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.