Apostolic Tradition 16.9-11

Apostolic Tradition 16.9-11

One of what have become to be known as Church Order documents, the so-called Apostolic Tradition, is an anonymous aggregation of older sources, compiled and reworked in a relatively coherent text, in Greek. The text is no longer extant in Greek apart from small fragments, but is found in various translations in Latin, Sahidic, Arabic and Ethiopic. There are noticeable traditions from North Africa, Syria and Rome, and contains little to no internal information with regards to the identity or geographical location of the main redactor/compiler. Thus it is difficult to situate the community of the compiler/redactor. It was probably compiled in the mid-third to mid-fourth century. In the subsequent centuries, it was translated and redacted by each new community using the document, adding/removing/changing material, or completely reworking it into a new document, a phenomenon which has become to be known as “living literature.” This makes the establishment of the “original” text a very difficult, if not futile exercise.

The extant versions we have are as follows: a Latin translation [Verona Palimpsest]; Sahidic; Arabic; two Ethiopic, Book 8 of the Apostolic Constitutions, The Canons of Hippolytus and the Testamentum Domini.

Section 16, within a larger section on catechumens [15-21] contains a list of various professions which are incompatible with the Christian faith. This list is not covered by the few small extant Greek fragments, it is in all translations/versions/derivatives of the text, with the exception of Latin, for which there is a large lacuna [chapters 7-21], however it is heavily modified in various editions. The list is held by some [Stewart-Sykes, Loc. 996] to predate the compilation of the text, to around the mid second century, while others [Hermeneia, p. 87] suggest it may be as late as the mid 4^th century that the list becomes recognisable as what we see in the versions extant today.

Within Section 16.9, the profession of soldier is discussed. This is present in all versions/derivatives of the text with the exception of the Latin lacuna. The discussion, in all versions [except that in Apostolic Constitutions 8], takes the form of first looking at the soldier who wishes to become a Christian, and secondly, a Christian/Catechumen who wishes to become a soldier. Two versions of the Apostolic tradition [Sahidic and Ethiopic 2] contain a prohibition of the military oath, [along with potentially the Canons of Hippolytus, which prohibits the taking of “bad word]. This may indicate that the prohibition is “original” to the Apostolic Tradition. In any case, it’s inclusion or removal in various versions throughout the third to fifth centuries is an intriguing facet of the “living literature” of church order documents, and the tradition history of opposition to the military oath by Christian sources. Translations of the relevant versions are shown below.

Apostolic Tradition 16.9 [Sahidic]	Apostolic Tradition 16.9 [Arabic]	Apostolic Tradition [Ethiopic 1]	Apostolic Tradition [Ethiopic 2]	Apostolic Constitutions 8.32 [4th Century]	Canons of Hippolytus, 13-14 [4th Century]	Testamentum Domini 2.2 [4th-5th century]
[Based on Greek Text]	[Based on Sahidic Translation]	[Translation made from a no-longer extant Arabic Translation]	[Based on Greek Text]	[Based on Greek text of Apostolic Traditions]	[Extant only in Arabic, through Sahidic, which was based on a Greek text]	[Based on Greek text. Extant in Syriac which was based on a Greek text. Also extant in Arabic and Ethiopic, through Sahidic, which was based on a Greek text]
Hermeneia, p. 88-90	Hermeneia, p. 88-90	Hermeneia, p. 88-90	Bausi, p. 39	Hermeneia, p. 90	Hermeneia, p. 91	Hermeneia, p. 91
9. A soldier who has authority let him not kill a man. If he is ordered, let him not go to the task nor let him swear. But if he is not willing, let him be cast out.	9. A soldier in the sovereign's army should not kill, or if he is ordered to kill, he should refuse, if he stops, so be it; otherwise he should be   excluded.	9. They are not to accept soldiers of an official, and if he is given an order to kill, he is not to do it, and if he does not stop, he is to be expelled.	9. Un soldato che si trovi in una qualsiasi autorità, non uccida; e anche se gli è stato ordinato, non immoli, non giuri e non si ponga serti sulla testa.	Let a soldier who comes be taught to do no injustice or to extort money, but to be content with his given wages. Let the one who objects be rejected.	[13] Whoever has received the authority to kill, or else a soldier, they are not to kill in any case, even if they receive the order to kill. They are not to pronounce a bad word.	[2.2] If anyone be a soldier or in authority, let him be taught not to oppress or to kill or to rob, or to be angry or to rage and afflict anyone. But let those rations suffice him that are given to him. But if they wish to be baptized in the Lord, let them cease from military service or from the [post of] authority, and if not let them not be received.
10. One who has authority of the sword, or a ruler of a city who wears the purple, either let him cease or be cast out.	10. One who has the power of the sword or the head of a city and wears red, let him stop or be excluded.	10. An official who has a sword or a chief of appointed people and who wears purple is to stop or be expelled.	10. Chi esegue condanne di spada, o il governatore di una città o un porporato, cessi, o altrimenti venga espulso.	[Not present]	[13] Those who have received an honor are not to wear wreaths on their heads. Whosoever is raised to the authority of prefect or the magistracy and does not put on the righteousness of the gospel is to be excluded from the flock and the bishop is not to pray with him.	[Not present]
11. A catechumen or faithful [person] if he wishes to become a soldier, let them be cast out because they despised God	11. A catechumen or a believer, if they want to be soldiers, let them be excluded because they distance themselves from God.	11. A catechumen or believer, if they wish to become a soldier, are to be expelled because they are far from God.	11. Il catecumeno o il cristiano adulto, se desidera essere arruolato, venga espulso, perché ha fatto un torto al Signore.	[Not present]	[14] A Christian must not become a soldier, unless he is compelled by a chief bearing the sword. He is not to burden himself with the sin of blood. But if he has shed blood, he is not to partake of the mysteries, unless he is purified by a punishment, tears, and wailing. He is not to come forward deceitfully but in the fear of God.	[2.2] Let a catechumen or a believer of the people, if he desires to be a soldier, either cease from his intention, or if not let him be rejected. For he has despised God by his thought, and leaving the things of the Spirit, he has perfected himself in the flesh, and has treated the faith with contempt.

References

• Bausi, Alessandro. "La “nuova” versione etiopica della Traditio apostolica: edizione e traduzione preliminare." (2011): 19-69.
• Bradshaw, Paul F., Maxwell E. Johnson, L. Edward Phillips, and Harold W. Attridge. The Apostolic Tradition: A Commentary. Hermeneia. Augsburg Fortress Publishers, 2002.
• Stewart-Sykes, Alistair, ed. On the apostolic tradition. No. 22. RSM Press, 2001. [Kindle Edition]

Oath of Dionysius of Alexandria, as recorded in Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 6.40.1

Oath of Dionysius of Alexandria, as recorded in Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 6.40.1

In his letter against Germanus, written c. 260 CE. The oath: ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ λαλῶ, καὶ αὐτὸς οἶδεν εἰ ψεύδομαι… is very similar to that of Gal. 1:20. The "ἐγὼ δὲ καὶ" suggests that Dionysius is responding to similar language used in an accusation made by Germanus, who perhaps used a direct quote from Gal. 1:20 as his formula.

Source: Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea. 2005. Ecclesiastical History, Books 6–10 (The Fathers of the Church, Volume 29), p.67-68. Translated by Roy J. Deferrari. Reprint (1955). CUA Press.

As for what befell Dionysius, I shall quote from his letter to Germanus, where, while speaking of himself, he relates as follows:

'I, too, speak before God, and He knows whether I lie; I have not taken flight driven in my own interests or without thought of God, but formerly, also, when the persecution under Decius was publicly proclaimed, within that very hour Sabinus sent a frumentarius to search for me, and I remained within my house for four days, expecting the arrival of the frumentarius; but he went about examining everything, the roads, the rivers, the fields, where he suspected I was hiding or going about, but he was smitten with blindness and did not find the house, for he did not believe that I when being pursued was tarrying at home. And after the fourth day, when God bade me depart and miraculously made a way, I and the boys and many of the brethren set out together with difficulty. And that this was the work of the providence of God was shown by subsequent events, in which perhaps we were useful to some.'

Martyrdom of Basilides, as reported in Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 6.5.5

Martyrdom of Basilides, as reported in Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiastica 6.5.5

Martyrdom c. 205 CE.

Source: Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea. 2005. Ecclesiastical History, Books 6–10 (The Fathers of the Church, Volume 29), p.14. Translated by Roy J. Deferrari. Reprint (1955). CUA Press.

After no long time had passed, Basilides for some reason was asked by the soldiers to swear, and he strongly maintained that it was not at all possible for him to swear, for he was a Christian and he openly confessed this. At first for a time he was thought to be joking, but, when he steadfastly held to it, he was led away to the judge. When he confessed in his presence to his opposition [to the oath], he was committed to prison.

Oath of Justin the Gnostic, as reported in Refutation of all Heresies, 5.23-24; 5.27:1-3

Oath of Justin the Gnostic, as reported in Refutation of all Heresies, 5.23-24; 5.27:1-3

In the anonymous Refutation of All Heresies, written in the third century in Rome, we are told of the “Gnostic” heretic Justin, his book “Baruch,” and the oath by which he binds his followers.

Source: Refutation of All Heresies. 2016. Trans: M. David Litwa. Writings from the Greco Roman World, Vol. 40. SBL Press. p. 331; 333; 353.

[5.23] Justin became a full-scale opponent against the teaching of holy scripture and in particular against the voice of the blessed evangelists. This is because the Word taught his disciples, "Do not depart to the path of Gentiles" (that is, pay no attention to the futile teachings of pagans), while this fool tries to lead his hearers astray to the fantastic tales and teachings of the pagans by directly quoting Greek myths. He neither teaches nor hands on his perfect mystery before he binds his dupe with an oath. 2. Then he sets out his myths to capture their souls. Consequently, the readers of the boundless blabbering in his books have his myths as a diversion. It is like when someone on a long journey finds an inn and decides to rest. Justin uses this method so that they will not despise diligent study when again they turn to their regimen of readings. They pursue this course until, swelling with pride, they rush toward the oft-trumpeted crime that he fabricated. He binds these people beforehand with hair-raising oaths neither to declare [the mysteries] nor to apostatize—and he forces them to consent. This is his method of handing on his impiously invented mysteries! Some-times, as I said, he employs Greek myths, at other times doctored books that in some respects reflect the aforementioned heresies. All these heretics, driven by one spirit, flow together into a single sewage "depth" as they variously narrate and relate the same doctrines in different ways. But all of them independently refer to themselves as “gnostics,” since they alone have gulped down the wondrous knowledge of the perfect and good!

[5.24] "Swear," Justin says, if you desire to know "what eye has not seen nor ear heard nor has it risen in the human heart." Swear by the one superior to all, the Good, the Highest one, to guard what is inexpressible, these teachings covered in silence! For surely our Father, too, when he saw the Good and was initiated by him, guarded the inexpressible secrets of silence and swore, as it is written: "The Lord swore and will not repent!" So, having sealed them by these words, Justin captures their souls with a host of myths in a bevy of books. Thus he leads them to the Good, initiating his initiates into unuttered mysteries!

So that we can travel without frequent detours, I will expose his unspeakable secrets from one of his books, a book that, in his view, is "glorious:' It is entitled Baruch. In it, I will reveal one out of many of his mythological discourses, a story with a prehistory in Herodotos. By reformulating this myth, Justin presents it to his hearers as something novel and from it constructs the entire system of his school.

[5.27:1-3] There is also written an oath in the first book entitled Baruch, which they make those about to hear these mysteries and become initiated into the Good swear. This oath, Justin claims, "our Father Elohim" swore when he arrived beside the Good. He swore and did not repent of this oath. The scriptures refer to this, he claims, in the verse: "The Lord swore and will not repent." This is the oath:

I swear by the one over all things, the Good, to keep these mysteries and to tell them to no one, nor will I backslide away from the Good toward creation.

Whenever one swears this oath, one comes to the Good and sees "what eye has not seen, nor ear heard, nor has it risen in the human heart," and drinks from "living water" (which refers to their baptismal bath), which they suppose to be a fount of "living, bubbling water." There was made a division, he explains, between water and water so that there is a water of the evil creation below the firmament, in which the earthly and animate are washed, and a water of the Good above the firmament. This water is living, and in it are washed the living spiritual humans. In it Elohim washed himself. When he washed, he did not repent.