^{page 19 note 1} De Baptismo vii, 2.

^{page 19 note 2} Ibid, viii, 1, 3.

^{page 19 note 3} Hippolytus, Commentary on Danieli, 16. For the baptismal rite of Apostolic Tradition see the edition of G. Dix (1937), 33-9, or of Botte, B. (La Tradition Apostolique, Paris 1946), 49–53.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 1} Didascalia Apostolorum Syriace, ed. de Lagarde, P., Leipzig 1854 (Anastatischer Neudruck, Göttingen 1911).Google Scholar For an edition of the Latin version with an English translation of the Syriac, see Connolly, R.H., Didascalia Apostolorum, Oxford 1929.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 2} For a review of the question, see Funk, F.X., Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum, Paderborn 1906, 1, iii–v Google Scholar; cf. Connolly, op. cit. lxxxvii-xci.

^{page 20 note 3} Wright, W., Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles, 1871, 1 (Syriac text) 272–333 and II (English tr.) 146-298.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 4} Burkitt, F. C., ‘The original language of the Acts of Judas Thomas,’ jTS, 1 (1900), 280-90;Google Scholar Klijn, A. F.J., The Acts of Thomas, Leiden 1962, 3–7, 15-16.Google Scholar

^{page 20 note 5} A. F. J. Klijn, op. cit. 38.

^{page 20 note 6} Klijn’s dating is ‘the beginning of the third century,’ op. cit. 20.

^{page 20 note 7} Socrates States that at Edessa Θωμα του αποστολου μαρτυριον ϵστι λαμπρον και π∊ριϕαν∊ς, and notes that it attracted the interest of the Emperor Valens c. A.D. 371 (Hist. Eccl. IV, 18).

^{page 21 note 1} Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 4–65; II, 3-60.Google Scholar

^{page 21 note 2} Ibid. II, 3; for an account of the two MSS, see 1, vii-ix.

^{page 21 note 3} ‘The original language of the Syriac Acts of John,’ JTS, 1 (1907), 249-61.

^{page 21 note 4} Ibid. 261

^{page 21 note 5} Lagarde, Didascalia, 70-2; Connolly, Didascalia, 146-7.

^{page 22 note 1} C. 49; Klijn, op. cit. 90, and see the comment on 244; Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 217; 11, 188Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 2} Cc. 121,157; Klijn, op. cit. 130, 149; Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 291, 324; 11, 258, 289.Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 3} C. 27; Klijn, op. cit. 77; Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 191; 11, 166-7Google Scholar

^{page 22 note 4} C. 121; Klijn, op. cit. 130; Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 291; 11, 258.Google Scholar

^{page 23 note 1} Dehinc ter mergitamur amplius aliquid respondentes quam Dominus in euangelio deteeminauit (De corona militis, 3). Tertullian is here referring to Matt, xxviii, 19; for the ‘amplius aliquid’ see Kelly, J.N.D., Early Christian Creeds, 1950, 82–8.Google Scholar

^{page 23 note 2} Dix, Apostolic Tradition, 36-7; Botte, La Tradition Apostolique, 50-1.

^{page 23 note 3} Klijn, op. cit. 77 (where Klijn introduces before ‘Spirit’ the adjective ‘Holy’ which is absent from the Syriac), 90, 130, 136, 199; Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 194, 217, 291, 301, 324; 11, 167, 188, 258, 267, 289-90. ‘Spirit of holiness’ is the old Syriac rendering of πνϵυμα αγιον, τо πνϵυμα το αγіоν, το αγιον πνευμα.Google Scholar

^{page 23 note 4} Connolly, Didascalia, 93; Lagarde, Didascalia, 39.

^{page 23 note 5} Yιoς μου ϵι συ, εγω σημϵρον γϵγϵννηκα σϵ. The authentic reading is, Cυ ϵι o Yιoς μoυ o αγαπητoς, ϵυ σoι ϵυδoυκησα.

^{page 23 note 6} Dialogue with Trypho 88 103 (written c. A.D. 155).

^{page 24 note 1} No extant version of the Diatessaron exhibits the reading: but if the απομνημονϵυματα των αποστολων, to which Justin refers in Dialogue 103, were in fact the Diatessaron, and not the Synoptic Gospels, the reading was present in Tatian’s text. In the Ebionite Gospel, the two readings were combined: Kαι ϕωνη ϵγϵvϵτo ϵк του ουρανου λϵγουσα. Cv μον ϵι о Yios о αγαπητοϛ, ϵv σοι ηνδοκησα · και παλιν · Εγω σημϵρον γϵγϵννηκα σϵ ( Epiphanius, , Haereses, xxx, 13 Google Scholar; Migne, , PG, 41, col. 429A)Google Scholar.

^{page 24 note 2} In a note on the Old Syriac of Lk. iii, 22, Burkitt, F. C. wrote, ‘There is no Syriac evidence known for the introduction here of Ps. ii, 8’ (Evangelion Da-Mepharreshe, Cambridge 1904, 1 (text) 263)Google Scholar.

^{page 24 note 3} There is, perhaps, a reminiscence of a baptismal connection between Ps. ii, 7 and Lk. iii, 22, and of an erroneous interpretation of the words, in Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechesis xi, 9 Google Scholar.

^{page 24 note 4} Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 43-6Google Scholar; 11, 39-42.

^{page 25 note 1} This story, or the tradition which inspired it, left its mark, in curious fashion, on subsequent Syrian liturgical usage. According to Ps.-Dionysius the Areopagite, the veil covering the μυρον at its consecration was made in the form of the Seraphs’ twelve wings, and the Sanctus was sung as an accompaniment to the consecration (De ecclesiastica hierarchia IV, ii, iii 5; Migne, , PG, 3, cols. 473A, 479BGoogle Scholar).

^{page 25 note 2} We may assume that, in the earlier period, a formal profession of belief was made before the rite began.

^{page 25 note 3} At each dipping John says, ‘In the name of’ (the Father, etc).

^{page 25 note 4} Wright, W., op. cit. 1, 58–9 Google Scholar; H, 53-4.

^{page 25 note 5} An allusion to a Syrian usage whereby the newly baptised at the end of the baptismal rite recited the Lord’s Prayer, see below, p. 35.

^{page 26 note 1} The voice of the Transfiguration (Matt, xvii, 5) is here transferred to the Baptism.

^{page 26 note 2} Lagarde, Didascalia 71; Connolly, Didascalia 146.

^{page 26 note 3} E.g. Levit, viii, 12; i Sam. x, 1-6; xvi, 13; 1 Kings i, 39.

^{page 27 note 1} ‘Entry into membership of the early Church,’ JTS, XLVIII (1947), 25–33. Google Scholar

^{page 27 note 2} Ibid.

^{page 27 note 3} Above p. 23.

^{page 27 note 4} Above p. 25

^{page 27 note 5} C. 132; Klijn, , op. cit. 135 Google Scholar; Wright, W., op. cit. I, 301 Google Scholar; 11, 267.

^{page 28 note 1} 1 Jn i, 3.

^{page 28 note 2} Theodore of Mopsuestia, Third Homily on Baptism ( Tonneau, R. and Devreesse, R., Les Homélies Catéchétiques de Théodore de Mopsueste, Studi e Testi 145 (1949), 421, 425Google Scholar); Narsai, , Homilies xxi Google Scholar and xxxii ( Mingana, A., Narsai Homiliae et Carmina, Mosul 1905, 1, 346 Google Scholar; 11, 148-9; Connolly, R. H., The Liturgical Homilies of Narsai translated into English, Cambridge 1909, 5, 66 Google Scholar).

^{page 28 note 3} Cf.Kelly, J. N. D., ‘the earlier Pauline conception of [Baptism] as the application of Christ’s atoning death to the believer seems to have faded’ (Early Christian Doctrines, 1958, 194 Google Scholar). Aphrahat, writing c. A.D. 345, makes a passing allusion to Rom. vi, 3, as offering Pauline confirmation of Christ’s institution of Baptism at the foot-washing (Jn xiii) on the eve of His passion, Dem. xii, Paschate, De (Aphraatis Demonstrations, Paris 1894, col. 529 Google Scholar).

^{page 28 note 4} For a convenient text, with translation, see Cross, F. L., St Cyril of Jerusalem’s Lectures on the Christian Sacraments, 1951 Google Scholar; references in this paper are made to this edition. The attribution of the five Catecheses to Cyril has been disputed by Swaans, W. J. (Le Muséon, LV (1942), 1–43 Google Scholar). Cross holds Swaans’s case to be not proved. B. Althaner is of the same opinion (Patrologie, Freiburg 1958, 279).

^{page 28 note 5} For an account and reconstruction of Constantine’s work, see Vincent, H. and Abel, F. M., Jérusalem, Paris 1914, 11, 1, 2, 154–217 Google Scholar. E. Wistrand persuasively suggests certain alterations in the detail of Vincent, and Abel, (Konstantins Kirche am heiligen Grab in Jerusalem nach den ältesten literarischen Zeugnissen, Göteborg 1952 Google Scholar).

^{page 29 note 1} De Vita Constantini, cc. 33, 34.

^{page 29 note 2} The sepulchre was not yet covered by a cupola and had not yet become the centre of a smaller and round church, as it was later to be (Wistrand, op. cit. 20-4, 35-6).

^{page 29 note 3} At the end of the fourth century, Egeria (or Aetheria) records that the newly baptised, on their way to the Martyrium, made a ‘station’ at the Holy Sepulchre, ‘quemadmodum exient de fonte simul cum episcopo primum ad Anastase (i.e. the Sepulchre) ducuntur. Intrat episcopus intro cancellos Anastasis, dicitur unus ymnus, et sic facit orationem episcopus pro eis, et sic uenit ad ecclesiam maiorem (i.e. the Martyrium) cum eis, ubi iuxta consuetudinem omnis populus uigilat’ ( Itinerarium Egeriae, xxxviii, 1, 2, ed. Franceschini, A. and Weber, R., Turnhout 1948, 82 Google Scholar). This usage may well have been instituted by Cyril. In the bishop’s ‘oratio’ we may have the origin of the prayer which in the Byzantine rite precedes the anointing with μυρον; cf. the prayer of the Barberini Euchologion, Ευλογητος ϵι κυpiϵ . . . η πηγη των αγαθων κτλ in Goar, J., ΕΥΧΟΛΟΓΙΟΝ sive Rituale Graecorum, Venice 1730 (repr. Graz 1960), 290 fGoogle Scholar; in Conybeare, F. C. and Maclean, A. J., Rituale Armenorum, Oxford 1905, 404 Google Scholar; and in modern editions of the Euchologion.

^{page 30 note 1} I, 2-8; Tertullian witnesses to the use of renunciation of ‘the devil and his pomp and his angels’ in North Africa c. A.D. 211 [De Corona Militis 3).

^{page 30 note 2} I, 9.

^{page 30 note 3} II, 2.

^{page 30 note 4} II, 4.

^{page 30 note 5} Ibid.

^{page 30 note 6} II, 7.

^{page 31 note 1} II, 4, το σωτηριον ϵκϵιου υδωρ και ταϕος υμιν ϵγινϵτο και μητηρ. Cyril Confirms his point by appeal to Eccles. iii, 2, καιρος του τϵκϵιυ και καιρος τov αποθανϵιν.

^{page 31 note 2} II, 4.

^{page 31 note 3} Cyril refers to the Voice, however, in Catechesis xi, 9; see above, p. 23, n.5.

^{page 31 note 4} III, 4.

^{page 31 note 5} III, 2, υμϵις δϵ μυρω ϵχρισθητϵ.

^{page 31 note 6} III, 1. Cyril quotes Is. lxi, I, πνϵυμα κυριου ϵπ’ϵμϵ ου ϵιυϵκϵυ ϵχρισϵ μϵ as a prophecy of the event.

^{page 31 note 7} III, 1.

^{page 31 note 8} Κακϵινος μϵν ϵν Ιορδανη λουσαμϵνος ποταμω και των χρωτων της θϵοτητος μεταδους τοις υδασιν ανϵβαινϵν єк τουτων, και πνϵνματος αγιου ουσιωδης ϵπιϕοιτησις αυτω ϵγϵνϵτο III, 1.

^{page 31 note 9} Ibid.

^{page 32 note 1} II, 3.

^{page 32 note 2} For a combination of Cyril’s ‘demonifuge’ doctrine with the traditional Syrian association of the bestowal of the Holy Spirit by means of the pre-baptismal anointing, see Narsai’s Homily xxii ( Mingana, A., Homiliae, I, 366-8Google Scholar; Connolly, R. H., Liturgical Homilies, 43-5Google Scholar).

^{page 32 note 3} But Apostolic Tradition enjoins the use, not οίμυρον, but of ‘oleum sanctificatum’ see the edition of Dix, 39.

^{page 33 note 1} It is worthy of note that, whereas Cyril devotes his first lecture to the preliminary embellishments, and his third to the added post-baptismal anointing, he takes the con stituents of the traditional rite (i.e. the pre-baptismal anointing and the baptismal act itself) together in the second lecture, which bears the title, Пєрі βαπτισματος.

^{page 33 note 2} c. A.D. 380 according to В. Althaner (Patrologie, 50).

^{page 33 note 3} III, xvi, 4 ( Funk, F. X., Didascalia et Constittttiones Apostolorum, 1, 211 Google Scholar). The Constitutor similarly brings Didache vii into line with Jerusalem usage by introducing both a pre- and a post-baptismal anointing, the latter with μνρον, although his source mentions only the use of water. Apparently on the basis of Didache vii, however, the Constitutor asserts that, when neither oil nor μυρον are available water alone suffices και πроς χρισιν και πроς σϕραγιδα και πроς ομολογιαν of the dying, VII, xxii, 1-3 (Funk, op. cit. I, 406); see also II, xxxii, 3 (Didascalia ix), where the Constitutor pursues the same method (Funk, op. cit. I, 115).

^{page 33 note 4} The Ordo contains no ceremonial directions. The use of the traditional ceremonies is presupposed.

^{page 34 note 1} Κατιδϵ єξ ovpavov και αγιασον το υδωρ τουτο, δος δϵ χαριν кαι δυναμιν, ωστε τον βαπτιζομϵνον каτ’ ϵντολην τov σον αυτω σνσταυρωθηναι και αυναποθανϵιν και αυνταϕηναι και σνναναστηναι και αυναναστηναι ϵις υιοθεσιαν την ev αυτω, τω νεκρωθηναι, μϵν τη αμαρτια, ζησοι бе τη δικαιοσυνη VII, xliii, 5 (Funk. op. cit. I, 451).

^{page 34 note 2} Rom. vi, 3-8, and 11; cf. 1 Pet. ii, 24 (Cyril uses this conflation in Procatechesis 5).

^{page 34 note 3} See above, p. 33, n.3.

^{page 34 note 4} The post-baptismal anointing was still unknown at Antioch c. A.D. 390, when Chrysostom delivered his Baptismal Catecheses; see Wenger, A., Jean Chrysostome. Huit Catéchèses Baptismales inédites, Paris 1957, 99–101.Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 5} τουτο то μυρον δος ϵνϵργϵς yeveaθai ϵπι τω βαπτιζομϵνω, ωστϵ βϵβαιαν και παγιον ev αυτω την ευωδιαν μϵΐναι του Χριστου σου, και σνναττοθανοντα αυτον συναναστηναι και σνζησαι αυτω, VII, xliv, 2 (Funk, op. cit. I, 451). In xxvii, 2, the Constitutor provides a Thanksgiving πϵρι μυρου, which he inserts between his editing of Didache x and xi, and which is couched in phraseology reminiscent of the Didache eucharistie prayers (Funk, op. cit. 1, 415). No doubt the Thanksgiving was intended as a consecration.

^{page 35 note 1} In the prayer for the consecration of the oil, VII, xlii, 2 (Funk, op. cit. i, 449).

^{page 35 note 2} III, xvii, 1 and VII, xxii, 2 (Funk, op. cit. 1, 211, 407).

^{page 35 note 3} VII, xlv, 1, 2 (Funk, op. cit. 1, 451).

^{page 35 note 4} ϵυθϵως γαρ ανϵλθων ταυτα ϕθεγγεται τα ρηματα · πатер ημων о ϵν τοις ουρανοις κτλ Homily VI on Colossians ii ( Migne, , PG, 62, col. 342 Google Scholar).

^{page 35 note 5} See above, p. 25.

^{page 35 note 6} Denzinger, H., Ritus Orientalium, Graz 1961, 1, 266–351.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 7} Μϵγας ϵιι κυριϵ και θαυμαστα єργа σου κτλ; Goar, J., ΕΥΧΟΛΟΓΙΟΝ, 288-9 Google Scholar; and in Conybeare and Maclean, Rituale Armenorum, 399-402. For the composition of the prayer see Scheidt, H., Die Taufmasserweihegebete, Münster 1935.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 8} ιαν γενομενοί σνμϕντοι τω ομοιωματι του μονογενονς οον γιου δια του βαπτισματος... The same conflation occurs in a Baptismal Catechesis of Chrysostom, о Παυλος ϕησι · єс σνμϕοιτοι γεγοναμεν τω ομοιωματι του θανατου αυτον δια τον βαπτισματος ...; Papadopoulos-Kerameus, A., Varia Graeca Sacra, St Petersburg 1909, 159 Google Scholar. There is no NT MS authority for συμφοιτοι instead of συμφυτοί.

^{page 36 note 1} E.g. by Narsai, see above, p. 32, n.2.

^{page 36 note 2} Homily xxi ( Mingana, A., Homiltae, I, 346 Google Scholar; Connolly, R. H., Liturgical Homilies, 51 Google Scholar).

^{page 36 note 3} I.e. the Byzantine dominions.

^{page 36 note 4} See Diettrich, G., Die nestorianischer Taufliturgie, Giessen 1903 Google Scholar; see also the review of this book by Baumstark, A. in Oriens Christianus, III (1903), 219–26 Google Scholar. The Nestorian revision was the first to transform the rite into a baptism of infants.

^{page 36 note 5} Liturgia Sanctorum Apostolorum Adaei et Maris... necnon Ordo Baptismi, Urmiae: Typis Missionis Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis, 1890, 55–75, contains the Syriac text, which is also printed in Diettrich, op. cit. For an English version, see The Liturgy of the Holy Apostles Adai and Mari... and The Order of Baptism, 1893, 63-82.

^{page 37 note 1} Quoted by Edmund Bishop in his Liturgical Note appended to Kuypers, A. B., The Book of Cerne, Cambridge 1902, 234 Google Scholar.