Ancient Homily,' as it would appear, speaks from Corinth (see
Bp Lightfoot Clement ii. p. 197 ff.). The Letter of the Churches

evidence can be given.

'

mind

of Southern Gaul shews us the

of these Churches, which

were offshoots from, and in close correspondence with, the AposChurches of Asia Minor. The Clementine Homilies' give us
the traditional view held by Jewish Christians, those probably of
the East (Dr Salmon in D. C. B. i. p. 577). Tertullian and Cyprian
speak from Carthage; Origen from Alexandria and afterwards from
Palestine.
Origen's view is repeated by his pupil Dionysius, and
tolic

'

by Peter, both Bishops of

his early

home.

The

last

the 'Clementine' Liturgy, with whatever Church


nected,

and

Cyril,

who

two witnesses,

it is to

be con-

takes us back to the Mother Church of

Christendom, combine to represent to us a very early devotional


tradition. It is hardly too much to say that the unanimity of these
witnesses,
is

combined with the variety of their character and

conclusive as to the mind of the Church of the

first

origin,

three

centuries.
1

Unless

(1887).

may

except a short note

(p.

124) in

my

essay on 'Chrysostom'

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL

Note on the

A.

147

ONE.'

'Soi^gs' in St Luke's Gospel in relation to ancient

Jewish Prayey^s (see

A comparison of the

p.

128

n.).

Benedictus with Clement's Epistle (see above,

128

p.

n.)

suggests a larger problem of great interest, closely connected with the subject

Synagogue discussed in the Introduction.


has shewn the affinities between the
The further problem
Epistle of Clement and the Eighteen Benedictions.'
Is there any connexion between the 'Songs' of St
at once confronts us
Luke's Gospel (for the whole series must be considered together) and ancient
Jewish Prayers ?
For the purpose of comparison I take those parts of Jewish Prayers
which appear to have been in most frequent use from very early times, viz.,
the Introductory and Concluding Benedictions of the Shema, the Eighteen
Benedictions, the Kadish and the Kedusha (see Dr Ginsburg's art. Synagogue
in Kitto -Alexander Cyclop, of Bibl. Lit.).
Passages the text of which seems
of the relation of the

Bp

Church

Lightfoot {Clement

i.

to the

392

p.

ff.)

'

doubtful

have marked with an

The

(1)

Lc.

1.

49

V.

The Eighteen

Magnificat.
fxeyaka o hvvii-

iTToirjcriv fioi

Comp.

TOi.

asterisk.

Thou

Lord....O

51, (noiijdfu Kparos.

(nnnj
3

Koi ayiov to ovofia avrov.

Benedictions.

mighty

art

Thou

("1133) for ever,

of

mighty acts

"pya).

Thou

art holy,

and Thy name

is

holy.

51

f.

bifCTKopTTiaev inr(pr]cf)avovs 8ia-

voia KapSlas avrav'

dno

icadelXfu

bwaaras

dpovcov Koi vylraxrtv Tajrdvovs,

TTft-

*12 Let

all

proud

men

moment,... Bow them


in our days.

perish in a

down

speedily

Blessed art Thou,

vmt'Tas fV(TrXTj(Tfv aya6a>v kcu ttKovtovv-

Lord, that breakest the enemies in

ras f^aTr((TT(i\ev Kevovs.

pieces,

13

and bowest down the proud.


the righteous and upon

Upon

the pious... let

Thy

compassions, we

pray Thee, be moved.


16 Send us not away, our King,
54

ai/reXd/Sfro

'l(rpa^X

Tov, p.VT]cr6fjvai eXeovf,

TTpos

Koi

rm

Toiis

Trarfpas

(TTTeppaTi

Kadai (KaXrjafV

rip.atv,

avTov

naihos av-

els

tw
tov

'A^paap.
aliova.

empty from Thy presence.


1 That bestowest gracious

benefits

(DnDn)...and rememberest the piety


of the fathers (ni3X nDn)...0 Lord
the Shield of Abraham.
2 Fulfilling

His

truth

to

that sleep in the dust.

102

them

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

148

The Benedictus.

(2)

Lc.

i.

^la-parj'k,

68 tvXoyijTof Kvpioi
oTi

Xaw

\vTpaxriv Tut

Qfos tov
inoirjVfv

koi

(jrf a-Kt-^aro

ovtov.

Lord, our

Blessed art Thou,

God and the God of oiu- fathers, the


God of Abraham, the God of Isaac,
the God of Jacob... Even He that
bringeth a Redeemer unto their sons'

sons for His Name's sake in love.


2 Setting at liberty them that are
in bonds.

*7 Redeem us with a
demption...

Thou,

strong Redeemer.

perfect re-

God, art

Blessed art Thou,

Lord, the Redeemer of Israel.

10 Sound a great trumpet for our


and lift up a banner to
freedom
gather our captives... He that gathereth the outcasts of His people Israel.
14 Establish in the midst of her
;

69
o(K6)

Koi TjytipfP Kepas aoiTr^pias

rj/iti/

eV

[Jerusalem] speedily the throne of

AavelS naibos avrov.

David.
15 Cause the shoot of David Thy
servant to spring forth and let his
;

horn be exalted in Thy salvation.


Lord, that causest
Blessed art Thou,

71 (TWTTipiav

e'l

fxdp^v ^fiav Koi (K

Xtipos navTOiP rdv fjnaovvTav

the horn of salvation to spring forth.


See the passages from the 12th

Benediction quoted above as parallel

r^fias

i\6p(ov pvaSfVTas-

72

f.

TTOirjaai

Kai

fjpitov

tXtoi ptera rav TTarlpav

p.vr]cr6rivai

diad^Ktjs

avTOV, opKOv ov (opoiTfv Trpos

ayias

See the passages quoted above as


parallel to Lc.

i.

54.

Aj3paa/x

TOV naTfpa i^pav.

75 \aTptvtiv avTa
hiKaioavvji

iv

6(n6Tr)Ti

Koi

fpdniov avTov Traaais roTf

13

Upon

the righteous and

upon

the pious....
Father, to Thy
Turn us again,
and make us draw near, our
King, to Thy service ("|mi3y'?) and
5

law

fv

d(f>((rfi

afiapriuv avToiv

{v.

77).

bring us back with a perfect repent-

Thy presence.
May the service (mnV)

ance to
17

of

Thy

people Israel be pleasing to Thee perpetually ^


1

But

This Benediction
it

may

is

probably subsequent to the destruction of the Temple.

incorporate an earlier formula.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


77 Tov dovfai yvaxTiv

crcorripias

tw

Thou

14.9

graciously givest to

knowledge, and teachest

Vaoj avTov.

man

man

imder-

So graciously give imto

standing.

us knowledge and understanding and

wisdom.
6 Pardon

iv di^e'cret d/xapriaJf avrav.

we have

for

78 bia crnKayxva tXfovs 0(ov

79 inif^avai roly iv dKOTti


davarov

KaBrjfiei'ois,

^fxaiu.

Ka\

(tkio.

tov KaTfvdvvai rovs

Upon

13

our Father, for we

us,

have sinned.

Forgive us, our King,

transgressed.

us

let

Thy compassions

Lord our God.


CI^Dm) be moved,
*19 Grant... grace and mercy, righteousness and compassion unto us.
*19 For in the light of Thy countenance Thou hast given to us,

Lord

Law and life,... blessing


and peace. May it be good in Thine
eyes to bless Thy people Israel with

jrdSar rj^Cav els 686v elp^vrjs.

our God, the

abundant strength and peace.


The Benediction at the beginning of
Shetna: Blessed art Thou... who

the

Greatest light... who makest peace...

He

mercy causeth the light


earth and the

in

shine upon the

to
in-

habitants thereof.

The Gloria

(3)

Lc.

14 86^a iv

ii.

eVi yfjs

in Excelsis.
vylriarois

Qta

koI

iv dvdpcoTrois fvSoKias.

elprjVTj

The Kadish:
fer

Conip. Lc. xix. 38 iv ovpava

elp^vrj

peace upon us and upon

We

The Kedusha:

Thy name

Koi 86^a iv v\l/iaT0is.

May He who makes

peace in His high places (VDnD3) con-

^DSJ'a);

prophet

all Israel.

sanctify

in this world as they [the

Angels] sanctify

(DHD

will

as

in the high heavens

it

it is

written by the

(Is. vi.).... Blessed

be the glory

of the Lord from His place.

The Nunc

(4)

Lc.
ov...

29 vvv

ii,

iv

dimittis.

dnaiXveis tov 8ov\6v

2 Loosing

*9

flprjvrj.

May

them that

are in bonds.

its (the year's)

close be...

peace.

31 OTl {l8oV

01

o<j

9a\p.ol p.ov to aoi-

The
it will

great root-thoughts

be seen,

common

The Prayers and


Testament

17

May our eyes

behold when Thou

returnest with compassion to Zion.

T1]pl0V (TOV.

the

salvation, mercy, deliverance, benediction are,

to the

Jewish Prayers and the

'

Evangelical Songs.'

Songs' are of course both ultimately based on the Old


and in this and other aspects the parallels which I have pointed
'

THE lord's prayer IN THE EARLY CHURCH.

150

be compared with those which have been found between the


implied in
Lord's Prayer and Jewish formulas. The suggestion which seems
Zacharias,
these resemblances, viz., that the utterances of the Virgin Mary,

may

out above

Uves were largely based on familiar


They spoke as filled with the
forms of devotion,
Holy Ghost (Lc. i. 67) for they gave a new meaning to current thoughts
and expressions. The Angelic Song took a form which would not be wholly

and Simeon, at supreme

crises of their

psychologically natiu-al.

is

'

'

unfamiliar to pious Israelites.

The Songs' however come to us in a literary form and in a Greek transJewish Prayers
lation. The question then arises, May not the Greek version of
*

used in the Hellenistic Synagogues miderlie the Songs as they are given
There is one piece of evidence upon which I
to us in St Luke's Gospel ?
Psalms of Solomon.' Professor Ryle and
'the
viz.,
wish briefly to touch,
Mr James in their recent edition of these Psalms have in their Introduction
'

'

(p. xci

collected a considerable

f.)

in

Luke

i.

ii."

To

number

of instances of the " similarity in

the Psalms of Solomon] and the 'Songs'


these instances add Ps. viii. 31 (i8ov ol d^^aX/nol avrap

phraseology between our Psalms

[i.e.

compared with Lc. ii. 30, Ps. xi. 2 tfKirjViv 6 Beos 'icrpaijX eV r^
But the Editors do not ofier any
e7n(TK07Tjj avT^v compared with Lc. i. 68.
May not the explanaexplanation of the phenomenon which they notice.
in these Psalms
phrases
the
tion be found in a common source whence
Jewish Prayers
Greek
the
viz.,
derived,
T.
are
N.
the
of
Songs
and in the
have not, so
of the Hellenistic Synagogues ? As Prof. Ryle and Mr James
a few notes
add
to
venture
I
subject,
far as I have noticed, touched on the
to
Solomon'
of
Psalms
'the
of
relation
the
regard
to
in
references
and

(?

7/i(5/)

ancient Jewish Prayers.

(1)

The two Editors draw

attention

(p. Ii)

to the

to that of the
references in the Psalms to the doctrine of retribution and
The second Benediction ('Thou causest the dead to live...
resurrection.

Blessed
quickening the dead in Thy plenteous compassion.
compared
be
should
;
life
to
dead
the
')
bringest
Lord, that

art
it,

Thou,

like the

doctrine.
Psalms of Solomon, was probably directed against Sadducean
I with
xiii.
xii.
10
ff.,
vii.
4
8,
28 f.,
(2) Compare Ps. Sol. ii. 35 flf., iv.

Benedictions 12,

13;

Benedictions 14, 15.

and the Benedictions


of the Psalms,

ii.

Ps. ix. 12
(3)

The

will

v.

Trotw./ i\(ov rolf ayanSxx^v avrou eV

37 f

above

ix.

p. 18)

20, x. 4

ff.,

Ps. xvii.

23 with

between the Psalms

be shewn by a study of the following passages

41 {(vXoyrjTos Kvpios ds top

words which close the Psalm),


viii.

with Benediction 5;

f.

close similarity of thought

xi. 9, xvii.

that the phrases

ro'is

16,

(cvXoyTjror Kvpios 6

dX^e^a, words which close the Psalm),


25 f., xviii. 1 ff. (4) I have suggested (see

ayanaaiv

are derived from Greek Jewish Prayers


Kvptf, TO rXeof (Tov fVi navras: tovs

aldova (vu>niov tcov hov\u>v axiTov,

17, 21, 22, vi. 9

{avrov),

compare

dyan^uras

ae), vi.

toU imoiiivov<nv {avrov)


Sol. iv. 29 (y/wiro,

Ps.

9 (quoted just^ above),

avrov iv d\Tj6(ia.\ xiv. 1 {niaTos Kvpios


X. 4 {to fKtos Kvplov eVt tovs dyanairras
I have also
iraiSetav avTov).
vnoiMivova-i
ro'is
dXrjdda,
avTov
To'is dyan^a-iv
Christian liturgical
pointed out (see above p. 18) how frequent in cjxrly

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


fragments
petition
Vlll.

It

the

is

i^etitiou

the gathering together of the scattered, a

for

which seems based upon the 10th Benediction

34 ((rvvdyayf

8ia<nropap 'icpaiyX

rfjv

151

compare

Ps. Sol.

fXeov Koi ^prfOTOTriTos),

/xer*

xi.

3*.

be remembered that the starting point of this investigation was

will

the fact of a certain resemblance between a passage of Clement's Epistle

(which certainly

closely connected with Jewish Prayers)

is

dictus (see above p. 128

To

sift

and the Bene-

n.).

the matter with real thoroughness would require

among

other

things an attempt to attain to a critical text of the Jewish Prayers, a careful

examination of the Hebrew of these Prayers and of the passages of the 0. T.


Hebrew and in the Lxx, on which the Jewish formulas are

in the original

Such a work

ultimately based.
present.

outside the scope of a note like the

lies

venture however to hope that

problem connected with the

'

Songs

have shewn that there

is

St Luke's Gospel which invites

in

'

thorough treatment.

Note on the bearing of some of


the interpretation of dvo rod

B.

While

I fully

the Offices

and Liturgies on

Trovrjpov (see p. 145).

recognise that only a thorough liturgical scholar can appraise

accurately the value of the evidence of the Liturgies on such a matter as that

under discussion, I think that a collection of passages bearing on the point


may not be without interest and importance.
Baptismal and kindred offices,
(1)
catechumen (Assemani Cod. Liturg. i.
e^elXov

TTjv yf^vx']''

TTovrjpa

x^pa"

Cod. Liturg.

''

iii.

tov BovXov aov

avra
p.

57)

avTov.

fTTiTrjdfvfjiaTcov

(x^^v^-

e'/c

(^)

tov

(a)
p.

In a Greek form for making a

110) there occurs the petition, av

Trovrjpov... fif) trvyxwprycrjjf nveifxari rivi

In a Greek 'Confirmation'

(Assemani

office

we find the prayer pvaai dno tov Trovrjpov kq TraWwi/ rcHv


The term 'the evil one' occurs in the Syrian Baptismal

the Offices of the Patriarch Severus (see above p. 37), Gratias


agimus tibi hac de causa quod dignos eflfeceris servos tuos ut ad sanctum
baptisma accederent et abrenunciarent malo ( ] m . -^ ).' Comp. Cyril, ]\Iigne
rite given in

jP.

'

G. 33 p. 1069 {aTTOTaacropal

croi,

^arava, aol

Jerome Com. in Mat. xxv. 26 (renuntio


tuis et

mundo

tuo, qui in

the term in question


'

maligno positus

est),

idvTj, (puis

With Lc.

ii.

pompae tuae

et vitiis

though in both these passages

be an addition of the writer.

In the Test, xii Patriarcharum the phrase <nr\ayxva

in Zab. 7, 8.

may

rcH TTOvrjpa) koX afioraru) rvpavvcii),

tibi, diabole, et

32 compare Benj. 11 {yvwaiv

yvtbaeus iireix^alvwv rtp

eX^oi's (Lc.

Kaivriv

i.

78) occurs

(pwri^^wv Travra to.

'\(Tpari\ iv crurrjpiq,).

Cyril of Jerus. (Migne P.G. 33 p. 1080) to i-jriopKiarbv tovto fKaiov...dvva,piv

TrjXiKavTTjv Xap^dvei, ucTTe

.Traffas dopoLTovs

toO trovTipoO iKdiuKet.v rds dwapeis.

::

THE lord's prayer

152

The

(2)

Liturgies proper.

groups of passages,

assumed

definitely

(a)

viz.

It will

be best to collect separately three

passages in which

neuter interpretation is

tlie

phrases which bear some resemblance to the last

(6)

the early church.

in

and which may be in some cases indirect references to


The
clearly support the masculine interpretation.
which
passages
;
references given are to Dr Swainsou's Greek Liturgies (unless it is other-

petition of the Prayer,


(c)

it

wise stated), as that

is

the nearest approach to a critical edition.

The Coptic Liturgy, Anaphora of St Basil


(i)
in temptationem, neque permittas ullam
inducas
nos
ue
p. 223),
iniquitatem in nos dominari, imo potius libera nos ab actionibus inutilibus,
earumque cogitationibus, earum motibus, aspectibus earum, illecebris earum
Neuter

(a)

interpretation,

(Hammond

temptationemque extingue

(Hammond

rites

p.

344),

The Koman and Ambrosian


the Gregorian and Gelasian Canon (Hammond

et repelle a nobis,

(ii)

Libera nos, quaesumus, Domine, ab omnibus malis praeteritis,


The Lord's Prayer had preceded, (iii) Mozarabic
l^raesentibus, et futuris.
p.

372

f.),

(Hammond

rite

p.

345)

after the Lord's

a malo, confirmati semper in bono,


formula succeeding the Lord's Prayer.

Prayer the Presbyter says, Liberati


The Galilean rite has a varying

(iv)

Hammond

Nativity, Libera nos, omnipotens Deus, ab

345) gives that for the

(p.

omni malo,

et custodi nos in

omni

opere bono.
Possible references

(6)

and paraphrases.

There are many petitions

in the

Deacon's Litany and elsewhere in the several Liturgies which seek for deliverance from various evils, e.g. Lit. of St James p. 230 f., vivip tov pva-dijvai. ^pai

dno
Koi

iracrrjs

Kivbvvov Ka\ dvdyKTis, alxpoKcocrias, niKpov davarov,

dXlyl/^tai, opyfjs,

Twv avojjuav

234, 250, 280.

Similar prayers will be found on pp. 125, 166, 224,


unfrequently petitions begin with the words pvaai jj/ttay,

tJ^wv.

Not

which yet can hardly be thought

to be expansions of the clause of the Lord's

of the Presanctijied p. 178 dWa pvaai rj/xas (k ndvrwv twp


drjpevovTOiu ras yj/'vxas '^p-cii', Lit. of St James p. 331 piiaai ;/iiaf dno rfjs ipo^tpas
Again, there are other
Koi due^ixvidarov Koi (f)piKTTis rjpepas ttjs Kpiafcos.

Thus

Pnxyer.

petitions of

navTos

Lit.

which the following may be considered a type pvaai i^pds dno


dvOpanivov {Lit. of St James p. 224 f.), ndvra
:

neipaa-fjiov bia^oXiKov re Koi

ndvra neipaapov, naaau uaTaviKt^v ivipynav, Ka\ dvdpunwv novrjpcov


of Alexandria p. 4). These and such like
with
what
seems
to be, if my suggestion (p. 121 f.) be true, a
together
petitions
Jewish litiu-gical phrase, viz. dno Truin-bs nomjpov {npayparos), must be taken
Se (pdovou,

(ni^ovkrjv, dnoBlco^ov a0' ^fxuv {Lit.

into account in considering those passages which

seem

to

make

for a neuter

create a tendency towards expanding the


simple expression of the masculine interpretation and so diluting or elimina-

interpretation.

They would always

In this connexion the following series of passages is very significant


it.
the Scriptural source Eom. xvi. 20 (6 8e 6(oi ttjs ilpr^vrji (rvvrpi-^fi tov 2aTavav vno tovs nodas vp^v iv raxft) the meaning here cannot be questioned
(ii) Rom. I. c. is quoted (with necessary adaptations) in the 'Clementine'
ting
(i)

Liturgy

(Hammond

^. 6)

(iii)

Lit. of

Alexandria

p.

46

f.,

tov 2aTavav koi

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL


TTacrav

avrov rqv ivipyaav ku\ noinjpau Bvvafjup

contere et deprime sub vestigiis

Aethiopum
case

p. 21, omiies hostes et

Thus the primary

velociter.

is certain, is lost in

fjfioiv.

reference to Satan, which in this

process of liturgical development.

Masculine interpretation.

(c)

vnb tovs noSas

avtrrpiyf/ov

eorum liostea visibiles et invisibiles


eorum velociter: (v) Canon Universalis
adversario3 eorum subjice et coutere sub

uuiversos

(iv) Lit. Copt. S. B'tsilii p. 21,

pedibus eorum

153

ONE.'

The

following passages are clear

(i)

Lit.

of Alexandria p. 6 {Cod. Rossanensis), aWa piaat. ^fias dno tov novrjpov Kat eK
T(ov epyuv avrov.
(n) ib. p. 62, dXXn piiaai i^p.as dno tov Trovrjpov...crv yap
i8a)Kas

tm

i^ovcrlav rrarflv indvoi o(pa)v Ka\ aKopnlcov Kn\

rip.'iv

iraaau

rrjv Bvvafiiv

of St James p. 306 fl". (all four MSS. given by Dr Swainson


give substantially the same reading), dWa pvaai ijixas dno tov nopijpov, Kal tK
TOV e^Qpov.

Tav fpywv

(iii)

avToii, Kal nda-rjs

The

avrov.

Lit.

Syriac

enrjpdas Kal p.ido8eias avrov, Kal

(Hammond

p.

78)

much

has a

t()(VT]s

Kal dnaTr]!

simpler Embolismus.

(iv)
The Coptic Liturgies, (a) Lit. Copt. S. Basilii p. 5, omuem invidiam,
oninem temptationem, omnem operationem Satanae et consilium hominum
improborum, impetumque hostium tam occultorum quam manifestorum
depelle a nobis
Tu enim ipse es, qui dedisti nobis potestatem calcandi
serpeutes et scorpiones, omnemque virtutem inimici. Et ne nos iuducas in
temptationem, sed libera nos a malo^ {h) Lit. Copt. S. Cyrilli p. 63, sed libera
nos a malo actiones diabolicas a nobis remove iusidias per consilia improborum hominum omnes inutiles effice. (c) ih. p. 73, libera eos ab operibus
malis diaboli, et contere omnia opera eius sub pedibus illorum velociter.
(v) The Syrian Liturgy of SS. Adaeus and Maris (Hammond p. 280), sed
libera et salva nos a malo et ab exercitibus eius.
:

To

arrive at an approximately correct estimate of the value of this

evidence the following points must be borne in mind

(i)

The evidence

for

found almost exclusively in Latin Liturgies,


which either in their original formation or in their subsequent development
would not be outside the influence of St Augustine's teaching, (ii) The masculine interpretation is found in passages, notably in the diflerent forms of
the neuter interpretation

is

the Embolismus, where the reference to the Lord's Prayer


(iii)

The

variety of the witnesses

to us from the

is

a noteworthy

fact.

is direct and certain,


The evidence comes

Church of Alexandria, probably in the Greek Liturgy of St


of Autioch, from the Coptic Church of Egypt,

James from the Patriarchate


1

With

this

Ethiopic Canon
Satanae,
secretam

it

is

(p. 5),

very instructive

omnem

omnem machinationem
et

to

compare the

parallel passage

in

the

omnem dolum, omuemque operationem


hominum improborum, iitsidtationcmque inimici

invidiam,

manifestam procul fac.quia tu es qui dedisti nobis potestatem calcandi


omnemque virtutem inimici. Et ne nos inducas, Domine,

serpentes et scorpiones,

in temptationem, sed libera et eripe nos ab omni malo.

Satan's enmity in the introduction to the petition


Lit.

quoted above in the text

a paraphrase.

in the actual petition

is

The reference here

to

plainer than in the Coptic

however the reference

is lost

in

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

154-

from the Church of

Adaeus and Maris.

Eiisteni Syria ia the Liturgy of SS.

Again, the passages quoted above from a Baptismal and a 'Confirmation'


OflBce are at one with those cited

from the
which

Liturgies,

(iv)

These different

have not attempted to ascertain, miLst be taken in connexion with the liturgical evidence derived from
the 'Clementine' Liturgy and from Cyril of Jerusalem. These two latter
authorities, the respective dates of which are within certain limits fixed, and
pieces of evidence, the several dates of

whose agi'eement, as we have seen, points to still more ancient liturgical


usage, shew clearly that in their interpretation of the last clause of the Lord's
Prayer the later Liturgies are not introducing an innovation.

Evidence derived from the Early Versions.

(iv).

The

(a)

Syriac Versions.

The importance
than once

approximately

represent

more

of these Versions has been insisted on

in this Essay (see p,

the

39

n,),

original

on the ground that they

Aramaic

our Lord's

of

utterances.

The Old

inserting

Syriac,

the

petition

for

deliverance

in

St Luke, has in both Gospels the following rendering

from

the-evil (-one)

The
and
'

us

Syriac Vulgate has the

it is
')

but

deliver-us

same

translation in St

Matthew,

again repeated (except in regard to the translation of

in the Jerusalem

In St Luke

and the Philoxenian Versions,

the Vulgate Syriac introduces another verb.

The main

may be

points in regard to the evidence of these Versions

briefly stated thus

In the two passages in the New Testament where in the


1,
Greek the neuter interpretation is certain, viz. Luke vi. 45 {irpo(pepei TO irovripov) and Rom. xii. 9 {aTroarvyovvre's to irovrjpov), the
> *^>), the number of course
Vulgate has the definite feminine (|A
depending on the pointing. The former passage is wanting in the

Curetonian fragments of the Gospels,


2,

In the following passages, where the masculine

matically certain,
V.

18, the

viz.

Matt.

xiii.

Vulgate Syriac has

shew that

in

the

first

19, 1 Cor.
i

of these

'^.

v.

L3, 1

John

is
ii.

gram13, 14,

The Curetonian fragments

passages,

which

is

the

most

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


important, the Vulgate
01(1 Syriac.

but repeating the rendering of the

These passages indicate that the simple word (with-

out the addition of

and

is

155

l^-Cut as in

sufficient translation

Luke

45) was

vi.

be a clear

felt to

of the phrase 'the evil man' or,

when

that required to be represented, 'the evil-one.'

In two passages the word

3.

where
is

*^ is gratuitously

introduced

not required by the Greek and where the interpretation

it is

certain.

In St Matthew

38,

xiii.

39 {ra Be ^i^dvid elaiv

TrovTjpov, 6 Se e-)(6po<i 6 cnreipa'i

Syriac has

not

only

aura iariv
in

the

ol

first

clause

tou

viol

The Old

6 Bid/3o\o'i).

but,

as

the

equivalent of 6 Bcd^oXo^, in the second also

In Acts

X.

38

(toi)?

KaTaSuvacrrevofievovi vtto rov 8ta^6\ov)

the Vulgate Syriac represents rov Sta/SoXov in the same way.

These two passages were pointed out by Bishop Lightfoot.

Canon Cook however in his reply passed them over


They are manifestly of crucial importance. For in the

in silence.
first

place

39 clears up, as far as the Syriac is


concerned, the meaning of the ambiguous word in v. 38, and with
it, it can hardly be questioned, that of the other passages in
this rendering of Matt.

xiii.

St Matthew commonly considered doubtful.

some variation

(unless indeed there was

The Version which

of reading in the Greek,

other evidence for which has disappeared) introduced the word as

name

diflferent idea

xiii. 39 could hardly have intended to express


by the same word in vi. 13. And in the second
place the two passages together shew that Q was current as
a recognised name for Satan among Syrian Christians from the
second century and onwards, and thus form a link between the
acknowledged usage of later Syriac writers (see Payne Smith
Syr. Thes.) and that of our Lord's time which is the 'unknown

Satan in

for

quantity

>

in the problem.

'

The

facts reviewed above seem fairly decisive as to the


gender of ] > *"^ in those passages where the meaning of the Greek
must remain uncertain to the scholar who confines his studies to
4.

viz.

Matt.

16, 1

John

accidence,

Eph.

vi.

v.

37, 39, xiii. 38,

iii.

12, v. 19.

John

The

xvii. 15, 2

Thess.

passages in St

iii.

3,

Matthew

here referred to are happily included in what remains to us of the

Old Syriac Version.

THE lord's prayer

156

rigidity in

and

the early church.

judgment we must make allowover-refinement and


interpreting Semitic modes of thought and expression

To sum
ance both

in

up, while in forming a


for

tendency to Western

our

also for the fact that Syriac usage in regard to the

expressing the neuter fluctuated, yet

it

way of
much

does not seem too

to say that the evidence of the Syriac Versions certainly favours

the masculine interpretation of diro rov Trovtjpov.


(b)
The Latin Versions.
The materials accessible at the present time

to the student of

the Latin Versions are not sufficient to insure absolute completeness in results.

Still in

the investigation which follows I hope

that the evidence collected will justify an opinion as to the bearing


of the Latin Versions on the point of interpretation

under

dis-

cussion which will not hereafter require serious modification.

The Old Testament.


(1)
The group of passages in Deuteronomy
19, xxi. 21, xxii. 21, 22, 24, xxiv. 7 is

Versions.
TTovrjpov i^

The type

of rendering given in the LXX.

avroov.

vfjicov

each passage.

The

xiii. 5, xvii.

7,

12, xix.

worth study in the Latin

The Vatican MS.

is

e^apet? top

has rov irovrjpov in

variant ro irovTjpov however would be liable to

done in xiii. 5, xix. 19 (see Tischenimportance to notice that St Paul (1 Cor. v.


13) in a general reference to these passages has rov 7rou7]p6v, and
that Aquila has rov irovrjpov in xxiv. 7 (see Field Hexapld), the

arise in all the passages as it has


dorf).

It is of si-me

only passage of the group of which any rendering of the other

Greek Versions has been preserved. We may therefore conclude


that, though the neuter reading existed, the reading generally
current was rou irovrjpov.
Putting aside the Latin rendering of the verb as unimportant
for our present purpose \ we note four renderings of the noun in
the Latin Versions.
(i)

Malum

is

the commonest rendering.

So

Tert. adv.

Marc.

1 The verb used is the future or imperative of tollere or auferre.


In xxii. 22
however the reading in Ziegler's Fragmenta is eradicahi.'^. Jerome adv. Helvid. c. 4
has eradicabitis. At first sight this word seems to imply the neuter interpretation.

But usage does not confirm

this impression.

Corp. Scrip. Keel. Lat.

p. 537) reads in

(Vulgate, delebit eos).

xii.

Thus the SpecuUim


Deut.

xviii.

12,

(ed.

Weihrich,

eradicabit eos a te

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


V.

14 (comp. adv. Hennog.

Hartel
rich p.

be noticed, takes

malum

dualism he asks, Aliud

Malignum

Hartel

i.

(ed.

should

enim apud creatorem Auferte malum

est

bonum

(Ziegler BruchstiXcke

7 by Lucifer

xvii.

21 by Augustine

xxii.

Quaest.

in

Vorhieronymianischen

einer

Deut.

by the Fragmenta Mona-

762), in xxii. 21, 24

p.

(loc. cit.), it

arguing against Marcion's

given as the rendering in

in

75),

p.

(Migne P. L. 34
censia

is

TertuUian

as neuter; for

de vobis, et Declina a malo et fac

(ed.

de Sancto Athan.

11), Lucifer

75) quoting Deut. xvii. 12, and the Speculum (ed. WeihThis rendering is consistently
460) quoting xvii. 12.

p.

followed by Jerome in the Vulgate.

(ii)

157

Uber-

setzung des Pentateuch, Mlinchen, 1883), in xxiv. 7 by Augustine

(Migne P. L. 34

malignum
(iii)

Augustine (see below

764).

p.

p.

164) takes

as masculine.

Nequam

is

found in

xxii.

22 as given in the Fragmenta

Monacensia,
(iv)

Iniquum

is

found in Lucifer (ed. Hartel

p.

77) who,

it

be noticed, gives three renderings of rov irovripov {to irovrjpov)


The whole quotation runs thus: Testificatus
in as many pages.
will

est iniqua ..facite ei

quemadmodum

nequiter egit facere adversus

fratrem suum, et auferes iniquum ex vobis

iniquum

ipsis

(Deut. xix. 18 f ).

here masculine.

seems
This group of passages is of special interest as giving all the
renderings of 6 Trovrjpo'i which are found in the New Testament.
clear that

It

In Job
Kov(}>L^rac

xxi.

representation
art.

is

30 where the Vulgate has et? rjixepav a.TrcoXela'i


the Old Latin as given in Sabatier's

TTovTjpo'i,

of

Majoris Monasterii (see

Cod.

Vulgate, Diet, of the Bible

iii.

p.

Bp

Westcott

1692) and the Vulgate {Cod.

Amiatinus) both read, In diem perditionis servatur malus. In


such a context it would be very natural to take malus as referring
Thus in the interlinear Commentary on Job printed
to Satan.
with Jerome's works (Migne P.L. 23
to his friend Philip (see D. C. Biog. iv.
antiqui hostis vel impii in hoc mundo.

p.

1437), assigned by some

p.

357), there

is

the gloss,

Again, Gregory the Great

Expositio in beatum lob seu Moralium Libri (Migne P. L.


p.

1117) writes thus on

rum

v.

31

Beatus lob

corpore loqueretur, subito ad

dum

de

*lo

omnium malo-

omnium iniquorum

caput verba

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

158

enim quod in fine mundi Satan hominem ingrediwhere the reference at least in part is to v. 30. If then
we could be sure that this part of the Old Latin rendering of
the Old Testament was pre-Christian (see Bp Westcott art.
Vulgate, D. B. iii. p. 1691), we should have grounds for arguing
convertit: vidit
ens, &c.,

that the passage supplied an important precedent for the trans-

New

the

lation of 6 TTovTjpo'i in

In any case

Testament.

we

see the associations connected with the term malus in the Latin
Bible.

New

(2)

Testament.

In the Gospels the evidence as to the Old Latin

The

abundant.

fairly

is

greatest assistance, especially in regard to

St

volume of Bishop Wordsworth's


volume (p. xxxiii) and to Dr
Hort's Introduction (p. 81) I must refer for the classification
which is adopted in the following table of the MSS. to which I
Matthew,

found in the

is

first

To

edition of the Vulgate.

this

refer.

'African text':

(1)

portion containing

Cod. Palatinus

(i)

Matthew

the earlier chapters of St

Abbott's edition of Cod. Z.

=e

does not contain

begins at

is

detached and

is

(ii)

Cod. Bobiensis

=k

19

xiii.

it

xii.

The

49.

given in T.

K.

contains parts of

St Matthew and St Mark.


(i) Cod. Vercellensis = a, according to
European text
(2)
Bp Wordsworth, has a European' text in St Matthew, a mixed
'

'

'

'

'

text in the other Gospels,

Claromontanus = h.
Matt. V. 25 vi. 4.

(ii)

Cod.

(iv)

'

(3)

Italian text'

'Mixed

(4)

Cod. Colbertinus = c.
(v)
beiensis 2 =
(Lat. vers.) = d.
ff.,.

'Vulgate':

(5)
('

Book

of

(iii)

= L.

Cod. Vercellensis

(v)

Cod.

(iii)

h.

does

Cod. Amiatinus
(iii)

Cod.

Rushworthianus

('

=a

not contain

{^cq above),

Cod. Corbeiensis 1 =/i.

Cod. Sangermanensis

(i)

=q

Cod. Brixianus =/.


(i)

Armagh ') = D.

Lichfeldensis
(vi) Cod.

text':

Veronensis

Cod.

Monacensis

= g^.

= K.

(ii)

(iv)

(vi)

Cod.

Bezae

Cod. Dublinensis

Cod. Egertonensis

= E.

Kenanensis ('Book of

Gospels of

(ii)

Cod. Cor-

(iv) Cod.

Kells')

Mac Regol ') = R.

= Q.

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


Matt.

V.

37.

(1) (2) (3) (5) a

malo

Christi 23, adv. Praw.

de malo
Matt.

(2)
(4)

so Tert. de Praescr. Haer. 26, de

Came

9.

a malo.

(4)

(1)

159

V.

So Hilary in

d.

loco

(Migne P.

39.

non resistere adversns nequam nequam


(3) non resistere malo.
non resistere malo.

malum
non

(5)

(sic) k.

g^.

resistere malo.

a malo EQ.
Aug. de Serm. Dam. in. (Migne P. L. 34
resistere adversus malum.
Matt.

L. 9 p. 9-40).

p.

1258) has: non

vi. 13.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) libera nos a malo.

Tertullian de Orat.

Fuga

viii.

devehe

erue nos a maligno.

ii.

(v.l.

evehe) nos a malo; de

As the phrase

'a maligno' does not,

so far as I know, occur in

any other authority for the 0. L. text,


it is probable that Tertullian here gives an original rendering, as
he not unfrequently does (Dr Hort Introduction p. 78). 'Erue'
however is found in Lc. xi. 4 iny!
Matt.

xii.

35.

nequam homo de nequa thesauro

(1)

Cyprian Ep. 55
(2)

Matt.

xiii.

e.

nequam

(2)

mains

ah

q.

(3)

mains/

Matt.
(1)
^

cited

mains
mains
xiii.
fill

second

k.

malignus

h.

malignus d g.\
malignus DLQR.

c ff^ fi\ g^.


pleriqiie.

38.

maligni
iis.

by Sabatier.

So

19.

mains

(5)

k\

h).

(1)

(4)

nequam

mains homo de malo thesauro profert mala

(5)

(3) (4)

(mala profert

emittit

(58).

f.

e.

taking

its

mali

k.

name from

the Abbey of St Germain, sometimes

THE lord's prayer

160
(2)

f.

nequitiae

a.

f.

IX

THE EARLY CHURCH.

maligni h

Speculum, Mai Pair. Nova


f. maligni/.
(3)

f.

q.

Biblio.

in the

i.

iniqui b (so Augustine

Pars

p. 112).

ii.

maligni c?.
nequitiae c jf!. ^'inequam j^i.
diabuli
nequam
plerique.
nequam
Q.
(5)
Compare Iren. iv. 66, 67. Rursus in zizaniis ait zizania sunt
(4)

f.

f.

f.

f.

maligni... juste scriptura eos qui in abscessione perseverant

filii

semper

angelos dixit maligni.

filios cliaboli, et

The passage

is

of

importance as shewing (a) the interpretation which Irenaeus gave


to

the

Tov

required that

Luke

vi.

'

'

maligni

'

the

that

{h)

maligni

filii

of his author

should be the genitive masculine.

45.

vacat

e.

deliberately

translator

when the context

'

malus homo de malo thensauro cordis

(1)
feret

and

irovripov,

adopted the form

sui

malum

pro-

k.

malus (homo q) de raalo thensauro (cordis sui q) proferet


(profert q) mala h q.
malus homo de malo thensauro cordis sui profert malum/.
(3)
nequam de malo profert malum a. malus homo de malo
(4)
(thesauro cordis sui c) profert malum c ff.^. malus de malo froferet
(2)

malum

(sic)

(5)

Luke
(1)
(2)

has

d.

malus homo de malo

profert

malum.

xi. 4.

vacant e k.
Cod. Vindobonensis (see

Bp Wordsworth

Vulgate

p. xxxii)

eripe nos a malo.

(3)

erue

nos a malo

authorities appear to have

John
(1)

/
:

(cf Tert. de

Fuga

ii).

All other

libera nos a malo.

xvii. 15.

ut serves eos a malo

e.

(2)

ut serves eos a malo h.


ut conserves illos a maligno

q.

(3)

ut conserves eos a maligno/.

(4)

ut serves eos a malo

(5)

ut serves eos de iniquo


ut serves eos ex malo.

When we

c jfod.

turn from the Gospels to the Epistles

we become

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'

161

conscious of the lack of evidence as to the Old Latin texts.


delusive habit of quoting as

Dr Hort remarks

MSS,'

poverty of evidence.'

{Introduction p. 82),
It will

be sufficient

to record the rendering of the

The

'

texts of bilingual

Old Latin the Latin

has obscured the real

'

for

my

present purpose

Vulgate {Cod. Amiatinns), and to

note some of the more important variations as they appear in


The greatest help is derived here as elsePatristic quotations.

where from the monumental work of Sabatier. Unfortunately


none of the passages in the Pauline Epistles, to which I have
occasion to refer, are found in the Freisingen Fragments (Ziegler,
Itala-fragmenta, Marburg, 1876), which appear to give an Italian
'

(Dr Hort, Introduction, Notes on Select Readings p. 5).


Tert. adv. Marc. v. 14 odio
xii. 9 odientes malum.
habentes malum.
Compare the group
1 Cor. V. 13 auferte malum ex vobis ipsis.
text

'

Rom.

of passages from

Deuteronomy

(see above,

p.

156

f.).

Compare

Tert. adv. Herniog. 11 frustra laboramus de auferendo

nobis

That Tertullian took

ipsis.

'

malum

from de Pudic. 13 incesto...quem


words
e

m de Aleatorihus ^

medio
Gal.

'

scilicet

The same interpretation

medio ipsorum.

malo ex

as masculine

is

is

clear

auferri jussisset

de

presupposed by the

Apostolus iterum dixit: eximite malos

vestro.

4 ut eriperet nos de praesenti saeculo nequam.

i.

in loco has de...malo.

Augustine in

loco

and

Jerome

in de Pecc.

Mer.

(Migne P.L. 44, p.


Eph. vi. 12 16 contra spiritualia nequitiae {v. 12)... in die
malo {v. 13)... omnia tela nequissimi ignea {v. 16).
In V. 12 spiritualia nequitiae is as old as Cyprian, Test. iii. 117,
and Tert., e.g. adv. Marc. v. 18. But there are the following
135) has de...maligno.

variations
(ii)

(i)

hostes spirituales nequitiae (Tert. adv. Marc.

spiritualia malitiae (Tert. adv.

Compare

malitia spiritualis {Apol. 22).

Cypr. Fp. 55 (58).


e.g.

in Ps.

Marc.

Iv.

(Ambrose de Parad.

xii.,

9, p.

390).

Migne P.L.

(v)

14),

24, de Jejun. 17).

(iii)

spiritus nequitiae,

(iv) spirituales nequitias, so

(Migne P. L.

iii.

iv.

Hilary often, see

nequitiam spiritualium

14, p. 302).

13 Cyprian [Test. iii. 117, Ep. 55 (58)] has: in die


ncquissimo; Vigilius Thapsensis de Tnnitate xii. (Migne P.L. 62,

In

p.

320)
c.

V.

in die maligno.

11

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

162
In

V.

16

Cyprian has: omnia candentia iacula nequissirai

(i)

(Test,

Sando iii. 7, Migne P. L. 16, p. 786)


Leo (Senn. 39, Migne P. L. 54, p. 266)
tela maligni ignea; (iii) Zeno of Verona (Tract. 43, Migne
P. L. 11, p. 496) omnes sagittas illius mali. (iv) The following
Tertullian has omnia diaboli ignita
glosses should be noticed.
Hilary in an
tela (adv. Marc. iii. 14), tela diaboli (de Fuga 9).
in.

117)

omnia
omnia

(ii)

Ambrose

(de Sp.

tela maligni ignita;

indirect reference has:

P. L.

ignita diaboli tela (in Ps.

jfigne

cxlii.,

9, p. 838).

2 Thess.

3 qui confirmavit vos et custodiet a malo

iii.

(v.

ut liberemur ab importunis et malis hominibus).


2 Tim.

me Dominus ab omni

18 liberabit

iv.

John

13

ii.

xxxvi. 52 (Migne P. L. 14,

in Ps.

12 ex maligno erat... opera eius maligna erant.

iii.

V.

992) has

p.

opere malo.

Ambrose Enarr.
vicistis malum.

malignum.

vicistis

f.

18

malignus non tangit eum...mundus totus in maligno

f.

positus est.

The

readings in 1 Jn.

iii.

12,

v.

18

f.

given above are those of

the Freisingen Fragments (Ziegler, Itala-fragmenta) which in this


Italian text (Dr Hort, Notes on
These fragments unfortunately do not

Epistle probably represent an

Readings

Select

include

It

ii.

13

5).

p.

'

'

f.

remains to review the evidence of the Latin Versions, so

far as it has

been here collected.

the passages

malum
is grammatically certain
Rom. xii. 9, compare Tertullian's comment on
from Deuteronomy (see above, p. 157); nequam is

used in Matt.

xii.

(1) Passages
is

used in Lc.

where the neuter

vi.

45,

35

(1).

(2) Passages where the masculine is for some reason certain


malus is used in Job xxi. 30, Matt. xiii. 19, Lc. vi. 45 (2) (4) d,
1 Cor. V. 13, 1 John ii. 13 f. (Ambrose); malignus in Deut.

xxiv. 7 (Augustine), Matt.


1
vi.

John
45
(3)

ii.

13

f.,

iii.

xiii.

12, v. 18

f.;

19,

38 (translator of Irenaeus),

nequam

in Matt, xiii,

19

(1), Lc.

(4).

In one or two cases where the gender

uncertain, a gloss

is

is

grammatically

inserted in the text which witnesses to the

hold obtained by the masculine interpretation.

Such

glosses are

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL OXE.'


diabuli

nequam

diaboli in Eph.

the

filii

in Matt.

xiii.

38

nequitiae in Matt.

xiii.

the insertion of the word

(5),

Against these must be weighed

16 (see above).

vi.

163

38, which,

should be noticed,

it

MSS,

occurs in representatives of two groups of

Three words, iniquus, nequam, malignus, are used in


(4)
some authorities in passages where malus is also found, (a) iniquus

is

John

xvii.

so found in Deut. (see above,


1.5

The

(4).

passages, in none of which

matically certain, has


is

157), Matt.

p.

rare use of the

word

in

no interpretative value.

19

(1)*, xiii.

thes.), Gal.

i.

38

asterisk

it

45

(4) (5), Lc. vi.

In the

4.

thing, expressed

by a noun

nequam

xii.

naturally used of a person

Matt.

The word

note the gloss of

xii.

35 (1)*,

is

35 (de nequa
applied to a

marked with an
somewhat more
in Matt. xiii. 38 and

in the passages

certainly masculine.

is

(4)*,

two places the word

last

of

(6)

so found in Deut. (see above, p. 157), Matt. v. 39 (1),

xiii.

(2),

the masculine interpretation gram-

is

little or

38

xiii.

this series

is

the use of the superlative, which can hardly be used of abstract


evil,

in

Eph.

vi.

Hence the occurrence

16.

alternative rendering in Matt. v. 39,

xiii.

of the word as an

38

slightly

inclines

towards the masculine interpretation of the doubtful phrase


these verses,
translation of
xiii.

is

malignus

(c)

38 (translator of

certain

(ii)

Gal.

Iren.), 1
4,

i.

noun denoting a thing;

Eph.

John
vi.

in

most important alternative

found in

It is

7rovr]p6<i.

the

is

(i)

13,

ii.

Matt.
v.

xiii.

19 (2) (4)

13 (Vigilius), where

qualifies

it

38 (1) (2) (3)


(4), John xvii. 15 (2) (3), 1 John iii. 12, v. 19, Eph. vi. 16 (Ambr.,
Leo), where the gender is grammatically doubtful, though in the
last

(iii)

passage the masculine

reasons to be certain.

As

is

vi.

is

iii.

v.

18 the gender

to these passages, in the first place


rrovrjpo'; is

class of authorities but occurs in

we ask the

12,

question

why

is

no evidence that malus was used as

that the use of malignus to represent

any one

(Tert.), xiii.

generally admitted for exegetical

In 1 John

masculine, but here there

a translation.

Matt.

13

(5),

18 where the masculine

we

notice

not confined to

each in turn.

Secondly

the word so often takes the place of

malus as an equivalent of Trovr)p6<;. An answer to this question


will be found (a) in a brief study of the use of the word malignus
(b) in two passages from Augustine.
in the Latin Bible
When we turn to the Vulgate as given in the Cod. Amiatinus
;

112

THE lord's prayer

164

the early church.

in

the word used (i) of persons: Job v. 12, viii. 20, Ps.
habitabit juxta te malignus), ix. 15 (brachium peccatoris
(non
6
xiv. 4 (ad nihilum deductus est in conspectu eius
maligni),
et
malignus), c. 4 (declinantem a me malignum non cognoscebam),

we

find

V.

cxviii.

me

115 (declinate a

spiritibus

malignis)

of things:

(ii)

maligni),

Lc.
Ps.

viii.

cxliii.

ab

(curatae

10 (de gladio

22 (cordis nostri maligni), Jas. iv. 16 (omnis


maligna est), 2 John 11 (communicat operibus illius

maligno), Baruch
exultatio talis

i.

John 10 (verbis malignis garriens in nos). To this


group of passages the following given by Ronsch Itala n.
Vulgata p. 333 should be added Prov. xx. 8 non adversabitur ei

malignis), 3
last

quidquam malignum God.

1.

i.

18 (dissipat omue

malum

Vulg.),

Wirceh. (a cogitationi-

xxiii. 22 a malignis cogitationibus


bus suis pessimis Vulg.), Jon. iii. 8, 10 de via sua maligna (mala
Mic. ii. 3
Vulg)...B, viis suis malignis (via mala Vulg) Weing.

Jer.

quoniam tempus malignum

(pessimum

est Fiild.

est

Vidg.).

review of these passages shews that Biblical usage agrees with a


priori probability, and that malignus (= maligenus), the opposite
of benignus,

is

naturally and properly used of persons;

Psalms the word 'malignus,' like the word


technical sense.

If the

word

is

'sinner,' has

applied to things,

it is

in the

almost a

almost ex-

when personal qualities are transferred to them.


The two following passages from Augustine shew that

clusively

sense

characteristic

of

malignus was

explicitly

this

recognised

by

(Migne P. L. 34, p. 764),


he continues: nam
malum)
(auferte
v.
13
after quoting 1 Cor.
scriptum est. Hoc
hie
Graecus habet rov iroviqpov, quod etiam
autem potius malignum solet interpretari quam malum, nee ait to
TTovrjpov, id est, hoc malignum, sed rov Trovrjpov, quod est, hunc
Latin writers

(a) Quaest. in Deut. 39

malignum... Quamvis alitor

unusquisque

malum

vel

illud apostolicum

malignum

alternatives are placed] ex se ipso

acceptabilior esset,

si

hoc

malum

possit intelligi

ut

[note the order in which the


sit

jussus auferre.

vel hoc

Qui sensus

malignum, non autem

hunc malignum in Graeco inveniretur. Nunc autem credibilius


Quamquam possit eleganter
est de homine dictum quam de vitio.
intelligi etiam homo auferre a se malum hominem (Eph. iv. 22
(6) Aug. in Gal. i. 4 (Migne P.L. 35, p. 2108),
seculum praesens malignum propter malignos homines, qui in eo

veterem hominem).

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL ONE.'


sunt, intelligeudum est, sicut dicimus et

malignos inhabitantes

165

malignam domum propter

in ea.

Thus, in passages where malus is found in the oblique cases,


the occurrence of the corresponding case of malignus in other
Latin authorities becomes a strong argument for the masculine
interpretation.

an

oblique

alternative

In Matt.

case

of

v.

malus

37, 39, Lc.

rendering, the neuter

vi.

without

occurs
is

45 (malum), where

malignum

as

an

the certain or the almost

universally accepted interpretation.


In 2 Thess. iii. 3 the a
malo was probably looked upon as a quotation from the Lord's
Prayer, though it should be remembered that with our present
slight evidence for the Latin texts of the Pauline Epistles

we are

unable to assert that no other rendering was current. Thus


we are brought to Matt. vi. 13, Lc. xi. 4. Here three points
are to be noticed (i) the rendering a malo was, we may believe,
:

early fixed by devotional usage.

of the

Greek word and seems

'simplicitas interpretatiouis

Prax.

5,

'

comp. de Monogam.

of

It
to

was the obvious translation

be a precise example of the

which Tertullian speaks

11).

(ii)

Tertullian,

who

{adv.

discusses

the petition in de Oratione and in de Fuga (see above, p. 134 f),


while in both 'J'racts he adopts the masculine interpretation, in the
second of them, which is of later date than the former, characteristically gives the revised rendering a maligno.
His attempt to
introduce this new rendering brings into prominence the inter-

which he had already given of a malo; his failure


strong was the hold which the old translation
had on Christian men.
(iii) The translation a malo must be
viewed in the light of those passages of the New Testament in
pretation

indicates

how

which the word

is

certainly masculine,

and of those

in

which

the use of an oblique case of malignus in some authorities supports the masculine interpretation of the corresponding case of
malus.

To sum up, the evidence of the Latin Versions taken as a


whole, and the decisive evidence of Tertullian and of Cyprian,
whose interpretation

is

repeated by several Latin writers (see

above, pp. 67 f, 137 n.) on whom probably the spell of Augustine's


influence had not rested, are the two sides of an arch which,

meeting together and mutually strengthening each

other, firmly

THE lord's prayer

166

the early church.

in

support the conclusion that the early Latin-speaking Christians


held the last petition of the Lord's Prayer to refer to Satan ^

It remains to bring together in a brief statement the

The record
what

main

re-

of this lengthy discussion of different classes of evidence.

sults

of our Lord's

cannot but think

and teaching

life

in the

Gospels gives

a conclusive confirmation of the view

is

that Christ taught His followers in the closing petition of the

from Satan in his manifold enmity

Prayer to ask

for deliverance

against man.

The Apostolic teaching

of the Epistles of the

New

Testament, the witness of writers of the early Church, several of

whom happen

to

be typical

writers, the choice of

passages in two of the earliest versions of the

words in certain

New

Testament,

supply evidence which powerfully supports the verdict based on

Two

the testimony of the Gospels.

Pauline Epistle (2 Tim.

iv.

17

f.),

passages, however, one from a

the other from what

the earliest Chi-istian document outside the

is

perhaps

New

Testament (see
above, pp. 119 ff., 126 f.), may be considered as ambiguous or even as
adverse. The utmost however which can be said seems to be that
these two passages indicate that the neuter interpretation, which
'

have not the knowledge requisite for the discussion of the Egyptian Versions.
points however I may briefly touch, (i) Canon Cook (A Second Letter p.

On two

can judge, makes good his contention, that the Memphitic version has
Diouysius of Alexandria, as we have
already seen (p. 140), gives the neuter interpretation of that passage.
Should we
not connect the interpretation given in the Memphitic version with that of
44), so far as I

in 1 Jn. V. 19 'lieth in evil (wickedness).'

In the same

Dionysius?
Apocalypse

may

took as regards this

Anyhow

way

the

reflect the position

difficulties which Dionysius felt as to the


which the Memphitic and Thebaic versions

Book (Bp Lightfoot

in Scrivener's Introduction p. 398, ed. 3).

the example of Dionysius shews that

it is

possible to aflQrm the neuter

vi. 13.
The
any presumption as to its intei-pretation of the latter,
(ii) Canon Cook, claiming the Memphitic
Version as a witness on his side, admits that there is some probability that the

interpretation of 1 Jn.

v.

19 and the masculine interpretation of Matt.

interpretation of the former passage in the Memphitic does not raise

Thebaic Version

is

against him.

He

seeks however to break the force of this adverse

evidence by the suggestion that the masculine rendering


Origen.
clearly

On

is

due to the influence of

The answer to this suggestion is two-fold. On the one hand


shewn that the masculine interpretation is not the invention

the other hand,

Origen did, as

it

it

has been

of Origen.

in the one clause of the Prayer of which the genius of

seems, give currency to a new interpretation, both the Thebaic and

Memphitic Versions embody an


'bread of tomorrow').

earlier

and simpler interpretation ('coming

bread,'

'DELIVER US FROM THE EVIL


clearly is grammatically possible,

early times.

dence

is

With

one.

ONE.'

167

was not absolutely unknowu in

these two exceptions the tenour of early evi-

In particular the consideration of the liturgical

many lines converge towards one point, leaves no


doubt as to the way in which the last petition of the Prayer was
evidence, where

interpreted in early times or rather, as I think the whole body of

evidence clearly shews, continuously from the


instinct of the Christian Church.

first,

by the devotional

VIII.
["Oti coy ctin h BACiAeiA
AlooNAC.

h Dynamic ka) h holA

ka'i

'Amhn

eic

toyc

(St Matthew).]

the true text of St Matthew's Gospel has no doxology


at the close of the Lord's Prayer cannot be considered doubtful.
The authorities which add a doxology differ as to the exact form.
The theory, which finds an explanation of some of the problems

That

connected with the Lord's Prayer in an adaptation or expansion


of the Prayer for liturgical use, has in regard to the doxology its

most obvious application. Nowhere except in the petition for


daily bread has early liturgical usage made so deep and lasting
a mark on the Lord's Prayer as in the addition of the doxology.
A brief statement of some of the facts about the use of
doxologies in the early Church may be useful. The complete
discussion of the subject would require thorough knowledge of the
'

'

Jews and Christians alike.


f.
we have a point where

liturgical forms of

In 1 Chron. xxix. 10

liturgical

streams which afterwards flowed widely apart are united.


passage runs thus in the LXX.: evXoyTjTOf
tou alwvo<i koX

6 irarrjp rjp,6)V diro

Cod.

aol: Hebr.

TO Kav-xrj/ia Kol

rj

"TJ?),

Kvpte,

vUt] Kal

rj

e(U9

el,

tov

Kvpie

alu)vo<i.

fieydkcoavvr] koL

?;

The

6 de6<; 'Icrpa//X,

av
t]

(so Cod.
BvvaiJ,i<;

Aral

la')(y<i.

two types of doxologies. The first


doxology begins with the word Blessed.' Such a form occurs
It is
frequently in the Old Testament, especially in the Psalms.
It is found in the New Testathe essentially Hebraistic type.

Here

side

by

side are

'

ment

(Lc.

i.

08, 2 Cor.

i.

3,

xi.

31,

Rom.

i.

25, ix. 5, Eph.

i.

3,

Temple
8), and instances of its use in the worship of the
It is
vi.
13.
Matt.
on
Hebniicae
Horae
Lightfoot's
in
given
are
1 Pet.

i.

THE DOXOLOGY.
very

common

in Jewish Prayer Books.

know, in the

Its absence, so far as I

portions of early Christian

liturgical

suggests that

had not so prominent a place

it

of the Hellenistic as in those of the

The

169

second doxology

is

Ps, xxviii. 1, xcv.

7, ciii.

This type of doxology

Bp Westcott (Hebrews

in the

of the kind familiar to us in connexion


in the

Old Testament as

31, 1 Chron. xvi. 27 should be

common

very

is

formulas

Hebrew Synagogues.

Such passages

with the Lord's Prayer.

literature'

in the

New

compared.

Testament.

464 f) has collected the passages and


has brought out many points of interest in regard to them. Outp.

side the Apostolic writings,

it

is

very frequently found,

exact

its

in the liturgical portions of the Didache, of Cle-

form varying,

ment's Epistle, of the Martyrdom of Polycarp.


are all explained

if

we suppose that

The phenomena

this liturgical usage passed

over from the Synagogues of the Hellenistic Jews into those of


the Christian

'

The evidence

Brethren.'

for this will, at least in

part, appear in the following discussion.

In this form of doxology there are normally four elements


The reference to God croi, aov, avrw, c5. (ii) The verb, which

(i)

is

always, I believe, in the indicative,

icrriv, e.g.

Didache

viii.

2,

The verb however is commonly omitted, always so in


the simplest forms, (iii) That which is ascribed to God, glory,'
(iv) The description of eternity.
'power.'
simplest form is
the
Thus
Clem. 58.

'

(i)

(Tol {(p)

[(ii)

eVr/y]

(iii)

-q

(iv)

eh

86 ^a
rov'i al(ova<; (tcov alcovcov) (afMrjv).

This form
xiii.

21, Did.

found in Gal.

is

*2, *3,

ix.

i.

5,

*Rom.

xi.

36, 2 Tim. iv. 18,

Hebr.

*2, *4, Ep. Clem. 38, 43, 45, 50, 'the

x.

Ancient Homily' 20 (where the simple formula auTw... sums up


an elaborate preface rS fiovw OeS dopdrw k.t.X.), *Clem. Hom. (ed.

Ign. Eph. 1 can hardly be considered an exception.

the Liturgies,
evXoynrbs
/xed'

fiari,

eis

e.g.

Swainson

Clementine Liturgy
'

rovs aiiovas-

ov evXoyrjTos

vvv Kal

'

ad

Kal

p. 136).

a.ny]v.

Lit. of St

el Kal SeSo^air/t^/'os

(rvv

It is

however found in

(Hammond p. 16) a.yios...r7ji 56^t]S avrovJames (Hammond p. 26, Swainson p. 218)

rS

iravayioi Koi dyaffi^ Kal fwoTrotCf) <rov

So in Lit. St Chnju. (Hammond p.


Thus the ancient form was elaborated and Christianised.
eh

tov% aluvas-

afirjv.

irvetj-

119,

THE lord's prayer

170

THE EARLY CHURCH.

The passages marked with an

Dressel

p. 9).

simpler

et? rot)? alwva<;.

Didache

IN

added'.

is

(Ifiijv

In

mark the formula

asterisk have the

all

the passages except those in the

This

last point is of itself sufficient to

as liturgical.

Each of the elements

in this normal form admits of variation


and elaboration. The variations in (iv) are not of great importance.
In the Didache the severely simple 6t<? toi;9 alwva^ is throughout
adhered to. In Clement 64 we find Ka\ vvv koL ek Trai/ra? rot)?

alwva<i
(cf.

14).

2 Pet.

Twv alwvwv, in Mart. Poli/c. 21


Still more elaborate forms occur

iii.

yeved';

Eph.

The elaboration

of

it

In

Tim.

vi.

When

article.

(viii. 2; ix. 4, x.

o)

Longer forms are found in Jude 25 {86^a


Koi i^ovaia), Apoc.

Koi

25,

r)

v.

When

another word

13, vii.

ev^apicTTLa Kal

12

Clem. 64 {ho^a koI fieyaXcoauvT],

BvvajjLi^

koI

t)

Apoc.

i.

added.

is

/neyaXcoavvr) Kparo'i

euXoyia koX

(?)

TLfir)

r]

ij

out of

left

16, 1 Pet. iv. 11 (comp. v. 11),

Didache

(to) Kpdro'i, in the

ao(j)La

Jude

gives rise to very various forms.

(iii)

always has the

added, usage varies, but the variations can be

account.

yevedp

et?

21,

iii.

18.

Bo^a stands alone


is

uTro

in

r)

ho^a koI

Bufafxa Kal

KpaTO'i, rifi^,

tj

tV^i/'?),

r^

comp. 61, 65, Mart.

Polyc, 20, 21).

There

is no variation in regard to (ii), unless the iyivero of


10 should be noticed in this connexion, until we turn to
Thus, to take a single example which will also
the Liturgies.

Apoc.

xii.

illustrate the elaboration of later doxologies, in the

Liturgy of St

James (Hammond p. 48, Swainson p. 324 f.) we find the following


form crot yap irpeireL Kol CTro^etXerai irapd Trdvroyv i^fxcov trdcra
Bo^oXoyia, TLfxr), 7rpoaKvvr}cn<s, koi ev^apicrrla, tm irarpl Kal ro)
:

viQ)

Kal T(p ayicp

TrveiifMari,

vvv Kal

del,

Kal

l<;

tov<;

alwva^

tcov

aicovcov.

The variations in (i) have a special importance, for through


them the ancient form, inherited, as I suppose, from the Jewish
Synagogue, became Christianised. This new stamp was given to
the doxology in one of three ways,
(a) Sometimes the divine
glory
2 Pet.
^

is

This

ascribed to the Son.

iii.

18, Apoc.

i.

6,

But when the doxology

Athan. de Virgin.

Mart.

is

the case in 2 Tim.

Foli/c. 21. 1, 4,

added.

18,

and perhaps in Clem.

of Did. ix. 3 reappears in Coiistit.

13, the a^i-qv is

iv.

Ap.

vii.

25 and in

THE DOXOLOGY.

171

Sometimes Christ is represented as the mediator {8l ov),


xvi. 27', Jude 25, Didache ix. 4, Clem. 58, Gl, 64, 65,
Mart. Polyc. 14 (the Martyr's prayer), 20. (c) Sometimes the
Three Persons of the Trinity are named. I do not think that
this form occurs earlier than the prayer of Polycarp before his
martyrdom, St ov aoi crvv avTa> koi Tri/evfiari dyiw rj 86^a (14)
20, 50.

as in

(b)

Rom.

(q) t) So^a avv irarpX koi ayiw TTvevfUiTi).


In the controversies of the fourth century about the doctrine
of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, the varying forms of doxology,

so 22, 3

which

fall

under the

words of theological

head, were degraded into the watch-

last

For

strife.

this stage of their history

must

it

be sufficient to refer to the locus classicus in Hooker's Ecclesiastical


rolity

The
to

42. 7

V.

ff.*

earliest doxologies, to pass to

begin with a personal pronoun

(c5).

The

insertion of otl

Didache, where

{^ort

a subordinate matter, appear

(crot,

crov),

aov eanv

or with the relative

the

k.t.X.) is as old as

used to introduce the doxology at the close of

it is

two Eucharistic formulas (ix. 4, x. 5), and also at the end of the
Lord's Prayer (viii. 2). Though the form of the doxology at the
end of the Lord's Prayer varied, yet (so far as I have observed) it
always commences with otl^. It may be added that, when the
doxology came into use as a formula complete in itself, or, especially in the Western Church, as the constant ending of the Psalms
recited in worship (Bingham Antiquities Bk. xiv. ch. ii.), the
first element of the normal form was eliminated altogether.
This
adaptation is probably to be traced back through the Gloria in
Excelsis (Apost. Gonstit.

ho^a iv
de

dew

vyjriaToi^

Virgin.

14,

vii.

47) to the Angelic

The grace

k.t.X.).

tract

which

contains perhaps

the

oldest

follows

koX

oiKripfiwv

iX.7jfi(ov

Comp.

preserves

instance
6

the very remarkable form in Eph.

Hymn
meat

after

very

of this

21 {avT(^

i]

ii.

14

Athan.

ancient

forms,

usage.

Kvpia, rpocprjv
iii.

(Lc.
in

It

eBcoKe

56^a iv ry

is

as

toi<;

(KKXijcriq.

Kal

iv Xpi(TT<^'Ir]<Tov).
2

The

familiar words of the 'Constantinopolitan' Creed {to

<Tvv5o^a^6/j.evov) are of
3

course a relic of this

<tvv

warpl Kal

vl(^...

strife.

Thus the doxology was taken in close connexion with the petition for deThus Chrysostom in loco ovkovv el avrov ianv /3a(rtXo,

liverance from Satan.


ovdiva SeSoiKivai XPV>
Siavffxo/xivov.

^'''^

ouSevds ovtos tov avdiffrafiivov,

ij

Kal irpot avrov rrjv apxV"

THE lord's prayer

172

avTov So^a narpl

(f)0^ovfievoi<;

vvv Kol ae\ koI

From

in

the early church.

the form of the doxologies

they occupy

vlw koI dyto) irvevfJUiTt kol

teal

et? rot)? ala)va<i.

we tura

early Christian writings.

in

Apostolic Epistles,

it is

are quoted,

'

For

If

we put

which

aside tho

true to say that they are found with but

few exceptions in a liturgical context.


the prayer of Polycarp

to the position

when

this cause,

This becomes clear as to

the words which precede the doxology

yea and

for all things, I praise

Thee,

and heavenly
High Priest, Thy beloved Son, through Whom to Thee with Him
and the Holy Spirit be glory both now [and ever] and for the
ages to come.
Here Bp Lightfoot draws attention to
Amen.'
the close parallel between these words and the Gloria in Excelsis
as given in Apost. Gonstit. vii. 47, and notes the liturgical
complexion of the words which follow, dva7r/x-\lravTo<; Be avrov ro
Polycarp in fact
65, 67).
dfirjv (comp. e.g. Justin Martyr Apol.
is represented as using when he came to die a form of prayer
closely akin to that which he had often used as o TrpoecrTw?, to
I bless Thee, I glorify Thee, through the eternal

i.

quote Justin's phrase, in the congregation.

What

Polycarp did in the hour of his

fiery

triumph, Clement

In the prayer at the close of the


Epistle, in which two of the doxologies referred to above are

does

through his

all

letter.

found, 'his language,' says Bishop Lightfoot, 'naturally runs into

those antithetical forms and measured cadences which his minis-

Church had rendered habitual with him.' But


this is not all.
The litany at the close is only the climax of the
epistle, which may be regarded as one long psalm of praise and
thanksgiving on the glories of nature and of grace (Bp Lightfoot

trations in the

'

'

Clement

i.

p. 386)'.

Even more instructive is the study of the doxologies in the


Here there are three forms of doxology. {a) The simple

Didache.

form aol

rj

ho^a

over the cup

el<i

(ix.

roz)? al(ova<i.

2),

This occurs in the thanksgiving

over the bread {to K\.dafia)

(ix. 3),

twice

(x,

1
Two points in detail may be noticed, (a) three doxologies occur in close connexion with the mention of the divine Name (4;:J, 4o, 64) {b) the parallel between
oi;ros...eXX67t/iios idTai eis rbv dpidfibv tQv aw^oixivuv 5(a 'L Xp., 5t' ov k.t.X. (58, see Bp
;

Lightfoot's note) and Mart. Polijc. 14 {tov "Ka^tlv

fie fiipos

(v dpi9/j.(^ tCiv /xapTupuv).

THE DOXOLOGY.
the

in

4)

2,

Eucharistic

The

ifj,7r\i](rdr}vat).

l73

Communion

formula after

(/jLera

to

substantial identity of this form with that

found in the Apostolic Epistles and in Clement has already been


(b) The longest form in the Didache (aov
(p. 169).

pointed out
(TTiv

So^a Kol

7]

Irjaou X.pLaTOu et? rot)?

Bia

8vvafjLi,<i

7]

alcJovas:)

may
The intermediate

occurs at the close of the remarkable prayer that the Church

be made one as the bread

form

{(70V

iarcv

r]

8vvafii<;

one

is

koI

t)

(ix.

86^a

4).

(c)

et? Tov<i aldova<;) closes

second prayer for the gathering together of the Church*


also the Lord's Prayer

(x. 5)

the

and

(viii. 2),

Regarding these passages together, we learn that the liturgical


usage of the Christian Church, inherited no doubt from the
Hellenistic Synagogues, was to close a prayer with a doxology.
The passages in the Didache and in the Martyrdom of Polycarp
are obvious examples of this custom.
A doxology ends the great
prayer in Clement's Epistle (59
61) and the prayer in c. 64.

Hence the addition

of a doxology to the Lord's Prayer

was the

simple following out of the prevailing use.

This conclusion

is fully corroborated by the evidence supby the Didache. Here the same doxology which closes
the post-communion form of thanksgiving and intercession (x. 5)

plied

Prayer

closes also the Lord's

clearer

or

more

suggested that
liturgical

(viii.

No

2).

testimony could be

to the point than this.

It

might further be

connexion

of

the

frequent

doxology with

forms belonging to the Eucharistic Service of Holy

Communion

{Didache, Clement, Prayer of Polycarp) points to the

purpose of the addition of the doxology to the Lord's Prayer,

viz.

the adaptation of the Prayer for use in that service^

The formula

in

c. x.

may

be said to contain in an embryo form what appeared

in later liturgies as (a) the Great Intercession (e.g.

pansion of the Lord's Prayer (Preface, Embolismus

formula

to.

ayia roh d7fots

(et rts

as in Did. the words ilKxawa tw


2

It

ayios

vli^

icrTiv, epxio'doj

Aa/3i5

Hammond p. 18) {h) the exHammond p. 47 f.) (c) the


Did.; Hammond p. 21, where
;

e.g.

have a place in the context).

should be noted however that in the Liturgy to which Cyril of Jerusalem

witnesses (Catech. xxiii. 18) the Prayer closed with

It is
dfi-^v without a doxology.
remarkable that in two passages where St Paul seems to be referring to the last
petition of the Lord's Prayer (Gal. i. 4 f., 2 Tim. iv. 18 fif., see above, pp. 115, 119) he
passes into a doxology, using the same form in both places. The immediate occasion

of the thanksgiving

no doubt

is

the thought of deliverance, general (Gal.

i.

4)

aud

THE lord's prayer IX THE EARLY CHURCH.

174

One

point remains to be considered, the variation in the form

of the doxology which

The

authorities.

attached to the Lord's Prayer in

is

such diversities exist of

fact that

the conclusion at which

we have

some

still

We

of these variations

is

The Old Latin

indeed

its

Zol^a

in the

r]

Zvva}ii<i, this

The simple

to KpdTo<; {Vulg.

v. 11.

The Thebaic Version has: quoniam tuum est robur et potentia


aevum aevi. Here also, if the Greek text represented is 77

in

KoX

Bvva^i,<;

Headings

rj

(Dr Hort, Introduction, Notes on Select


form.
?}
la'xy'i however has a

la-'x^v^

p. 8),

we have a unique

place in 1 Chron. xxix. 11


it

(iii)

hvvaya^ takes the place of the simple

r]

found in 1 Pet.

is

of

position.

kernel.

know, unique.

so far as I

is,

the

to the third element

If virtus here represents

form in which the simple

imperium)

confirms

Cod. Bobiensis (k) has: quoniam est tibi virtus

in saecula saeculorum.

?/

difiFerent

consideration

further strengthens

will confine our attention

doxology, which

arrived.

itself

ends the long

combined with a preceding

Apoc.

series in

vii.

This

12.

may be

77

Si5i/a/xt<?

considered

sufficient evidence for the supposition that this

form was current

in the worship of the Hellenistic Synagogues.

Gregory of Nyssa

(Migne P. G.

44, p. 1193)

ends his exposition of the Lord's Prayer

thus, diro Tov irovripov rou iv


fiivov, ov pvcrdeirj/iev 'x^dpiTt
1)

Bo^a afia

t&J irarpX

rov

rS

rovra

KocrfKo

')(^piaTOv,

on

rrjv la'^vv KeKTrj-

avrut

rj

koI

Bvvafii<:

koI tu> ayiw Trvevfxart vvv Kat aet Kat

et?

rwv aloovcov dpL-qv. The passage is a good illustration


of the combination of elaboration and conservatism which is
an important element in liturgical history. The kernel of the
doxology (77 BvvafiL<i koX rj Bo^a) is identical with that of the
doxology which ends the Lord's Prayer in the Didache (viii. 2,
Toi)? alc5va<;

X. 5).

The Old
Koi

rj

Bo^a,

which presupposes a Greek text rj ^aaiXeia


know, the earliest form in which the

Syriac,
is,

so far as I

kingdom has a

place.

passages as Ps.

cxliv.

'

that this doxology


it is

is

remarkable that

personal (2 Tim.

Lord's Prayer

iv.

(cf. 1

18).

It

'

would appear probable

11 (Bo^av

ttJ? j3aac\La<;

an independent form.
77

if

view of such

aov epovcnv), 12

However

^aaCketa does not occur

But

in

this

may

be,

in the doxologies

the doxology was already in use at the end of the

Cor. xiv. 16), devotional habit

may have prompted

the addition.

THE DOXOLOGY.

175

with which we have at present dealt.

The nearest approach to it


the doxology with which Clement ends his letter, 86^a, Ttfir^
Kpdro'i KoX fieyaXayavvT], 6p6vo<i alwvio'i^ (so Mart. Polyc. 21).
is in

The extraordinary

richness

supplies a doxological

KoX

(T(OTT]pia

in

form

8vvap,i^ Kol

Tj

Apocalypse

of the

respect

^aa-iXeia rov

T)

rov y^picnov avrov

e^ova-ia

this

containing the word, apri iyevero

comp.

10,

(xii.

deov
xi.

15,

passage, taken in connexion with the fact that the


1

Chron. xxix. 11

is

iiy^J^^n niH^

some forms

of the LXX.

Hexapla, in

loco),

reference to

'

by

which

*]7,

aol, Kvpte,

the kingdom

The doxology, which

'

current

the

Hebrew

may

^aaiXeta koI

the Apost. Constit.

18,

iii.

St Basil

(Hammond

p.

ho^a),

rj

'

Syrian

'

is

24*.

suggests that the

Prayer in the familiar

of

first,

I believe, found in

It occurs in Chrysostom's

253

(vii.

d),

at

the

close

(Hammond

St James

of the
p.

48,

Anaphora of
126, Swainson p. 167), though in the
the Holy Trinity and a more elaborate
Liturgies, e.g. in the

The

description of eternity are added.


in the

the

text of the

be a conflation of the form just

vii.

Commentary on St Matthew
Embolismus in the Liturgy
Swainson p. 309) and in other
Liturgies a reference to

among

Bo^a) and the form witnessed to by

rj

Bvpa/xa koI

{-fj

of

represented in

may have been

closes the Lord's

English use^ and which


(77

This

17).

Hebrew

^aaiXeia (see Field

77

Old Testament, the Apocalypse, the Old Syriac


form was Hebrew rather than Hellenistic.

the Didache

i)

tJ

tends to shew that a form of doxology with a

Jews^; the combination of authorities

noticed

is

koI

rjfioov

text explains

its

fact that it

gained a place

almost undisputed supremacy in

later times.
If the further question

is

asked

and commentators add a doxology

why

found in St Matthew's Gospel, the answer


^

Ps. xliv. 7 6 dpovos

Comp. Dan.

vii.

Chald.); Kai idodr) avrif i^ovala


3 It

is

idodr]

kclI rifir]

ij

dpxh xal

17

is

not far to seek, and

Comp. Hebrews

ffov, 6 deos, ets aiCova aiu>uoi.

14 Kai avri^

and translators
form of the Prayer

copyists

to the longer

ri/x^ Kai

ij

i.

it

8f.

^a^iXela (Tlieod.

so

^aaiXiKi^ (lxx.).

worth notice that while. the A.V. has the kingdom and the power and the
Book has the kingdom, the potcer, and the gloi-y.

glory, the rendering in the Prayer


*

I refer to

Lagarde's text.

The Editio princeps

in the latter place has simply ^ pajiXeia..

(see

Lagarde's Preface

p. iv.)

176

THE lord's prayer in the early church.

supplies one more confirmation of the theory that the doxology

At

a liturgical accretion.

least

when

is

the period of purely oral

transmission was over and the Gospel of St Matthew and that of

St Luke were in general circulation and were seen to present two


different forms of the Prayer, a longer

and a shorter, the natural


and completeness would ensure the longer form
as given by St Matthew being employed in the public Prayers of
the Church and being as time went on embodied in the Liturgries.
Thus to this longer form the doxology would become regularly
desire for fulness

attached.

This obvious conjecture as to the earliest devotional

usage of the Church

is

confirmed by the evidence of the Didachd.

Thus even from sub-Apostolic

days

liturgical

would

custom

suggest the interpolation of a doxology in St Matthew's Gospel


alone.

To sum
shew that

up, the evidence

which we have considered seems

to

several different forms of doxology, ultimately to be

traced to the Old Testament, were in

years of the Church's

life

common

use in the earliest

that the public prayers, especially those

of the Eucharistic Service, generally concluded with one or other of

these doxologies

that from the

prayers, had attached to

it

first

now one

as the Didache in particular

the Lord's Prayer, like other


doxology,

now another

that,

seems to suggest, the Lord's Prayer


was in this way frequently adapted for use at the Service of Holy
Communion finally that one form of doxology, which appears to
be a conflation of two di.stinct forms, was added to the Prayer in
the Syrian text of St Matthew's Gospel and so has remained the
common conclusion of the Prayer since the fourth century.
;

'

'

INDEX.
Acta Thomae, 36

Syriac Version, 40

n.,

Doxology, 171, 175; on John

xii. 27,

80

58 n.

Acts of the Apostles

ii.

97, 155; xii. 11, 77;

Agathangelus, 17, 32
Antichrist

f.,

conception

40, 81

xiii.

x. 38,

Clement

88

100

petition

for

ii.

of Alexandria; use of 6 irovripos,

Clementine Homilies

and

9, 3;

iii.

iii.

10,

on glosses in petition against

temptation, 63, 67; on maUgnus, 164


aWoTpios,

6 irovrjpos,

Cook, Canon

12

i,

and similar

verbs, 71

117

ff.,

Letters on diro rod

and passim 95

ff.

irovrjpov,

167

Corinthians, First Epistle to

dird after pvecrdai.

against

prayers

ff.

Colossians, Epistle to;

71,

143 n.

6,

120 n.

dvridiKos,

use of

Liturgy;

Clementine
Satan, 141

100, 116, 133

82

Augustine

for gathering together

18 n., 151

of,

forgiveness, 58

Apocalypse;

Church; prayer

38, 63
of,

Homilies of;

Aphraates,

f.

17, 8 n.

9,

ii.

17

Second Ep.; i. 10, 78; xii. 7 f., 114 f.


Cyprian on last two petitions of Lord's
;

ff.

d-TTOdT^vaL,

54

vpiivaL,

used of persons, 114

Prayer, 64, 136

u.

f.

Cyril of Jerusalem; on

f.

131, 144

d-rro

tou

irov-qpov,

f.

Baptismal and 'Confirmation' Offices;

Greek and Latin, 28


Barnabas,

the

Kovqpbs, 98

Belial

f.,

151

Epistle

Syrian, 37

use

of;

69

126

f.,

f.,

172

in,

35

n.,

Doxology

meaning of

f.,

root, 92

vice,

172;

118

f.,

men;

129

Chromatius;

power of Satan

ff.

gloss in petition against

Chrysostom
V.

37

ff.,

C.

on

f.,

168, 175

iTriovaLos,

95; on diro toO

49

on Matt.
91; on

irov.,

f.,

53

n.,

on

two

last

and

of,

168

ff.

f.

used

in Eucharistic Ser-

f.

Egyptian Versions; Memphitic, on cwMemphitic and Tlielovaios, 46 n.


;

baic

Chronicles; xxix. 10

33

over,

temptation, 67
1

n.,

different forms at end of

Lord's Prayer, 174


Christian

23

development

after prayers

(C'S3)

16

f.

petitions of Lord's Prayer, 68, 139

f.

(^

Didache; 12

Dionysius of Alexandria;

Ii.

in later Jewish literature, 87

Bishops' Book; Lord's Prayer

_s

of 6

form

on

diro

ttov.,

of doxology,

Ephrem; on
49

tov

166 n.; Thebaic,

174

petition

for

daily bread,

f.

12

'

178

INDEX.

Esther, Book of;

73 n., 126

iv. 16,

John,

Powers of; teaching of O.T. on,

Evil,

86

f.

80

St,

18

of, V.

Aramaic original word, 61 f.


el<rv^yKai; Aramaic original word, 61 f.
iK after pvejdat and similar verbs, 71 ff.
elaeXBeiv;

e/cxew; Pentecostal key^vord, 21

116

f^eXdeiv;

ff.

xii.

27,

First Epistle

of; Ixiii. 10

ff.,

31

>

King's Book;

petition against tempta-

69

f.

Aramaic equivalent, 124

iinoO<nos; origin of the word, 46


e<p-^/Mpos,

109

122

f.,

Book

Isaiah,

tion,
euecTTus,

Gospel according to;

xvii. 15,

f. ;

Kyrie eleison; origin, 15

n.

n.

34

KaTa<JKr]vo\)v,
f.

49 n.
Lightfoot, Bp; on liturgical element in

TO Kad' Tjn^pav, 43

Galatians, Epistle to;

i.

f.,

115

Ep. Clem., 17; in Mart. Polyc, 172;


on imovcnos, 44 n., 49 Letters on diro
;

ff.,

TOV TTOVrjpOV, 71

173 n.

Gethsemane, Garden

place where

of;

Christ taught the Lord's Prayer to


Apostles, 123

Lion; image of Satan, 120


Liturgies; evidence on glosses in petition

against temptation, 68

fif.

TTovqpov,

Gloria Patri, 171


Gnostics; parodies of Church Prayers, 36
St.,

Greek Jewish Prayers, 16

121, 126,

19

25, 107 n.,

on

origin according to Matt,

and Lc, 11;

rule as to its use in


Didach6, 12; original Aramaic form,

13; order of clauses in Tertullian, 27;

174

liturgical adaptations, 28,

Hebrews, Epistle to; v. 7, 81


Hebrews, Gospel according to

63
;

diro rov

ff.

150

Gregory of Nyssa,

f.

forms of dox-

151;

ff.,

ology, 170, 175

Lord's Prayer

Gospels; origin of Synoptic, 8


fi.,

141

petition

ff.,

66

ff.,

45

35,

f.

168

Luke, St; i. 74, 78;


See Songs

xxii.

28

ff.,

108

f.

15,

19

f.,

'

for daily bread, 52

Hermas, Shepherd of, 130 f.


Hilary; gloss on petition against temptation, 66 f. on ciTro rod iTov7)pov, 67,

Mark,
p.

St;

xi.

57;

25,

xvi.

21

Marshall, Prof.;

137 n.

Homily, the Ancient; on aVo toO wovq128

poO,

for forgiveness, 59

ff.

Hort, Dr, 24, 35, 41, 68 n., 158


Hymns, Latin Pentecostal, 38

Matthew, St;
ff.

57;

Christ's

62;

i.

Epistle of;

St,

sayings, 48;

21, 48 n.;

Jerome; on

ii.

en-iot/crtos,

references
i.

to

gloss

157

xxi.

30

(in

95

f.

vi.

38, 155,

14

159

f.,
f.

57 n.

35

the divine invocation in Baptism,


;

f.

Numbers, Book

of; xvi., 21

ff.,

81

f.

f.,

Book of;

xiii.

p.i\as, 6; a name for Satan, 99 n.


Malignus; meaning and use, 163 f.

Name,
on

petition against temptation, 67

Jewish Authorised Prayer Book, 31


39 n., 41
Livocation forms of, 28 ff.
Job,

97;

(Syriac),

15ff.,47ff.
49, 52;

v. 37, 39, p.

xiii. 28,

xviii. 35,

vOQlk. Din), 55
James,

on Synoptic question,
on Aramaic original of petition

19;

Latin Versions),

Old Latin Version


Prayer, 23 n., 64

glosses in Lord'a
f.;

classification of

MSS., 158 rendering of wovrjpos, 159 ff .;


;

doxology, 174

,;

LVDEX.
Origen

on dro

tow Toyrjpov, 138

meaning

xofrjpor,

6<p6a\fjLbi

179

sayings, 39 n.

f.

of phrase,

93 n.

51

f.,

tion,

form of doxology, 174

ovpayoi, ovpofol, 23 n., 41 n.

>QOn,
Mr

Page,

renderings of (Tiovinos,

and of petition against tempta61 f. on aro tov Tov-qpou, 154 ff.

T. E., 6n., 11, 43, 55

Peter of Alexandria; on iro tou

(TKoXo^f/,

TOfTjpov,

54

114 n.
3

ffvva,y<jyyfi,

f.

140

fragments of Greek Jewish


Prayers in his writings, 19 n.
Polycarp: Epistle of, on petition for
Pbilo

56

forgiveness,

ment

Martyrdom

in

political

by

of,

etymology,

irovT]p6^;

92

n.

f.

and

explanation

Hebrew and
f.

use in N.T.,

applied to spiritual powers, 93

meaning

of

renderings

of,

Latin

94;

irovTjpos,

156

50

f.

Temptation of our Lord, 103

25

f.,

pviffdai;

24, 78;

vii.

xvi.

9 n.

VV^; meaning of

on 'ne nos inducas,'


'a malo,' 134

'malus,' 135

f.

f.

Test. xii. Patriarch., 88 n.

Theophilus ad Autol., 97

n.

Second Epistle

to;

iii.

Timothy, Second Epistle

to;

iv.

f.:

112

constructions after, 78

f.,

144 n.

i.

10,

ff.,

17

f.,

f.

79, 119

root, 91

65,

use of

Thessalonians, First Epistle to;

ff.

to;

f.

on

78

Bomans, Epistle

Holy

for

for forgive-

134

petition

on petition

f.

ness, 58
f.

on

27;

26

Spirit,

ff.

order of earlier clauses pf

Tertullian;

Prayer,

social

Syriac equivalents, 91

93

172

89;

meaning, 90

Aristotle,

frag-

liturgical

f. ;

Tatian's Diatessaron; Arabic Version,

173 n.

ff.,

TO. de\TjiJ.a.Ta,

39

Sibylline Oracles; on evil powers, 87

Vienne and Lyons, Letter

Solomon, Psalms of; compared with


Jewish Prayers and 'Songs' in Lc.

Vulgate MSS.; glossesin Lord's Prayer,


23

n.,

65; rendering of

of,

100, 132

wovripos,

159

ff.

150

'Songs' in St Luke's Gospel; compared


with Ep.

Clem.

Prayers, 147

128,

Ways, the Two; compared with 'the

Two

Impulses,' 102

Westcott, Bp,

ff.

Synagogues; in Jerusalem,
Christian

Jewish

^vith

Hebrews, 2;

1 f

among

and Helle-

1 n.,

Wisdom, Book

of;

Wordsworth, Bp

nists, 5

49

n.,

97

n.,

157

169
ii.

23

J., 64,

f.,

87

158

Syriac Versions; approximately represent

Aramaic

original

CilMBRinOB: PRINTED BY

of

Christ's

C. J.

Yetser ha Ka, 89, 101

CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT

ff.

THE UNIVKKSITY PRESS.

f.,

IN

COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT


COPYRIGHT UVW
OCKER & TRAPP INC.

AND
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
PRODUCED THIS REPLACEMENT VOLUME
ON WEYERHAEUSER COUGAR OPAQUE NATURAL PAPER,
THAT MEETS ANSI/NISO STANDARDS Z39.48-1992
TO REPLACE THE IRREPARABLY
DETERIORATED ORIGINAL.
2000

Princeton Theological Seminary Libraries

1012 01252 5202