YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY THE LIBRARY OF THE DIVINITY SCHOOL THE PAULINE FORMULA "Induere Christum" WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO THE WORKS OF St. John Chrysostom DISSERTATION Submitted to the Faculty of the Sacred Sciences at the Catholic University of America in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Doctorate in Theology BY The Reverend Leo Joseph Ohleyer, O. F. M., S.T. L. of the Province of the Sacred Heart St. Louis, Missouri Catholic University of America Washington, D. C. 1921 Nihil obstat, Faustinus Hack, O.F.M. Censor deputatus. Imprimi permittltur, Samuel Macke, O.F.M. Minister Provincialis. Nihil obstat, P. L. Biermann Censor deputatus. Imprimatur, Georgius Gulielmus Mundelein Archiepiscopus Chicagiensia. Universitas Catholica Americae Washingtonii, D. C. S. Facultas Theologica, 1920-1921 No. 17 PREFACE St. Paul, as is well known, originated a number of typical phrases, aptly styled formulas, by which to express concisely and comprehensively the great truths of the Christian religion. These set forms of speech occur most frequently in connection with the Apostle's Christological teachings. Some of the Pauline formulas have received exhaustive treatment at the hands of scholars of note. Deissm'ann's study *Ev Xpto-™ Tyo-oi5 and Heitmiiller's work Im Namen Jesu are only two of many instances. One of the most striking and important of these formulas, which has not yet found a solution, is "Induere Christum." The present treatise is an attempt at a solution. The author wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness and to express his sincere gratitude to the Rev. Dr. Heinrich Schumacher, Professor of New Testament Exegesis at the Catholic University, with whose aid and under whose direction this monograph has been written. Acknowledgments are due also to the Rev. Ferdi nand Gruen, O. F. M., for his services in revising the manuscript and preparing it for the press. Leo J. Ohleyer, O. F. M. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Introduction 7 chapter I. History of the Interpretation of "Induere Christum" in the Middle Ages and in Modern Times 3 II. Interpretation of "Induere Christum" according to St. John Chrysostom 33 III. Historico-Literary Investigation of ('Ev)Svav-(''Ev)Sv- eadai 53 IV. Application of the Results to Rom. XIII, 14 and Gal. Ill, 27 98 Corollary. Confirmation of the Results by the Meaning of the Formula HaTrrl&iv ets rb ovopa lyaov IOI Bibliography 103 INTRODUCTION The much disputed expression "induere Christum" is one of the most important and interesting of the N. T. formulas. It receives its chief importance from its connection with Baptism and regeneration. This phrase was chosen by St. Paul (Gal. Ill, 27) to express the grand truth of man's palingenesis, which is the incomparable and transcendent realization of the cherished hopes and ardent cravings of the ancient peoples, Jewish and Gentile, for a o-oirypla from the slavery of sin and satan and for a renewal of themselves and a closer union with God. Again, "induere Christum" is used by St. Paul without any reference to Baptism, in an ethical sense. In Rom. XIII, 14, is contained an epitome of the principles of moral perfection. It is evident from these con texts alone, which concern the most vital truths of Christianity, that our formula presents a paramount and pivotal problem of N. T. exegesis. ! But this phrase has received an astounding variety of inter pretations; and, what is worse, as time proceeds, the views con cerning the meaning of the expression become more and more divergent and confusing, culminating in the findings of the com parative study of religions. Both the extraordinary importance of the words and the utter confusion concerning their meaning, therefore, recommend this famous N. T. formula to a special study and a thorough investigation. CHAPTER I HISTORY OF THE INTERPRETATION OF "INDUERE CHRISTUM" IN THE MIDDLE AGES AND IN MODERN TIMES For the investigation of the Pauline formula "induere Christum" a history of its interpretation in the Middle Ages and in modern times will be of great advantage and importance. Such a historical review will not only clearly set forth the problem involved and the status of opinion bearing on it, but also suggest methods of arriving at a correct solution. Since the number of commentaries on Rom. XIII, 14, and Gal. Ill, 27, is very great, and since many interpreters give identical explanations, it is both impossible and unnecessary to quote or to mention them all. We shall cite as many authors as is necessary to obtain a comprehen sive view of the state of the question. For the sake of clearness and brevity we shall group them in classes, according to their explanations of the origin of the Pauline formula. I. "Induere Christum": A Metaphor Derived from the Idea of Putting on a Garment Exegetes are quite generally agreed that the phrase "induere Christum" is to be taken, not in a literal, but in a figurative sense ; and that it stands in some relation to the idea of putting on a garment. Some commentators, who think that the metaphor is immediately derived from the expression "induere vestem" (evSueo-ftu IpAnov), inquire no further into its origin, but base their interpretation of Gal. Ill, 27, and Rom. XIII, 14, solely on the analogies they find by considering Christ as our garment. Opin ions vary, however, as to the fundamental idea contained in this comparison. 1. Union. — To put on Christ as a garment, according to some authors, means to enter into intimate union with Him. Beet ex- 3 plains the ground of this analogy when he says that "clothes are something distinct from us ; which, when put on, become almost a part of ourselves." Applying this explanation to Rom. XIII, 14, he says God presents to us the image of His Son and "bids us enter into a union with Him so close that Christ becomes the element in which we live and move."1 For similar reasons, Farrar describes Christ "as a close-fitting robe" to be put on by "close spiritual communion."2 2. Imitation. — Shook remarks, in reference to Rom. XIII, 14, that the putting on of Christ as a garment implies an intimate spiritual relation with Him, which is effected "by shaping our character by his," or by imbibing "Christ's spirit to the extent that the 'ego' is completely covered up, as far as possible."3 Ac cording to Horace Bushnell, the ground of the comparison consists in this, that "dress relates to the form or figure of the body, character to the form or figure of the soul" ; that, in fact, char acter "is the dress of the soul." This similarity in relations, he asserts, is the reason why character is so often represented in Holy Scripture as the dress of the soul. Since "character is the soul's dress, and dress analogical to character," he concludes that "whatever has power to produce a character when received is represented as a dress to be put on." In this manner, he con tinues, Paul regards Christ as "the soul's new dress" or "new character" when he exhorts the Romans to put Him on. "Christ," he explains, "is to be a complete wardrobe for us himself, and that by simply receiving his person we are to have the holy texture. of his life upon us, and live in the unfolding of his character."4 3. Profession of Discipleship. — The phrase "induere Chris tum" in Gal. Ill, 27, where it occurs in connection with Baptism, is interpreted by Matthew Henry to mean to "put on his livery" and declare ourselves "to be his servants and disciples." By put ting on Christ in Baptism, he adds, "we profess our discipleship to him and are obliged to behave ourselves as his faithful serv ants."5 Already in the middle of the sixteenth century, Musculus interpreted the words "Christum induistis," in Gal. Ill, 27, to mean to be dedicated and consecrated to Christ. After stating 1 Comm. on Rom., 347. 2 Life and Work of St. Paul, II, 263. a Comm. and Lex. on N. T., 325. * Bible Readers' Comm., II, 265. 1 Exposition of O. and N. T., IX, 301. that "induimini Christum," in Rom. XIII, 14, expresses an exhor tation to "vivere, ambulare ac conversare secundum spiritum et vitam Christi," he adds that, in Gal. Ill, 27, St. Paul reminds the Galatians that, when they were baptized, they put on not Moses but Christ — "non Mosi, sed Christo esse initiates ac consecratos : ideoque vivendum ipsis esse non sub paedagogia Mosis sed sub gratia, spiritu, fide ac professione Christi." He further says that, like Moses, Christ has a distinctive garb, which His followers must wear. The robe of Moses is the Law ; the garment of Christ is especially His grace, His justice, and His spirit. He concludes with the remark that the baptized person puts on Christ "dum in gratiam illius, justitiam et praerogativam inseritur, ac per spiritum illius regeneratur."8 4. Covering and Protection. — The analogy between Christ and a garment that is put on, according to some authors, implies the idea that Christ is our covering and protection. Guyse says that the baptized "are, as it were, all covered with Christ, as a man is covered with his garments."7 He gives the same interpre tation of Rom. XIII, 14: "See that ye be all over covered with Christ, as with a garment, and be found in him."8 According to Locke, Christ so covers the Christians that "to God now looking upon them there appears nothing but Christ."9 Already Calvin had said that Paul by the "metaphor of a garment" wished to express the close union of the faithful with Christ, so that "in the presence of God, they bear the name and character of Christ, and are viewed in him rather than in themselves."10 Pool says, in ref erence to Rom. XIII, 14, that it is "Christ and his righteousness only that can cover us (as a garment doth our nakedness) in the sight of God."11 According to Hofmann, the command to put on Christ was given in contrast to the moral nakedness of the natural man, "im Gegensatze gegen die sittliche Blosse des natiirlichen Menschen;"12 whereas long before him St. Bruno had seen in the words of Paul a reference to the naked state of man's soul in consequence of original and personal sin. He observes, relatively • Comm. ad Gal. et Eph., 125-126. 7 Practical Expositor, III, 335. » Op. cit., Ill, 541. 9 Quoted from Belsham, Ep. of Paul, III, 72. The original could not be obtained. 10 Comm. on Gal. and Eph., no. 11 Annotations on H. Bible, 526. " Heilige Schrift N. T., Ill, 547. 6 to Gal. Ill, 27, that man, who by sin became naked and suffered want and ignominy, puts on Christ "et ad tegendam nuditatem suam et ad gloriam."13 More clearly does he refer to Adam's sin when he interprets St. Paul's exhortation to the Romans as a command to clothe their nakedness with the faith of Christ and the other virtues that follow on faith: "Homo, enim, propter peccatum de paradiso nudus ejectus est; sed nuditas ista velari debet ornamento fidei caeterarumque virtutum."14 Guyse and Macknight stress the point that Christ covers us completely. Guyse, as we have observed, remarks that we are, "as it were, all covered with Christ, as a man is with his gar ment."15 Macknight asserts that "to put on as a garment this or that quality . . . signifies to acquire great plenty of the thing said to be put on."18 But long before these men, Ven. Herveus explained St. Paul's exhortation "Christum induimini" as mean ing: "Formam Christi sumite vestem, ut habitus et forma illius undique fulgeat, et repraesentetur in nobis."17 The idea of covering suggests, if it does not necessarily in clude, that of protection. In fact, both ideas may be harmonized in so far as this covering is at the same time decorative and pro tective. Walaf ridus Strabo,18 Peter Lombard,19 and other medie val writers, in explanation of Gal. Ill, 27, quote the words : "Christum induistis, id est, conformes ei facti estis, quod est vobis honor, et contra aestus protectio." The idea of covering and protection is clearly set forth by St. Thomas : "Qui induitur aliqua veste, protegitur ac contegitur ea, et apparet sub colore vestis colore proprio occultato. Eodem modo et qui induit Christum, protegitur et contegitur a Christo Jesu, contra impugnationes et aestus, et in eo nihil aliud apparet nisi qui Christi sunt."20 Corol. 1. "Induere Christum" means to put on Christ as our armor. — Beet21 regards the words "put on the Lord Jesus Christ," in Rom. XIII, 14, as "parallel" with the expression contained in v. 12: "Let us . . . put on the armour of light." To the exposi- 13 Opera, II, 217. " Op. cit., II, 73. 1B Op. cit., Ill, 335- 18 Apostolic Ep., 393. 17 Migne, P. L., 181, 782 A. 18 Migne, P. L., 114, 577 D. 19 Migne, P. L., 192, 133 A. 20 In Omnes Pauli Ep. Comm., 142 D. 21 Comm. on Rom., 347. tion of Rom. XIII, 14, given above, he adds : "Since union with Christ makes us safe, and gives us power to do God's work, to put on Christ is to arm ourselves for the fight." According to Whedon, St. Paul exhorts the Romans to let Christ "be buckled on" to their "body and soul as an armour," and to put Him on "instead of wanton attire."22 Moule explains how we are to put on Christ as our armor: "It is by the 'committal of the keeping of our souls unto Him,' not vaguely, but definitely and with pur pose, in view of each and every temptation."23 Zahn2* objects that, although St. Paul's term reminds us of his words in v. 12, yet "wird . . . Christus schwerlich dadurch als die Waffenriistung der Christen bezeichnet sein sollen." The foregoing explanation, he continues, could not be applied to Gal. Ill, 27, and Eph. IV, 24, and Col. Ill, 10. Moreover, the passages, in which the Apostle describes the armor of the Christians, mili tate against the proposed interpretation. On the contrary, he says, the picture of the "notwendigen Riistung fur den Kampf" is superseded by that of the "wohlanstandigen Wandels." Corol. 2. Christ as the "covering" for our sins. — The inter pretation that Christ is as a garment covering us, has, on the other hand, been advanced as a proof of the Protestant doctrine con cerning the outward imputation of the justice of Christ. "Induere Christum," according to Melanchton, means, in the first place, that the sinner with the arm of faith seizes Christ as his Savior and acknowledges Him as the covering whereby we are shielded against God's wrath.25 In Baptism, he says, in another place, we have put on Christ "scl. imputata nobis ipsius justicia."28 Catholics maintain that the metaphor gives no countenance to this theory. Belsham calls it a "notion than which nothing can be more foreign to the Apostle's mind, or more inconsistent with reason and with Christianity."27 Comely also warns against this interpretation. After quoting the words of St. Thomas given above, he adds that we must be careful not to understand St. Paul's figure "de mera quadam apparentia vel externa imputa- tione ; per baptismum quippe," he continues, "homo regenerate," since through Baptism the new man is born, the Christian be- *2 Comm. on N. T., Ill, 384. 23 Ep. to the Rom., 368. 24 Brief an d. Rom., 567. » Opera, XV, 719. 28 Op. cit, XV, 1024. " Ep. of Paul, III, 73. 8 comes a member of the mystical body of Christ, is informed by His Spirit and is perfectly conformed to Him.28 Burkitt contends the idea of a garment does not adequately express the change wrought in us when we "put on Christ in Baptism. "To put on Christ," he observes, "is not as to put on a Suit of Cloaths fitted to the body, but as Metal cast into a Mould, receiving the figure from it."29 Comely and Schaefer, however, reject this view. According to Schaefer, clothes give a new form and at the same time fit the figure of the person who wears them. "So," he continues, "besteht der Getaufte in seiner Personlichkeit fort, tritt aber mit dem lebendigen Christus in eine mystische Vereinigung ein."30 A decidedly better way to find the solution of our problem, is to seek, as many commentators have done, to establish the philo logical origin of St. Paul's formula. II. The Metaphor "Induere Christum," a Hebrew Original Vorstius31 and others insist that St. Paul borrowed this figure from the Hebrew tongue. "Evoveadai, they maintain, is the equiva lent forTinb, which, in its literal sense, means "to clothe." Stock32 asserts that Vorstius has clearly proved that the metaphorical sig nification was given to evaveadai by the N. T. writers after the example of the Hebrew equivalent. Stephanus,33 Cornelius a Lapide,34 and Alexander Natalis35 simply regard this phrase as a Hebraism. Cremer remarks "die Prof.-Grac. kennt diese Aus- drucksweise nicht ausser dem homerischen em'mwu akKyv, avaiSelyv, II. 20, 381 ; 1, 149. Sie ist wesentlich semitisch."38 Gesenius87 adduces various instances of the metaphorical use of 51125 and the corresponding words in Aramaic and Syriac ; while Schoettgen,'8 to buttress his contention that St. Paul, in Rom. XIII, 14, is speaking "de anima sane vestienda," quotes several cabalistic in terpretations of rabbis, in which they speak of clothing man's soul. 28 Comm. in II Cor. et Gal., 517. 29 Expository Notes on N. T. (no pages marked). 30 Brief e an d. Thess. u. an d. Gal., 302. 81 De Hebraismis N. T., 126. 32 Clavis N. T., 336. 38 N. T. Graec. et Lot., 215. 34 Comm. in Scrip. S., XVIII, 226. 35 Comm. in Omnes Ep., 205. 38 Bib.-theol. Wbrterbuch d. neut. Gr'dc, 377. 87 Thesaurus Phil. Crit., II, 742. 88 Horae Heb. et Tal., 571. Yet when the authors, who think "induere Christum" is a metaphorical locution borrowed from the Hebrew language, wish to determine the precise meaning of the original Hebrew and the fundamental idea underlying the metaphor, they differ not a little. i. "Induere" = Union. — Borger,39 who is quoted also by Bloomfield,40 opines that the Hebrew equivalent for "induere" is used "de quavis conjunctione arctiore." Accordingly, he inter prets Gal. Ill, 27, as meaning "arctissimo cum Christo vinculo estis conjuncti." De Wette41 regards the phrase as a "Bild der innigsten Geistesgemeinschaft mit Chr." He adds that the word 12335 was used in a similar sense by the Hebrews. 2. "Induere" = Abundance. — According to Tholuck,42 "1035 in a figurative sense, means to be wholly filled with anything." Accordingly, he states that Paul in Rom. XIII, 14, "exhorts to a close union of the soul with Christ." Stuart, after interpreting "induimini Christum," in Rom. XIII, 14, in the sense of "imitate," adds that "perhaps it here means like the Hebrew TO 35 , to be filled with, and so the idea is: Be filled with a Christian spirit, abound in it ; 'let Christ dwell in you richly.' "4 '43 3. "Induere" = Adoption. — Thus Ellicott explains a>8veo-6ai, which is used in the LXX for the Hebrew ti$35. In this sense, too, he interprets Gal. Ill, 27. "The Christian, at his baptism, 'took to himself Christ, and sought to grow into full unison and union with Him."44 4. "Induere" == Assumption of Qualities. — Preuschen45 re marks that in the N. T. ivSvta-dai, like 12J15, is very frequently used metaphorically to signify the "Annahme v. Eigenschaften, Tugen- den, Gesinnungen u.a." "Induere Christum" he takes to mean "sich d. Geist Chr. wie e. Gewand umlegen." In a similar way, Wieseler46 notes that the figure of a garment is frequently used in the O. T. in regard to "Eigenschaften, Zustanden und Stimmun- gen der Seele." In the same meaning, he says, is the phrase "to 39 Interpr. Ep. ad Gal., 246. 40 Recensio synop. Annot. Sacr., VII, 406. 41 Erklarung d. Brief es an d. Rom., 177. 42 Exposition of Rom., 399. 43 Comm. on Rom., 406. 44 N. T. Comm., II, 448. 45 Griech.-deutsch. Handworterbuch 2. N. T., 387-388. 46 Comm. iiber d. Gal., 318-320. 10 put on a person" used in the N. T., by which "nicht zunachst der aussere habitus und Wandel, sondem vor Allem die bis in den Grund gehende Umbildung und Verahnlichung gemeint wird." Accordingly, he explains Gal. Ill, 27, as meaning "sein Bild," i.e., that of the heavenly and perfect man, "in sich aufnehmen und in sich ausgestalten." With this explanation, he contends, also Rom. XIII, 14, harmonizes very well. Here the Roman Christians are exhorted to put on the Lord Jesus, i.e., "nach dem V. 13 erwahnten Gegensatze, des Herrn Jesu Bild durch einen sittlichen Wandel in sich auszugestalten." 5. "Induere" = Acquisition of Anything whereby we are honored or dishonored. — Stephanus47 remarks that 12J3b is used "in re quavis cujus accessione vel ornamur . . . vel dedecora- mur." He adds, however, that the "peculiaris energia" of the Pauline formula in Gal. Ill, 27, seems to be "quod in possessionem Christi mittamur, ita ut ille sit in nobis et nos in illo." By way of example he refers to Judg. VI, 34, where we read: "Spiritus autem Domini induit Gedeon." In Rom. XIII, 14, Stephanus thinks that the Apostle refers to the "f ructus sanctificationis . . . a Christi Spiritu exorientes," with which we are to adorn our selves. A more exhaustive exposition of ^he figurative meaning of 312)5 is given by Cornelius a Lapide. He declares that the Hebrew word 1252b is used to express that some one is clothed with "pudore, decore, salute, justitia, maledictione, id est, his repleri, copiose decorari, vel dedecorari." "Indumentum," therefore, signifies "copiam undique circumfusam."48 In Canon XXXVII, he ex plains the nature of the metaphor. At times, he says, St. Paul mentions the "rem . . . pro adjacentibus rei." Thus, for in stance, Christ is called faith, grace, and Baptism. Among other examples that serve to illustrate this way of speaking, he adduces that of "induere Christum." By this figure, St. Paul means to say that the baptized put on "Christi virtutes, spiritum et mores."40 In agreement with the foregoing explanation of the figurative meaning of "induere" in general and of "induere Christum" in particular is his interpretation of Gal. Ill, 27, and Rom. XIII, 14. The Galatians, he explains, have received in Baptism the "copiam " N. T. Graec. et Lat., 78. 48 Comm. in Scrip. S., XVIII, 226. 49 Op. cit, XVIII, 29. 11 Christi gratiam, dona, virtutes," which surround and cover them like a garment, so that they become "consortes divinae naturae et filiationis, ac consequenter divinarum operationum," by which Christ should shine in them.50 And the exhortation in Rom. XIII, 14, means : Put on the Lord Jesus Christ, so that "Jesu spiritus, gratia, virtus, vita, in vobis eluceant."51 6. "Induere" Expresses Condition in Contrast to Con duct. — Cremer52 contends that, whenever Paul uses ivSveo-Oai meta phorically, a condition (Zustand) is meant and not conduct (Ver- halten) . St. Paul's exhortation to put on Christ "lauf t nicht auf ein Verhalten wie das Verhalten Jesu hinaus," and his statement in Gal. Ill, 27, "besagt nichts weniger, als dass die Getauften erscheinen, als waren sie Christus oder Abbilder Christi." Here Christ is to be considered "nicht nach seinem Verhalten, seinem Wandel, sondern nach seiner Heilsbedeutung." After observing that the words X/dio-tov iveova-aaOe in Gal. Ill, 27, must be interpreted in accordance with the phrase iv Xpiarcp thai, he continues: "Wer getauft ist, hat Christum angezogen, ist des Heiles teilhaftig." If Rom. XIII, 14, is to be interpreted consistently with the fore going explanation, it must mean that the Romans "durch den glaubigen Zusammenschluss mit dem Herrn des Heiles sich in den Stand setzen sollen," to fulfill the exhortation contained in the second half of the same verse. III. The Metaphor "Induere Christum" a Greek Original Another class of commentators hold that the Apostle's figure is Greek in origin. They point to the fact that the Greek writers use ivoveo-dai with a personal object, which is exactly the use St. Paul makes of the word. Commentators conclude, therefore, that the inspired writer was not the originator of this figurative locution in Greek, and that he did not borrow the expression from the Hebrew, but that he merely used a metaphor already in vogue among the Greeks. The opinions of exegetes, however, concern ing the precise meaning of the current Greek phrase hioveo-Bai nva, and consequently of the Pauline formula ivovcadai Xpiarov again vary greatly. The following list will give an idea of the obscurity and confusion concerning the fundamental concept contained in these figures of speech. 50 Op. cit, XVIII, 547- 81 Op. cit, XVIII, 226. 52 Btb.-theol. Worterbuch d. neut. Gr'dc, 378. 12 i. ENAYESOAI TINA = Imitation in General. — Tholuck5* ventures the opinion that evSu'eo-lW nva "directly signifies, even in Greek, to imitate anyone" ; while Stuart54 less boldly asserts that to imitate "is the usual sense" of the Greek figure. Olshausen55 observes that "profane writers also use a.7ro8ijeo-0 Greek-Eng. Lex. of N. T., 214. 81 Notes on Rom., 322. 15 5. ENAYE20AI TINA = Expression for Discipleship. — Schleusner82 attaches a twofold meaning to our figure. 'Evovw nva, he says, is used either of one "qui aliquem doctorem sequitur, qui alterum imitatur eique similis fieri conatUr," or of one, "qui arctissimis cum aliquo conjungitur vinculis." Accordingly, re ferring to Gal. Ill, 27, he says the baptized are united with Christ "arctissimis vinculis." As is evident from the words quoted above, discipleship, according to Schleusner, implies imitation; and in this sense he understands Rom. XIII, 14: "Imitamini sensus et animum Domini nostri J. C." He cites Dion. Hal. as an authority for the use of ivSveo-Oai nva in the sense of to imitate, and he adds that also in other writers the phrase "Platonem, Pythagoram induere" is used in the meaning of "fieri discipulum Pythagorae et Platonis, se conformare ad ejus exemplum."83 Similarly, Barnes,84 commenting on Schleusner's words, observes that the "Greek writers speak of putting on Plato, Socrates, etc.," in the meaning of "to take them as instructors ; to follow them as disci ples." Hence he understands the "induere Christum" in Rom. XIII, 14, as meaning "to take him as a pattern and guide, to imi tate his example, to obey his precepts, to become like him."85 6. ENAYE50AI TINA =Intimate Union and Life-Fellow ship. — Ellicott88 remarks that from the instances collected by Wetstein it is clear that ivovtaOai nva is a "strong expression, de noting the complete assumption of the nature etc. of another." Ford,87 in his exposition of Rom. XIII, 14, declares that St. Paul's expression denotes "the most intimate spiritual union and appro priation, such as is indicated by our baptism into Christ." Elli cott88 himself interprets the "induere Christum" in Gal. Ill, 27, as implying a most intimate union with Christ, — "we are brought cis p.(av avyyivaav Kal ptlav ISeav (Chrys.) with him"; SO that, as Calvin89 had said, before God we bear the name and the person of Christ, and "in Ipso magis quam nobismet Ipsis censeamus." De Wette,90 as was noted above, understands the phrase cv&vto-dai Xpurrov as a "Bild der innigsten Geistesgemeinschaft mit Chr."; 82 Nov. Lex. Graeco-Lat. in N. T., I, 631. 88 Ibid. 84 Op. cit., 322. 88 Ibid. 88 Comm. on Gal., 89. 87 Comm. on Rom., 280. 88 Op. cit., 89. 89 Comm. on Gal. and Eph., no. 90 Erklarung d. Brief es an d. Rom., 177. 16 while Philippi91 calls it a "figure for entrance into most intimate union and life-fellowship with Him." As examples of this use of ivUtadai, both authors refer to the Hebrew word 125ab as well as to the Greek and Latin classics. The explanation of eVovco-flai nva given by Borger92 and ap proved by Bloomfield,93 is essentially the same as the foregoing. It means, according to these writers, "homine aliquo familiariter uti ; familiaritatem contrahere cum aliquo." Familiarity connotes union, and it is in this sense that they interpret the Pauline formula in Gal. Ill, 27. By Baptism, they say, we are united to Christ "arctissimo . . . vinculo." Calmet94 understands the phrase "indui aliquem" in the same sense; "nempe, res illius curare, unius esse sententiae, familiaiter uti." According to him, the "induere Christum'' in Rom. XIII, 14, means to love and follow Christ, and to show forth "divini hujus exemplaris effigiem in gestis ;"95 whereas the form in Gal. Ill, 27, signifies to be filled with Christ's spirit, "ipsius spiritu perfusi," to be enriched with his gifts and made beloved sons of God.96 Turner97 and Rendall98 give no general meaning of the phrase iv&veadat nva, but maintain that the precise sense in each instance must be determined by the context. Turner gives to "induere Christum" in Rom. XIII, 14, the meaning to "become assimilated to the character of Christ," and to Gal. Ill, 2"j, to embrace "the religion of Christ."99 IV. The Metaphor "Induere Christum" Derived from Various Civil or Religious Customs In order to explain the precise meaning of the Pauline formula, some commentators follow a course quite different from the one described. Abstracting from the philological origin of "induere Christum," they discover in the phrase a figure taken from the idea of putting on a garment, and maintain that it is used by St. Paul in reference to some incident or custom ; but as to the nature of this fact or custom they are by no means agreed. The opinion 91 Comm. on Rom., 315. 92 Interpr. Ep. ad Gal., 246. 98 Recensio synop. Annot. Sacr., 406. 94 Comm. in N. T., Ill, 520. 98 Ibid. 98 Op. cit, III, 835. 97 Notes on Rom., 96. 98 Ep. to the Gal., II, 174. 99 Op. cit, 96. 17 of exegetes on this point may be divided into three classes, ac cording as they explain our metaphor by facts or customs that are Christian, Jewish, or pagan in origin. i. "Induere Christum" Derived from Christian Customs a) From the Garments of Baptism Taking their cue from the words : "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ" (Gal. HI, 27), some interpreters conclude that St. Paul derived his simile from the custom of put ting on clothes — in later times new clothes — after Baptism. This view is held as certain by Usteri, Macknight, and Beyschlag. Usteri remarks that St. Paul applies this figure to "die das aussere Leben wie das Innere des Gemiithes umfassende Verahnlichung und Vereinigung mit Christo."100 Macknight simply adds that, in the Apostle's phrase, Christ signifies "the temper and virtues of Christ."101 According to Beyschlag,102 the practice of putting on the clothes — "perhaps in those days a new white baptismal robe" — suggested to Paul the idea of Baptism as the medium of our com munion with Christ. It is of interest to note that J. B. Lightfoot103 seems undecided as to the correctness of this opinion. On the one hand, he deems it "scarcely probable" that "the ceremonial of baptism had become so definitely fixed at this early date, that an allusion to the white garments of the baptized" would speak for itself. On the other hand, after noting that the metaphor is very common in the LXX, he adds that in the context of a passage of St. Justin,104 which he regards as a "reminiscence of this passage of St. Paul," "there is apparently an allusion to the baptismal robes." Trollope105 accords to this view only a mere probability ; while Ellicott,106 although deeming it "very plausible," rejects it. Other commentators are more positive in rejecting this explanation. They assert that the method of procedure was quite the opposite ; that the language of St. Paul in the course of time gave rise to the custom of putting on new or white garments after Baptism. Already Musculus107 advanced this view. According to him, the 100 Comm. iiber d. Gal., 135. 101 Apostolic Ep., II, 270. 102 N. T. Theol., II, 236. 10S£/>. to the Gal., 149-150. 104 Migne, P. G., 6, 745 A. 105 Comm. on N. T., II, 465. 108 Comm. on Gal, 89. 107 Comm. ad Gal. et Eph., 126. 18 early Christians, in order to express that by Baptism Christ is put on, clothed in a new and white garment those whom they baptized. Deyling,108 who flourished in the beginning of the eighteenth cen tury, shared the opinion of Musculus. The practice of putting on white garments after Baptism, and wearing them for eight days, he says, owes its origin to the Apostle's words, and first came into vogue in the beginning of the third century. Hasaeus,109 a con temporary of Deyling, likewise rejects the explanation of the origin of the Pauline formula from the putting on of white gar ments after Baptism on the ground that this custom was not in vogue in the time of St. Paul. Of the more modern exegetes, Sieffert-Meyer110 declines to accept this opinion for the same reason as Hasaeus. He adduces the common use of the figure of speech and the absence of any hint in the context as further gen eral reasons for rejecting this as well as any other allusion that might be attached to St. Paul's words. Schaefer111 also deems the currency of this mode of expression a sufficient reason for rejecting "zu seiner Motivierung" all allusions to any customs, and he mentions especially the "Anlegen von Kleidern bei der Taufe." Like Musculus and Deyling, Schaff112 is of opinion that the "figure of putting on Christ as a new dress gave rise afterwards to the custom of wearing white baptismal garments" ; but he adds that there is "no trace that such a custom existed already in the Apostolic Church." Rendall113 thinks that "perhaps the language of the Apostle contributed to the spread of the ceremonial." Yet he maintains that the "symbolism of white garments . . . differed materially" from the idea St. Paul wishes to express in Gal. Ill, 27. The white robes, he explains, "signified the cleansing effect of baptism" ; whereas the Apostle, as the context shows, is speak ing of "enfranchisement and emancipation from control." b) From the Water of Baptism Schmidt and Holzendorff apparently see in the phraseology of St. Paul in Gal. Ill, 27, an allusion to the waters of Baptism, which, like a garment, entirely covered the neophyte. So, they 108 Observat. Sacr., 326. 109 De Baptizatis Christum indutis, 1009. 110 Brief an d. Gal., 228. 111 Erkldrung d. zwei Brief e an d. Thess. u. an d. Gal., 302. 112 Pop. Comm. on N. T., Ill, 323. 113£/>. to the Gal., II, 174 19 say, those who are baptized are, as it were, "enveloped in Christ, so that they appear as the image of Christ, the Son of God."114 In a somewhat different way, H. J. Holtzmann115 explains the "Christum induistis" in Gal. Ill, 27. According to his view, the immersion in Baptism represents "den Untergang des alten Fleischesmenschen," the emersion "den Hervorgang eines neuen, eines Geistesmenschen" ; "der ganze Akt aber heisst 'den Christus anziehen.' " 2. "Induere Christum" Derived from Jewish Customs a) From the Inauguration of the High Priest A second class of exegetes, especially of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, think that St. Paul derived his image from Jewish customs. Deyling,116 who, according to Wolf,117 is the most celebrated of these authors, seeks to explain the Pauline form of speech by referring to the solemn inauguration of the High Priest, which at the time of the second temple was performed by the vesting with the priestly robes, and which was called "multi- plicatio vestium." At the time of the first temple, he explains, according to the express law of God (Ex. XXIX, 7), the High Priest was anointed before being admitted to his sacred functions. But at the time of the second temple, because, as the Talmudists say, the oil of unction, or holy oil, was no longer to be had, or because the Jews no longer attributed any sanctifying power to it, the priests were consecrated and initiated by the investment with eight garments. Consequently, to put on the robes of the High Priest was tantamount to being made High Priest. In this cere mony Deyling finds the key for the explanation of the "induere Christum" used by St. Paul. For in Baptism the Holy Ghost, like the holy oil, "is poured forth abundantly" on the Christians, and they are clothed with Christ, "hoc est justitia, merito, et sanctitate ejus, tamquam vestibus sanctissimis." Thereby they are inducted into the priestly office and consecrated priests of the New Law. The part of the High Priest's accoutrement, which is most pertinent to our subject, he says, is the "pj, the plate of gold on which were engraven the words STliTS 1251p — "Sanctitas Jeho- 114 Comm. on N. T., 305. 118 Lehrbuch d. neut. Theol., II, 197. «• Observ. Sacr., 322 ff. »« Curae Phil, et Crit, III, 738. 20 vae." This plate, which like a fillet encircled his forehead, was to signify that the High Priest was "ipso Jehova . . . indutus, sum- maque Dei sanctitate munitus ornatusque." After referring to a similar practice of the pagans, who wore coronets bearing the images of the gods, to show that they were their priests and devotees,118 he remarks that, in contrast to the pagans and the Jewish High Priest, the Christians "non idoli nomen, nee nudas nominismfTliteras, sed Christum ipsum, quando baptismi lavacro initiantur, et consecrantur, teste Apostolo, induunt."119 For Christ is Jahve, our justice ; He is the Holy One of the Lord, yes, Holi ness itself. The golden plate, Deyling adds, possessed no inherent sanctity, as the Jews foolishly asserted; it was merely a symbol of the sanctity and justice of Christ with which the Christians are clothed in Baptism. Before concluding, we shall adduce one more parallel men tioned by Deyling. As the High Priest had to observe a certain order in vesting with the sacerdotal robes, so the Christians must first put on Christ "in regeneratione et justificatione . , . imputa tive per fidem, . . . dein in renovatione imitative per sanctifica- tionem.120 J. Lightfoot, who wrote in the middle of the seventeenth cen tury, gives a similar explanation of the origin of the Pauline formula. He does not, however, derive the metaphor from the inauguration of the High Priest. He is of opinion that the meta phorical use by St. Paul of "induere" and "exuere" is to be ex plained by the vesting of the priests in the Old Law in general. For, when the turn of the priests came to minister in the temple, they first put off their ordinary clothes and, after washing them selves, vested with the sacerdotal robes. Also during the time of their service in the temple, they took off their priestly garments at night and resumed them again in the morning. "Ad hanc consuetudinem," he concludes, "alludere videntur haec loca Scrip- turae in quibus induere et exuere metaphorice sumuntur.121 b) From the Making of the Covenant with the Jewish People Theodore Hasaeus122 rejects the exegesis of Deyling chiefly because the whole analogy is limited to only one point, namely, that of clothing ; whereas the fact or custom by which Gal. Ill, 2"j, 118 Cfr. Suetonius, Domitianus, 4, 4. 119 Op. cit, 322. 120 Op. cit, 327. 121 Opera, I, 650. 122 De Baptizatis Christum indutis, 1018 S. 21 is to be explained, must represent both a clothing and a washing. Also, he rejects, without comment, as unsatisfactory, the opinion advanced by J. Lightfoot and others, which contains both these elements. Only that fact or custom, he asserts, can serve as an adequate explanation of the expression "induere Christum" in Gal. Ill, 27, which contains the vestige of a washing and a clothing; the latter, however, must be of such a nature that it suggests the putting on of Christ as a garment. Moreover, the symbolic mean ing of this fact or custom must have been kept alive in the minds of Jews and Christians by some ceremony. Finally, it must agree with the purpose St. Paul had in view. All these elements, he thinks, are contained "in illustri ilia populi Judaici in numerum Foederatorum Dei aggregatione" and in the Jewish and the Christian rites to which this fact gave rise. To obtain a fair idea of the nature of this interpretation, it will be sufficient to examine briefly the author's exposition of his third point; namely, that the putting on of the clothes on the memorable occasion referred to may be regarded as a type of the putting on of Christ as a garment. The cloud under cover of which God appeared when he gave the Law on Sinai, was the same as the famous pillar of cloud and of fire, out of which God thereafter was wont to speak to His people. But, as is admitted even by the Jews, He who spoke from the cloud and promulgated the Law, was the Son of God. But this cloud or pillar, because it covered and surrounded the people, is represented under the picture of a garment. This contention he seeks to prove especially by passages from sacred and profane writers who describe a cloud after the manner of a garment, and from the fact that the water trickled down from out the cloud and surrounded the people like a garment. Since — so he would have us conclude — at the time of the making of the Covenant, after the people had washed themselves and put on their clothes — perhaps fresh clothes — Christ spoke through a cloud which bears some resemblance to a garment, the act of the people's dressing may be conceived as a putting on of Christ. 3. "Induere Christum" Derived from Pagan Customs a) From the "Toga Virilis" The figure "induere Christum," some authors hold, has been borrowed by St. Paul from the custom of changing the "toga praetexta" for the "toga virilis." When the Roman youth donned 22 the "toga virilis," he was emancipated from the domestic rule and ushered into the ranks of citizens. The investment of a youth with man's dress was celebrated by religious rites.123 To this custom Bengel124 and Fausset125 refer St. Paul's words when they call Christ our "toga virilis." Bengel adds, in explanation of Gal. Ill, 27, that, consequently, the Christians are not estimated by what they were but that they are alike of Christ and in Christ — namely, sons of God.126 Rendall, however, infers from St. Paul's phrase not the idea of divine sonship but that of enfranchisement and emancipation from control. As the youth donned the "toga virilis" when he became of age, so is the Christian "invested at his Baptism with the robe of spiritual manhood," and thereby he comes into the possession of the "independence of a grown up son."127 Cornelius a Lapide128 and Crocio129 think that St. Paul refers also to the toga of the Hebrews. They add that with the toga the youths, as it were, put on "virum et virilem animum, virtutem et decus." Wolf130 says Crocio's view derives no slight degree of probability from the words of St. Paul, who, on the one hand, compares the Law with a pedagogue and the Jews with infants, and, on the other hand, alludes to the manhood or majority of the Galatians, who were converted to Christ. To illustrate the first point, Wolf quotes Crocio's Words in which he compares the moral law to a strict pedagogue, whose duty it was to lead the pupils to Christ ; the ceremonial law to the "toga puerilis," which prefigured the "toga virilis" of Christ ; and the judicial law, to a nurse, who guarded the Jews against what might harm them. On the other hand, remarks Wolf, when St. Paul says the Galatians are no longer under the Law, as a pedagogue (v. 25), and calls them sons (v. 26), i.e., adults, he hints at their majority. The exegete concludes that the Christians who have put on Christ can well be compared to the Roman youths who "toga virili aetatis virilis et libertatis quoque argumentum praeferebant."181 123 Cfr. Rendall, Ep. to the Gal., II, 174 i24 Gnomon of N. T., II, 360. 125 Comm. on O. and N. T., II, 332. 128 Op. cit., II, 360. 127 Op. cit., II, 174. "8 Comm. in Scrip. S., XVIII, 27. 129 Comm. in Ep. Pauli Minores, I, 96. 130 Op. cit, III, 739. "1 Ibid. 23 b) From the Initiation of the Sophists In their search for a suitable explanation of the Pauline for mula, interpreters have gone so far as to suggest that the figure was derived from the initiation of the sophists. In ancient Greece, when a young man wished to be enrolled in the ranks of the sophists, he was ceremoniously conducted to the public baths and there clothed with a distinctive garb (rpi^iav), which none but a sophist could wear. This initiation ceremony Hasaeus132 men tions in passing as a possible, though not satisfactory, explanation of "induere Christum." c) From Seneca or Stoicism Between the epistles of St. Paul and the writings of Seneca there are such striking parallels in thought and construction that some have deemed the two authors pupils, one of the other.133 One of these parallels bears on our subject. Seneca exhorts Lucilium: "Indue magni viri animum et ab opinionibus volgi secede paulisper."134 Pfleiderer135 notes the similarity between this exhortation and that contained in Rom. XIII, 14; but he does not think St. Paul borrowed his phrase from Seneca or vice versa. Clemen remarks that the resemblance "is one of expres sion only."136 Pfleiderer187 thinks that the parallels between St. Paul's style and Seneca's prove that both drew from a common source, namely the Greek culture of the time, "which was deeply imbued with Stoic conceptions," and which, moreover, exercised an influence on the Hellenistic Jews. Clemen,138 too, admits that St. Paul was "partially indebted for his style to Stoicism," which flourished at Tarsus. d) From the Mystery Religions Perhaps the most interesting explication of our metaphor is that which derives it from the mystery religions. The most striking similarities between Christianity and the ancient religions of the Orient are those that refer to man's rebirth and his union with the deity. In the mystery religions, man's regeneration and union with his god is frequently expressed by a change of garment. 132 De Baptizatis Christum indutis, 1011. 183 Cfr. Pfleiderer, Urchristentum, I, 30. ™ Lib. VII, Ep. V (67), 12. «s Op. cit, I, 41. 188 Primit. Christ, 61. 137 Op. cit, I, 41. 138 Op. cit, 61. 24 In the prehistoric period, divinities were represented under the form of animals ; and man, in taking the name and the semblance of his gods, believed that he identified himself with them. Even the ancient Romans clothed themselves with animal skins "be it that they believed they thus entered into communion with the monstrous idols which they worshipped, or that, in enveloping themselves in the pelts of their flayed victims, they conceived their bloody tunics to possess some purifying virtue."139 These primitive practices left their traces in numerous cults. The Roman mystics of later days put on cloth and paper masks, which repre sented the deity they worshipped. The initiates of the different mysteries in Greece and Asia Minor bore the title of Bear, Ox, Colt, and similar names. But let us examine more in detail the alleged analogies with St. Paul's expression that are found in the different mysteries. a. Egyptian Mysteries}*0 — The soul of one who is admitted to the mysteries of Isis, travels at night through the twelve houses of the zodiac, and in each his body is consecrated by a new gar ment. The putting on of these garments signifies that he has undergone twelve transformations. In the morning, the initiated is clothed with the heavenly garment ; a burning torch is placed in his right hand, and on his head a crown, from which palm- branches protrude, like so many rays. Thus arrayed he is placed on a pedestal before the goddess as a statue of the sun-god and is revered by the assembled mystics as a god. His divine regenera tion is then celebrated with a feast ; and for a few days the initi ated can enjoy the unspeakable happiness of being god's image. Thereupon, he leaves his heavenly garment in the temple, where it is kept for him, and returns to the earth. If the goddess so desires, the mystery must be renewed. The renewal, however, can be effected only by the putting on of the heavenly garment. After his death, the mystic is again clothed with this garment or with a simple black and white dress, which designates the wearer as the Logos. The clothing with these garments is to signify the union of the deceased with his god. p. Phrygian Mysteries.1*1 — The same idea pervades the Phrygian Mysteries. The mystic is decked in a wonderful festive 139 Cumont, Oriental in Rom. Paganism, 153-154. 140 Cfr. Reitzenstein, Hellen. Mysterienreligionen, 29-30. 141 Cfr. Reitzenstein, Op. cit., 32. 25 robe and a crown during the initiation, which consists in a bath, not with water, but with the blood of a bull. When the dress and the crown are tinged with the blood, he steps forth to be venerated as a god by the assembly. His dress is preserved for him; but after twenty years he must renew the consecration, at which he again wears the garment and thereby again becomes god. y. Persian Mysteries.1*2 — The cult of Mithra embodies similar ideas. In the liturgy of Mithra, which was strongly influenced by the Egyptian mysteries, the mystic who wishes to be reborn and to become a son of god wanders through the heavens and calls out for his own heavenly body which God has formed for him. This body he must put on instead of his earthly body ; but after the initiation he must resume the garment of his earthly body. Cumont says that there were seven degrees of initiation in the mysteries of Mithra, and that the mystic successively assumed the names of Raven, Occult, Soldier, Lion, Persian, Runner of the Sun, and Father. "These strange appellations," he continues, "were no empty epithets with no practical bearing. On certain occasions the celebrants donned garbs suited to the titles that had been accorded them."143 On various bas-reliefs, they are repre sented as carrying the counterfeit heads of animals, of soldiers, and of Persians. Dolger,144 to prove that the mystics wore the masks of their degree of initiation, refers especially to a representation of Mithra- communion on the bas-relief of Konjica. Here, on both sides of the table, we see mystics wearing animal masks, which, as Dolger emphasizes, cover only the face. 8. Babylonian Mysteries. — To prove that these ideas were cur rent also in the Babylonian mysteries, Dolger145 calls attention to a relief in bronze which pictures the exorcism of a sick man. The relief is divided into two parts. Above, there are seven figures with animal heads, which represent the demons, who, according to the ideas of the Babylonians, are the cause of disease. Below, on a pallet, lies the sick man with his hands raised in supplication to the deity. At each end of the bed two figures, wrapped in a fish garment, are performing the exorcism. These figures repre- «2 Cfr. Reitzenstein, Ibid. "8 Op. cit, 152. "4IX6T2, 148. 148 Op. cit, 147. 26 sent priests who are devoted to the cult of the fish deity Ea- Oannes. Dolger concludes that "wenn nun babylonische Priester im Fischgewand eingehuflt erscheinen, so ist damit sinnbildlich dargestellt die engste Vereinigung mit der Gottheit, dadurch, dass man sie wie ein Gewand anzieht."146 We have seen that the idea of putting on the garment of a god in order to express union with him, is quite common in the mys tery religions. It need not surprise us, therefore, that students of the comparative study of religions assert St. Paul derived his idea of putting on Christ as a garment from the mysteries. But the discovery is not new. Already Hasaeus, who wrote in the beginning of the eighteenth century, referred in passing to the initiation into the mysteries of Isis and Mithra as possible explanations of the origin of St. Paul's formula. He rejects this view as unsatisfactory, however, chiefly because, as he says, "Apostolus scribit ad Judaeos, quibus ilia gentilium sacra, ad quae ap-vryois vix aliquis accessus concedebatur, aut prorsus non, aut parum sane perspecta atque explorata erant."147 In our own times, however, Clemen says that the expression "to put on Christ" "might ultimately be traced to the belief — which was probably no longer held even in regard to the Mysteries in general — that the participant in the rites is physically united with the deity."148 Dolger first discusses the dependence of St. Paul's formula on the cult of Mithra. After pointing out that this form of worship ¦ was spread also in Tarsus, the Apostle's native city, he states that, if it is true that in the cult of Mithra masks were worn in the religious services already in the first half of the first century, "ware es an und f iir sich nicht undenkbar, dass Paulus bei seinem Worte vom 'Anziehen Christi' hierauf Bezug genommen hatte." But he adds immediately, "doch fehlt der Hauptvergleichungs- punkt: das Anziehen des Gottlichen." St. Paul, he explains, is speaking of the transformation into Christ, of the putting on of the spirit of Christ ; whereas the masks, worn in the worship of Mithra, were indeed a symbol of the degree of initiation, but not of the putting on of the deity. This idea, he contends, is brought out in the picture described above of the exorcism of the. sick man. For the fish garment covered, not only the head, but the whole body, and thereby expressed "die engste Beziehung zu Ea-Oannes, 148 Op. cit, 147. 147 Op. cit, 1014. 148 Primit Christ, 232. 27 dem Gott der Wasserwohnung, der Fischgottheit." From this fact he draws the conclusion: "Ware zur Zeit des hi. Paulus diese morgenlandisch-babylonische Auffassung von dem Anziehen des Fischgottes auch in Tarsus, bezw. Kleinasien und Palastina bekannt gewesen, — der Beweis steht jedoch noch aus — so konnte man vielleicht mit Recht annehmen, dass der Apostel mit Bezug auf die gelaufige heidnische Vorstellung sein Wort vom Anziehen Christi gepragt hatte."149 But this, he says, must remain an open question. Dolger puts it down as his opinion that we need not admit a direct allusion to any symbolic investiture to explain the phrase of St. Paul, for the reason that the idea of ivoveaOai "als das Anziehen einer geistigen Qualitat oder Gemutsverfassung" was very familiar to the Orientals.150 Steinmann follows Dolger pretty closely. After referring to the rites in vogue in the Babylonian and Persian mysteries, he concludes: "Sollte in diesen Brauchen wirklich der Gedanke der Vergottung durch Anziehen des Gewandes ausgedriickt sein, so konnte man vielleicht mit Recht annehmen, dass der Apostel mit Bezug auf die gelaufige Vorstellung sein Wort vom Anziehen Christi gepragt hatte."151 Yet, after recalling that this metaphor is found in Seneca and is frequently used by St. Paul, he prefers to regard the figure as an "Ausdruck der bilderreichen Sprache des Orients."152 We see from the foregoing review that even Catholic authors are much inclined to attribute some influence of the mystery religions on the use of our metaphor by St. Paul. e) From the Worship of Comus Before concluding this part of our investigation, we should like to note a few explanations taken from pagan religious cus toms, which are said to apply especially or solely to Rom. XIII, 14. The first of these explanations is drawn from the worship of Comus, the god of festive mirth, in the later mythology of the Greeks. In the orgies celebrated in honor of this deity, men and women interchanged their clothes and gave themselves up to im moral practices. To this dissolute custom St. Paul is said to allude when he commands the Romans, as it were, to put on, not Comus, but Christ.. This opinion is held by John H. Majus and is men tioned by Wolf.153 149 Op. cit., 149. 150 Op. cit, 149-150. 151 Brief e an d. Thess. u. Gal, 96. 182 Ibid. 153 Curae Phil, ct Crit, III, 271. 28 The latter, however, vigorously opposes this view. He grants that in regard to Rom. XIII, 14, the gloss has a slight degree of probability ("speciem exiguam") on account of the word «<3/«>« occurring in verse 13; but he maintains that the context of 'in duere Christum" in Gal. Ill, 27, clearly proves that this interpre tation is entirely false, for St. Paul here speaks of an entirely different matter, namely "de Christo, fide in baptismo ad justitiam induendo."154 He adds that, in his opinion, the metaphor in Rom. XIII, 14, refers, not to holiness that is not tainted by the vices of rioting and drunkenness (rapv, p.e8wv), but "inprimis ad justitiam Christi tenendam et solicite servandam."155 Kypke156 adopts an explanation of St. Paul's formula similar to that held by Majus. He does not, however, refer the words of Paul only to the worship of Comus, but in general to the Ktop.01, the nightly riotings that were held in honor of various gods. In these revels, men and women not only exchanged clothes, but frequently engaged in dances in which they wore masks. He concludes that St. Paul, in his exhortation, referred to these irpdowa and ay^para and exhorted the Romans to flee the shameful vices practised on these occasions. f ) From the Sacra Saliorum We may briefly note two other explanations of Rom. XIII, 14, which Deyling157 tells us were held by his contemporaries. Some, he says, refer the words in question to the festivities of the Salii. Every year the Salii, who were priests of Mars, in memory of the small oval shield that fell from heaven during the reign of Numa Pompilius, marched through the city. Each carried a shield on his left arm and in his right hand a short staff with which he struck the shield. At the altars and the temples of the god they halted and, singing a special chant, danced a war dance. g) From the Lupercalia Another custom mentioned by Deyling158 which is made to serve as a key to "induere Christum" in Rom. XIII, 14, is the Lupercalia. After offering sacrifices to Lupercus and indulging in a banquet at which wine flowed plentifully, the priests, half naked and half clad in goat skins, ran through the streets at night and with thongs made of goat skins struck every person they met, 154 Op. cit, III, 741. 158 Ibid. 138 Observat Sacr., II, 185. 157 Observat Sacr., 328 ff. >58 Op. cit, 329-330. 29 especially women, who sought the whipping from an opinion that it averted sterility and the pangs of childbirth. After reviewing the various customs proposed as the key for the explanation of "induere Christum," we may note that some authors, like Ellicott,159 Sieffert-Meyer,160 Comely,161 and Schae fer,162 explicitly deny all reference of St. Paul's words to any custom, whether Christian, Jewish, or pagan. The chief reasons for their rejection of all such explanations are summed up by Sieffert : "Geschichtl. rituelle Beziehungen des Bildes sind bei der allgemeinen Gangbarkeit desselben, und da der Kontext durchaus keine Andeutung enthalt, abzuweisen."163 Corollary— Relation Between Gal. Ill, 27, and Rom. XIII, 14, in General Commentators, old and new, have compared the use of the Pauline formula in Gal. Ill, 27, with its use in Rom. XIII, 14. In the former passage, the putting on of Christ is referred to our justification, in the latter to our sanctification.184 Some authors refer the putting on of Christ mentioned in Gal. Ill, 27, also to our sanctification, and that spoken of in Rom. XIII, 14, to our justification.165 In Gal. Ill, 27, the phrase is used in a "dogmatic" (Cook,166 Schaff,167 Sieffert-Meyer168) or "dogmatic-liturgical" sense Zockler189) ; in Rom. XIII, 14, in an "ethical" (Cook,168 Schaff,167 Sieffert-Meyer,168 Denney170) or "ethical-ascetical" sense (Zock ler169). In the former passages, the putting on of Christ is "rep resented as a finished fact" (Schaff,171 Lipsius,172 Sieffert- Meyer173) ; whereas, in the latter, it is the "subject of an ethical 159 Comm. on Gal., 89. 180 Brief an d. Gal, 228. 181 Comm. in II Cor. et Gal, 517. 182 Erklarung d. zwei Brief e an d. Thess. u. an d. Gal, 302. 183 Op. cit, 228. 184 Cfr. Calvin, Comm. on Rom., 490. D'Outrein, Spicilegium, 366 ff. Deyling, Observ. Sacr., 327. Wesley, Notes on N. T., 412. Godet, Comm. on Rom., 451. 165 Cfr. Pool, Annotations on H. Bible, 526. Guyse, Practical Expos itor, III, 541. Whedon, Comm. on N. T., Ill, 384. Binney, People's Comm. on N. T., 428. 188 Holy Bible with Comm., Ill, 214. 187 Pop. Comm. on N. T., Ill, 323. 188 Brief an d. Gal, 228. 189 Brief e an d. Thess. u. Gal, 71. 170 Ep. to the Rom., 699. 171 Op. cit, III, 323. 172 Brief e an d. Gal Rom. Phil, 171. 173 Op. cit, 228. 30 exhortation" (Lipsius172) to a "continuous duty" (Schaff174). "In both cases," adds Schaff, "vital fellowship is meant, but each step in the growing conformity to Christ is a new putting on of Him."175 Luther176 says the putting on of Christ mentioned in Gal. Ill; 27, is "according to the gospel," that mentioned in Rom. XIII, 14, is "according to the law." Jiilicher177 warns us not to conclude from the use of this phrase by St. Paul in his exhortation to the Romans that there was no trace of the new spiritual life left in them. He merely used this emphatic expression to stir up their conscience thoroughly. Valuation and Conclusion of the First Chapter After reviewing the interpretations of "induere Christum" by commentators in medieval and modern times, we are in a position to state the net results and estimate their value at least to some extent. We have noted an astounding variety of opinions con cerning the meaning and the origin of our metaphor. A number of exegetes think that the Pauline formula is immediately derived from the expression "to put on a garment" ; but they vary greatly in their explication of the fundamental idea expressed by this metaphor. Union, imitation, profession of discipleship, covering, and protection are the main ideas proffered. Some see in the expression a reference to the moral nakedness of the natural man, or of man in the state of original or personal sin. Others think the phrase used in Rom. XIII, 14, is equivalent to that other phrase of St. Paul, "put on the armour of light." Another class of interpreters seek to establish the philological origin of the phrase. Of these some contend it is of Hebrew, others of Greek origin. The principal idea contained in the origi nal, and consequently in St. Paul's expression, according to those who stand for the Hebrew origin of the phrase, is union, abun dance, adoption, assumption of qualities, virtues, and sentiments, or acquisition of anything whereby we are honored or dishonored. Cremer insists that the expression denotes a state or condition, and not conduct. The meanings given to the original phrase and to the Pauline expression by those who emphasize the Greek origin, are still more numerous. By some commentators the ex- 174 Op. cit, III, 323 and 134. 175 Op. cit., Ill, 134. 178 Comm. on Gal, 436. 177 Brief an d. Rom., 311. 31 pressions are made to imply imitation in general ; by others exter nal or internal imitation, or both internal and external imitation, or discipleship, or intimate union and life-fellowship, or finally familiarity. Turner and Rendall say no general meaning can be given ; but the sense must be determined by the context in every instance where the phrase is used. A third class of authors abstract from the philological origin of the phrase. Assuming the phrase to be a figure taken from the idea of putting on a garment, they maintain that St. Paul alludes to some fact or custom, by which his words must be ex plained. Some of these commentators think the Apostle derived the simile from Christian customs : from the garments of Baptism, or the waters of Baptism. Others seek an explanation in Jewish customs or incidents ; namely, the inauguration of the High Priests under the second temple, the vesting of the priests with their min isterial garbs, or the making of the Covenant on Mount Sinai. Finally, others propose pagan customs as the origin of the Pauline phrase. The investiture with the "toga virilis" or with the cloak of the sophists, or the dressing of the initiates in the various mys tery religions with a garment to express their union with the deity, have been advanced as explanations. A few authors have suggested that the "induere Christum," especially as used in Rom. XIII, .14, contains an allusion to the worship of Comus or to the Sacra Saliorum or to the Lupercalia. On the other hand, others positively deny all reference to any custom or fact, whether Chris tian, Jewish, or pagan in origin. This tremendous confusion of ideas clearly shows that we have before us one of the greatest N. T. problems still awaiting a solu tion. The investigation, however, of the conflicting and confusing interpretations of our metaphor is by no means useless for the solution of our difficulty. For, in the investigation of a problem, a historical review is bound to reveal the strength of one theory and the weakness of another. It shows which methods are im possible and which may be practicable for the correct explanation. So it is in our case. Although by our historical review we have not been able to find the solution of our problem, still in the laby rinth of opinions we can find a thread, which, if followed, may lead us to the solution. We have observed that some exegetes, in order to discover the fundamental idea contained in our metaphor, have sought first of all to establish the philological origin of the phrase together 32 with the meaning of the original. Commentators have noted a few examples of the very phrase of St. Paul, a&vto-Oal nva, in Greek authors. In the face of these facts, is it not reasonable to seek the key for the solution of our problem in the meaning and the use of this phrase by other Greek writers? For unless the context or the usage and spirit of St. Paul expressly demand the contrary, it must be assumed that he wrote iv&vtadai Xpiarov in the current understanding of the phrase boveaOai nva. But just here lies the difficulty. For, as we have noticed, the answers that have been given to the all-important question concerning the precise meaning of this expression in Greek literature, are extremely conflicting. Hence it seems to be necessary for the solution of our problem to seek some authority who stands in close touch with the Hellenic world and with St. Paul, and who can, therefore, more surely unfold to us the hidden meaning of this phrase both in the Greek literature and in the writings of the Apostle. No one is better suited to this task than the great St. John Chrysostom. For, both as an interpreter of the meaning of Greek phraseology and as an exegete of St. Paul's epistles, he ranks foremost among the schol ars of the early Church. An ardent admirer of the Apostle of the Gentiles, he devoted himself to an assiduous study of his writings. In his exegesis, he is faithful to the historico-philolog- ical method. He seeks above all to establish the literal sense of Holy Scripture ; and to this end he often prefaces his explanation with a historical introduction, and at times he even stops to clear up grammatical difficulties. Well has it been said that "no one has ever interpreted Holy Scripture so successfully as Chrysostom, with such thoroughness and prudence, one might say, with such sobriety and accuracy, yet with so much depth and comprehen siveness."178 For this task of exegesis he was eminently fitted. Reared and educated at Antioch, he was quite familiar with the thoughts and customs of the Oriental world. Besides, he was conversant with Greek philosophy and customs, was well versed in the Greek classics, and he lived at the time of the later phase of the Koivy Sioaoctos. Thus he not only was a grand representative of Oriental and Hellenic culture, but he also possessed a perfect knowledge of the ancient Greek literature as well as of the linguistic milieu in which St. Paul moved and wrote. 178 Bardenhewer, Patrol, 339. CHAPTER II INTERPRETATION OF "INDUERE CHRISTUM" ACCORDING TO ST. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM As is evident from the first part of our investigation, there exists among commentators utter confusion concerning the mean ing of the Pauline formula. In the present chapter we shall con sult the writings of St. John Chrysostom, the greatest authority on exegesis in the early Greek Church, in the hope that he may throw some light on this obscure question. We shall examine in particular the two passages in his commentaries referring to the "induere Christum" in Rom. XIII, 14, and Gal. Ill, 27. We shall first take up his commentary on Rom. XIII, 14, which is contained in his XXIV Homily on this Epistle. I. ENAYESOAI XPISTON in Rom. XIII, 14 1 . Exhortation to Put on the Arms of Light In Rom. XIII, 12, Paul tells us : "The night is passed and the day is at hand. Let us therefore cast off the works of darkness and put On the arms of light" — aTro6a>p.tda ovv to epya rov ctkotods, cvovo-wptOa oi to 07rAa rov vaip*6a) , they produce a change in us and conform us to themselves ; they give us safety and splendor. The expres sion ivovawneBa Se ra oirAa must mean : let us enter under this power, let us give ourselves up to this power and consequently be changed by it and conformed to it. Later we shall see what Paul under stands by "the arms" to which we should surrender ourselves. 2. Exhortation to "Put off Evil" In v. 13, Paul exhorts us to walk honestly, as in the day ; there upon he enumerates the principal works we should throw off. They are rioting and drunkenness, chambering and impurities, contention and envy. Chrysostom characterizes these sins as the bad garment — to rcovypb. IpAna — of which we should strip ourselves. 3. Exhortation to Put on Christ But, he says, Paul was not satisfied to strip us (airoovaai) of these garments; he wished thereupon to decorate us splendidly (7ri'£ei). But what is this new decoration? Paul tells us in the remarkable words : dAAa tvovaaaOe tov xvptov 'lyaoiv Xpurrov (v. i4). The meaning of the words "induere Christum" Chrysostom sets forth by contrasting them with the "exuere" and with the "induere arma." a) The "exuere" of Paul in v. 12, refers to the Kaxla ; but in speaking of this, says our Doctor, the Apostle mentions only deeds — ore p.ev yap rrepl rrjs Kcueia? Icpyaev, epya eXeytv* These are the irovypa. IpAna. b) The "induere" of Paul, therefore, naturally refers to the apery in contrast to the «a>a'a. Here, however, as Chrysostom explains, Paul mentions not deeds but, in the first place, arms — ore oe irepl rijs apery? ovKen 2/oya dAA' oir\a.B Thereby, he continues, the Apostle shows that virtue places him who possesses it in com plete safety and complete splendor — SeiKvvs on iv iraay aadtakeiq KaOiaryaw rj apery tov e\ovra ovttjv, Kal iv rraoyj kap.wporrjri.'' Thus we see that the on-Aa in v. 12 is a metaphorical expression for apery. By this explanation of oirXa Chrysostom evidently characterizes virtue as a superior power; and, if we enter into it (ivSvo-wfieBa) , 4 'T&pgita literally = to go into ; cfr. Liddell-Scott, Greek-Eng. Lex., 476. 8 Migne, P. G., 60, 623. 0 Ibid. 7 Migne, P. G., 60, 623-624 35 we are possessed of and changed by it ; we are made perfectly safe and brilliant. 'Ev8vap,e6a rb. aVAa then means : let us give ourselves over to the power of virtue ; the lx0VTa simply expresses the fact of possession. c) But, says Chrysostom, Paul does not pause here but passes on to something greater, something far more tremendous — dAA' iirl rb p.ei£ov ayu>v tov Aoyov, o iroAAai piKp.eda 81 to oVAa tov dxaroi, as we have seen, mean, according to Chrysostom's explanation: Let us give ourselves up to the power of virtue, which will effect that we have or possess virtue (rbv eXovra airyv), and that, consequently, we are changed by it and conformed to it. By analogy we can infer the general meaning of the command ivSvaaade . . . Xpurrov; viz., Give yourselves up to the power of Christ, so that you may possess Him and be changed by Him, and conformed to Him. Does this agree with Chrysostom's exposition of the words? 8 Migne, P. G., 60, 624. 36 Chrysostom first explains the effect this "induere" produces in us. As is evident from the context and the explanation of Chrysostom given above, the words ivSvaaade . . . Xpiarov are intended by the Apostle to refer to the acquisition or practice of virtue. Therefore, Chrysostom, in his explanation, likewise refers to virtue. To the words, he gives us the Lord Himself for a gar ment, the King Himself, he adds : for he who has put Him on, possesses virtue in its entirety — 'O yap tovtov rrepiBeBkypevos, arraaav i\et KaOokov ttjv aperyv. The first effect of the "induere arma" is our having, or pos sessing virtue — rov ex0VTa a-vryv, i.e., dptTrjv. But he who has put on (rrepiBeB\yp.evo68pa tkovvros ion. The mutual relations between Christ and us, which are enu merated above, not only express our intimate union with Christ, but imply also His power and dominion over us and our charac- 10 Cfr. Migne, P. G., 60, 624. 38 teristic of being His property. At the end of this passage, Chrys ostom expressly tells us that Christ seeks to be our all by uniting and joining us to Him in every way. This uniting of us to Him, of course, presupposes the power and dominion of Christ over us, His property. Here then we have again the principal elements of the "horrendum mysterium," possession of us as His property and His actual dominion over us and our consequent real union with Him. But the mystery includes still more. Although Christ, as our Lord and King, has power and dominion over us, still the motive that guides Him in its exercise is His exceeding love for us. It is for this reason that He exercises His power by uniting us to Him in every way — jravri rporria ovyKokkwv Kal awdrrrwv ypas ; orrep tou a6Spa d>ikovros ian. Chrysostom continues his exposition thus : Obey then and, rousing thyself from sleep, put Him on (IvSvaai airov), and when thou hast put Him on give up thy flesh to His bridle — koI evSvadpevos evi/viov airia rrdpexe ttjv adpKa. For this is what Paul intimates when he says, "Make not provision for the flesh in its concupiscences." The putting on of Christ here includes the subjection also of our flesh (body) to the power of Christ. Finally, after mentioning various vices that excite our lust, Chrysostom concludes: But thou, having put on Christ and thereby renounced all those things, seek only one thing, namely, to have a healthy body — 'AAA* 6 rbv Xpurrov h>8e8vp.evos av, rcdvra acelva rrepiKO^/ai, ev tjrrrei pjovov, oirws vyiaivowav «?XBS Tr)v crdpKa.11 According to Chrysostom's explanation given in the first half of the XXIV Homily on the Epistle to the Romans, the phrase ivSvaaaOe . . . Xpiarov means : a) Give yourselves up to the possession and dominion of Christ, who is your possessor as you are His property. b) This power Christ exercises over you out of love; conse quently c) You are united to Him in every way; so that d) He dwells actually in you and e) Dominates your whole being, even your body. 5. Confirmation of the Reality of Christ's Indwelling in Us Of the phrase ei 81 Xpiarbi iv vp.lv, which was cited by Chrysostom to show that the "induere Christum" effects the real indwelling 11 Migne, P. G., 60, 624. 39 of Christ in us, we find a wonderful exposition in the XIII Homily on the Epistle to the Romans. In this passage, Chrysostom em phasizes the reality of Christ's indwelling in us and of His taking possession of us. According to Chrysostom, the indwelling of Christ in us is implied by the indwelling of the Holy Ghost. But the reality of the indwelling of the latter he stresses again and again by repeating the word ex«v. We have, possess, the Spirit ; i.e., the Spirit dwells in us in reality. A striking description of the reality of this possession of the Spirit is given in the following words: Do not fear when you hear me speak of mortification (veKpiaaiv) ; for you possess the life really, which no death will deprive you of ; for this is the life of the Spirit. The IIveC>a here according to the context, is the third Wdorao-is of the Tpt'as. — 'Ex«s yap ttjv ovtois £v Kvpuvay. Here Chrysostom exclaims: Behold the absolute domination! behold the insuperable power! — EZSts 8eo-7roTetav iiriTetap,ivyv. EtSes la)(yv dp.aXov.ie 6. Further Explanation of "Induere Christum" and of Its Effects Towards the end of the XXIV Homily on the Epistle to the Romans, the "induere Christum" is again explained; especially its effects are again emphasized with wonderful force and clear ness and further developed. Here Chrysostom exhorts his readers to put on Christ in order to avoid all the vices he has just men tioned. That we may escape from all these (things), let us put on Christ — tov Xpiorov evSva&ueda, and be with Him continually — Kat p.er' airov SiyveKV's mp.ev.17 Evidently these last words, which express a lasting union, are an explanation of the preceding tov Xpurrov iv8vap.e8a, and must stand in relation to it as the effect to the cause. In this passage, Christ is without doubt regarded as a power who can and will afford us protection, provided we put Him on and thereby become united to Him. The tov Xpiorov iv8vamp*da, therefore, must mean : Let us enter into the power of Christ, let us become the property of Christ and give ourselves up to His power. In the passage before us, then, we have expressed : a) The surrender to the power of Christ — rbv Xpiorov ivSvawptBa, which has as its immediate effect 18 Migne, P. G., 60, 519. 19 Migne, P. G., 60, 631. 17 Migne, P. G., 60, 627- 41 b) A lasting union with Christ — Kai per' airov Sitjvoccbs 3>pev ; and as a further effect c) The protection against the evils — Iv' ovv ravra Sutcpvyupe* arravra. This exposition is highly illuminating and interesting. Chrysostom immediately tells us expressly that the lasting union is included in the "induere." He says : errel koI tovto icmv ivovaaadai, to ptySerrore airov airokeupByvai. — For this is the meaning of "to have put Him on," never to be separated from Him. But he empha sizes in the same sentence another effect of the "induere": to rcdvroBev airov cpaiveaBai iv yp.lv, — to exhibit Him always in us. These words express the visibility of Christ in us. He should be visible in us. We should really be what Christ is ; we should be other Christs. This visibility of Christ in us is evidently an effect of the "induere." From this we must conclude that the lasting union, too, is an effect of the "induere," for the two clauses are parallel. Through the union with Christ, which is the effect of the "induere Christum," the visibility of Christ in us is produced. Moreover, since this visibility is the effect of the "induere," it says more than mere imitation, it implies rather an assimilation to Christ. But we may ask in what respect Christ should be visible in us. Since many things can be predicated of Him, the context or the cir cumstances must determine in each case the nature and the extent of this representation or assimilation. We have said that Paul's exhortation, h>8vaaaBe . . . Xpiarov, in Rom. XIII, 14, refers to the acquisition or practice of virtue ; and it is in this sense that Chrysostom explains the Apostle's words. He tells us that Christ should be visible in us through our sanctity and through our mod eration — 81a ryv keyoptev, 'O Seiva tov Seiva iveSvaaro, ryv irokkyv dydrryv keyovres Kal ryv dSidkenrrov awovaiav.1* So we say of friends, such a one has put on such another, meaning their great love and constant intercourse ; for — so he continues — he who has put on seems to be that which he has put on — 6 yap ivSvadp.evo's, ixelvo aiverax, orcep evSeSvrai. Considering the meaning given above of ivSveaOai Xpurrov, the phrase 6 Seiva tov Seiva iveSvaaro, when used of friends, should mean that the one gives himself up to the influence of the other and consequently becomes really his property and is both united and conformed to him. Chrysostom, however, says that the phrase expresses the strong love and the constant intercourse of friends. At first sight, it may seem that these two explanations are at variance; but they harmonize perfectly. The proverb clearly contains the three principal elements of the phrase h>8veadai Xpurrov, surrender to the influence of another, union, and con formity. a) Love or friendship naturally moves a person to give him self up to the influence of his friend, so as to become his property. The influence which the latter exercises likewise is owing to his love for the former. This love and the consequent influence of the one friend over the other result in b) Real union of the friends, and c) Assimilation or conformity of the one to the other, so that the one is visible in the other and may be called his "alter ego." 18 Migne, P. G., 60, 627. 43 In answer to the question, in what respect one is visible in the other, we may say that the words of Chrysostom show, — and in common parlance the circumstances will indicate, — that the con formity effected by this ivSveaBai is to be understood as a con formity in thoughts, sentiments, and even exterior habits. This second effect is included in the first and is also expressly stated by Chrysostom when he adds the ground of analogy of this proverb : For he who has put on (someone or something) appears to be that which he has put on. It is clear from this explanation that the ivSveaBai in this proverb means, to become the possession of another, to give oneself up to his power and control. Moreover, this proverb is especially well adapted to illustrate and confirm the meaning of ivSveoOai Xpurrov, since it both emphasizes the reality of our union with Christ and shows again that He exercises His power over us out of love. 8. Confirmation of the Meaning of the Proverb The meaning of the proverb 6 Seiva tov Seiva eveSuWro and con sequently also of the phrase ivSveaOai . . . Xpiorov finds a remark able confirmation in the XIII Homily of Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Ephesians. In a moral exhortation, which he sub joins to his interpretation of St. Paul's words : "And put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth" (Eph. IV, 24), he urges his hearers to put on the gar ment of justice and never to put it off. To strengthen his exhor tation he adds that "to put on" means nothing else than never to put off — To 8e, tvSvaaaOai, oiSev dkXo Sykol, y rb p.y8erroTe airoBeaBai.19 In order to prove his statement, he cites two texts of the Psalmist, who speaks of man as having put on a curse as a garment — 'EveSvaaro Kardpav (is IpAnov, koi ^ei airia20 (Ps. CVIII, 18), and of God as having put on light as a garment — Kal iraAtv, 'O irept/SaAAdp.cvo? <*«os toivw irdvroOtv iv yp.lv 6 Xpiarov.23 The holiness and the moderation, through which, as he said above, Christ should be visible in us, should show them selves in deeds similar to those of Christ. Therefore, to his own question, how He should be seen (iraveiTai) he answers, If 22 Migne, P. G., 55, 263. 28 Migne, P. G., 60, 627. 45 thou doest His deeds — *Av to bceivov noiy<:. Therefore, he exhorts them to imitate the example of Christ (tovto Kat av £ykaov), which he then describes.24 Conclusion and Summary According to St. John Chrysostom, ivSveaOai Xpurrov = I. To surrender ourselves to the possession and dominion of Christ, to become the property and possession of Christ, who out of love for us exercises His power over us by 2. Uniting us most intimately to Himself. This union is a) permanent "ex parte Christi," b) real, above all. This is the "horrendum mysterium," that, in consequence of our surrender to Him, He out of love really dwells in us and consequently really dominates our being by 3. Conforming us to Him. This conformity, as the context of St. Paul's ivSvaaaBe . . . Xpiordv and Chrysostom's explicit expla nation shows, refers here to the acquisition and practice of virtue. We should be other Christs by our holiness and moderation. Christ, who is absolutely all virtue, will help produce this effect in us. 4. This meaning of ev8tW0ai Xpiorov is illustrated and con firmed by a popular proverb which has essentially the same mean ing as the Pauline formula : to surrender to the influence of an other, to become the property of another,- who exercises his influ ence out of love ; union and conformity are the effects. 5. The expression ivSveaBai Ttva was quite common at least in the later Koivy SidAeKTos, and its meaning was well known to all. 6. According to Chrysostom, St. Paul wrote his formula in the current understanding of the common phrase ivSveaBai nva. It need not surprise us that Chrysostom does not say in express words ivSveaBai = to give oneself up to the power, to become the property, of some one or some thing. For the use of the expres sion was so common that its most elemental and essential idea was clear as daylight to all. Therefore, he explains chiefly its effects, which differ somewhat according to the circumstances in which the phrase is used and according to the nature of the person or the thing that is the object of the e'vSveo-tfai. But from this ex planation we can not escape the conclusion that the fundamental meaning of the term, according to Chrysostom, is, to become the "Ibid. 46 property of, to give oneself up to the possession and dominion of another person or thing. II. ENAYE20AI XPISTON in Gal. Ill, 27 in Chrysostom's commentary on Gal. Ill, 27, we have, not only a most emphatic confirmation of the explanation of evSiWai Xpiarov given in his exposition of Rom. XIII, 14, but a still more striking explanation of the problem and in addition the all-impor tant and distinct reference to Baptism as the historical fact by which the ivSveaBai XpioTdV is effected in the life of the Christian. 1. The "Horrendum Mysterium" of ENEAYSASOE XPI2TON In Gal. Ill, 26, we read: "For you are all children of God, by faith in Christ Jesus." In these words, says Chrysostom, Paul pronounces a great and wonderful truth — pAya elrre Kal OavpaaTov, and in the following verse, he explains the manner in which they became sons of God — Aeyei Kai rov rporrov ttjs vto&eatas. He quotes the words : "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ" — 'Oooi ydp eis Xpicrrov iBaTrriaByre Xpurrov iveSvaaaOe. Then he raises the question, why we have here the ex pression Xpiorov iveSvaaaBe and not the words ix tov ®eov eyewy&yre — have been begotten of God. For, he adds, the latter expression is better adapted to convey the idea that they are sons of God — to ydp aKokovBov tov 8ei|ai vtoiis toijto ijv. He answers in the remark able words : '6ti 7roAii ptKpiKo>8earepov in both passages expresses the awe (horrendum) of the mystery. The words ev8ueo-0at Xpiarov, therefore, contain for Chrysostom far more of the awful and mysterious than the phrase "to be begotten of God," which would seem to be awful and mysterious enough. This again points to something more extraordinary, something far beyond the limits of anything yet heard of. What is it ? 2. Description of the "Horrendum Mysterium" Chrysostom immediately describes the tremendous mystery : El yap 6 XpioTOS Yios tov ®eov, av 8e airov cvSiSvaat. tov Yiov evcuy iv 47 eavry Kat irpos ati-rov dd>opMi4 undoubtedly = nature, essence ; see below. 48 14, with the exception that in this case our conformity with Christ is explained, not as an assimilation of Christ's virtues, but as a participation of His nature. In both cases, the nature of the conformity is determined by the context of the phrase. Commenting on the following verse of the Epistle (Gal. Ill, 28), Chrysostom, not only emphatically repeats and elucidates our participation in Christ's nature, but adds a further effect thereof ; namely, that we are all one in Christ — the Christians by Baptism become the possession of Christ so completely that they are all one in Christ. After quoting the words of St. Paul: "There is neither Jew nor Greek : there is neither bond nor free : there is neither male nor female ; for you are all one in Christ Jesus" — Wvres ydp vpels e£s iare iv Xpiarw lyaov — Chrysostom exclaims in admiration of the mystery: Dost thou see the insatiable soul? — EtSes *l>vxr)v aKopearov. He then explains the ground for his admira tion : Paul was not content with pronouncing the great and won derful truth : we are made children of God by faith, but he tries to find something more exact to show with greater clearness our closer oneness with Christ — ttjv iyyvrepav rrpos rov Xpiorov evtooriv.27 Here we have the emphatic statement that the ivSveaBai Xpiarov spells a more intimate union with Christ than the "being born of God." But Chrysostom continues: And when he has said airbv iveSvaaoBe, he is not even content with this expression ; but he ex plains it and penetrates more deeply into this union — ivSorlpm rrpotiai ry? Toiaimjs oT)vayv, eva rvrrov ixtTt TavTes rbv Toii Xpioroii.28 As is undoubtedly proved by H. Schumacher,29 the word popd>y in St. Paul and the Greek Fathers means the nature of a thing.30 In this passage p.opd>ij can mean only the divine nature of Christ, for the participation in His human nature is had prior to the ev8TJeo-0ai Xpiarov and is no "horrendum mysterium." After declaring that we have received the nature and the image of Christ, the Son of God, Chrysostom, filled with wonder and 27 Migne, P. G. 61, 656. 28 Ibid. 29 Christus in seiner Pr'dexistenz und Kenose. 30 Especially when used of spiritual things this term can not mean any thing but nature. Chrysostom likewise uses i>,op^ in this sense. For instance, in his commentary on the Epistle to the Philippians (II, 6), he says that the /uop0») of the servant means the nature of man and the itop&i of God, the nature of God : vitrei &v0pujros, $ 'intfAi row 8oi\ov—i. (Migne, P. G., 62, 220.) 49 awe at the greatness of this mystery, exclaims : What can be more awful ((ppiKtuSeo-repov) than these words? And he explains again what he understands by this "horrendum mysterium." He that was a Greek and a Jew and a slave before, now goes about having the nature, not of an angel or archangel, but of the Lord of all, and showing forth Christ in himself — dAA' airov rov ndvroiv Aco-tto'tov ttjv popdtyv ex«>v rrepiepxerai, Kal iv airio SeiKvtis tov Xpiarov.31 In Other words, man, by putting on Christ in Baptism, becomes another Christ ; he receives the nature of Christ, the Son of God and Lord of all; he becomes a son of God. This, however, is not mere figurative language, but it is a "horrendum mysterium," which points to an awful reality. In the following verse (Gal. Ill, 29), Paul shows that evSveo&u means to become Christ's property, to come into His possession and power. For he says, "If you are Christ's — et 8e vpeis Xpiarov, then you are Abraham's seed, heirs according to promise." Xpurrov is here the "genetivus possessionis" and expresses possession. But nowhere in the context does Paul say that the Galatians are Christ's property, but merely that they "put on Christ." The eivai Xpiarov then must follow from the ivSveaBai Xpiarov, which can only mean, to become Christ's property, to come into His posses sion and under His power. It is of the utmost importance to note that the ivSveaBai Xpiarov, as here explained, takes place, according to Paul's express words, in Baptism. When we are baptized into Christ, he says, we be come His property ; we pass into His possession and under His dominion ; and He exercises His power over us by giving us His p.opy. 5. What makes the Xpiarov iveSvaaode more awful and mys terious than the he rov ©eov iyewyBrjre, is the greater oneness — iyyvrepa evwois — it effects, which is the result of our being com pletely the property of Christ and consists in our actually pos sessing Him or His real indwelling in us. 6. The expositions of ivSveaBai Xpiarov in Gal. Ill, 27, and in Rom. XIII, 14, are identical, except : a) In Gal. Ill, 27, Baptism is expressly mentioned as the historical fact by which the evSveo&u is effected. b) In Rom. XIII, 14, love is emphasized as the reason for Christ's exercise of power over us, who are His possession. 52 c) In Rom. XIII, 14, the conformity with Christ, which is the effect of the evSveo&u, regards the virtues of Christ ; the Christians should be other Christs by the assimilation of His virtues, Christ should be visible in their deeds. d) In Gal. Ill, 27, the conformity regards the nature of Christ; the Christians are other Christs by the participation of Christ's divine nature; they show Christ in their nature. In both cases the nature of the conformity with Christ is deter mined by the context in which the phrase, ivSveaBai Xpiorov is used. CHAPTER III HISTORICO-LITERARY INVESTIGATION OF ENAYEIN-ENAYE20AI We have seen how Chrysostom explains the phrase ev8veo-0ai Xpurrov and further illustrates and confirms it by the use of a Greek proverb. Of the few exegetes who take cognizance of this illustration, Zahn and Bloomfield object to it. Zahn does not posi tively reject Chrysostom's explanation, but merely says that the phrase used in illustration of the formula ivSveaBai Xpiarov by Chrysostom "gehort vielleicht einem bereits christlich gefarbten Sprachgebrauch an" -1 in other words, it is a result of a Christian tendency. What is the truth concerning this tendency? Viewed in its true light, the existence of such a tendency does not constitute an objection to the explanation given by Chrysostom of evSveo-tfai Xpio-Tov, but it is rather a powerful confirmation thereof. For, if the use of the phrase 6 Seiva rov Seiva eveSvo-aTo, as an expression of friendship, in the sense in which it was explained by Chrysostom, should have originated from the Pauline formula through the influence of a Christian tendency, it would be a splendid and im portant testimony of the understanding of St. Paul's words by the Christians of the first three centuries of our era. This testimony would be all the more decisive since this specific meaning was supposedly given to a common and well-known phrase by men who wrote and spoke the same language as the Apostle, and were, therefore, good judges of the meaning of the latter's phrase. This interpretation of evSveo-ftu Xpurrov is a strong confirma tion of the assumption that Paul penned his words in the current meaning of the phrase ivSveaBai nva. For, as we have already re marked and as we shall presently show, the expression was not coined by St. Paul, but it was in vogue before his time. But the use of the phrase by the Apostle in Rom. XIII, 14, and Gal. Ill, 27, could hardly have been sufficient to give rise to a proverbial saying that was understood in a meaning essentially different from 1 Brief an d. Gal, 187. 53 54 that which was attached to the original phrase, and to which the people were accustomed. Bloomfield's objection is of a more serious nature. He con tends that the "common phrase" adduced by Chrysostom in ex planation of the Pauline formula "is scarcely apposite."2 The idea expressed by the proverb, he adds in his commentary to Rom. XIII, 14, "is quite different with that here meant to be inculcated by the Apostle, which only implies imitation of our Lord." He concludes with the remark referred to in our first chapter, that "in the numerous other passages" found in Greek literature and "cited by the Philological Commentators of ivSveaBai, drroSveoBai, induere, exuere, there is no more than a slight allusion to conduct considered figuratively, as a dress."3 This is indeed a serious objection, and if it is true, then Chrysostom's interpretation of the Pauline formula is, if not positively false, at least foreign to Greek usage. Like Bloomfield, other exegetes who think the phrase of the Apostle is of Greek origin, interpret it in the sense of mere imitation of conduct. Although, as we have noted, other com mentators who base their interpretation of our formula on the use of the phrase ivSveaBai nva, explain the Apostle's words as denoting imitation of internal dispositions and even union, still none admit that the words express the idea of possession. What then does the history of the phrase reveal about its real meaning? I. Meaning of ENAYEIN According to Lexicographers If we turn to lexicographers, we can obtain no clear and definite results as to the meaning of ev8veo-0ai. According to Liddell-Scott4 ev8v(<) means, 1, "to go into" and is used : a) "of clothes," in the sense of "to put on." b) in the meaning of to "enter, press into." — As an example of the metaphorical use of ivSveaBai with a personal object, these authors refer to the phrase rov TapKwtov eceivov ev8vop.evoi which means "assume (the person of) T." — 2. "EvSvo, these authors further state, may have a casual signification, "to put on another." Menge5 says that ev8v, an inquiry into the original meaning and use of the simple component Svw-Svopuu will be emi nently useful, if not absolutely necessary, in order to establish the 8 Handworterbuch d. Griech. Sprache, I, 732. 7 Griech.-deutsch. Schul-Worterbuch, 258. 56 precise meaning of ev8vV are similar to those of evSviu. These authors agree that the literal meaning of Svtu is "to enter."8 II. (EN)AYEIN-(EN)AYE2®AI IN THE HELLENIC WORLD I. A YD AND ENAYO IN HOMER Already in Homer we find the use of Svetv or Svea&ai. In his epics, the word is frequently employed in its strictly literal mean ing, in a naive material sense, implying a local motion of persons or bodies by which they go from one place to another and enter physically into, and are enclosed by, some thing or place. This idea is expressed, in the first place, by Sveiv or 8veo-0ai followed by the simple accusative of the thing or place entered. Thus Homer speaks of persons entering a city, the walls of a city, the bosom of the sea, and the earth. For instance, Athena comes to meet Odysseus when he is about to enter the beautiful city of Scheria — dAA' ore Si) dp' euekke mkiv SveaBai epavvrjv.9 When the parents of Hector entreat him to seek safety within the walls he refuses and says : Woe be to me ! if I indeed entered within the gates and walls — & poi eyiiv, el pAv Ke 7rvAas Kai reixea Svo).10 In //. 1 8, 140, Thetis, the sea goddess, tells the Nereids, sea nymphs, to enter into the broad bosom of the deep — vp.eis p.ev vvv Svre Bakdaays eipea Kokirov.11 When Axylus and his attendant Calesius are killed in the battle of Troy, both enter the earth — ™ 8' dpcpw yalav iSvryv.12 Andromache, the wife of Hector, pleads with her husband not to expose himself to the danger of death. For, she says, it were better for me to enter the earth (i.e., to die) if I am to be deprived of thee — ep.oi Se Ke KepStov eii; aev dd>ap.aprovay xBova Svpevai.13 In Homer we also find Sveiv-Sveo&u used with the simple accusa tive to express the idea of clothing or arming oneself. In his 8 Cfr. Liddell-Scott, Greek-Eng. Lex., 398 ; Menge, Griech.-deutsch. Worterbuch, I, 196. 9 Od., 7, 18. 10 //., 22, 99. 11 II, 18, 140. 12 II, 6, 19. 13 II, 6, 4". 57 epics, the phrase 8vW x«"akov 8v.20 Ino, after giving the shipwrecked Odysseus a wimple, where with he might swim safely to shore, goes back into the surging sea — avry o ay es rrovrov eovaero Kvpxuvovra. Again, Odysseus says that if those who have slain the kine of the Sun do not make fit atonement, he will go into Hades and shine among the dead — Svaopai eis 'Ai8ao Kat ev veKveaai cpaeivia.22 In the same manner, Svetv-SvW&u with eis or es and ev or ivi — which originally meant the same as eis or es — is used with regard to armor. In the Iliad and the Odyssey, we find the expressions Sveiv es revxea,23 SveoBai iv revxeaai2* and oirAotcrivevi Setvoioiv Sveiv.25 From the foregoing examples of 8veiv-8veo-0ai, used either alone or with the prepositions eis or ev, it is clear that the Greeks con ceived the act of clothing or of arming oneself, expressed by Svetv- Svea&ai, as an entering into a garment or armor. What conclusion can we draw from the foregoing examples taken from Homer? a) Some expressions are so colorless that from them we can not conclude anything as to the meaning of ivSveaBai. Thus, when it is said that Odysseus is about to enter the city, 8vW0ai has no "//., 18, 416; Od., 15, 61. is//., 6, 340; 3, 328; 17, 202. i« II, 5, 845. 17 77., 2, 578; 11, 16. »8//., 18, 241; Od., 2, 388:3, 329- „ „ . T , 19 Cfr. Liddell- Scott, Op. cit, 398; Pape, Op. at., I, 596. 29 //., 8, 85. 21 Od., 5, 352. 22 Od., 12, 383- 23 Od., 22, 201 ; 24, 498. 24 Od., 24 496- 25/'., 10, 254; 10, 272. 58 special characteristic. The idea expressed is merely the motion from one place to another, and consequently the ceasing to be in one place and the beginning to be in another. But even this is interesting enough. b) Likewise, in the phrases — the arrow enters into the brain and Hector enters within the gates and walls, the Sveiv of itself has no distinctive meaning. The fundamental idea expressed by this verb is here again the moving from one place to another, the ceas ing to exist in one place and the beginning to exist in another. In both phrases, however, the idea of power is apparent. But this idea is strictly speaking not expressed in Sveiv. For, in the one case, the power to wound or kill is in the arrow ; and in the other, the power to protect is in the gates and the walls. Still neither the arrow nor the gates and the walls can exercise this power except through the Sveiv: the arrow can not wound or kill unless it enters the body ; and the gates and walls can not afford protec tion unless Hector gets behind them. Avetv in these phrases seems to be connected with the idea of power in the sense of to exercise power, or to be subject to power, respectively. And this idea of power is predominant over that of motion. Likewise, it may be noted, that in these phrases Sveiv expresses, not so much the idea of ceasing to be in one place and beginning to be in another, but rather the idea of ceasing to be in a certain state or condition and of beginning to be in another. c) More characteristic are the expressions 8veiv-8veo-0ai x'roiva, revxea. Here again the basic idea is the moving from one place to another. But this idea does not stand in the foreground. Aveiv- 8v'eo-0ai here emphasizes, not the motion from one place to another, but the action by which the person receives a new outward appear ance from the object, — the garment or the armor. The question is whether such an effect on the subject (which implies the idea of the exercise of a quasi power) is intimately and permanently or only accidentally connected with Sveiv-8vea0ai and ev8veiv-ev8veo-0ai. The characteristic must be noted at all events. d) Still more distinctive are the expressions to enter the earth, the sea, Hades. Here, too, the fundamental idea is : to move from one place, not only to another, but into another ; to cease to be in one place and begin to be in another ; to leave the former and to be united with the latter. But something more is connoted: the "terminus ad quern" is a place that surrounds and encloses and, as it were, holds the subject, takes possession of it, and controls it. 59 Thus, for instance, when the Nereids enter the sea, the idea is implied that their action is modified by, and according to, the nature of the sea ; they pass under its dominion. When Axylus and Calesius are said to enter the earth, not merely the going from the one place to the other is expressed but the passing under death's dominion, — generally speaking, the pass ing under the dominion of something else. Consequently, here again Sveiv implies, not only the ceasing to be in one place and the beginning to be in another, but the ceasing to be in one state or condition and the beginning to be in another ; and this new exist ence is effected by the power of that which is "entered." Especially striking is the example of Andromache. She would rather give herself up to the other place, i.e., to the dominion of the earth, i.e., death, than be deprived of Hector. Here a further parallel is to be noted. As before she was the property of Hector, so now she would be the property of Hades. The important ques tion is: Is this idea of possession and power only accidentally connected with Sveiv, or does a general, a permanent, connection exist between the two ? From the foregoing investigation we can draw the following conclusions : a) The fundamental idea expressed by Sveiv or SveaBai is the moving from one place to another and consequently b) The ceasing to be in one place or one state and the begin ning to be in another place or state ; this last idea implies usually c) The power and dominion of the subject of the verb over the object or vice versa, in consequence of which d) The weaker element is changed; this change usually con forms the weaker element to the stronger. e) In the foregoing examples Sveiv and 8veo0ai show no differ ence in meaning since they are used promiscuously. A slight development of the naive material sense of 8vetv-8veo-0ai and evSv'eiv-evSveo&u is to be noted in the following examples. Nestor tells the wounded Agamemnon, I do not counsel that we should enter the battle, for it is not meet that a wounded man should fight — 7ro'Aep.ov 8*ovk dp,pe Kekevw Svuevai' ov ydp xws BeBkypAvov * ' 4} 26 eori puixeaoai. In a similar sense, Homer uses ev8v'eo-0ai or «rSveo-0at. Achilles giving a prize to the aged Nestor says : Now I give thee this prize 2»//., 14, 63. 60 unwon, for thou wilt not wield the cestus, nor wrestle, nor enter the javelin contest — oiSe r'aKovnavv iaSvaeai." In these examples, Sveiv and eo-Sveo-0ai or evSveo-tfai are used, not in their most strictly literal meaning, implying physical entrance of the subject into an object by which it is enveloped, but in the sense of participating in. We have here the first visible progress from the naive material expression. In the former example, "to enter the battle" is evidently equivalent to the phrase "to fight" ; whereas "to enter a contest" means the same as "to contend." Now, if a person takes part in a battle or contest he a) Goes from one place to another, and consequently he b) Ceases to be in the place and state in which he was and begins to be in a new state or condition. This implies c) A surrendering of the subject to the power and control of the object, d) A change in the subject according to the task and the requirements of the object. It is worthy of note that, in proportion as the strictly literal meaning of 8veiv-8veo-0ai and ev8veiv-ev8vW0ai is lost, the idea of power and possession projects itself. The question here is again : Are the self -sur render of the subject to the power of the object and the former's consequent change only accidentally connected with the verb ? Here we note that the II aorist active is used like the middle in the sense, "to give oneself up to the power of." In Homer we, moreover, find Sveo-ftu followed by eis and a per sonal object. Here again the giving up of oneself to the superior power of another is strongly emphasized. In a battle against the Trojans, Teucer, the archer, takes his stand beneath the shield of Ajax. Ajax stealthily withdraws the shield and Teucer spies his chance ; and when he has shot and hit one of the enemy, he returns, and as a child behind its mother, he enters into Ajax, who hides him with his shining shield — airap 6 avris itov 7rdis As vrrb p.yrepa SvaKiv eis KlavB'' 6 Se p.tv aaxei KpvirraaKe tf>aveivp' cti p.dAAov Svtj dxos KpaSiyv AaepnaSeto 'OSvayoi.29 Again, when Achilles looks at the armor Thetis has brought to him, still greater fury enters into him — (is eiS', &>s piv pAkkov ?8v XoAos.30 Another example: Odysseus tells Achilles that Hector does not reverence at all either men or gods, but that great madness has entered into him — Kparepy Se e kvaaa SeSvKev.31 These examples are remarkable. The predominant feature is that these passions take possession of man; although the ex pression "to take possession" is not used, still a proper analysis of the text demands this interpretation. In these examples, Sveiv is a strong and emphatic word that expresses : a) The moving from one place to another, and especially b) The possession and control of the passion over the person, which has as its effect c) The change of the person in conformity with the passion. 29 Od., 18, 347-348. 39 //., 19, 16. " //., 9, 239. 62 In some of the examples, this change is then described. Since in these examples the passions are regarded as the stronger and consequently controlling factor, Sveiv here means to take possession of and not to surrender to the power of. The idea of the control and possession of man by the passion is brought out with surprising clearness and force in the following example, which is found in the fifth book of the Iliad, v. 811-812. Athena tells Tydeus that she stands beside him and guards him and with all her heart bids him fight the Trojans ; yet, she adds : Either weariness of much striving has entered into thy limbs, or at least disheartening terror has taken hold of thee — dAAd aev rj Kap-aros 7roAvdi£ yvia SeSvKev, rj vv ai nov Seos iox" ax-qpiov. Here we have the solution of the mysterious meaning of Sveiv- SveaOai and evSvetv-evSveoflai by the identification of Sveiv with laxeiv. Avetv in these contexts means to take possession. Besides, it is clear from this passage that the idea of possession and control expressed in the preceding examples is, not merely accidentally, but permanently and essentially connected with 8veiv-8veo-#ai. This result is of the greatest importance. Also in Iliad, ivSveiv is used to express the possession and con trol of man by a passion. In this example, however, ev is separated from Sveiv by tmesis. Homer describes the distress of Achilles over the death of Patroclus. Into his heart, he says, intolerable anguish has entered — ev 8e' ol yrop 8vv' dxos oYAtjtov. 3Z A striking example of the use of Sveiv in the sense of taking possession is found in the seventeenth book of the Iliad (v. 210- 212). When Hector puts on the armor of Patroclus, Ares, the dread war god, enters into him, i.e., takes possession of him, and his limbs are filled with valor and strength — 8v Se' p.iv 'Api?s Seivos evudAios, rrkr)a6ev 8'a.p oi pike' evros akxys Kal aBeveos. Perhaps such an example can be fully understood only in the light of ancient mythological and demonological views. The ancients not only regarded concrete material objects as deities, but even conceived the various dispositions that affect man for good or for evil as good or bad demons, which enter physically into man and operate in him. "Was den Menschen plagt und angstigt," says Dieterich, "was ihn verunreinigt und hemmt, sind bose 32 II, 19, 366-367. Damm, however, takes %rop to be the subject, and renders the phrase "induebat dolorem, quasi gravem vestem aut grave spiculum"; cfr. Nov. Lex., Grace, I. The phrase in either case implies possession. 63 Damonen, die materiell an und in ihm sitzen; was er leistet, handelt, was ihn treibt und starkt, sind gute Damonen, die in ihm wohnen und wirken. Durch die Leibesoffnungen," he continues, "gehen sie ein und aus, werden herein-und herausgezwungen, werden zitiert und ausgetrieben." In these words the author briefly characterizes this primitive belief, which, he says, we find among all "Naturvolkern," and which still survives "in f estgewor- denen z.T. abgegriffenen Bildern bei alien Kulturvolkern, ohne dass sie noch ins Bewusstsein treten."33 This view gives us a powerful illustration of the development of 8veiv-8veo-0ai and ev8veiv-eV8veo-0ai from its naive material sense to its metaphorical meaning. For originally madness, fury, and the like, were conceived also by the Greeks as demons that entered physically into man and dominated him. Later when this belief no longer prevailed, the same expression was preserved but taken metaphorically. In the examples cited above, dispositions and passions are con ceived as entering into man. It is of great interest and impor tance to note that Homer reverses this expression and speaks of man as entering into dispositions or qualities. An example of ¦ this latter phrase is found in the Iliad. Odysseus tells Achilles, who out of wrath against Agamemnon has refused to fight, that the Greeks dread a very great disaster at the hands of the Trojans. Now it is doubtful, he says, whether we shall save the well-benched ships or behold them perish, if thou enterest not into valor — el pr] av ye Svaeai dAxT;v.34 This expression, like the phrase "madness entered Hector," which occurs in the same passage, undoubtedly implies domination and control of the person by the respective passion. An apparent difficulty is created by the difference in the grammatical construction of the two phrases. In the expression "madness entered Hector," the object is possessed and controlled by the subject ; whereas in the phrase "Achilles should enter into valor," the subject is represented as being in the possession and under the control of the object. This difficulty can be easily solved. For in both cases, as the law of language itself demands, the verb describes the action of the subject. Accordingly, in the former phrase, madness is described as taking possession and gaining control of Hector; while in the latter expression, Achilles himself gives himself up to the possession and domination of 88 Mithrasliturgie, 98-99- »« 77., 9, 231. 64 valor. In the one case, then, the passion takes control; in the other, the person passes under the control of the passion. It is to be noted that in the examples suggesting possession and control of man by passion, the active voice is used ; whereas, in the last example, in which the verb means that man gives him self up to the control of might, the middle is used. This seems to point to the probability that the Greek mind knew of a distinction between the meanings here expressed by the active and the middle. We have to keep this in mind for our investigation to find out whether this supposition holds good. To sum up, the phrase under discussion clearly expresses : a) The moving of Achilles from one place to another, or rather b) The ceasing to be in one state or condition and the entering into another condition, which includes c) The giving over of himself by Achilles to the possession and power of valor, and consequently d) A change in Achilles effected by, and according to, the object — valor ; he should be, as it were, the personification of valor. Since Homer uses 8veiv-Sveo-0ai of man in connection with armor and garments, which not only envelop, but, as it were, give their form to the person that "enters into" them, it would seem that Homer derived this metaphorical expression from the figure of a garment. This assumption acquires greater probability from Homer's use of the cognate expression evwaBai or imivwaBai dAxTjv. Thus he describes the A j aces as clothed with impetuous valor — AtavTes Bovpiv imeipAvoi dAKTJv.35 Likewise he says the heart of Achilles is clothed with valor — 'AxtAevs — cppealv elpevos akKyv.3" It will hardly be denied that the words evwo-0ai or imivwadai akxyv are equivalent to the phrase SveaBai oAktjv. 'EvwaBai or iinewvaBai means, in the first place, to clothe, to envelop. The conception of valor in the expression "Achilles should enter into valor," as a garment, accords perfectly with the explanation we have given. For, if a person enters into a garment, he not only moves, as it were, from one place to another, but he freely gives himself over to the quasi possession of the garment, which changes his outward appearance. Having investigated in detail the use and the meaning of Sveiv- 8veo-0ai and evSveiv-eVSveo-^ai in Homer, we shall now proceed to 35 //., 8, 262. 39 //., 20, 381. Compare the expressions in //., 1, 149 : ivatStlriv iruifUvt, 65 examine the meaning and the use of these words in later authors. In our investigation, we shall pay special attention to such phrases as may throw further light on the original meaning of evSveiv- ivSvea&ai and on its historical development, especially in a figurative sense. 2. Metaphorical Use of AYEIN in Aeschylus In Aeschylus's (b. 525) Agamemnon, 228, we note an example of the metaphorical use of Sveiv. The chorus relates how Aga memnon, after some hesitation, finally decides to yield to the demand of Artemis and sacrifice his daughter in order not to disappoint his allies. His yielding to this bitter alternative is expressed by the phrase — 8 'dvdyKas eSv AeVaSvov.37 Necessity is here conceived as a yoke that controls Agamemnon and determines his course of action. Moreover, in this phrase Agamemnon is the subject. Consequently he is described as giving himself over to the power of the necessity of sacrificing his own daughter, for he is free to accept the other alternative. The effect of this surrender is, of course the sacrificing of his daughter. Here the II aorist is used in the sense, to enter into, to give oneself up to the power of. Perhaps the active expresses that Agamemnon is free to submit to the yoke or not. — In this example we have a) The ceasing to be in one state and the entering into another, which implies, b) The surrender of Agamemnon to the possession and power of necessity, and c) The consequent change in Agamemnon effected by, and in conformity with, this necessity. 3. AYEIN-AYE20AI and its Compounds in Herodotus Like Homer, Herodotus (b. 484) uses Sveiv in its naive mate rial sense. In his Historiae VIII, he speaks of an expert diver (Sv-nys) who dives into the sea — Svs es ryv Bdkaaaav.3* Likewise, we find eo-Sveo&u, or rather eoSvveiv, used by Herodo tus in its strictly literal sense. We may remark here that already in this author the compounds evSveiv-evSveoflai and especially eo-Sveiv- eaSveaBcu occur more frequently than in Homer. Describing the cultivation of palm trees in Babylonia, he says the natn es tie the fruit of the so-called male palms to the branches of the date- 37 Agam., 228 (Al. 217). 38 Hist, VIII, 8, 2. 66 bearing palms, to let the gall-fly enter the date — 6 t/^v tt> Bdkavov eoSvvwv.39 He uses eoSv'eiv also absolutely with the object understood. Speaking of the robbery of an Egyptian king's treasury, he says that one of the thieves entered in (eo-Svvros tov iripov avT0ivovros es dAAo £«iov aiei ytvdpevov eoSveTOt,44 Until it has circled through the forms of all the creatures which tenant the earth, the water, and the air, after which it enters again into a human body, which then comes into being — avVis es dvBpmrov aUpa yivopevov iaSvveiv.4" It may be observed in this example that the middle of eo-Svetv is used synonymously with the active of eo-Svvetv. The phrase "the soul enters the body" undoubtedly expresses a moving from one place to another which results in an intimate union between the soul and the body. Here, too, the idea of pos session is implied. As we have seen, in Homer Sveiv-SveaBai may mean either to take possession of or to surrender to the possession and power of; so the expression before us may be interpreted to signify : the soul gives itself up to the possession and power of the body or the soul takes possession of the body, according as the body or the soul is regarded as the stronger principle. Which idea is conveyed here, can not be determined with absolute cer tainty ; but, if the notion of the Egyptians concerning the nature of the relation between the body and the soul was the same as 39 Hist, I, 193, 5- 40 Hist, II, 121, 2. 41 Ibid. 42 Hist, II, 8i, i ; VII, 64; II, 42, 4 and 6. i3Hist., I, 172, 2; VII, 218, 1. 44 Hist, II, 123, 2. « Ibid. 67 that of the Greek metempsychosists, especially Pythagoras and Plato,46 who, as Herodotus says, borrowed the doctrine of the transmigration of souls from the Egyptians,47 then the phrase means : the soul gives itself up to the possession and power of the body. In consequence of its entering into the body, the soul not only gives life to it but also ceases to be in one state or condition and begins to be in a new state. It not only receives a new mode of existence, but it is variously affected by, and according to, the nature of the body to which it is united. This example is the more interesting as we see such a striking parallel to the texts of St. Paul we are investigating. In both cases, the general frame in which the ivSveaBai or eo8vveiv-eo-8veo-0ai occurs is the regeneration ; and in both cases the subject of the verb loses one mode of existence and enters on a new one, becomes subject to the power of the object of the ev8veo-0ai, and is changed by, and in conformity with, it. It is important to note the essen tial elements connected with eo-Svveiv-eo-Sveo-Sat in the phrase before us: a) The moving from one place to another. b) The surrender to the possession and power of the body and c) The consequent change in the life of the soul ; this implies d) The ceasing to be in one state and entering on another. e) The new life of the soul may be styled a regeneration. As Homer uses 8veiv-8veo-0ai and evSvetv, so Herodotus employs eo-Svveiv figuratively of passions that enter and take possession of man. The historian tells us that, when the Pelasgians learned that the sons of their Athenian concubines took concerted action against the sons of their Pelasgian wives, they consulted together and on considering the matter terror entered — Kai ad>i BovkevopAvouri Seivov n t'o-e'Suve,48 i.e., took possession of them. Here eo-Svveiv is used in the same sense as eo-Sveiv. 4. AYEIN, EISAYEIN AND ENAYEIN IN Sophocles Like Homer and Herodotus, Sophocles (b. 496) uses Sveiv in its naive material sense. The chorus says of Ajax, who com mitted suicide : O that he had ere this entered into the vast ether or the common Hades — ocpeke rcporepov alBepa Suvoi p.e'yav rj rov ™Xv7coivov *Ai8av.49 This phrase includes the idea of possession and •• They considered the body as the prison of the soul. "Hist., II, 123, 2. « Hist, VI, 138, 3- *9Ajax, 1192-1193. 68 power. But since Hades is deemed the stronger, the dominating factor, the meaning is not Ajax took possession of Hades, but gave himself up to the realm, the possession and power of Hades. "EvSvetv is employed by Sophocles in connection with garments. It seems that already at his time evSvetv was the commonly accepted compound of Sveiv. In the Trachiniae, the playwright speaks of a garment which poisoned Heracles who put it on — ov Keivos evSvs.60 This example is interesting, since it indicates clearly that, by enter ing into the garment, Heracles gave himself up to the power of the poison of the garment, which exercised its sinister effect on him. The exercise of the power of poisoning is here only acci dentally connected with evSvetv; but it is important to note that evSvetv is used to express such accidental features together with its own essential meaning — to pass under the possession and power of. Note the use of the II aorist active in this and the preceding example. Finally, Sophocles, like Homer and Herodotus, speaks of dis positions as entering man and taking possession of him. He, however, uses eio-Sveiv to express this figure. When Oedipus Tyrannus discovers that he has killed his father and married his mother, he pierces his own eyes. Thereupon, he exclaims, How both the sting of the points and the memory of the evils entered me together — oiov — e«re8v pt'dpta Kevrpcav re to>8' oiarprjpM Kal p-vypy kokwv.61 This exclamation of pain, not only expresses the mere entering of the sting of the points and the memory of the evils, but implies that the one as well as the other exercises a power over him, the power of torturing. This twofold idea is fully ex pressed by the phrase "they took possession of him." — In the two foregoing examples the II aorist active = to give oneself up to the possession of ; here it = to take possession of. 5. AYE50AI, ENAYEIN-ENAYE20AI, AND EISAYEIN in Euripides Also this tragedian (b. 480) employs SveaBai and eio-Sveiv in their strictly literal sense. Thus in Electra, Castor says the Furies enter into the earth's abyss — x**crlJ-a Svaovrai x^ovo's.52 Again, we read that, when Iphigenia is sacrificed, no one knows whither she has gone — oi yijs eio-e'Sv.63 60 Track., 759. « Oed. T., 1317-1318. 52 Electra, 1271. sa Iphig. A., 1583. 69 Also in Euripides we find evSveiv-evSveo-tfai used in connection with garments. In the Bacchantes he speaks of Pentheus putting on woman's clothes — Bykw evSvvai54 and evSvo-eTai.55 The purpose of putting on this disguise was that he might observe unnoticed the orgies of the bacchant women. As we have already remarked, Sveiv-SveaBai or evSveiv-evSveoflai, when used in connection with gar ments, emphasizes, not the motion of going from one place to an other, but the action by which the person receives a new outward appearance. This implies that the person gives himself up to the quasi possession of the garment. These ideas are more clearly expressed in the example before us. For surely, when a man puts on a garment of a woman he gives himself up to the quasi posses sion of the garment, which changes his outward appearance; he receives the outward appearance of a woman. It is likewise noteworthy that Euripides speaks of the o-apKos evSvrd,56 i.e., that into which the flesh has entered, meaning the skin. The o-dp£ is, as it were, the property of the skin, which envelopes and holds it and gives it a new outward appearance. 6. ENAYEIN-ENAYE5©AI in Aristophanes This dramatist (b.c. 448) uses evSvetv,57 evSveo-tfai,58 not only in its literal meaning with garment as its object, but also ivSveaBai in a metaphorical sense. In Ecclesiazusae we read of a plot formed by some women of Athens to attend the public meeting under the guise of old men and vote a change in government. Their action is referred to in the words — ev8vdp.evai — rokypa ttiAikovvtov,59 entering into such a daring scheme. Here the scheme is regarded as a power to which they give themselves over, and which conse quently governs and controls their actions. The middle is used to denote the surrender to the possession and power of something. A still more curious example of the metaphorical use of evSveiv is found in Vespae. At the end of the third act, the chorus sings the praises of the author of the play. He, they sing, imitating the art of divination used by Eurycles, has entered into the "ventres" of others and poured forth from there many a comical jest — ets dAAoTpias yaorepas evSvs Ko>p,u)8iKa vokka, x«to#ai.80 This expression 54 Bacc, 836, cfr. also 852. »s Bacc, 853. 58 Bacc, 746-747. 07 Thes., 1044; Lys, 1021. 58 Thes., 253. =9 Ecc, 287-288. 00 Vesp., 1020. 70 evidently implies possession and control. For, as it was believed that a spirit entered and took possession of soothsayers like Eury- cles and poured forth his ideas through the soothsayer's lips,61 so the poet describes himself as having entered into the "venter" of the players — taken possession of them — and as having conse quently poured forth his wit and humor from their lips. In this figurative phrase there are expressed most clearly : a) The moving from one place to another ; b) The possession and control of the object, which implies c) Union, and effects d) A change in the object in conformity to the possessor. The players speak the words and imitate the actions of the play wright. — Here the II aorist active is again used to express the taking possession of. It is of interest to remember Chrysostom's interpretation of the Pauline formula. He has the same exegesis of possession but significantly in the inverted order. What is more important. however, is that he calls our becoming the possession of Christ a "mysterium horrendum." Certainly no one would think of a "my sterium horrendum" in Aristophanes's example, since his words are not to be taken literally. The reason for the appellation "my sterium horrendum" in Chrysostom's interpretation is the fact that the expression ivSveaBai Xpiarov is to be understood in its literal and real signification. In the light of this passage, especially when it is considered in connection with all the preceding examples, the ev8veo-0ai Xpiorov of St. Paul would find its final solution. 7. ENAYEIN AND ENAYES0AI IN Xenophon In Xenophon (b.c. 434) we find the active voice evSveiv used in the causative sense of to clothe someone with a garment.82 It is more important to note several examples of the figurative use of ev8veo-0ai by this author. One of the leaders of the allies of Cyrus asks the king to address their troops, since his words would enter deepest into the minds of the hearers — Adyoi ovtoi Kai p,dAioTa evSvovTai Tats i//vxais toJv aKovovTiuv.83 'EvSvovtoi here seems to be 3 passive form, and it means: the words are entered into by the souls, i.e., the souls give themselves up to the power and influence of Cyrus's words. 61 Cfr. Rogers, The Wasps, 152. 92 Cyr., I, III, 3- "» Cyr., II, I, 13. 71 We have in Xenophon another example of the metaphorical use of evSvetv. He tells us that Cyrus entered into the care — iviSv p.ev-^-eis ravryv ryv impekeiav,ei of providing the best possible men for the most important offices in his realm. The care is here con ceived as a duty, a power to which Cyrus surrenders himself, and which in turn regulates his actions. 8. ENAYEIN-ENAYE20AI in Plato As Herodotus uses evSvetv and eV8veo-0at, so Plato employs the middle of evSvetv in connection with the doctrine of the transmi gration of souls. In Phaedo™ he teaches that the souls of the wicked are compelled to flit about the tombs until, through the desire of the corporeal which clings to them, they are again im prisoned in a body — evSe0<3o-iv ets awpa, — and they are likely to be imprisoned in natures (cvSovvtoi Se, <5oTrep etKos, eis — t/0t?) which correspond to the practice of their former life. Thus, those who have indulged in gluttony and violence and drunkenness are likely to enter into the species of asses and similar beasts — eis to. ™v ovwv yevri Kai toiovtwv Bypiwv ewcos eVSveoftu ; while those that have prac ticed injustice and tyranny and robbery go into, eis — ieVai, the species of wolves and hawks and kites and the like. Evidently in this example ivSveaBai eis is used synonymously with evSeto-flai eis, which means to be imprisoned in, and with ieVat eis, which simply expresses the moving from one place to another. 'EvSveo-flai and ie'vat receive their most emphatic interpretation from ev8eio-0ai. For the phrase, to be imprisoned, includes the idea to be subject to a controlling and dominating power, which here is the nature of the beasts into which the soul enters or to whose power the soul gives itself up. In consequence of this imprisonment, the soul receives a new mode of existence and is variously changed accord ing to the nature of the prison.66 64 Cyr., VIII, I, 12. 85 Phaedo, XXXI. 66 It may be of interest to quote a few words from Zeller relative to Plato's idea concerning the relation between the body and the soul : "Erhe- bliche Schwierigkeiten macht endlich auch das Verhaltniss der Seele zum Korper. Einerseits soil sie in ihrem Wesen so durchaus verschieden und in ihrem Dasein so unabhangig von ihm sein, dass sie ohne ihn existiet hat und dereinst wieder ohne ihn zu existieren bestimmt ist, ja sie soil nur dann einen vollkommeneren, ihrer wahren Natur entsprechenden Lebenszustand erreichen, wenn sie die Fesseln des Korpers abgestreift hat. Anderseits aber soil dieser ihr so fremdartige Leib einen so storenden Einfluss auf sie ausiiben dass sie von ihm in den Strom des Werdens herabgezogen in Irrthum verseucht, mit Unruhe und Verwirrung erfullt, durch Leiden- schaften und Begierden, durch Sorgen, Furcht, Einbildungen trunken gemacht wird ; die stiirmischen Wogen des korperlichen Lebens sollen ihren 72 In the Respublica, Plato uses evSv'eo-ftu with the simple accusa tive in the same sense. A certain Erus, who has returned from Hades, relates that he saw the soul of the buffoon Thersites enter ing into an ape — iSeiv ryv rov yeAo)T07roiov ©epotrov (yvxyv) iriByKov evSvop-e'vTTv,67 i.e., becoming the possession of an ape. Equally interesting are the examples of evSveiv-evSv'ecr&u used in a figurative sense. Plato speaks of an image entering man, and conversely of man or the mind of man entering an object. In the Respublica II, XVII, the philosopher treats of the edu cation of the citizens. Especially when the mind is young and tender is the image which we wish to imprint on each individual formed and enters in — pAkiara yap St; Tore irAaTTeTOt Kai evSverat twos, ov av Tts Bovkyrai ivayptyvaaBai eKaoTO).68 In this phrase, evSverai seems to be the passive form and to mean that the soul submits more easily to the possession and control of the tvVos, by which and conformably to which it is consequently molded.89 Again, Plato speaks of the mind entering into its object. He tells us that only he is competent to judge the relative happiness of the just and the unjust man who is not struck with the outward pomp of a tyrant, but who is able by reflection to enter into and see through the nature of man — os SvVarai tt} Siavoia eis dvSpos tJ0os evSvs StiSeiv.70 Not merely the figurative entering into the nature of some one else is here expressed, but also the exercise of the power of the subject that enters. In the previous examples we saw that the power implied by the ev8veo-0ai is exercised in shaping the object into something else. Here, however, by the evSvetv it is merely stated that the intellect exercises its power, namely the power to scrutinize ; but this connotes that it subjects the object to its scrutinizing power. The phrase then supposes an intellectual ewigen Kreislauf zerriitten und aufhalten ; beim Eintritt in den Korper soil sie den Trank der Vergessenheit geschlurft, sollen such die Anschauungen ihres f riiheren Daseins bis zur Unkenntlichkeit verwischt haben ; von ihrer Verbindung mit dem Korper soil jene ganze Verunstaltung ihres Wesens herriihren, die Plato mit so lebhaften Farben ausmalt." After mentioning other influences of the body on the soul, he concludes : "Von so durch- greifender Bedeutung ist das korperliche Leben, in seinem Anfang wie in seinem Fortgang, fur den Geist. Wie sich aber diess mit Plato's ander- weitigen Annahmen vertragerr soil, lasst sich allerdings nicht absehen. Cfr. Philosophic Der Griechen, II., I, 855-859. 97 Resp., X, XVI. 68 Resp., II, XVII. 69 Plato in Leg. I, XI, speaks of kind feeling taking possession of chil dren. But, since the correct reading of the Greek text is uncertain, the mere reference to this example suffices. ™Resp., IX, IV. 73 domination over the secret and mysterious ways of the human heart; an intellectual possession.71 In Cratylus evSvetv occurs in the sense of to clothe, but with a figurative connotation. Plato is discussing the derivation of names. When he is asked by Hermogenes to give the etymology of the names of various virtues, he replies that, since he has entered into the lion's skin — iiceiSyrrep tt/v AeovTijv evSe'SuKo,72 it is proper for him, not to shrink from the task, but to examine those names. The phrase evSverat tttv keovryv, as we learn from Gregory of Constantinople,73 was a familiar proverbial expression with the Greeks, and, according to Apostolius,74 it was applied to those who "magna aggrediuntur." In our text, Plato seems to mean that, since he has made bold to give the etymology of other words, he should not shrink from an attempt to comply with the request of Hermogenes. We have here a figure taken from the idea of putting on a garment. And what the phrase, to enter a garment, intimates, this figure clearly expresses; namely, to give oneself up to the influence or control of that which the garment represents — in our case, courage. The words then mean to enter into the possession of courage, to be possessed by courage. The effect of being thus possessed is Plato's attempt to explain the names. In the figure of a garment then we have : a) The surrender to the possession of that for which the gar ment stands, which implies b) A union, and effects c) A change in the subject in accordance with that for which the garment stands. — It is strange that in this figure the perfect of the active is used synonymously with the middle. 9. ENAYE2®AI in Aristotle Aristotle (b. 384) objects to those philosophers who indeed admit that the soul is united to the body, but who do not determine further the relation of the body to the soul, just as if it were pos sible, as the Pythagorean fables say, that any soul can enter any body — ryv rvxovaav yvxyv eis to tvxov evSvecrflai o<3pxi. This idea IS 71 This idea of possession is well expressed by our slang phrase "I got you." ™ Crat, XXVI. ™ Migne, P G., 142, 456 D. 74 Ibid. *5 Anima, I, III. 74 just as ridiculous as if some one would say that the carpenter s art could enter into pipes — ryv tcktoviktiv eis avAovs ev8veo-0ai. For, he concludes, just as an art must use (xpyaBai) its (correspond ing) instruments, so must the soul use the body, i.e., must have such a body as is adapted to its use. *Ev8veo-0ai, in the first phrase, means that the proper soul be possessed by the proper body. This meaning is evident from the example that follows, which says that the carpenter's art can not be possessed by pipes. 10. The Metaphor ENAYE20AI TINA in Dionysius In Ant. Rom., XI, V, of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (b.c. 54 B.C.) we note an example of the metaphorical use of ev8veo-0ai fol lowed by a personal object. This citation deserves special atten tion, not only on account of its close similarity with the phrase of St. Paul, but especially because it has again and again been quoted and referred to by exegetes as a proof that ev8veo-0ai Xpiarov means nothing more than imitation. It is also this example that Bloom- field has in mind when he says that, in the passages cited by com mentators of ev8veo-0ai, "there is no more than a slight allusion to conduct considered figuratively, as a dress."77 The important expression in question is found in a description of a meeting of the Roman senate. When Valerius was speaking, Appius and the rest of the decemviri sprang up and prevented him from continuing. A great noise ensued. Finally Marcus Horatius, no longer able to restrain his anger, addressed Appius and his associates : Very quickly do you force me, Appius, to rend the bridles in twain, since you are no longer moderate but put on that Tarquin — otWti peTptd£ovTes, akka. rbv TapKVVtov ixeivov iv- Svdjuevoi ;78 for you do not allow those to say a word who wish to speak in behalf of the common welfare. What is the precise mean ing of the phrase tov TapKVVtov eKeivov evSvdp.evoi? We have seen that, in the Greek literature from Homer down to Dionysius, ev8veo-0ai implies, in the first place, possession. We have further seen that he who is possessed, or becomes the posses sion, of another thing, is changed according to the possessor. If then we wish to interpret the words of Dionysius in accord ance with the unanimous testimony of the Greek writers, we must say that the fundamental idea implied in this phrase is possession. 79 Ibid. 77 Recensio synop. Annot. Sacr., VI, 160. 78 Ant Rom., XI, V, 2. 75 To exclude this idea and to interpret the words merely in the sense of to imitate is to establish an exception which is unwar ranted. Moreover, with this interpretation the context of our passage is in perfect agreement. Appius and his associates have, so to say, surrendered to the possession and power of Tarquin, are so possessed by Tarquin that they are changed according to him ; they become, as it were, other Tarquins. Since the context clearly shows that, in consequence of this possession, Appius and his asso ciates are changed or conformed to Tarquin and not vice versa, the words tov TapKvviov iKelvov ivSvopevoi evidently mean to surrender to the possession of Tarquin, or to let oneself be possessed by Tarquin, and not to take possession of Tarquin. The context, moreover, tells us precisely how Appius and his comrades are changed : they receive the qualities of Tarquin ; namely, his intolerance and arrogance. By receiving these quali ties, they are made quasi Tarquins. Horatius tells us this when he adds : For you do not allow those to say a word who wish to speak in behalf of the common welfare. The circumstance that the context gives us the key to the pre cise interpretation of the phrase evSv'eo-0ai Ttva, for determining not only the subject of the possession, but also the precise nature of its effects, is most important, yet it seems to be not generally rec ognized by commentators. Since in this phrase the effect of the possession is explicitly described, commentators conclude that external imitation, or as sumption of the qualities of another, is the primary and only idea contained in the word ev8vW0ai both in this instance and in all others in which it is used. Imitation is certainly included in this phrase. But to render the expression by "you are imitating that Tarquin" is to emasculate it. The fundamental and dominating idea would be better expressed by "you are possessed, you are bewitched by Tarquin." That Appius and his associates conse quently act like Tarquin, is only the result of the possession which forms the fundamental idea. And this effect is more than mere imitation. It is conceived as being effected by Tarquin; he, his power, is conceived as acting in them. Finally, from the fact that Dionysius represents Horatius as speaking these words in ordinary conversation, yes in a heated debate, we must infer that this metaphorical expression was a common and popular phrase. 76 This example of the use of evSv'eo-0at with a personal object is certainly most remarkable and bears a striking similarity to St. Paul's expression. But neither to this example can we apply the words of Chrysostom, "mysterium horrendum," for here we evi dently have a metaphorical use of ev8v'eo-0at. Appius and his com rades are not actually possessed and changed by Tarquin. Certainly Chrysostom saw in St. Paul's use of the same phrase more than is expressed here. This additional meaning, as we have seen, consists in the reality of Christ's possession of us; we are actually His property and He actually dwells in us and conforms us to Himself. There is no question that here we have the key to the solution of the Pauline formula. n. ENAYE50AI in Philo In the De Mundo IV of Philo (b. 25 B.C.), we meet with a strange use of ev8veo-0ai. Speaking of the specific differences be tween the various classes of creatures, he says that of the bodies some enter into habit, and others nature, and others soul, and Others a rational soul — tujv atopArav, to pev eveSvouTO e£iv, Ta Se cpvoiv, rb. Se yvxyv, to Se AoyiKirv x/mxyv.7B Evidently, in this citation, ev8veo-0ai can not mean to enter. For Philo immediately describes habit (e|iv) which one class of bodies eveSvVaTo, not as enclosing the bodies, but as being enclosed by them.80 In the same manner, he conceives the soul to be enclosed in the body as in a prison.81 'Ev8veo-0ai, then, in this case, does not mean to enter, but it implies the idea of possession. But does Philo mean that the bodies take possession of or become the possession of habit, etc. ? The latter is evidently his meaning, for the change that is effected in the possessed is here predicated of the bodies. Thus through their union with a <£vo-is or yvxri, as Philo explains,82 bodies become plants or animals or men, respectively. 12. ENAYES0AI in Josephus This author (b. 37 a.d.) uses the word only in its literal signifi cation with clothing83 and armor84 as its object. In Antiq. XIX, 1, 5, he speaks of the Emperor Cajus who put on woman's clothes — oroAds ydp ev8vdp.evos ywatKeias. He did this, adds Josephus, to 79 Opera. II, 606. 80 Ibid. 81 Cfr. also Zeller, Philosophic der Griechen, III, 2, 448. 82 Opera. II, 606 ff. 33 Antiq., XVII, 5, 7; XVIII, 4, 3J etc. 84 Bel Jud., V, 5, 7- 77 make the company mistake him for a woman. As we have already remarked,85 when a man puts on the garment of a woman he gives himself up to the quasi possession of the garment, and conse quently is changed by it; he receives the outward appearance of a woman. 13. Metaphorical Use of ENAYE20AI by Christian Writers In the first age of the Christian era, we repeatedly find evSveo-flai used in a figurative sense by the Christian writers. a) St. Clement of Rome The first example we wish to adduce is found in the (first) letter of St. Clement of Rome, which was written in the last decade of the first century of our era.86 In the third chapter, the author exhorts his readers to cleave to those to whom grace is given from God and to enter into concord — iv8vap.eBa ryv dp-dvoiav.87 At the same time he points out the manner in which it should manifest itself in them: being lowly-minded and temperate, holding our selves aloof from all backbiting and evil speaking, being justified by works and not by words.88 The words ivSvawp.e6a ttiv dpdVoiav, which are similar to Homer's phrase 8v'eo-0ai dAK^v, clearly mean : let us enter into the possession of concord, let us be possessed by concord, and thereby assume its qualities, i.e., become truly harmonious. b) St. Ignatius In his letter to St. Polycarp, written between 98 and 117,89 this holy martyr exhorts his friend by the grace wherewith he is clothed 7rapaKaA<3 ae iv x<*piTi ij ivSeSvaai,90 to press forward in his course and to exhort all men that they may be saved. 'Ev8veo-0at in this expression, as in the words of St. Clement, can not mean to enter physically into, for grace is not about us but in us. The natural meaning of the phrase is that Polycarp has become the possession of grace, that he has been possessed and transformed by it. c) Shepherd of Hermas In the Shepherd of Hermas (written between 140 and 155),91 the metaphorical use of ev8veo-0ai as an expression denoting the 89 £W. Jud., V, 5, 7- 86 Cfr. Bardenhewer, Patrol, 27. 87 Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, 21. 88 Lightfoot, Op. cit, 70. 89 Cfr. Bardenhewer, Patrol, 30. 90 Lightfoot, Op. cit, 131. 91 Cfr. Bardenhewer, Patrol, 40. 9S 78 entrance into the possession of various virtues and vices and other qualities, is quite frequent. He speaks of entering into (ev8v'eo-0ai) the faith of the Lord,92 justice,93 reverence,94 long-suffering, truth,96 good and holy desire,97 cheerfulness,98 strength,99 as also much folly,100 and great pride.101 A good desire he also designates as an eVSvpa.102 In the above-mentioned phrases, ivSveaBai can not have its strictly literal meaning of to enter ; for all the qualities mentioned are conceived as being in man, penetrating and affecting his very nature. The words can only mean that man surrenders himself to the possession and control of these qualities, and consequently assumes the nature and the qualities of the possessor. To con vince ourselves that this is the meaning of the phrase, we need only examine an example. In the 3. Vision, a young man appears to Hermas and relates the following parable. An old man, who has lost all hope in him self by reason of his weakness and his poverty, and who is waiting only for the last day of his life, suddenly receives an inheritance. He hears the news, rises, and full of joy enters into strength — eveSvWro ryv laxvv, and no longer lies down, but stands up, and his spirit, which was broken by reason of his former condition, is renewed again, and he no longer sits, but takes courage.103 Strength is here conceived as a power that came from without and took possession of the old man. The phrase eveSvoaTo ttjv laxvv then means : he was possessed by strength, and received the qualities of his possessor, i.e., he became strong, as the vision says, he no longer lies down, and his broken spirit is renewed. The possessing power inaugurates a restoration and renovation. 14. ENAYEIN AND AIIOAYE20AI IN LuciAN We now come to an example which has been adduced by a few exegetes to explain the Pauline formula. The phrase occurs in Lucian's (b.c. 120 a.d.) Gallus 19, and reads, d7ro8vo-dp.evos Se rbv 92 V., 4, I, 8; M., 9, 7; M., 9, 10 ;S., 6, I, 2. 98 M., 2; S.,6, 1,4. 94 M., 2, 4. 93 M., 5, II, 8. 96 M., 11, 4. 97 M ., 12, I, 1. 98 M., 10, III, 1 and 4. 99 V., 3, XII, 2. 109 S., 6, V, 3- 101 S., 8, IX, 1. 102 M., 12, I, 2. 193 Cfr. Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, 418. 79 Ilvflaydpav Tivas p.eTyp.idao> per' avrov.110 To this question the cock answers : 'Aairaatav ryv iK Mikyrov eraipav. Micyl lus rejoins: $ev rov Adyov, Kat yvvrr yap ev tois dAAois 6 Ilvflaydpas » ' 111 eyeveTO. It is inconceivable how any one who has only superficially read this passage and noted its context, can say that d7ro8veo-0ai here refers to imitation. It is evident that the phrase must be inter preted in the light of what precedes and follows ; namely, in the light of the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, and it clearly means to go out of. It is likewise strange that the phrase eve'Sv eis dvBpunrov aZaa, which occurs in the same context, has been entirely overlooked by commentators. 104 Nov. Lex. Graeco—Lat in N. T., I, 631. m Ibid. 105 Bib. Comm. on Rom., 404. 108 Notes on Rom., 322. 107 Recensio svnop. Annot. Sacr., VI, 161. i°8 Gall, 16. 109 Gall, 17. "° Gall, 19. 80 This latter phrase is evidently synonymous with the expression that occurs a few lines later, es llvtfaydpav t;kov — I came into Pythagoras. 'EvSvetv, accordingly, implies the union of the soul with the body ; and d7ro8ueo-0ai, its opposite, the disunion, the sep aration of the soul from the body — and not imitation. But the evSv'eiv here implies more than mere union ; it expresses a qualified union. Like the ecrSvveiv-eo-8v'eo-&H found in Herodotus and the evSveo-ftu in Plato, evSveiv here means that the soul becomes the possession of the body and is changed by it. In other words, the soul by its entrance into the body loses its former mode of exist ence and receives a new mode of being; yes, it is here represented as becoming that into which it enters. Thus, when the soul of the cock enters the body of Euphorbus, it becomes Euphorbus (ExHpopBos iyev6p.yv) ;112 when it enters the body of Aspasia, it is transformed (peryp.iaryv.lla Cremer119 explains this phrase as meaning " 'den Sophisten spielen,' sich verhalten, sich geben, darstellen als ware man u.s.w." Accordingly he thinks it is "vollig verfehlt" to seek to explain the Pauline formula by this example or that taken from Dionysius of Halicarnassus. It is difficult to see how the phrase eve'Sv rbv ao, is the use of these verbs by earlier writers with garments and arms as object, and the figure of Plato which is derived from the idea of putting on a garment, ttjv keovryv ivSeSvKa. Later, however, this proverbial figure is likewise expressed by the middle. N. B. «r8vveiv, with the v, is used by Herodotus in the sense of to take possession of and to surrender to the possession of. b) The middle voice always = to surrender to the posses sion and dominion of, to become the property and possession of . c) The II aorist active (ev)e'8w = to take possession, and to surrender to the possession of. When used in the latter 84 sense, it seems to emphasize the general meaning of the active, i.e., to bring out the free will of the agent. 5. The context always clearly tells us which is the precise meaning of the verb : a) If the subject is the stronger element and the change is effected in the object, it = to take possession and control of. b) If the object is the stronger element and the change is effected in the subject, it==to surrender to the possession and power of, to become the property of. 6. The context tells us also the precise nature of the change. Where the change is made by and according to a person, it means a change according to what the person stands for in the context. 7. When (ev) Sveiv- (ev)8veo-0ai is used in a metaphorical sense, the possession is not real but only imagined, and the change, though real, is conceived as being made by the possessor. 8. In the Koivy period ev8veo-0ai is used in a stereotyped form, according to which the object is the stronger element and the change is wrought in the subject, and = to give oneself up to the possession and power of, to become the property of. 9. The possession connotes union. Indeed, in some cases, the effect of the possession is described as an identity of the possessed with the possessor. 10. The change that results from the possession implies imi tation ; imitation, however, is not the fundamental idea contained in (ev) Sveiv- (e'v)Sveo-^ai, but only its effect, nor should it be styled mere imitation, but rather assimilation. 11. ('Ev) Sveiv- (e'v)8v'eo-0ai, as used in the philosophical system of the Greeks to express the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, is most characteristic and interesting, for here a) ('Ec)8t'eiv-(ev)8veo-0ai is taken in its literal meaning; b) It effects a union, a oneness of the possessor and the possessed. c) The further effect of the (iv) Sveiv- (iv)SveaBai is a kind of iraAtvyeveo-ia, a new mode of life for the possessed. III. ENAYEIN-ENAYE2®AI in Biblical Literature The question now arises whether the same meaning and use attach to ev8vetv-ev8v'eo-0ai in the Biblical as in the profane Greek literature, and, in any case, whether Paul in his formula followed either of these literary currents. Since Paul is known to follow his own ways, the meaning of ev8v'eiv-ev8veo-0at in Biblical literature 85 can not of itself prove decisive for the interpretation of the ivSveaBai Xpio-rdv in the Pauline epistles. But, in so far as the Biblical Greek writings should agree with the profane Greek literature as to the meaning and use of ev8veo-0at, they would seem to be a striking illustration and powerful confirmation of the results attained from the latter source. i. ENAYEIN-ENAYES©AI in the LXX a) Use of 'EvSveiv-'EvSveo-ftu with an Impersonal Object The term occurs more than 1 10 times in the LXX, and in almost every case where it has a Hebrew equivalent it is the rendering of one or the other form of the verb ID^b, which properly means to put on, to clothe.120 More than 60 times this word is used in its literal, naive material sense and is followed by the accusative of garment, or in a causative sense with the accusative of person and garment or only of person. In all these cases, except three, ev8veo-0at is the equivalent of the Hebrew Tinb. In 2 Kings VI, 14, it stands for "0)1= to gird, to surround;121 in Lev. VIII, 7, it is the translation ofln3=to give;122 while in Ez. XLIV, 17, it is the rendering of Tlby = to go up, to ascend,123 In these three cases, ev8v'eo-0ai is merely a free rendering of the Hebrew. Besides its frequent use with garment, ev8veo-0ai is found four times in the LXX in the sense of to put on a breastplate. Like wise here, where it has a Hebrew equivalent, it is the equation of mb. Like the expressions ev8veo-0ai xirwva-Tevxea found in profane Greek literature, all these phrases may imply that the person gives himself up to the quasi influence of the garment or armor, and consequently is changed by and according to it, i.e., receives from it a new outward appearance. In some instances in which ivSveaBai- ^b is used in its literal sense with garment as its object, we find garment modified by a word that denotes a disposition or quality. Thus, before Judith went to the camp of Holofernes, she put off the garments of her widowhood and put on the garments of her gladness — eve8vo-aTo Ta IpAna tt?s eicppoavvys airijs.12* There is no Hebrew equivalent for 129 Cfr. Gesenius, Hebr. u. Aram. Handworterbuch, 402. 121 Gesenius, Op. cit., 233. 122 Gesenius, Op. cit, 522. 123 Gesenius, Op. cit, 612. ">4Jud. X, 3- '"""' "' '->' ' 86 this phrase. In this expression, the symbolic signification of the word garment predominates. Again, in relating the acts of penance and humiliation Esther performed before appearing before the king with her plea in behalf of the Jewish people, the text says that, when she had laid aside the garments of her glory, she put on the garments of distress and grief — eveSvWro IpAna orevox«>pias Kai 7re'v0ovs.125 Here, tOO, we have no Hebrew equivalent. Although this expression, like the preceding, is to be taken literally, still it emphasizes the symbolic signification of the garments. A similar example is contained in Isaias. Describing the joy of the Messias he says : "I will greatly rejoice in the Lord, and my soul shall be joyful in my God. For he hath clothed me with the garments of salvation and with the robe of justice" — eve'Svo-* ydp p^e IpAnov aiarrjpiov xai x'Twva eicppoovvys.12* The Hebrew has : ¦'Stay npIS bryn 9VP-m "•Sltf'Sbn "'Si This phrase is not only symbolic, but also metaphorical. By metonomy, the "garments of salvation" here stand for "salvation" itself. It is important to note here that to put on the garment of something is the same as to put on the thing itself. The active is here used in a causative sense. The notion of possession always connected with evSveiv- evSveo-ftu has a very interesting meaning here ; it emphasizes that the being possessed by salvation is the gift of God. It means : God has caused me to be possessed by salvation. The figurative phrase, to put on the garment of a certain dis position, is less frequently met than the metaphorical expression, to put on a disposition as a garment. Thus we find the expres sions : to put on a curse as a garment- — e'veSvWro Kardpav a Kvpiov eve'Svae tov re8ecSv141= ^"13-^1^ jTUhb FliPP Wi'l. This phrase means that the Spirit of the Lord entered into Gedeon, took possession of him, and consequently ruled his actions, as the context shows. The text continues, "And he sounded the trumpet and called together the house of Abiezer, to follow him," etc. These actions are the result of the Spirit's possession. The phrase "the Spirit of the Lord possessed Gedeon" is similar to the expressions found in the profane Greek literature, which declare that fury, pain, madness, and similar qualities enter man and take possession of him. But here the phrase seems to have its literal meaning : the Spirit of the Lord literally entered into Gedeon and took possession of him. It is important to note, however, that this phrase, like the Greek, implies, first, possession and control ; second, a change in the possessed. — The aorist active iveSvae again is used to denote the taking possession of man by the Spirit. 141 A and B have : nveifta GeoC ivtSvv&iuaoe rov TeSeiiv. 89 Another example. When David, who had fled from Saul, doubted in what spirit the men of Benjamin and of Juda came to him, the Spirit "put on" Amasai : Kat rrveipa iveSvae rbv Apaaai1*2— ¦'TBSaynX Ulinb fiVrl. Here again the I aorist active eve'Svo-e is - T -I t ; IT - :' ° used and means that the Spirit took possession of Amasai and dominated him. The effects of this possession are the words of reassurance Amasai spoke to David. Finally, when the princes of Juda, who after the death of Joiada worshiped idols, would not listen to the prophets that were sent to bring them back to the Lord, the Spirit of God put on Zacharias : Kai rrvevpa Beov iveSvae rbv "Afapiav.148 Also here eveoWe equates the Hebrew JTllfob It has the same meaning as in the preceding examples. The effects of the possession of Zacharias by the Spirit are the words of reproach that the prophet thereupon speaks to the princes. A confirmation of this interpretation of UDb is found in the Syriac, the sister language of the Hebrew. For the first meta phorical meaning of the Syriac equivalent lebash is to invade, occupy, obsess.144 The variant reading of B in the first passage, and of A in the first and second passages is not opposed to this interpretation. For ivSwauota — to strengthen, surely implies the exercise of a power. In Isaias XLIX, 18, we have another example of the use of ivSveaBai with a personal object. The prophet says of Sion : "Lift up thy eyes round about and see. And these are gathered to gether, they are come to thee. I live, saith the Lord, that thou shalt be clothed with all these as with an ornament" — on Trdvras avrovs ue8a Se ra oirka rov tpwTos,147 the panoply of God — evSvo-acrfleTTjv 7ravo7rAiav tov Beov,lis and in particular the breastplate of justice — evSvodp-evoi tov BoipaKa ry rarreivotppoavvyv, rcpavryra, pxLKpoOvpiav. Here again the symbolic element, especially in connection with the word o-irAdyxva, suggests the Hebrew origin of this phrase. The sense, at any rate, is clear : The Colossians should be possessed and transformed by these virtues. A very striking example of the figurative use of ivSveaBai is found in 1 Cor. XV, 53-54. Explaining the manner of our resur rection, St. Paul says that on the last day "the trumpet shall sound and the dead shall rise again incorruptible. And we shall be changed" (v. 52). He then describes the change by which the risen shall be made incorruptible, by the figure of ev8veo-0ai. For, he says, "This corruptible must put on incorruption; and this mortal must put on immortality." — Set ydp to 6aprbv tovto ivSvaaaBai d8apalav Kal to Bvyrbv tovto ivSvaaaBai ddavaalav. The contrasts in this example throw the clearest light on the meaning of ev8vo-ao-0ai. The fundamental idea of property or possession and power is evi dent. But who is possessed ? Clearly the d6apata and the dBavaaia are the stronger elements ; they are the power that takes posses sion of the weaker elements, the to 8apr6v and the to Bvyrdv, and change them. The sense then can only be : The corruptible and the mortal, i.e., the body, are possessed and controlled by incor ruptibility and immortality. In consequence of this possession, corruptibility and mortality cease to be, and incorruptibility and immortality take their place, so that the body which was corruptible and mortal (to cpBaprov-rb Bvyrov), is now incorruptible and im mortal. Note here again the use of the middle : ev8vo-ao-0ai. 151 Bib.-theol. Worterbuch d. neut. Grac, 377- 94 It is also in this sense that Chrysostom explains the figure. He pictures this process as a clash between two powers. By St. Paul's phrase "this corruptible and this mortal," he says, the body is meant. Therefore, he concludes, the body remains, for it is the to ev8vdp.evov, one might say the object of possession and conten tion; but mortality and corruption are destroyed and vanish (d<£avi'£eTai) when immortality and incorruption take possession of the body — t) Se Bvyrorqi Kal t) cpBopd dd>avi£erai, aBavaaias Kal d.152 In consequence of this possession, the body itself becomes immortal and incorruptible. Chrysostom con tinues : Therefore doubt no longer how it will live a life without end, when you hear that it is made incorruptible — dVi dcpBaprov yiveTOi.153 St. Paul repeats his figure in verse 54: "And when this cor ruptible hath put on (evSvayrai) incorruption and this mortal hath put on (evSvoTjTOt) immortality, then shall come to pass the saying that is written : Death is swallowed up in victory" — KarerroBy 0 tfdvaTos eis vikos. Here it is made still clearer which is the domi nating power. Immortality gains the victory over mortality or death. The sense evidently is : the body passes under the dominion and power of incorruption and immortality. The expression KarerroBy — is swallowed up, is consumed — shows us the powerful effect produced in the body by the possession of incorruption and immortality. The latter, not only overcome and expel mortality and corruption from the body, but utterly destroy them. As Chrysostom says, neither a remnant of it, i.e., corruption, nor the hope of its return remains, for incorruption has destroyed cor ruption — ttjs dBapaia<: tt)v tpBopav dvaAwodoTrs.154 In this example, we, therefore, have a most emphatic use of ivSveaBai, which sug gests also the completeness, the totality of possession. A similar figurative use of ev8veo-&u is found in 2 Cor. V, 2-4. In the first verse of this chapter, St. Paul says we know that, if this body is dissolved, we shall receive a glorified body, not made by hands, but eternal. Therefore, he continues in verse 2, "in this also we groan, desiring to be clothed upon («rev8vo-ao-0ai) with our habi tation that is from heaven," i.e., already in this body we desire to be possessed by the glorified body. This meaning is postulated by the middle form of the verb. The being possessed by the glorified body is curiously described by ejrevSvoacrtfai, which supposes the «2 Migne, P. G., 61, 365. "3 Ibid. '¦" Ibid. 95 having become possessed by something else that has previously taken place by an ivSveaBai. The latter surrender to the possession of something else is explained in the next verse : ei ye Kai evSvodp.evot oi yvpvol evpeByaopeBa. This verse has been a crux for exegetes and has received a great variety of interpretations.155 But in the new light of our investigation of ivSveaBai, it can be satisfactorily solved. The ev8veo-0ai seems to refer to the possession par excel lence of St. Paul, i.e., the possession by the new life, the posses sion by Christ. The sense then is : Already in this body, although we have become the possession of Christ, we long to be possessed by the glorified bodies, i.e., to be glorified. According to this inter pretation, both the ev8v'eo-0ai and the orevSveo-tfai belong to the super natural order ; the former transforms the soul, the latter the body ; the «rev8veo-0ai is the natural completion of the ev8ueo-0ai. The evSveo-flat may be regarded as a technical term which Paul used so frequently that his readers here knew what he meant without any explicit modification of the term. One who was baptized, then, was simply an ev8vo-dp,evos. This will become clearer when we come to the other passages where Paul speaks of the ivSveaBai par excellence. B) Figurative Use of 'Ev8v'eo-0at with a Personal Object Apart from the two renowned passages in Gal. Ill, 27, and Rom. XIII, 14, St. Paul uses ev8v'eo-0ai with a personal object in the phrase "to put on the new man." In Eph. IV, 22-24, he says the Ephesians have been taught "to put off, according to former conversation, the old man, who is corrupted according to the desire of error, and to be renewed in the spirit of their mind and to put on the new man, who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth" — Kai evSvo-ao-flat tov Katvdv dvBponrov rbv Kara Bebv KnaBevra iv SiKaioavvy Kal baiornri tt/s dkydeias. The phrase ivSvaaaBai rbv Katvdv dvBpwirov is parallel with Liba- nius's expression eve'Sv tov aocpiaryv. But it is here more realistic. In both phrases, the object of ivSveaBai is designated by a generic noun which denotes, not a particular individual, but a class of persons. In both cases, moreover, possession is implied. But who is the possessor, and who the possessed? The words of Libanius mean to give oneself up to the possession and power of sophism, and consequently to be changed according to the 155 Cfr. Meyer, 2 Brief an d. Kor., 126. ff. 96 object, i.e., to become a sophist. This meaning, as we have seen, is clear from the context in which the phrase occurs. St. Paul's words likewise mean, as already the middle indi cates, to give oneself up to the possession and power of the new man, to be possessed by the new man, i.e., the new life, and con sequently to be changed by and according to the object, i.e., to become new men, to become men of the new life. As in the ex ample from Libanius, the military life is replaced by the sophistic life, so here the old life is replaced by the new. The difference between the two examples is this : The new life to which Firminus gives himself up is merely an avocation; the new life, according to Paul, however, is not merely an avocation, a profession, but something that affects the very essence of the soul. The new man to whose possession we should surrender, is described by Paul as one "who according to God is created in justice and holiness of truth," i.e., in true justice and holiness. Our new life then is a life of justice and holiness. By creating this new man, says Chrysostom, God created man a son ; but this takes place in Bap tism. — Yidv evfleios, cpyalv, airbv eKnae' tovto yap drrb tov Barrriaparo? yiveTat.156 In these words, Chrysostom describes the grand effect (vtdv — eKnae) and the cause (drrb tov BarrriapaTO'i yiverai) of this evSveor&u. The figurative use of ivSveaBai in Col. Ill, 10, is very similar to its use in Eph. IV, 24 ; and it must be explained in the same way. In an exhortation to the Colossians, Paul says : "But now put you also all away : anger, indignation, malice, blasphemy, filthy speech out of your mouth ; lie not one to another : stripping yourselves of the old man with his deeds, and putting on the new, who is re newed unto knowledge, according to the image of him who created him" — direKSvodpcvot tov iraAaidv dvBptinrov avv Tais irpdfceaiv avrov, Kat tVSuodpevot tov veov tov dvaKatvovpevov ets irriyvwaiv kot' eiKOva rov KTlCTaVTOS avrov. In this passage, Paul distinguishes between the "old man" and "his deeds." By the "old man," therefore, the principle of the old life or simply the old life, must be meant; and by the "new man," the new life. Paul tells us that we should free ourselves of the possession and power of the old life and surrender our selves to the possession of the new life. Note that already the evSvecrflai implies the eK8v'eo-0ai; the new life, when it takes posses sion of us, frees us from the dominion of the old ; it replaces, 159 Migne, P. G., 62, 96. 97 destroys the old. But Paul emphasizes the utter destruction of the old life by expressly mentioning first the hcSveoBai. The use of evSveo&u with a personal subject and object in the phrase to be possessed by the new man, has no parallel in the O. T. But it has a perfect parallel in Greek literature, in the words of Libanius ; and it bears a great similarity to the examples taken from Dionysius Hal. and Eusebius. True, also in the O. T. evSveoftu-'Unb occurs with a personal subject and object and de notes possession ; but, as we have seen, these examples differ from those found in Hellenic literature, in the koivt; period, and also in St. Paul. For in the former examples, the subject takes possession of the personal object ; while in the latter, the subject enters into, gives himself up to the possession and dominion of the object. In the former, the active evSvetv is used; in the latter, the middle ev8veo-0ai. This shows that Paul derived the use of ev8veo-0ai with a personal object, not from the O. T., but from the Hellenic literature. The other two instances in which Paul uses evSveotfai are the famous passages in Gal. Ill, 27, and Rom. XIII, 14. We shall take these up in our next chapter. Our investigation of the other passages in the N. T., especially in Paul, where the expression occurs, has yielded the same results as to the meaning of the word as we derived from the study of the term in the profane Greek literature and, in its main and essen tial idea, also in the LXX. But Paul goes further than even the Hellenists inasmuch as he strongly emphasizes the fact that the power to which we surrender ourselves wholly replaces and utterly destroys its contrary power. CHAPTER IV APPLICATION OF THE RESULTS TO ROM. XIII, 14, AND GAL. Ill, 27 Before applying the results of this investigation to the Pauline formula, we shall restate them in a summary way. In the first chapter we reviewed the various interpretations of the formula by exegetes in the Middle Ages and in modern times. Owing to the utter confusion concerning the meaning of our phrase, we had recourse to the greatest authority on exegesis in the early Greek Church, St. John Chrysostom. The study of Chrysostom yielded the following results: I. ENAYE20AI XPISTON — a) to surrender oneself to the possession and dominion of Christ, to become His property and possession. b) Christ exercises His power over us out of love by a) uniting us to Himself most intimately, so that we actually possess Christ or He actually dwells in us, and B) conforming us to Himself. The precise nature of this conformity must be deter mined by the context or circumstances in which the ev8veo-0ai is used. Therefore, in Rom. XIII, 14, the ivSveaBai regards the conformity to Christ's virtues; in Gal. Ill, 27, it re gards the conformity to Christ's nature. 2. The ev8veo-0ai Xpurrov is to be taken, not figuratively, but literally: we actually become Christ's property and possession, and consequently Christ really dwells in us and conforms us to Himself. In this reality consists the "horrendum mysterium," of which Chrysostom speaks. 3. The grand historical fact by which we first become the property and possession of Christ is Baptism. 4. His interpretation of the Pauline formula Chrysostom con firmed by the popular proverb d Setva tov Seiva eveSvoaTO and thus pointed to the Greek usage of the term ivSveaBai as the source of the 98 99 ev8veo-0ai Xpiarov and of his explanation of it, thereby giving us a touchstone wherewith to test the merits of his interpretation and to establish beyond all doubt the meaning of the formula. The investigation of the meaning of (ev)8v'eiv-(ev)8veo-0ai in the Hellenic literature resulted in a powerful confirmation of Chrysostom's interpretation : i. The first and fundamental idea connected with (ev)Sveiv- (ev)8v'eo0ai from its first use in Homer to its use in the Koivy period, is that of possession and dominion. 2. When used in its naive material sense, the term = to move from one place to another; either the subject that moves is a power or the place to which it moves is a place of domination. 3. In its more developed literal sense, as in its figurative meaning, the term expresses : a) Possession and dominion, which implies b) Union, and effects c) Conformity of the possessed to the possessor. The precise nature of this conformity is determined by the context or the circumstances. 4. a) The active (ev)Sveiv, except the II aorist, generally = to take possession and control of. b) The middle (ev)Sveo0ai always = to surrender to the possession and control of, to become the property of and to be dominated by. c) The II aorist active may have either meaning; the context must decide the meaning in each case. 5. In the phrase of Dionysius of Hal. rbv TapKvViov ixelvov ivSvoptevoi,1 we have a strict parallel to the Pauline formula, current already, before Paul wrote. It means to surrender to the posses sion and power of Tarquin ; to become his property and to be con trolled by him. The result is further confirmed by the use of ev8veiv-ev8veo-0ai in the LXX and the N. T., especially in St. Paul's writings. Here again the fundamental idea connected with the term is possession and dominion, which implies a union, and effects a conformity of the possessed to the possessor. In the Biblical literature, how ever, the II aorist active is not used, and the active always = to take possession and control of ; the middle always = to surrender to the possession of, to come under the dominion and power of, to become the property of. 1 Ant. Rom. XI, V, 2. 100 In the light of these overwhelming proofs there can be no doubt about the meaning of the Pauline formula in Rom. XIII, 14, and Gal. Ill, 27. There is no possibility of explaining it in any other sense than that which the term uniformly has in Hel lenic literature, profane as well as sacred. Both the usage of St. Paul, as we have seen, and the context of the phrase, as we have noted in Chrysostom's explanation and as we shall see presently, not only favor this interpretation, but demand it. The Pauline formula ev8v'eo0ai Xpiarov, then, undoubtedly means to surrender to the possession and power of Christ, to give our selves up to His power and dominion, so that we become His prop erty and possession and He dominates us. In the parallel to Paul's formula, which we found in Dionysius of Hal. the phrase tov TapKvViov eKeivov evSvdp^vot means to give oneself up to the posses sion of Tarquin, to become his property, and to be controlled by him ; but this is a figurative expression : the decemvirs are merely conceived as being the property and as being controlled by Tar quin. But the words of Paul ev8veo0at Xpiorov are not to be taken figuratively, but literally ; they express a dread reality, a "horren dum mysterium." This, then, is, in brief, the fundamental meaning of ev8veo0at Xpiarov. to surrender ourselves to the actual possession of Christ, so that we become actually His property and are actu ally controlled by His power; consequently, Christ really dwells in us and actually conforms us to Himself. The great historical fact by which the ev8veo-0at is first effected is our Baptism into Christ as St. Paul says: do-01 ydp eis Xpiorov iBarrriaByre, Xpiarov iveSvaaoBe.2 In Baptism we commit ourselves, our whole being, to Christ ; we surrender ourselves to His posses sion and power ; we become His property and possession, which He is to rule and dominate. Christ, the Son of God, exercises this power by uniting us most intimately to Himself, so that He actually and personally dwells in us, and by conforming us to Himself. This conformity consists in our participation of His p*>pr), His nature, our eleva tion to the dignity of sons of God. This is not mere figurative language ; it expresses a dread reality, a "horrendum mysterium." But the evSveo-0ai Xpiorov is to be perfected by our lives. There fore, Paul exhorts the Romans, who have been already baptized : T3v8voaCT0e tov Kvpiov 'Itjoovv XptoTov. We should, by our deeds, 2 Gal. Ill, 27. 101 practically renew our surrender to Christ's possession and seek to do His will, whose property and possession we have become by Baptism. If we do this, then, as Chrysostom explains, Christ, moved by His love for us, will unite us yet more closely to Himself (which expresses again a dread reality, a "horrendum myste rium") and will effect in us a conformity to His virtues. In Baptism, we became other Christs by receiving His popd>r,; in leading good lives, we become other Christs by assimilating His virtues. In the one case, we become sons of God by our nature ; in the other, we become sons of God, as Chrysostom says else where,3 by our works. In conclusion, we may remark that, since the phrase ivSveaBai Tiva was current in the Greek literature before St. Paul wrote, all the opinions of commentators who would see in the Pauline for mula an allusion to some fact or custom, whether Christian, Jewish, or pagan in origin, are unfounded. COROLLARY Confirmation of the Results by the Meaning of the N. T. Formula Barrr'i£,eiv eis to ovopa 'lyaov 'EvSveaBai Xpiarov, as we have seen, means to become the prop erty and possession of Christ and to be controlled by His power ; the ev8veo0ai is first effected in Baptism. This result receives confirmation from the investigation of another N. T. formula : Barrrit,eiv eis to ovopa lyaov. Heitmiiller, in his excellent study Im Namen Jesu, with the aid of the inscriptions and monuments (ostraca and papyri) representing the conversa tional and business language of the Hellenic world, has proved beyond all doubt that in general the formula eis Svopd nvos ex presses the "Zueignung an eine Person, die Herstellung des Verhaltnisses der Zugehorigheit4 unter Gebrauch des Namens der betr. Person."5 In explanation of one of his examples he says that the name is mentioned and "indem der Name genannt wird, ist die mystische Verbindung mit der betr. Person vollzogen."6 Barrrit, . eis to ovop.a Xpiarov means : "tauf en unter den Namen Christi, Christo zu eigen, in die Zugehorigkeit zu Chr. hinein."7 In his summary, he gives the difference between the expression Barrrit,. 3 Cfr. Migne, P. G., 60, 594- 4 "Im Namen Jesu," 109. 5 Ibid., 108. 6 Ibid. 7 Ibid., 116. 102 ev and ori t. dvdp^tTi and BarrriZ,. eis to ovop.a. The first two, he says, describe the manner in which Baptism takes place; "sie besagen, dass das Taufen sich vollzieht unter Nennung des Namens Jesu." The formula Bairrl£. eis rb ovopa, however, "giebt einen (den) Zweck und einen (den) Erfolg des Taufens an: es besagt, dass der Taufling in das Verhaltnis der Zugehorigkeit, des Eigentums zu Jesus tritt." But, he adds, the last formula contains also "das Moment der Namennennung.8 It is remarkable that, as our investigation shows, the two im portant N. T. formulas ev8veo-0ai Xpiorov (which is effected by Baptism ) and Barrri^eaBai eis to ovopa Iqaov both mean : to become by Baptism the property and possession of Christ and to be con trolled by His power. Here, then, in the work of Heitmuller, we have a powerful confirmation and an excellent test of the correct ness of our interpretation of the ev8veo-0ai Xpiarov. 8 Ibid., 127. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abbott, Lyman, The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, New York and Chicago, 1888. Abbott, T. K., A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles to the Ephesians and the Colossians, New"York, 1905* Agus, Josephus, S. J., Epistola Beati Pauli Apostoli ad Romanos, Ratis- bonae et Neo Eboraci, 1888. Alber, Johannes Nep., Interpretatio Sacrae Scripturae per omnes Veteres et Novi Testamenti Libros, Tom. 14 et 15, Pesthini, 1804. Alting, Jacobi, Operum, Tom. 4, Amstelaedami, 1686. Bardenhewer, Otto, Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur, Vol. 3, Frei burg, 1912. Bardenhewer, Otto, Patrology, The Lives and Works of the Fathers of the Church, Translated from the Second Edition by Thomas J. Shahan, Freiburg im Breisgau and St. Louis, Mo., 1908. Barnes, Albert, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Epistle to the Romans10, New York, 1871. Barnes, Albert, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Second Epistle to the Corinthians and the Epistle to the Galatians2, New York, 1872. Baxter, Richard, A Paraphrase of the New Testament3, London, 1701. Beelen, Joannis Theodori, C ommentarius in Epistolam S. Pauli ad Romanos, Lovanii, 1854. Beet, Joseph Agar, Commentary, on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, New York, 1891. Belsham, Thomas, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle, Vols. 1 and 3, London, 1822. Bengel, John Albert, Gnomon of the New Testament, A New Translation by Charlton T. Lewis, and Marvin R. Vincent, Philadelphia, 1861. Benseler, Gustav Eduard, Griechisch-deutsches Schul-Worterbuch, Ed. Adolph Kaegi10, Leipzig, 1896. Bernardini a Piconio, Epistolarum B. Pauli Apostoli Triplex Expositio, Parisiis, 1857. Beyschlag, Willibald, New Testament Theology, Translated by Neil Buchanan, Vol. 22, Edinburgh, 1899. Bingham, Joseph, The Works of, Edited by His Lineal Descendant R. Bingham, Jun., Vol. 42, Oxford, 1855. Binney, Amos, The People's Commentary, Including Brief Notes on the New Testament with an Introduction by Daniel Steele, New York, 1878. Blass, Friederich, Grammar of the New Testament Greek, Translated by Henry St. John Thackary, London, 1898. 103 104 Bloomfield, S. T., Recensio synoptica Annotationis Sacrae, Being a Critical Digest of Annotations on the New Testament, Vols. 6 and 7, London, 1828. Bocharti, Samuelis, Opera Omnia, Ed. Joannis Leusden et Petri a Ville- mandy, Vol. i8, Lugduni Batavorum, 1692. Boise, James Robinson, Notes, Critical and Explanatory, on the Greek Text of Paul's Epistles, Edited by Nathan E. Wood, New York, 1896. Borger, Elias Annes, Specimen Hermeneuticum Inaugurate exhibens Inter- pretationem Epistolae Pauli ad Galatas, Lugduni Batavorum, 1807. Bosanquet, Edwin, A Verbal Paraphrase of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, London, 1840. • Bousset, Wilhelm, Der Brief an die Galater-, Gottingen, 1908. (Die Schrif ten des Neuen Testaments, herausgegeben von Johannes Weiss.) Brenii, Danielis, Opera Theologica, Amstelaedami, 1666. Brown, Francis, A Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament, etc., Based on the Lexicon of William Gesenius as Translated by Edward Robinson, Oxford, 1906. Brown, John, Analytical Exposition of the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, New York, 1857. Brunonis, Sancti, Carthusianorum, Opera omnia, Ed. Theodori Petrei, Co- loniae, 1711. Burkitt, William, Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, London, 1716. Calmet, Augustini, O. S. B., Commentarius Literalis in Omnes Libros Novi Testamenti, Ed. Joannes Dominicus Mansi, Vol. 3, Wirceburgi, 1788. Calvin, John, Commentaries on the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians and Ephesians, Translated from the Original Latin by William Pringle, Edinburgh, 1854. Calvin, John, Commentaries on the Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, Translated and Edited by John Owen, Edinburgh, 1849. Clemen, Carl, Primitive Christianity and its non-Jewish Sources, Trans lated by Robert G. Nisbet, Edinburgh, 1912. Clemen, Carl, Die Entwicklung der christlichen Religion inner halb des Neuen Testamentes, Leipzig, 1908. Clemen, Carl, Religionsgeschichtliche Erkldrung des Neuen Testamentes, Giessen, 1909. < Cook, F. G, The Holy Bible according to the Authorized Version (A. D. 161 1 ) with an Explanatory and Critical Commentary, etc., Vol. 3, Romans to Philemon, New York, 1886. Cornelii a Lapide, S. J., Commentaria in Scripturam Sacram accurate recognovit ac notis illustravit Augustinus Crampton, Tom 18, com- plectens expositionem litteralem et moralem Divi Pauli Epistolarum, Parisiis, 1861. Comely, Rudolfus, S. J., Commentarius in S. Pauli Apostoli Epistolas. Epistolae ad Corinthios altera et ad Galatas, Parisiis, 1892. (Cursus Scripturae Sacrae.) Cremer, Hermann, Biblisch-theologisches Worterbuch der neutestamentli- chen Gracitat9, Gotha, 1902. 105 Crocii, Joannis, Commentarius in Omnes Epistolas Pauli Minores tribus tomis distinctus, edidit per filium Joannem Georgium Crocium, Mar- purgi, 1663. Cumont, Franz, The Oriental in Roman Paganism, Translated by Grant Showerman, Chicago, 191 1. Cursi, Carlo M., II Nuovo Testamento, Vol. 3, Roma, 1880. Damm, Christian Tobias, Novum Lexicon Graecum, Reedited by John M. Duncan, Vol. 1, London, 1833. Deissmann, Adolf, Paulus, Tubingen, 191 1. Delitzsch, Franz, A System of Biblical Psychology, Translated from the German by Robert Ernest Wallis2, Edinburgh, 1890. Denney, James, St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, London, 1901. De Wette, W. M. L., Kurze Erkldrung des Brief es an die Rbmer*, Leipzig, 1847. De Wette, W. M. L., Kurze Erkldrung des Brief es an die Galater und der Brief e an die Thessalonicher2, Leipzig, 1845. Deylingii, Salomonis, Observationum Sacrarum Pars Tertia Lipsiae, 1715. Dieterich, Albrecht, Eine Mithrasliturgie, Leipzig, 1903. Doddridge, Philip, The Family Expositor or a Paraphrase and Version of the New Testament with Critical Notes, Vols. 4 and 5, London, 1756. Dolger, Franz Joseph, IX6TS, Das altchristliche Fischsymbol in religions- geschichtlicher Beleuchtung. (Romische Quartalschrift fur christliche Altertumskunde und fur Kirchengeschichte , Rom, 1909.) D'Outrein, Johannis, Spicilegium, De Induitione Christi ad Loca Rom. XIII, 14 et Gal. Ill, 27. In : Bibliotheca Historico-Philologico-Theo- logica, Classis Quartae, Fasciculus Secundus, Bremae, 1720. Drummelow, J. R., A Commentary on the Holy Bible by Various Writers, Edited by, New York, 1909. Drummond, James, The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Thessalonians, Corinthians, Galatians, Romans, and Philippians, New York and Lon don, 1903. (International Handbooks to the New Testament, Edited by Orello Cone.) Du-Hamel, J. B., Biblia Sacra Vulgatae Editionis cum selectis annotationi- bus2, Matriti, 1740. Ellicott, Charles J., A Commentary, Critical and Grammatical, on Saint Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, Introductory Notes by Calvin E. Stone, Boston, i860. Ellicott, Charles J., A New Testament Commentary for English Readers, London, 1884. Estii, Guilielmi, In Omnes Pauli Epistolas, item in Catholicas, Commen- tarii, Ed. Franc. Sausen, Moguntiae, 1843. Farrar, F. W., The Life and Work of Saint Paul, London and New York, 1879. Feine, Paul, Theologie des Neuen Testaments2, Leipzig, 1912. Findlay, G. G, The Epistle to the Galatians6, London, 1900. (The Exposi tor's Bible.) Ford, D. B., Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Philadelphia, 1889. (American Commentary on the New Testament, Edited by Alvah Hovey.) 106 Fritzsche, Car. Frid. Aug., Pauli ad Romanos Epistola, Tom. 2, Halis Saxonum, 1839. Gatakeri, Thomae, Opera Critica, Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1698. Gazlay, Sayrs, Comments on Select Passages of the Holy Scriptures, Cin cinnati, 1870. Gesenius, Gulielmus, Thesaurus Philologicus Criticus Linguae Hebraeae et Chaldaeae Veteris Testamenti, Vol. 2, Leipzig, 1839. Gesenius, Gulielmus, Hebraisches und aramdisches Handworterbuch uber das Alte Testament, etc., Ed. Frants Buhli8, Leipzig, 1899. Godbey, W. B., Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. V, Acts-Romans ; Vol. IV, Corinthians-Galatians, Cincinnati, 1899. Godet, F., Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, Translated from the French by A. Cusin ; Translation Revised and Edited by Talbot W. Chambers, New York, 1889. Gray, James Comper, The Biblical Museum: A Collection of Notes, etc., Revised by George M. Adams. The New Testament, Vol. 2, Containing the Epistles and the Revelation, New York, 1897. Grotii, Hugonis, Operum Theologicorum, Tomus Tertius continens Anno tations in Epistolas Apostolicas et Apocalypsim, Basileae, 1732. Gunkel, Hermann, Zum religionsgeschichtlichen Verstiindnis des Neuen Testaments2, Gottigen, 1910. Guyse, John, The Practical Expositor or an Exposition of the New Testa ment, Vol. 3, Containing the Acts of the Apostles, and Paul's Epistle to the Romans3, Edinburgh, 1775. Vol. 4, Containing Paul's Epistles to the Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians3, Edinburgh, 1775* Hammond, H., A Paraphrase and Annotations upon all the Books of the New Testament, London, 1702. Hasaei, Theodori, De Baptizatis Christum indutis ad illustrationem loci Gal. Ill, 27, Exercitatio. In: Bibliotheca Historico-Philologico-Theo- logica, Classis Quartae, Fasciculus Sextus (cfr. D'Outrein), Bremae, 1721. Heideggeri, Joh. Henrici, Opus analyticum, Vol. 2, Trajecti ad Rhenum, 1720. Heitmiiller, Wilhelm, "Im Namen Jesu". Eine sprach-und religionsge- schichtliche Untersuchung zum Neuem Testament, speciell zur alt- christlichen Taufe, Gottingen, 1903. Henry, Matthew, An Exposition of the Old and New Testament, Vol. 9, Romans to Revelation, London, 1866. Hofmann, J. Chr. K. v., Die Heilige Schrift Neuen Testaments. Dritter Theil: Der Brief Pauli an die Rbmer, Nordlingen, 1868. Holden, George, The Christian Expositor, Vol. 2, New Testament, London, (no date). Holsten, G, Das Evangelium des Paulus, Berlin, 1880. Holtzmann, Heinrich Julius, Lehrbuch der neutestamentlichen Theolo gie2, Ed. A. Jiilicher und W. Bauer, Tubingen, 191 1. Hovey, Alvah, Commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians, Philadelphia, 1890. (American Commentary on the New Testament.) Jacobs, Henry E., Annotations on the Epistles of Paul to the Romans and I Corinthians, Chaps. I- VI, New York, 1896. 107 Jacobs, Henry E., Spieker, George F., Swenson, Carl A., Annotations on the Epistles of Paul to I Corinthians VII-XVI, II Corinthians, and Galatians, New York, 1897. Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., and Brown, D., A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments, Vol. 2, New Testament: Matthew-Romans, Hartford, 1877. Jeremias, Alfred, Babylonisches im Neuem Testament, Leipzig, 1905. Joannis Chrysostomi, S., Opera omnia, Ed. J. P. Minge, Parisiis, 1862. Jiilicher, Adolph, Der Brief an die R'dmer, Gottingen, 1908. Juncker, Alfred, Die Ethik des Apostels Paulus, Halle a. S., 1904. Kypke, Georgii Davidis, Observationes Sacrae in Novi Foederis Libros ex Auctoribus Potissimum Graecis et Antiquitatibus , Tom. 2, Acta Apos- tolorum, Epistolas et Apocalypsim Complexus, Wratislaviae, 1755. Lake, Kirsopp, The Earlier Epistles of Saint Paul, Their Motive and Origin2, London, 1914. Lambert, John C, The Sacraments of the New Testament, Edinburgh, 1913. Lewin, Thomas, The Life and Epistles of St Paul, London, 1890. Liddell, Henry George, and Scott, Robert, A Greek-English Lexicon3, New York, 1897. Lightfoot, Joannis, Opera Omnia, Vols. 1 et 2, Roterodami, 1686. Lightfoot, J. B., Saint Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, London, 1910. Lightfoot, J. B., The Apostolic Fathers, Edited and Completed by J. R. Harmer, London, 1 91 2. Lipsius, R. A., Brief e an die Galater, R'dmer, Philipper, Freiburg i. B., 1891. Luthardt, Chr. Ernst, Der Brief Pauli an die R'dmer, Nordlingen, 1887. Luther, Martin, A Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, Ed. S. S. Schmucker, Philadelphia, 1872. MacEvilly, John, An Exposition of the Epistles of St. Paul and of the Catholic Epistles, Vols. 1 and 2, Dublin, 1898. Macknight, James, A New Literal Translation from the Original Greek of all the Apostolic Epistles with a Commentary and Notes, Vols. 1 and 2, London, 1816. Melanthonis, Philippi, Opera Quae Supersunt Omnia, edidit Carolus Gottlieb Bretschneider, Vol. 15, Enarratio Epistolae Pauli.ad Romanos, Halis Saxonum, 1848. Menge-Guthling, Griechisch-deutsches und deutsch-griechisches W'drter- buch: TeU I. Griechisch-deutsch2, von Hermann Menge, Berlin- Schon- berg, 1913. Menochii, Joannis Stephani, Commentarii Totius Sacrae Scripturae, etc., Tom. 2, Venetiis, 1722. Meyer, Heinr. Aug. Wilh., Kritisch-exegetisches Handbuch uber den Brief des Paulus an die Rbmer*, Gottingen, 1865. Meyer, Heinr. Aug. Wilh., Kritsch-exegetisches Handbuch uber den zweiten Brief an die Korinther, Gottingen, 1870. Millii, Joannis, Novum Testamentum Graecum, Ed. Ludolphus Kusterus, Leipsig, 1746. Minge, J. P., Scripturae Sacrae Cursus Computus, Vol. 24, Parisiis, 1862. 108 Moule, H. C. G, The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Romans, Cam bridge, 1894 Musculi, Dusani Wolfgangi, In Epistolam D. Apostoli Pauli ad Romanos Commentarii, Basileae, 1555. Musculi, Dusani Wolfgangi, In Epistolas Apostoli Pauli ad Galatas et Ephesios Commentarii, Basileae, 1569. Nageli, Theodor, Der Wortschatz des Apostels Paulus, Basel, 1904. Natalis, Alexander, Commentarius in Omnes Epistolas Sancti Pauli Apos toli et in VII Epistolas Catholicas, Tom. 1, Parisiis, 1768. Olshausen, Hermann, Biblical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and Thessalonians, Translated from the German by a Clergyman of the Church of England, Edinburgh, 1856. Olshausen, Hermann, Biblical Commentary on the New Testament: Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, Translated from the German by a Clergy man of the Church of England2, Edinburgh, 1856. Paige, Lucius R., A Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 4, Epistle to the Romans, Boston, 1857. Paige, Lucius R., A Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 6, From the Epistle to the Galatians to the Epistle of Jude, Boston, 1870. Parker, Joseph, The People's Bible, Vol. 24, Romans-Galatians, London, 1898. Pape, W., Handworterbuch der Griechischen Sprache2, Braunschweig, 1871. Pfleiderer, Otto, Der Paulinismus: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Urchrist- lichen Theologie, Leipzig, 1890. Pfleiderer, Otto, Primitive Christianity, Translated by W. Montgomery, and Edited by W. D. Morrison, Vol. 1, New York, 1906; Vol. 4, New York, 1911. Philippi, Friedrich Adolph, Commentary on St Paul's Epistle to the Romans, Translated from the Third Improved and Enlarged Edition by J. S. Banks, Vol. 2, Edinburgh, 1879. Philonis, Judaei, Opera Quae Reperiri Potuerunt Omnia, etc., Ed. Thomas Mangey, London, 1742. Piscatoris, Joh., Commentarii in Omnes Libros Novi Testamenti3, Her- bornae Nasoviorum, 1637. Platts, John, A New Self-Interpreting Testament, Vol. 3, London, 1827. Poli, Matthaei, Synopsis Criticorum Aliorumque Scripturae Interpretum, Vol. 4, Londini, 1676. Pool, Matthew, Annotations upon the Holy Bible, Vol. 3, New York, 1853. Preuschen, Erwin, Vollstdndiges griechisch-deutsches Handworterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der iibrigen urchristlichen Literatur, Giessen, 1910. Pulpit Commentary, The, Edited by H. D. M. Spence and Joseph S. Exell, New York (no date). Ramsay, W. M., A Historical Commentary on St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, New York, 1900. Ramsay, W. M., St. Paul, the Traveller and the Roman Citizen, New York, 1896. 109 Reitzenstein, R., Die hellenistischen Mysterienreligionen, ihre Grund- gedanken und Wirkungen, Leipzig und Berlin, 1910. Rendall, Frederic, The Epistle to the Galatians, Vol. 22, London, 1903. Rickaby, Joseph, S. J., Notes on St Paul: Corinthians, Galatians, Romans2, London, 1905. Robinson, Thomas, A Suggestive Commentary of St. Paul's Epistle to ihe Romans, Vol. 2, New York, 1873. Rosenmulleri, Jo. Georgii, Scholia in Novum Testamentum, Tom. 3, Norim- bergae, 1829; Tom. 4, Norimbergae, 1830. Sanday, William, and Headlam, Arthur C, A Critical and Exegetical Com mentary on the Epistle to the Romans, New York, 1906. Schaefer, Aloys, Erkldrung der zwei Brief e an die Thessalonicher und an die Galater, Miinster i. W., 1890. Schaefer, Aloys, Erkldrung des Brief es an die Rbmer, Miinster i. W., 1891. Schaff, Philip, A Popular Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 3, The Epistles of St. Paul, Edinburgh, 1882. Schilling, D., Commentarius Exegetico-Philologicus in Hebraismos Novi Testamenti, Mechliniae, 1886. Schlatter, D. A., Die Theologie des Neuen Testaments. Zweiter TeU: Die Lehre der Apostel, Stuttgart, 1910. Schleusner, Joh. Fried., Novum Lexicon Graeco-Latinum in Novum Testa mentum, Vol. 1, London, 1829. Schleusner, Joh. Fried., Novus Thesaurus Philologico-Criticus sive Lexicon in LXX et Reliquos Interpretes ac Scriptores Apocryphos Veteris Tes tamenti, etc., Lipsiae, 1820. Schmidt, Paul Wilhelm, and Holzendorff, Franz von, A Short Protestant Commentary on the Books of the New Testament, Translated from the Third Edition of the German by Francis Henry Jones, Vol. 2, London, 1883. Schmoller, Otto, The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians, Translated from the German by C. C. Starbuck, with Additions by M. B. Riddle, New York, 1887. (Lange-Schaff, Commentary on Holy Scripture.) Schoettgenii, Christiani, Horae Hebraicae et Talmudicae in Universum Novum Testamentum, etc., Dresdae et Lipsiae, 1743. Schumacher, Heinrich, Christus in seiner Prdexistenz und Kenose, nach Phil, 2, 5-8, Rom., 1920. Schweitzer, Albert, Paul and His Interpreters, A Critical History, Trans lated by W. Montgomery, London, 1912. Shedd, William G. T., A Critical and Doctrinal Commentary on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, New York, 1893. Shook, William R., A Brief Commentary and Lexicon on the New Testa ment, Chicago, 1911. Sieffert-Meyer, Der Brief an die Galater9, Gottingen, 1899. (Meyer, Kom- mentar uber das Neue Testament.) Simar, Hub. Theophil., Die Theologie des heiligen Paulus, Freiburg im Breisgau, 1883. Steinmann, Alphons, Die Brief e an die Thessalonicher und Galater iiber- setzt und erkldrt, Bonn, 1918. 110 Stephani, Henr., Novum Testamentum Graece et Latine, Annotationes in Quibus Ratio Interpretationis Reddatur, 1550. Stevens, George Barker, The Theology of the New Testament, New York, 1905- Stock, Christian, Clavis Linguae Sanctae Novi Testamenti, Ed. John Fred. Fischer, Leipzig, 1752. Stuart, Moses, A Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, Edited and Revised by R. D. C. Robbins, Boston, 1859. Teeter, Lewis W., The New Testament Commentary, Vol. 2, Mount Mor ris, Illinois, 1894. Thayer, Joseph Henry, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti, Translated, Revised and Enlarged4, Edinburgh, 1908. Thomae, D. Aquinatis, O. P., In Omnes D. Pauli Apostoli Epistolas Doc- tissima Commentaria, Venetiis, 1562. Tholuck, Fred. Aug. Gottreu, Exposition of St. Paul's Epistle to the Ro mans, Translated from the Original German by Robert Menzies, Phila delphia, 1884. Tirini, Jacobi, S. J., In Universam S. Scripturam Commentarius, Vols. 4 et S, Taurini, 1884. Tittmann, John Aug. Henry, Remarks on the Synonyms of the New Testa ment, Vol. 2, Edinburgh, 1837. Trollope, M. A., Analecta Theologica: A Critical, Philological, and Exe- getical Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 22, London, 1842. Turner, Samuel H, Notes on the Epistle to the Romans, New York, 1824. Ursini, Johannis Henrici, Analectorum Sacrorum Libri Sex, Vol. i2, Francofurti et Marburgi, 1668. Usteri, Leonhard, Commentar iiber den Brief Pauli an die Galater, Zurich, 1833- Vaughan, C. J., St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans with Notes, London, 1893. Vincent, Marvin R., Word Studies in the New Testament, Vol. 4, New York, 1900. Vorstii, Conradi, Commentarius in Omnes Epistolas Apostolicas, Harder- wici, 1631. Vorstii, Johannis, De Hebrismis Novi Testamenti Commentarius sive Philologia Sacra qua turn Theologica turn Philologica accedit ejusdem de Adagiis N. T. Diatriba, Francofurti et Lipsiae, 1705. Wahl, Christ. Abraham, Clavis Novi Testamenti Philologica, Leipzig, 1829. Weiss, Bernhard, Biblical Theology of the New Testament, Translated from the Third Revised Edition by David Eaton, Edinburgh, 1892. Weiss, Bernhard, Die paulinischen Brief e und der Hebr'derbrief, Leipzig, 1902. Weiss, Bernhard, Der Brief an die Rbmer6, Gottingen, 1899. (Meyer, Kommentar uber das Neue Testament) Weiss, Johannes, Das Urchristentum, Gottingen, 1914. Wernle, Paul, Die Anfdnge unserer Religion2, Tubingen und Leipzig, 1904 Wesley, John, Explanatory Notes upon the New Testament*, New York, 1818. Ill Wetstenii, Joannis Jacobi, Novum Testamentum Graecum Editionis Re- ceptae cum Lectionibus Variantibus Codicum, MSS., etc., necnon Com- mentario Pleniore, etc., Tom. 2, Continens Epistolas Pauli, Acta Apos- tolorum, Epistolas Canonicas et Apocalypsim, Amstelaedami, 1752. Whedon, D. D., Commentary on the New Testament, Vol. 3, Acts-Romans, New York, 1871 ; Vol. 4, I Corinthians-II Timothy, New York, 1875. Wieseler, Karl, Commentar Uber den Brief Pauli an die Galater, Gottingen, 1859. Wolf, Jo. Christophorus, Curae Philological et Criticae in X Posteriores S. Pauli Epistolas, Vol. 2, Hamburg, 1738. Wrede, W., Paul, Translated by Edward Lummis, London, 1907. Zahn, Theodor, Der Brief des Paulus an die R'dmer2, Leipzig, 1910. Zahn, Theodor, Der Brief des Paulus an die Galater, Leipzig, 1905. Zeller, Eduard, Die Philosophic der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Ent- wicklung*, Leipzig, 1889. Zockler, Otto, Die Brief e an die Thessalonicher und der Galaterbrief, Nordlingen, 1887. Universitas Catholica Americae Washingtonii, D. C. S. Facultas Theologica, 1920-1921 No. 17 THESES DEUS LUX MEA THESES QUAS AD DOCTORATUM IN SACRA THEOLOGIA Apud Universitatem Catholicam Americae CONSEQUENDUM PUBLICE PROPUGNABIT LEO J. OHLEYER, O. F. M. PROVINCIAE SSmi CORDIS JESU S. THEOL. LICENTIATUS THESES i The fundamental idea expressed by hSieiv-ivSieaBai in the N. T. for mula ivSieaBat Xpiarov is possession and dominion. II The active evSieiv, except at times in the II aorist, as the historico- literary investigation of the term shows, means to take possession of. in The middle ivSveaBai, as the same historico-literary study reveals, always means to give oneself up to the possession and dominion of. IV The exegesis of St. John Chrysostom shows that the formula "induere Christum" is to be taken, not in a metaphorical, but in a literal sense. v The contention of Bloomfield, that the popular proverb o Seiva rbv Seiva kveSiaa.ro is "scarcely apposite" to illustrate the meaning of the Pauline formula, can not be maintained in the light of the investigation of ivSveaBai in the Hellenic literature. VI The currency of the phrase hSieaBal nva in Greek literature is suf ficient proof that St. Paul's words evSieaBai Xpiarov contain no allusion to any custom or fact, whether Christian, Jewish, or pagan in origin. VII The similarity of the ivSveaBai Xpiarov, as used by St. Paul in Rom. XIII, 14, with the phrase of Seneca "indue magni viri animum," does not prove a dependence of one on the other. VIII Modern commentators in their manifold theories have completely lost sight of the fundamental idea contained in the formula "induere Christum." IX The arguments for the three years duration of the public ministry of Christ outweigh those advanced in favor of the one year or two years dura tion. x The similarities between the IV Gospel and the writings of Philo do not prove a dependence of St. John on Philo. XI John, the Presbyter, who is mentioned by Papias, is most probably identical with John, the Apostle. 115 116 xn The theory of Chwolson gives the most satisfactory explanation of the date of the Last Supper. xiii The explanation of Pfleiderer and Wellhausen, according to which XXI, 1-19 of St. John's Gospel is identical with Luke V, 1-11 and merely symbolical, is untenable. xiv The evidence to the contrary is not sufficient to invalidate the testi mony of St. Irenaeus concerning St. John's sojourn in Ephesus. xv The ingenious explanation of the Apocalypse by Marosow is refuted by the historical testimonies that prove the existence of the Apocalypse already in the second century. xvi St. Paul accepted the word awetSyais from the Hellenic world but gave it a deeper meaning. XVII As an explanation of the "stimulus carnis" (II Cor. XII, 7) that af flicted St. Paul, both the theory of persecution and that of carnal tempta tion must be rejected. XVIII The conversion of St. Paul can not be explained as the mere result of a natural psychological development, but must be regarded as a miracle. xix The discovery of the date of the reign of Aretas IV, ruler of Damascus, definitely fixes the date of St. Paul's conversion between 34 and 37 A. D. xx The speech of St. Paul on the Areopagus is not, as Norden claims, a forgery consisting in an imitation of a set type of speech used by mis sionaries in the first and second centuries A. D. xxi A careful study of the character and contents of the Pentateuch reveals a uniform plan in its composition so that it must be considered a literary unit. XXII The so-called double narratives in Genesis contain no contradictions, nor are they sufficient to disprove the unity of the authorship of this book. XXIII The arguments amassed by critics to impugn the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch are not of sufficient weight to justify the statement that these books have not Moses for their author but have been compiled from sources for the most part posterior to the time of Moses. xxrv The contention that some passages of the Pentateuch show a later than a Mosaic origin may be admitted and explained by the fact that the Penta teuch was a living law-book for the Jewish people and thus was perhaps open to occasional modifications in minor points. 117 xxv In the chronology contained in the III and IV Book of Kings and the II Book of Paralipomenon, the fraction of a year which marks the begin ning of a reign, and that which marks the end thereof, are recorded each as a chronological unit along with the full year-unit of a reign. xxvi In these Sacred Books the years of the kingdom of Juda are computed according to the sacred year, whereas the years of the kingdom of Israel are computed according to the civil year. xxvii For the correct understanding of the chronology of the kings of Juda and of Israel we must accept an interregnum, as the Sacred Text implies, between Zambri and Amri of Israel and between Achaz and Ezechias of Juda. xxviii For a harmonious chronology of the times of the kings of Juda and of Israel it is essential to accept a coreign of Joram with Josaphat in Juda and of Achab with Amri in Israel. xxix The coreigns of the kings of Juda and of Israel are entered in the Sacred Text chronologically, and are cross-checked on the contemporary rival reign, doubly : once at the year of accession of a king as coruler, a second time at the year of accession as sole ruler. xxx The view of some critics that the discourses of Eliu, Job XXXI, i-XXXVII, 24 are a later interpolation is untenable from the linguistic as well as from the contextual standpoint. xxxi Regula fidei protestantica neque tuta, neque universalis aut ad con- troversias dirimendas apta dici potest. XXXII Regula fidei catholica est tuta, omnibus obvia, et ad lites componendas plane sufficiens. XXXIII Sola in Ecclesia Romana plene inveniri potest nota apostolicitatis. xxxiv Ecclesiam suam ita instituit Christus ut semper primatu Petri tam- quam visibili centro auctoritatis et unitatis polleret. xxxv Testis praeclarus est Sanctus Paulus veritatis resurrectionis ex mor- tuis Domini nostri Jesu Christi. xxxvi Progressus dogmatum non in eo consistit ut eis sensus tribuendus sit alius ab eo quern intellexit Ecclesia, sed in eo quod uberior et clarior prae- beatur eorumdem explicatio. xxxvn Secundum Concilium Vaticanum "existentia Dei per ea quae facta sunt, naturali rationis humanae lumine certo cognosci potest", et secundum 118 juramentum praescriptum contra Modernistarum errores, "etiam demon- strari potest". XXXVIII Christus nos redemit non tantum doctrina et exemplis, sed specialiter morte sua piaculari. xxxix Humana Christi natura, quatenus hypostatice Verbo conjuncta, una et eadem adoratione cum eodem Verbo est colenda ; quare etiam Cor Jesu cultu latreutico dignum est. XL Beata Maria virgo fuit ante partum, in partu et post partum. XLI Sacramenta Novae Lagis gratiam conferunt ex opere operato omnibus obicem non ponentibus, ideoque falsum est assertum Modernistarum Sacra menta eo tantum spectare, ut in mentem hominis revocent praesentiam Creatoris semper beneficam. XLII Ad validitatem Sacramentorum requiritur intentio vere interna faciendi quod facit Ecclesia, ac proinde non sufficit jocosa vel externa intentio. XLIII Validus est Baptismus sive per immersionem, sive per infusionem, sive per aspersionem collatus ; sed propter rationes congruas in ecclesia Ro- mana Baptismus per infusionem est conferendus. XLIV Communio sub utraque specie singulis fidelibus jure divino non est necessaria, ideoque Ecclesia potuit legitime calicis usum laicis interdicere, prout de facto propter rationes optimas interdixit. XLV "i. Qui a media nocte jejunium naturale non servaverit, nequit ad sanctissimam Eucharistiam admitti, nisi mortis urgeat periculum, aut ne- cessitas impediendi irreverentiam in sacramentum. "2. Infirmi tamen qui jam a mense decumbunt sine certa spe ut cito convalescant, de prudenti confessarii consilio sanctissimam Eucharistiam sumere possunt semel aut bis in hebdomada, etsi aliquam medicinam vel aliquid per modum potus antea sumpserint." — Can. 858. XLVI The inherent right of every human being to subsist from the earth's bounty implies the right of access thereto on reasonable grounds. XLVII The laborer has an inborn right to a living wage ; this claim is valid, generally speaking, in his present occupation. XLVIII The employer's right to interest on his capital is morally inferior to the laborer's right to a living wage. XLIX Natural justice demands that the remuneration of every adult male laborer should be such as to maintain himself and his family in reasonable and frugal comfort. 119 L Under existing conditions, interest-taking does not violate justice. LI Can. 13 et 14. LII Can. 91-95. LIII Can. 96 et 1076. LIV Can. 97 et 1077. LV Can. 1078. LVI St. John Chrysostom is rightly recognized as one of the most brilliant representatives of the historico-philological method of biblical interpreta tion, who at the same time does full justice to the hermeneutical principle of a mystico-typical sense in Holy Writ. LVII The exile of St. John Chrysostom, effected by the coalition of the Byzantine court with Theophilus, Patriarch of Alexandria, is the tragedy of a fearless antagonist of the injustice practised by the State power and its allied forces. LVIII The religious aspect of the Reformation does not adequately explain its rapid spread in Germany. LIX Both by his doctrine and by his political activity, Luther increased the religious unrest of his day and hindered the progress of the true reform movement. LX The Knownothing party was not only a political party but primarily an anti-Catholic organization. BIOGRAPHICAL Leo Joseph Ohleyer was born July 31, 1891, in Indianapolis, Indiana. His primary studies he pursued at Sacred Heart Parochial School, of the same city. In 1905, he entered the Preparatory Seminary at Teutopolis, 111. After completing his novitiate (1910-1911) in the Franciscan Order, he devoted two years more to the classical studies at Quincy, 111. In the Franciscan Seminary at West Park, Ohio, he pursued the course in Philoso phy (1913-1915) and in Theology (1915-1918), completing the latter course in St. Louis (1918-1919). In 1919, he matriculated at the Catholic Uni versity of America, where he received the S. T. B. and S. T. L. in 1920. He is specializing in Holy Scripture and Oriental Languages.