The Canons of Athanasius of Alexandria (Arabic and Coptic Versions, tr. Riedel & Crum, 1904) — Canons of Athanasius

WORKS ISSUED by tHe fe AN TRANSLATION SOCIETY

THE CANONS OF ATHANASIUS —

MUS., COPTIC PAPYRUS XXXVI, FOL.

BRIT.

THE CANONS OF ATHANASIUS OF ALEXANDRIA.

the ARABIC AND COP TCe VERSIONS WITH INTRODUCTIONS, NOTES AND APPENDICES

WILHELM RIEDEL

Professor in the University of Greifswald.

AND

ae W. E. CRUM, M.A. a

PUBLISHED FOR THE TEXT AND TRANSLATION SOCIETY BY WILLIAMS AND NORGATE

TEXT AND TRANSEA TION SOCIETY.

President.

Professor Sir R. K. DOUGLAS, British Museum.

Vice-Presidents.

Mr. F. C. BURKITT, University Lecturer in Palaeography, Cambridge.

Mr. A. COWLEY, Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford.

Hon. Treasurer.

Dr. C. D. GINSBURG.

CONTENTS.

Introduction. |W. R.] .

Table of Canons.

meppendie be C.) ©.

Mable of Biniica! Passages. |W. E. C.) .

General Index. [W. E. C.] Errata.

INTRODUCTION.

Jou. Moscuus, Pratum, XL.

In the Introduction to his translation of Athanasius’ Festal Letters, Larsow writes': ‘What could call forth more ad- miration, what attract more attention among thcological students than the discovery of a work, lost indeed in the Greek original but preserved in a Syriac version, by the illustrious man whom the Church of all ages has most justly honoured as ‘the Great’, ‘the Apostolic’:’ Similar ex- pressions would fittingly introduce the work published for the first time in the following pages — should its authenticity be satisfactorily demonstrated. Scepticism however is here inevi- table; for the sole European who has hitherto perused it regards this work with suspicion. E. Renaudot, the learned Oratorian of Jansenist sympathies, well known as the editor of the Liturgiarum Orientalium Collectio and as collaborator in the Perpétuité de la Fot, gives, in his Hestorza Patriarcha- rum Alexandrinorum Facobitarum, certain information re- garding the canon-law of the Alexandrine church? and, while

2 Paris 1713, 4°.

NET INTRODUCTION.

Since Renaudot no one appears to have read these canons, probably owing to this suspicion of spuriousness which might well act as a primary deterrent from any concern with the work. And of his predecessors, only Wansleben' gives the headings of our canons, and that not from a direct acquain- tance with them, but from the account given by Abt ’I1-Ba- rakat. That learned Copt, in his catalogue of Christian-Arabic literature, observes with reference to Athanasius ?: ‘More-

over to him (Athanasius) are due 107 Canons, which he

INTRODUCTION. IX

And of his predecessors, only Wansleben' gives the headings of our canons, and that not from a direct acquain- tance with them, but from the account given by Abt ’I1-Ba- rakat. That learned Copt, in his catalogue of Christian-Arabic literature, observes with reference to Athanasius ? : ‘More-

over to him (Athanasius) are due 107 Canons, which he

INTRODUCTION. IX

composed concerning the priesthood etc. A list of them has already been given in the chapter treating of the lists of the canons.’ By the last words the writer refers to the 5th chapter of his theological Encyclopedia, which contains a ‘List of the Canons ordained by the Fathers, the saintly Apostles and the holy Patriarchs and Bishops who came after them and were assembled in the recognized Synods’. ! There, under the heading: ‘The Canons of Abba Athanasius the Apostolic, 20th Patriarch of Alexandria — in number 107 Canons’, Abt ’l-Barakat gives? a full and accurate list of the contents of the work, concluding with the following note: ‘In the MS. here used it is stated that, in the MS. whence it was transcribed, the statement is found that this holy Canon of Saint Athanasius, the great teacher of the land of the Egyptians, was ove canon. But I, poor Michael, who am not worthy to be bishop of Tinnis, held it right, when copying (or translating) it, to examine it and divide it into 107 sections, so that each section should clearly show its contents and that all who seek (therein) anything should easily and conveniently find it’.4 This Michael is presumably identical with the continuator of Severus’s Patriarchal His- tory, completed in 1051 ° and utilized by Renaudot for the period subsequent to 880.° He had been ordained deacon by the patriarch Zacharias (1004—1032), priest by Sinuthius? (1032—1046), whom he had served as secretary, and was nominated bishop of Tinnis by Christodulus (1047—1077), who had already employed him as envoy to John of An- tioch. It is probably to him then that we owe the Arabic version of our canons.

1 Translated in ARQ., pp. 18—76. 2 Fol. 143a@ of the Berlin MS. 3 Translated in KRQ., pp. 54—58.

V. the subscription to the Canons, p. 69 infra.

5 Renaudot, Hist. 399, 414.

6 Ze. from .م‎ 3223 cf. p. i. IV, v. of preface and 322.

edu ts. 414. 58 22727403: 407;

X INTRODUCTION.

This Arabic translation is preserved in the following collec- tions of the Canons of the Coptic church:

1. In that of the priest Macarius, who lived in the mona- stery of Abi Yuhannes the Short, in the Scetic desert, about the year 1350 (v. KRQ. 127). The MSS. of this work now in Europe are enumerated /. c., 122 ff.

In the Berlin MS, of AD. 1335 (— RK: v) KAO 120 ff.)

a collection of canons related to that of Macarius.

In a collection in Paris, Bibliothéque Nationale (Catal.

oP)

no. 138, v. KRG. 136), related to nes. % and 2. 4. In the collection put together by J. S. Assemani, mainly on the basis of that of Macarius (v. ARQ. 153, no. 33).

In the Melkite collections, on the other hand, the Athan- asian Canons are wanting (7. ¢.) 88 10, It; Dp 13004.

In a collection in Paris, Bibliothéque Nationale (Catal. oP)

no. 138, v. KRG. 136), related to nes. % and 2. 4. In the collection put together by J. S. Assemani, mainly on the basis of that of Macarius (v. ARQ. 153, no. 33). In the Melkite collections, on the other hand, the Athan- asian Canons are wanting (7. ¢. ) 88 10, It; Dp 13004.

l-urther, excerpts from them are embodied in certain Nomocanons: in two Arabic-Ethiopic Penitentials (v. Ap- pendix A); and in the canonical collection of Farag Allah of Achmim.! On the other hand, they are wanting (pace Renaudot) in Ibn al-‘Assal’s Canon Law (better known in its Ethiopic form as the Metha ‘Nagast), as also in the Nomocanon of Michael of Damietta.

We are however taken back considerably further than the 11th century Arabic translation by the remains of the Coptic, whence the Arabic is derived. The London papyrus (B) belongs, in Mr. Crum’s opinion, to the 6th or 7th cen- tury; and, since the Coptic text is without doubt itself but a translation, the Greek original of the canons would date at any rate from the 6th century.

For further conclusions as to their provenance we are dependent upon the internal evidence of the canons. It is important here to notice that, in regard to form, they are comparable neither with the Apostolic Canons, the synodal

INTRODUCTION. XI

decrees of the 4th century, nor with the Canons of Timothy of Alexandria.’ They consist, not — as the subsequent Arabic distribution into sections might easily lead us to expect — of brief, judicially conceived paragraphs, but for the most part of lengthy disquisitions on the importance and sanctity of the priestly office, frequently interspersed with dogmatical or exegetical comments, sometimes too with narratives of the writer’s own experiences. By the concluding words the writer (or a later continuator) wishes apparently to indicate the arrangement of the work (p. 67, § 105): ° ‘This whole writing doth consist of three chief parts, whereof the first treateth of the fear of God and of the altar, the second of compassion toward the poor, and the third of the keeping of virginity. Whoso efc.’ (v. .م‎ 67). The first 81 5 then might be referred to verecundia, §§ 82-91 to museri- cordia, 55 92—104 to castitas. But such a division presents difficulties, and it is possible that the passage cited does not refer to the arrangement of the work, but 15 intended as a development of § 104, wherein the author had exhorted to the observation of ‘all His (God’s) commandments and all the words that are written in this book of the church’s law’, to which he then adds the observation that the contents of these numerous injunctions may be gathered under three main ideas: reverence for the sanctuary, charity and purity. Yet even thus an indication as to the arrangement of the whole work would be afforded; for these are, in fact, the principal conceptions which, whether in homiletic or ascetic disquisitions or in separate rules, are here applied to the concrete rela- tionships of Christian life.

The author is without doubt a cleric, since he addresses the clergy as his ‘brethren’. He is a bishop, and even appears to stand in an authoritative relation towards other bishops; for he gives them both instruction and commands (e. g. 55 14,

Migne; PG. 33, 1293 ff.

XII INTRODUCTION.

16, 18, $4, 61, 62, 06, 76, $2, 104). We. may therefore sce in him either a metropolitan, archbishop or patriarch. He is a learned theologian with an extraordinary familiarity with Scripture; Chronicles and Zechariah come as readily to him as the Gospels.

Furthermore, he is an Egyptian. The argument for local- izing the work in Egypt is based primarily on the history of its preservation — in Egypt alone are we able to trace it — but also by various subordinate features. The months which occur are called by their Egyptian names, ©. .م‎ Tubah, Barmidah. The feast of the Epiphany, in the month of Tubah, is termed the feast of the New Year, coincident with the harvest of grain and fruit: “The last of all fruits is the olive, which men gather upon this day; wherefore this is called by the Egyptians the feast of the New Year.” ا‎ To Egypt moreover points the fact that the Epistle to the Hebrews is cited as a work of St. Paul.? The re- ferences too to the property of the church and to its fellahin point to Egypt; nor does that to vine cultivation (f. 112 ©( in any way contradict this. For, although wine 15 not today produced in Egypt, it was still an important ‘ndustry in the Christian period, as may be seen from innumerable refer- ences throughout the private documents (papyri, ostraca ), and from some also in literary texts. ‘

Thus an Egyptian provenance may be regarded as certain. Yet the writer was no Egyptian in the narrower sense of that name. He shows the influence of Greek upbringing and Greek ideas and speaks of ‘barbarians’ in contemptuous terms

We oe ar 4

2 “The Alexandrine church has, from time immemorial, read the Ep. to the Hebrews as a genuine work of Paul, together with his other Epistles” (Th. Zahn in فرش‎ 2.3 IX. 775). Cf. also Athanasius in the 39th Festal Letter (Migne, PG. 26. 1177).

3 E. g. Pap. Oxyrh. XCII, CXVII, CXLI, CL, Fayum Towns CXXXIII.

INTRODUCTION. XIII

(ff. 1022, 1160). Presumably therefore he is an Alexandrine.

to the Hebrews as a genuine work of Paul, together with his other Epistles” (Th. Zahn in فرش‎ 2. 3 IX. 775). Cf. also Athanasius in the 39th Festal Letter (Migne, PG. 26. 1177). 3 E. g. Pap. Oxyrh. XCII, CXVII, CXLI, CL, Fayum Towns CXXXIII. INTRODUCTION. XIII

(ff. 1022, 1160). Presumably therefore he is an Alexandrine.

When then did the Egyptian archbishop, or possibly Alexandrine patriarch, who composed this work, live? We saw that the remains of the Coptic version take us back to the 7th century, so that we must seek the Greek original at any rate in the 6th. The whole character of the work forbids us to think of a later period. The writer is acquainted with many pagans (§ 95), he speaks of the charismatic gift as of something still familiar' (§ 52), he knows the festivals of Easter, Pentecost, Epiphany (or the New Year), but ignores that of Christmas (f. 10386( 3. Nor does he anywhere quote, 35 On numerous occasions he might have done, the earlier documents of church law. A terminus ad quem having thus been proposed, we must seek the superior limit certainly not beyond the 4th century. The Egyptian church, as con- ceived by our author, is no longer a state-persecuted body; it is the church of the state. The writer feels himself to be a member of the Roman empire when he speaks of the duty of the king to protect his territory against the attacks of the barbarians (f. 102 a); he appeals to the civil law in describing the duties of the bishop towards the poor at the three great festivals and towards those in distress whom he must visit and assist: ‘for the laws (yuo) of the kings do teach us how we must conform ourselves to God’s benevo- lence and refresh all them that are in need.’ I have failed to find the passage to which this refers, but the assumption is at any rate made that the Roman emperor issues edicts to the bishops. In accord with this we find that one who robs a church is handed over for punishment to the civil power (§ 90 end, f. 1176). This last incident is stated by the

2 Shenoute however is acquainted with it (Leipoldt, p. 7, Anm. 2).

XIV INTRODUCTION.

author to have actually befallen ‘when he himself was still a youth’, and we are thus obliged to place the composition at least thirty years later than the establishment of the state church by Constantine. These various considerations may lead us to decide with some assurance upon the period be- tween 350 and 500.

7, Anm. 2). XIV INTRODUCTION. author to have actually befallen ‘when he himself was still a youth’, and we are thus obliged to place the composition at least thirty years later than the establishment of the state church by Constantine. These various considerations may lead us to decide with some assurance upon the period be- tween 350 and 500.

Now Arabic literary tradition of the 11th century ascribes the work to the patriarch Athanasius the Great, who was born about 293, who while still very young served 6 years as a reader (ca. 309—315), who at the outbreak of the Arian controversy (ca. 318) was a deacon (2. e. aet. 25), and in 326 was ordained bishop of Alexandria, which office he held, with the interruption of five exiles (335—37, 339—46, 356— 62, 362—64, 365—66), until 373. Seeing that the contents of the work before us presuppose a definite period of peace in the church, we should be obliged, were Athanasius the author, to consider either the period 346—56 or 366—73, and, for preference, the latter of these.

Is it then possible that Athanasius should have composed this work, about the year 370? The silence of Greek writers as regards a work of Athanasius referring specially to Egyptian conditions, is conceivable. But it is remarkable that Severus of Ashmunain, in his chronicle of the Alexandrine bishops, although he gives a list of the writings of Athanasius pre- sumably from Coptic sources, makes no mention of canons. ! Still more suspicious is the circumstance that the canons of Timothy of Alexandria (Migne, PG. XXXIII) are current in the Armenian church under the name of ‘Canons of Athan- asius’;? and moreover that a number of spurious writings besides pass under his name. It would seem not impossible

that the present work may owe the name of Athanasius 1 17. Severus ben el-Mogaffa‘, .له‎ Seybold, 1904 (Corpus Scr. Christ. Or., ed. Chabot), text p. vl. Cf. Dashian: Armen. Hss. der Mechit.bibliothek zu Wien, p. 134, col. 2. Mr. Crum drew my attention to this.

INTRODUCTION. XV

merely to the imagination of its Arabic translator, Michael; the extant Coptic fragments at any rate preserve no author’s name. Further, Renaudot calls attention to certain internal difficulties: sant inter cellos canones multi (which?) guz aetati Athanasit convenire non possunt et posterioris temporis adisct- plinam repraesentant. Yet there are, on the other hand, passages in the work which appear to point both to this period and to Athanasius as their author. We may draw attention to the following points:

Further, Renaudot calls attention to certain internal difficulties: sant inter cellos canones multi (which? ) guz aetati Athanasit convenire non possunt et posterioris temporis adisct- plinam repraesentant. Yet there are, on the other hand, passages in the work which appear to point both to this period and to Athanasius as their author. We may draw attention to the following points:

1. The writer's interest in distinguishing between the canonical and apocryphal books, which characterized Athan- asius; cf. his Festal Letter of 367.' ‘The Reader shall read nought save the catholic word, lest the people mock at the lying words of the abolished (apocryphal) writings, which be not of the spirit of God, but of the world’ — so says § 11 (f. 1026). By a slight alteration in one Arabic letter the reading ‘catholic word’ could be replaced by ‘canonical word’. But even if the traditional reading be retained, the idea is in perfect agreement with those expressed in the above-named Festal Letter: nut Guus, adyamytol, nanelvav no- YOUICOLEYVOY, KL TOUTWY avayIyYwonoueVwY, CVdLLOD THY aTOKpU- Dav لاسا الام‎ ٠ AAR aipetindy éotiv emivoig, ypaddvtay wiv ore béroucwy ترم‎ And again in § 18 (f. 1040): ‘Vhe Bishop shall prove the Reader often and the Singers, lest they read any but the common, catholic books, whence all the people do learn the great and merciful work of God.’ It is to be ob- served here how, in both instances, ‘canonical’ and ‘catholic’, ‘apocryphal’ and ‘heretical’ are coupled together.

2. Still more remarkable is the twice repeated reference to Meletius. In § 12: ‘The singers shall not sing the writings of Meletius and of the ignorant, which sing without wisdom, not as David and in the Holy Spirit, but like the songs of the heathen, whose mouths ought to be stopped.? But if

XVI INTRODUCTION.

they sing not in the Holy Spirit, then let them sing not at all. It is written: ‘Ye shall not add aught thereunto neither take aught thence.’' And § 25 enumerates, among those who are to be carefully excluded from the sacrament, all sorts of magicians and also all such as say ‘that Meletius hath (or the Meletians have) a church.... For had they been ours, they had remained with us? and had not risen against the Lord, nor had separated themselves from His church. And how can there be two churches, seeing the apostle Paul saith ® that the church is one?’

For had they been ours, they had remained with us? and had not risen against the Lord, nor had separated themselves from His church. And how can there be two churches, seeing the apostle Paul saith ® that the church is one? ’

This last paragraph, in thus fixing the limits of the sacra- mental community, treats heathen and heretics as zpso facto excluded and does not so much as mention them. Those alone are named about whom there might exist a doubt; those, that is, who either are or at any rate declare them- selves to be or are regarded by others as being, members of the church. Of the first of these, the author names such as practise any form of superstition — a class very largely represented in Egypt; of the second, the members of the schismatical church of Meletius. The latter are not to be treated as members of the catholic church; for they are schismatics, maintaining that Meletius has a church, in other words, that there are two churches, while in truth there is but one. Now these Meletians aim at fellowship with the catholics; but this is to be refused until they shall forsake the community of Meletius and confess one catholic church. Furthermore we learn that in the Meletian church hymns were sung which had perhaps been composed by members of that body. The intrusion of hymns thus emanating from schismatics into the service of the catholic church must be prevented and with this object a general injunction is issued against the use of any liturgical songs beyond the biblical Psalms.

i Deut, 11.32. 1¥; 2: 2 1 Joh. 11. 3 Col. I. 24, Eph. V. 23—32.

INTRODUCTION. XVII

Of the Meletian schism we know, it is true, very little; that little however is in complete accordance with what we learn from our Canons.! Meletius or Melitius, bishop of Lycopolis, was excommunicated in 311, by Peter of Alex- andria. ‘But Meletius’, says Athanasius, ? ‘appealed not unto another synod, neither did he seek to defend himself, but rather was the cause of a schism and his companions are up till now called not Christians but Meletians.’ For Athan- asius, then, he was not a heretic but a schismatic, ‘who had

3 and whose ad-

Meletius or Melitius, bishop of Lycopolis, was excommunicated in 311, by Peter of Alex- andria. ‘But Meletius’, says Athanasius, ? ‘appealed not unto another synod, neither did he seek to defend himself, but rather was the cause of a schism and his companions are up till now called not Christians but Meletians. ’ For Athan- asius, then, he was not a heretic but a schismatic, ‘who had

3 and whose ad-

rent asunder the seamless robe of Christ,’ herents, the Meletians, nevertheless ‘boast that they have received that which belongeth not unto them, namely, that they also were reckoned of the catholic church.’ For, as Epiphanius°® relates, a difference of opinion had arisen be- tween archbishop Peter and Meletius regarding the treatment of the /apsz, and, in the course of this dispute, Peter had had his deacon announce that whoso was of his opinion should come to him, but that those who agreed with Meletius should join him. From thenceforth each party had refused to the other communion both in prayer and sacrament. Meletius appointed separate bishops, priests and deacons and set up his own churches, even in Alexandria itself. To put an end to this schism, the synod of Nicaea had decided that the adherents of Meletius should be readmitted into the catholic church. Yet Athanasius wished ‘that that decision had never been taken at Nicaea.’® The hostility between the two parties continued; Meletians and Arians made common cause, and, at the synod of Tyre (335), brought about the deposition of Athanasius. Thus we may understand how, about 350, the Meletians, rather than the Arians, appear as the true

1 Cf. Hefele, Conciliengesch. I. 343 ff. and especially H. Achelis in PRLZ.3

XVIII INTRODUCTION.

enemies of the catholic church in Egypt.! In later times we learn that the sect was still in existence in Egypt in the middle of the 5th century.? Further, Theodoret states 3 that the Meletian monks had adopted various superstitious practises, Jewish ablutions and the like. Possibly the mention in our canons of the Meletians, directly after fortune-tellers and magicians, may have some reference to this; while the statement of the canons, that the Meletians sang in their services newly composed Psalms, may be connected with their eventual union with the Arians and the identification 4 of the two parties in the popular mind; for Arius had no- toriously sought to propagate his doctrines by means of popular songs.® Still more striking is the strict exclusion enjoined by our canons of Meletians from the catholic ser- vices, when we recall the refusal to them of communion by the archbishops Peter and Athanasius.

In short, the brief phrases wherein Meletius is here men- tioned are perfectly comprehensible as ordinances issued by Athanasius in the years 366—73. And it may be finally observed that the singing of new psalms is here forbidden in the very words of Deuteronomy which Athanasius quotes in reference to the biblical canon:® Mydelg adrors tai Baaaéto, feyode TouTwy ADxipEioc$a Th.

3. A third point which may lend support to the Athan- asian authorship of the present work is its relation towards

monasticism. In these ecclesiastical canons there is naturally

And it may be finally observed that the singing of new psalms is here forbidden in the very words of Deuteronomy which Athanasius quotes in reference to the biblical canon:® Mydelg adrors tai Baaaéto, feyode TouTwy ADxipEioc$a Th. 3. A third point which may lend support to the Athan- asian authorship of the present work is its relation towards

monasticism. In these ecclesiastical canons there is naturally

' Larsow 80, 84, 127, Griitzmacher Pachomius 74. The Meletians attempt to win Pachomius for their party, but he is referred by a vision to Alexander of Alexandria as the true orthodox bishop.

2 Socr., HE. I. رو‎ Theod., HZ. I. .و‎ In Shenoute’s time they had become unimportant. [They seem to have existed in the 6th Cent. ti. Kew, des ies. grecg. III, 134 and even in the 8th, v, Renaudot, Hiss. 230° We Ee C.);

Stat. 1 ae. AN... #9072, HF, IL, ot.

5 Cf. PREA 11. 13. The condemnation of iswrimo? Waauol is however found also in Can. Laod. 59 and Can. Basil. 5 97 (KROQ. 274).

6 Migne, PG. 26. 1437.

INTRODUCTION. XIX

no special treatment of monasticism beyond that of the re- lations between the sacerdotal church and the monks. Thus, for example, in § 48, no priest is allowed to enter a virgins’ monastery, unless he be of advanced age. As, for reasons of expediency, access to the nunnery is thus made difficult, so on the other hand monks and nuns are forbidden to frequent certain liturgical functions. We can learn, from Can. Laod. 9, Gangr. 20, of the annually recurrent festivals of the martyrs which took place in chapels dedicated especially to them. From the latter of these canons we moreover gather that such celebrations were by many denounced, clearly on account of the abuses to which they frequently gave oc- casion.' Such festivals took place usually at night and appear to have acquired the character of public holidays with which secular entertainments were combined; hence in § 92 atten- dance at them is forbidden to monks and nuns, who are rather at these times to hold a solemn festival in their mon- asteries. When going to divine service, nuns are enjoined to walk by twos, and under the eye of the ‘mother’, z. e. the prioress. If a father should desire to visit his daughter in a monastery, he must have recourse to the ‘mother’s’ in- tervention. Virgins of both sexes are to fast strictly and may not eat anything whence blood has gone forth, neither drink any wine (§ 98), excepting in cases of illness (§ 92). ? Not however in monasteries alone is the virgin, as a distinct order, to be sought; she is found besides in the family itself. In every Christian household there is to be a virgin; for one virgin is the salvation of the whole house (S§ 908, 104). But these virgins may not be treated as slaves or ser- vants (§ 103); such treatment would be a contempt of their estate and cyyux. Parents may give their children to the

XX INTRODUCTION.

In every Christian household there is to be a virgin; for one virgin is the salvation of the whole house (S§ 908, 104). But these virgins may not be treated as slaves or ser- vants (§ 103); such treatment would be a contempt of their estate and cyyux. Parents may give their children to the

XX INTRODUCTION.

Lord in youth (§ 97), provided the latter show an inclination in that direction. ' Virgins of this class do not celebrate the feasts of the martyrs with the community generally, but apart, in the convent and under the supervision of the abbess. The convent serves indeed as a place of contempla- tive retreat for women generally. Thus it was customary, for example, to pray for the departed on the goth day after death, because it was held that on that day ‘the soul of the departed appears before Christ and is requited according

to the merit of his deeds.’

Many used therefore to pass this night in prayer at the graves of their relatives. Never- theless the Council of Elvira (AD. 306), in its 35th canon, ordained: Placuit prohibert ne foeminae in coemeterio pervt- gilent, co quod sacpe sub obtentu orationts latenter scelera com- mittunt. The custom was however so firmly rooted, that com- pensative measures had to be devised and thus our ggth canon rules that women who may desire to offer prayers for the soul of a son or husband shall repair to a virgins’ convent and there, in company with the nuns, pass the night in prayer,

3 For their services the

‘lest any soul should suffer hurt.’ nuns are to receive remuneration. On the other hand, there is a general prohibition to nuns against attending any fes- tivity, whether of joy or mourning, at the houses of their relatives. Permission to do so is granted only as an ex- ception, and then in company with the prioress. Nuns how- ever, like monks, receive their due share of inherited pro- perty (§ 102).

Is it possible that these regulations are to be ascribed to Athanasius, in about the years 366—373? His interest in monasticism is well known. ‘The father of orthodoxy, he is

2 Cf. KROQ. 169. § 17, Const. Apost. VIII. 42, Rhode Psyche 12.

3 Cf. Leipoldt, Schenute 117, Anm. 7.

INTRODUCTION. XXI

Nuns how- ever, like monks, receive their due share of inherited pro- perty (§ 102). Is it possible that these regulations are to be ascribed to Athanasius, in about the years 366—373? His interest in monasticism is well known. ‘The father of orthodoxy, he is

2 Cf. KROQ. 169. § 17, Const. Apost. VIII. 42, Rhode Psyche 12. 3 Cf. Leipoldt, Schenute 117, Anm. 7. INTRODUCTION. XXI

besides the first episcopal patron of monasticism.’' He had narrated the life of Anthony (+ 356), had maintained close relations with Pachomius (+ 346), the founder, in 322, of the first monastery, and, in the years of his persecution, had sought refuge with the monks of the desert. It should not surprise us therefore to find points of striking resemblance between a work likewise ascribed to Athanasius, the De Virginitate sive de Ascesi,? and the present canons. As early as Erasmus that tract was indeed declared to be spurious; but Eichhorn has produced in its defence weighty arguments, with which I am myself inclined to agree. Moreover, what we know of the Pachomian monks accords well with our canons. During her brother’s life (¢.e. before 346) Maria, the sister of Pachomius, had established a convent wherein dwelt four hundred nuns. We learn from the rules there observed that, if a monk desired to visit a nun, the super- intendant of the convent, as well as another nun, had to be present at the interview, just as in canon 92. The care of souls among the nuns is entrusted to an aged man, 5” as in canon 48. Since the Pachomian monks wore a peculiar dress, ° so too the nuns would be already distinctively clothed, as is taken for oranted in our canons.’ The Pachomian rule again permitted its monks to receive the visits of their re- latives, though not too often, and also, in cases of death, to obtain the director’s leave to accompany the funeral, exactly as in the canons. According to the Antonian re- gulations the monks were obliged to fast daily until the gth hour: so too in our canons. Thus all the rules regarding

monastic life, which are to be presumed from these canons

1 Loofs inv? ALS Ty 197. 2 Migne, PG. 28, 251—283. 3 V. Theol. Stud. und Krit. 1903, 342.

4 Griitzmacher, Pachomius 100; cf. PRE? XIV. 548. 5 Lbid.

poldt 145).

XXII INTRODUCTION.

agree with what is known as to the regulations of the cloister in Egypt in the year 350.!

Thus all the rules regarding

monastic life, which are to be presumed from these canons

1 Loofs inv? ALS Ty 197. 2 Migne, PG. 28, 251—283. 3 V. Theol. Stud. und Krit. 1903, 342. 4 Griitzmacher, Pachomius 100; cf. PRE? XIV. 548. 5 Lbid. poldt 145). XXII INTRODUCTION. agree with what is known as to the regulations of the cloister in Egypt in the year 350.!

Again, a strong argument for the high antiquity of the work is offered by the fact that the authority of earlier canonical writings is nowhere cited. Neither the Apostolic Canons nor those of Nicaea or of any other synod are ever mentioned. It is indeed said, in § 5 (f. 974), that the minister of the altar must walk in the canons of the Apostles, and in 8 9, that it is not of the church’s canons to use false weights and measures. Yet neither of these ordinances is supported by quotations from the so-called Canons of the Apostles or from those of a synod, but rather by biblical texts — the second by 1 Pet. V. 2, the first by a reference to the Pastoral Epistles. Athanasius too employs the terms fxnrysinatino: xavovee (Migne, 2?G. 25, 224 D), ‘Apostolic tradition’ (Larsow, p. 69), ‘canon of monasticism’ (PG. 28, 268 C) in this sense. The sole quotation from a work of ecclesiastical law which our canons show relates to an im- perial edict (f. 1048, v. p. XI above).

But beyond this, resemblances may be found, in the first place, with the canons of Laodicea (e. g. f. 1024), which date from the 24 half of the fourth century. Should it be sought to demonstrate a dependence here of one from the other — a condition which I hold to be unlikely — it is in our canons that the elder form would have to be recog- nized; and thus the view of Boudinhon, that the Laodicean canons are a compilation from canons of the 4th century, 3 would receive support. Further, attention has been drawn in the notes to the frequent resemblances to the copto- arabic canons of Basil, while, on the other hand, we observe

a slight divergence from those of Nicaea. The latter ordain

INTRODUCTION. XXIII

(can. 5) that, in each province, synods shall be held twice a year, the first before Quadragesima, the second in the autumn. ! Similarly the 20th canon of Antioch ordains that the metropolitan must assemble the bishops of his eparchy for a synod twice yearly, while the 38th canon of the Apostles makes almost the same rule. Our 68th canon, on the other hand, requires that all the clergy of an Egyptian voyée shall meet their bishop thrice a year — the وهل‎ was, it is true, but a small district.

Again, a point of contact with the Hippolytan Canons may be mentioned. The § 80 treats of the sick who dwell in the sanctuary. If they be poor, the steward must provide for them, while for such as sleep in the church he shall care as for his children, giving heed to them as unto the vessels of the church, and so forth (v. p. 49). Now in the 24th Hip- polytan canon? we read: ‘With the bishop there shall always be a deacon, to give him information as to the doings of all, especially as to one that is sick, that he may be aware thereof. For the sick it is of importance that the chief-priest visit him.... But the sick shall not be suffered to sleep in the xo:mytypiov, except those that are poor. Wherefore shall he that hath a house not be borne into the house of God, except it be to pray, and thereafter he shall be carried again unto his house. The steward that hath the care of the sick shall cause the bishop to bear the cost of them, even unto the earthen vessels, because the sick have need thereof. Let the bishop give the same unto the steward.’ The requirement here of the Hippolytan canon appears to me to be the later in date; for while the Athanasian canon assumes that the sick of all classes sleep within the church, there to be healed, that of Hippolytus restricts this usage to the poor, who are without provision at home.

1 Cf. O. Braun, Syzhados 18. 2 Cf. c. 61 of the Egyptian Church Order.

XXIV INTRODUCTION.

These rules are at the same time evidence of the extent of the church’s economic activities. As regards the structure of the church, we learn that, in order to reach the real interior of the building, two doors had to be passed; the outer of them guarded by the 4éupwpoi, the inner by the deacons (§ 25). In the intervening space stood the catechu- mens (§ 25, f. 105a@), besides such heretics and schismatics as desired to be present at the service. The ecclesiastical orders are here seen in their full development of seven suc- cessive grades: bishop, presbyter, deacon, subdeacon, reader, psalmist and doorkeeper, just as in the Laodicean canons, S$ 21—24, and the Concil. Quinisextum, § 4. Their sevenfold division the writer supports from various biblical passages (f. 101a); possibly therefore this arrangement had not, at the time, attained the position of a generally recognized doctrine. !

The clergy wear a peculiar garb (f. 1054), which is kept in a special room, together with the rest of the: church fur- niture )5 28). This room is apparently identical with that wherein the tithes of the harvest etc. are stored. The ma- nagement of the church’s property is the duty of the steward (sizcveuzoz) who plays an important part in our canons. ° Where more than one steward is required, these have at their head the cixoveues wsyus, the colleague of the bishop. Single churches have their own husbandmen ( fe//ahin), who till the land with hired labourers. Such detailed instructions as to the management of ecclesiastical property, suggesting as they do comparisons with Can. Antioch. 24, 25, Gangra 7, 8, Apost. 39, 40, are especially interesting. And it may be here observed that, to judge by the Egyptian ostraca,

1 The catholic church, though recognizing 7 orders, counts them differently (v. Wetzer-Welte IX, 1032, Kraus, Realenc. I], 555). I have failed to find any testimony regarding the antiquity of the number. Harnack (Urspr. d. nie- deren Wethen, TU. 11. Iv, 100) appears to regard the eight orders as the older number; but in this he can scarcely be correct.

2) Cf. Can. Basil. 96. ; 3 Cf. Suicer, Thesaurus, 5. 7.

INTRODUCTION. XXV

the economy of the Christian church would seem to have imitated that of the heathen temples. For, according to these texts, the landowner was called upon to pay, beyond the land and poll taxes, a contribution towards the temple of his: “disttict = ane? so, ao well as the state dues,.\we-read. of the collection of the ‘sacred barley’ and ‘sacred wheat’, a hundredth part of the total harvest. The corresponding duty upon vines and fruit-plantations amounted to a sixth of the whole, and so on. But the question can not be further fol- lowed out here. We were only concerned to show that the regulations of our canons are not in contradiction to the conditions of the age of Athanasius; and this point may, I think, be held sufficiently demonstrated. Nor will any one contend that church legislation was a field beyond the pro- vince of Athanasius. !

Finally, it would be difficult to discover a closer resem- blance to the style of our canons than in that of the Fes¢al Letters of Athanasius (e. g., here p. 67, compared with the close of the 1st Letter).

Now the Chronicle of John of Nikiu? records that Athan- asius, on his recall from his fourth exile (364), assembled a synod of all bishops and teachers.and composed two tracts, ° one upon the Logos and the Trinity, the other upon the ‘Commandments of Christ’.4 Of the second of these Zoten- berg states that it is otherwise unknown. The ‘Command- ments’ might, for two reasons, be identified with our canons: (1) because the latter begin with the words, ‘These are the

and composed two tracts, ° one upon the Logos and the Trinity, the other upon the ‘Commandments of Christ’. 4 Of the second of these Zoten- berg states that it is otherwise unknown. The ‘Command- ments’ might, for two reasons, be identified with our canons: (1) because the latter begin with the words, ‘These are the

1 Perhaps Can. Basil. 31 (ARQ. 249) refers to an Athanasian work of this nature. [On the other hand, the Athanasian works cited by Can. 2 of the Trullan Synod (692) among the canons of the fathers still in force, are doubt- less those included likewise in the collections of Balsamon and Zonaras (Migne, PG. 138, 545 ff.), viz. the Epistles to Amon and Rufinian and a passage from the 39th Festal Letter (cf. Th. Zahn, Athan. u. d. Bibelkanon, 1901, p.3). W.E. C.]

XXVI INTRODUCTION.

laws’, and (2) because the date given in the Chronicle agrees fairly with that at which we have arrived. To me, then, it ap- pears not impossible that these canons are, as a whole, derived from a work of Athanasius. Not, of course, that every phrase of the Arabic version is to be claimed as Athanasian; a comparison with the Coptic fragments shows how great is

the freedom of much of the Arabic translation. !

Moreover the impression is often given of confusion in the text, and the conclusion, from § 105 onwards, has almost the appea- rence of a subsequent addition.

It remains to say something as to the plan followed in the present edition of the Arabic version. It is based upon the translation contained in the MS. Diez, qu. 107, of the Royal Library at Berlin (= R; cf. KRQ. 129—135), which is described as followed by Ahlwardt (Ka/al. IX. 539, No. 10181): ‘21g foll., 4°, 19 (20) IL, (26 X.16}; I9g—20 x 12) cm.; from f. 51 onwards 18-19 كا‎ 111 cm.). — Condition: in general fairly good, though somewhat dirty and spotted, with water stains in the margins of the first third. A certain

number of worm holes. — Paper: yellow, thick and smooth. — Binding: brown leather with fastening ..... No. 11. —

107 in number. — Script: rather large, good, regular, fully vocalized, although diacritical points are sometimes wanting. Titles in red. The copy dates from AM. 1055 = AH. = AD. 1338. According to f. 108 one fol. is wanting. Fol. 1226 is blank.’

1 Cf. e.g. 55 44 and 46, in two recensions (pp. 34, 35 and 119, 120 below).

2 Cf. 55 79 and 43, 80 and 44, 86 and 64. In the Coptic MS. BP a frag- ment paged 91, 92 has the text of 5 101 arab. (v. .م‎ 113 below), while another leaf, paged 97, 98, shows § 48 (v. .م‎ 91 below). These facts are most easily explicable, as Mr. Crum observes, on the assumption that our earliest Coptic text was arranged in a sequence totally different from that in the translation of Michael of Tinnis.

3 This is not quite accurate. F. 108 ends indeed with § 54 and f.

INTRODUCTION. XXVITI

(v. . م‎ 113 below), while another leaf, paged 97, 98, shows § 48 (v. . م‎ 91 below). These facts are most easily explicable, as Mr. Crum observes, on the assumption that our earliest Coptic text was arranged in a sequence totally different from that in the translation of Michael of Tinnis. 3 This is not quite accurate. F. 108 ends indeed with § 54 and f. INTRODUCTION. XXVITI

This manuscript is well fitted to serve as the foundation of the text, being not only the oldest but being moreover very carefully written.' To follow its orthographic peculi- arities, is, I believe, to contribute something to the needs of Arabic philology. The Arabic employed in this version is not of the classical idiom; it would therefore be a funda- mental error to treat such a text from the classical stand- point and to correct it in accordance with Wright’s grammar. Neither can the classical rules as to orthography be here observed; to do so would to be give our Canons a linguistic form which in reality was never theirs. The Arabic dialects moreover are today zealously studied, and to many therefore the exact idiomatic and orthographic forms of the oldest begins with § 57, thus omitting §§ 55, 56. Yet there is no evidence of a missing leaf. The quire has, like all the rest, 10 leaves, and moreover, the old Coptic pagination is continued without interruption. §§ 55, 56 must there- fore either have been absent in the MS. copied or must have been omitted

through the scribe’s carelessness. 1 The following is the scribe’s subscription to the Canons:

‘Finished are the Canons of the excellent, saintly, great father Ath., the apostolic, patriarch of Alexandria. And their number is 107 canons. In the peace of the Lord. Amen. And this (befell) on the 8th of the month Amshir, year 1055 of the pure Martyrs, which corresponds in the blessed Arabic months (//¢. month) to the 21st of the simple month Ragab of the year 739 of the Hijra. And praise be to God for ever and ever. My God, have pity upon the poor scribe, who is overwhelmed in oceans of sin and wickedness and clothed in all vice and wickedness, and forgive him at thy advent to this world. Amen.’ Both the above dates correspond to Febr. 2, 1339.

XXVIII INTRODUCTION.

The Berlin MS. was collated throughout with photographs

of two MSS. of the Macarius text, viz.

(Christi 1372), quorum benedictiones Deus nobis unpertiatur. Amen.

St. John the Dwarf, Ss is situated in the desert of Scete (oxi). He extracted his documents from a large number of books found, either in the desert monasteries or at Cairo. After several years of laborious work, the collection, of which the present MS. is an exact copy, was completed. It contains the following pieces:

‘....40. (ff. 323—339).— Canons of the Church, set in order by St. Athanasius, patriarch of Alexandria, and numbering 107. At the end of the work, Michael bishop of Tennis (i) informs us that he had rearranged these canons in a more convenient order... +

INTRODUCTION. XXIX

After several years of laborious work, the collection, of which the present MS. is an exact copy, was completed. It contains the following pieces:

‘.... 40. (ff. 323—339). — Canons of the Church, set in order by St. Athanasius, patriarch of Alexandria, and numbering 107. At the end of the work, Michael bishop of Tennis (i) informs us that he had rearranged these canons in a more convenient order... +

INTRODUCTION. XXIX

For the first 10 canons (ff. 323@2—3275) I had the use of a copy made from this MS. by Mr. Crum; for the remainder (ff. 328a—3380) I used photographs taken by Mrs. Crum. This MS., as having been made directly from the author’s copy, is our best authority for the Macarian collection. Be- sides it, a partial copy by Mr. Crum of a MS. of AD. 1680, now in the Bodleian (Hunt. 32), has been collated for 55 59— 61, 65—70, 73, 74. It is thus described by Uri in his catalogue (I, p. 40):

‘No. LXII. — Paper (dombycinus) codex, written by the same hand as the preceding.’ Foll. 238. Contains the 22d part of the Canons of the Alexandrine Church, consisting of

ae 13. Athanasius of Alexandria: 107 Canons.’

Finally, for §§ 55, 56, wanting in R, I used Mr. Crum’s لالت‎ Olt. Faris Woo. no. 252 (De Slane p. 68), a copy made for Wansleben in 1664 (cf. ARQ. 122), and no. 238, probably part of a distinct collection of Alexandrine Canons. 4¢72 ma 130).

Unanimous readings of these Macarian MSS. are in the following pages indicated by M, those peculiar to the Va- tican,? Paris and Oxford (Bodleian) MSS. respectively by Mv, Mp, Mb.

I had originally noted in the margin all the variants of the MS. M. Subsequently, in order to reduce the cost of printing, but contrary to my own wish, I restricted these to a selection. The reader will however still find all variants of importance noted. As in the case of the Hippolytan Canons, I should have been glad to omit in the present edition the division into separate canons, an arrangement

1 °No. LXI.— Paper codex, elegantly written, in AM. 1397 = AD. 1680.’

(p. 39). 2 It should be observed that this MS. was frequently corrected by its scribe in accordance with the rules of grammar: ¢. g. he read in the copy before him

the most part ignored such variants.

XXX INTRODUCTION.

LXI. — Paper codex, elegantly written, in AM. 1397 = AD. 1680. ’

(p. 39). 2 It should be observed that this MS. was frequently corrected by its scribe in accordance with the rules of grammar: ¢. g. he read in the copy before him

the most part ignored such variants. XXX INTRODUCTION.

not merely in itself very recent —some 700 years later than the original composition — but detrimental to the literary form and not infrequently quite false, as, for example, be- tween §§ 80 and 81, where a sentence is cut in half, and at the beginning of § 79, where the train of thought is com- pletely ignored.'! However I finally decided to acquiesce in the traditional arrangement; for it is in this form alone that the Arabic text has reached us and upon it too the description of Abt ‘l-Barakat, and thence that of Wans- leben, was based. The titles of the individual canons as given in the Berlin MS. are included in the notes. These are not to be found in the Macarian collection, nor do they agree at all with the headings given by Abt ’l-Barakat. ? They would thus not be part even of the original Arabic translation. For this reason they are here relegated to the notes, where their retention may be justified on grounds of practical utility.

The Arabic text was translated by me into German and thence into English by Mr. Crum. The responsibility for the translation from the Arabic rests with me alone, although I have to thank Mr. Crum for many suggestions.

The notes in the lower margins fall into two groups. Those bearing J/etters refer to important textual variants, while those signed with figures relate to the subject-matter, biblical quotations or parallel passages from other ecclesias- tical literature.

Of the Coptic fragments and their relation to the Arabic

1 It will be observed that the Coptic version frequently shows divisions divergent from those of the Arabic (v. p. 83 below). 2 AiO, Ga it.

3 (My thanks are due to Mr. F. G. Kenyon for kindly reading a proof of the English of this and also of pp. 117—140. W. E. C.]

TABLE OF Fr CANONS,

ACCORDING TO THE ARABIC VERSION (MS. R.).

. Of the priests, the ministers of the altar.

. Likewise concerning the work of the priests at the

altar.

. Likewise concerning the priests, the servants of the

altar.

Likewise concerning the priests.

. Of the bishop and his keeping watch for the people. . Of what is the duty of the bishop, how his way

of life should be and that he must be sufficiently instructed. Of the glory of the church.

. Of that it is not lawful to dwell with the wives.

That it is not lawful that the priest have two

INCaSuLes.

. That the bishop is answerable, not for the congre-

gation alone, but also for the whole clergy.

. Of the service of the subdeacon and other matters. . What the singers may sing.

. Of the order of ministry of the doorkeepers.

. How the bishop shall order his expenses.

. Of the bishop’s visits to the poor and others.

. Of the bishop’s almsgiving every Sunday.

. That the bishop is answerable, not for the congre-

gation alone, but also for the whole clergy. . Of the service of the subdeacon and other matters. . What the singers may sing. . Of the order of ministry of the doorkeepers. . How the bishop shall order his expenses. . Of the bishop’s visits to the poor and others. . Of the bishop’s almsgiving every Sunday.

. Of the gathering of the priests unto the bishop.

Can.

TABLE OF THE CANONS.

. That the bishop enquire concerning the affairs of

the priests.

. That the church must needs have a (gauged) measure.

Of the priests’ victuals from the church.

Of the honour of the husbandmen of the church

above others.

. That priests may not be husbandmen.

Of a poor church.

Concerning reverence and respect for the priests.

. That whereunto the presbyters shall give heed. . Of that which no child of the church may behold. . Of such deacons as smite one another at the altar.

. Of the garments of the priests, wherein they cele-

brate the sacrament. Of whoso of the priests is drunken.

Of him that drinketh wine in the Paschal days.

. Of him that goeth unto a bath. . Of him that talketh or sitteth at the holy altar.

Of the place of dividing the bread.

That the priest shall not stand at the oven.

. Concerning the ministry of the readers, that none

may trouble them therein.

. Concerning the holy mysteries, that they may not

be carried without.

. Of the deacons, that none may speak while he

beareth the cup.

3. Of a priest, that he may not sell in the market. . Of a deacon, that he draw not nigh the altar when

an older then he is there.

. Of the hour of the sacrament.

. Of a priest that talketh with astrologers and others. . Of him that is found in adultery.

. Of the deacon whose wife dieth.

. Of the ornaments of priests’ wives.

TABLE OF THE CANONS. XXXIII

Of whoso of the priests putteth away his wife.

Of a priest that parteth a man from his wife.

Of the priests’ visiting of the sick.

Of what priests are suffered to go into a virgins’ convent.

Of the trades that befit the priests.

Of a priest that is present in the church, but goeth forth and returneth again.

Of a priest which saith that he hath no need of the altar.

Of one of the clergy in whom the grace of the Holy Ghost appeareth.

Of the accusation which befalleth priests.

Of one of the bishop’s children that sinneth.

[Of a priest measuring with two measures.|

[That a priest shall befriend orphans.|

Of the week of the holy Pascha.

Of the readers, that they give heed unto that which they read.

Of the singers and that which they sing.

Of the afternoon prayer on the Friday of the Pascha.

Of that whereof the steward of the church must take heed.

Of the church vessels and of him with whom they are.

Of all the first-fruits that are given to the priests.

Of not making offering of the offering of yesterday.

Of the church’s goods; that, if it be possible, the offerings and the priests’ victuals shall be pro- vided therefrom.

Of the afternoon prayer on the Friday of the Pascha. Of that whereof the steward of the church must take heed. Of the church vessels and of him with whom they are. Of all the first-fruits that are given to the priests. Of not making offering of the offering of yesterday. Of the church’s goods; that, if it be possible, the offerings and the priests’ victuals shall be pro- vided therefrom.

Of the bishop’s eating with the priests.

Of such as talk at the time of eating.

Of the assembling of the village priests unto their bishop.

Of a presbyter that is an husbandman.

BO.

TABLE OF THE CANONS.

. Of whoso of the priests is rich and of the charity

that he must do.

. Of the children of the priests that are found reading

in magic (books).

. Of the penance of the magician.

. Of such as talk of hours and concerning conjurers

and others.

Of the penance of an adultress, when she doeth penance.

Of them of the priests’ children that are found in

the theatre.

. Of such as despise the holy altar.

. Of the honour of the sanctuary and its beauty and

its respect.

. Of the holy mysteries.

. Of him whose wife dieth and who committeth for-

nication secretly.

. Of the sick which are in the church. . Of the welcoming of strangers.

. That what remaineth over to the bishop, that shall

be given to the poor.

. Of such as give tithes and first-fruits among the

priests and the laity.

34. That almsgiving is incumbent upon every man. . Of the alms and offerings for him that is dead.

. Of the offerings for the dead according to the tes-

timony of the Old (Testament).

. Of them that oppress the poor.

. Of them of whom the priest receiveth offerings.

. That the words are joined together in two chapters. . Of the steward with whom is the store-house.

. Concerning the feasts of the martyrs.

. Of this, that monks may not go unto feasts.

. Ofthelaity, that they likewise are children ofthe church.

TABLE OF THE CANONS. XXXV

That whoso hath a son fit for marriage, he must needs marry him.

Of the obedience of children unto their parents.

Of the care of parents for their children and the ordering of them.

Of her that voweth her daughter unto the Lord.

Of this, that there must be in every house a virgin.

Of the virgins and of who of the believing women shall go unto them.

Of such of the believers as go to rest.

Of a nun of whom a kinsman dieth.

Of the inheritance of male and female virgins from their parents.

Of virgins, that none may cause them to be servants. Of her that hath no virgin daughter, that she appoint some one of her maids (thereunto). Of the fear of God and pity for the poor, and

of purity. Of the incense which is offered up in the sanctuary. Of the wine of offering.

Of:

IOI.

Gan:

f. 95

R f. 96a

R f. 964

0 1 ay Wag ees 00

0 M siya.

R f. 98a

R f. 998

pr.

R f. 1008

i 1104

2( Mv + 49.

R f. 102a

Of the incense which is offered up in the sanctuary. Of the wine of offering. Of:

IOI. Gan:

f. 95

R f. 96a

R f. 964

0 1 ay Wag ees 00

0 M siya. R f. 98a

R f. 998

pr. R f. 1008

i 1104

2( Mv + 49. Oo

R f. 102a

r) Mp J, Ris.

R f. 1026

R f. 1032

0) M | sai,

2 eee wil J Y >)

+) rAriinds 20

me © ne

R f. 1086 ‘Js

R f. 6

Ey SA yp ial

i} a

R f. 107a

R f. 1076

0 Rf. 108a

‘ae

f. 1086

Rf. 109a

10 ae

3 Nels wales as] Yioxs 10

R f.llla

ex kA 55

R f.112a

Rf, 1126

Ne ae

wey oe oo hh 0 iad

wie

11 11be

R f. 113d

. ee

x: i

5 Se ee reo “7 1 at se ate 3

: Sic 10

om at

R f. 11624

} t

Rf llia

hxc Fy Mp> f Mc, Lm) ME Si.

cow

RA. I2ike

R f. 1216

R f. 1224

(1 .كس‎ d) Minka. ¢-)Mp>. f) M>. g) What follows is from M only. For the ee in R 2. Introduction. h) Mp

The Canons of the holy, excellent Athanasius, the apo- stolic, Patriarch of Alexandria. May his blessing be with us. Amen. And their number is 107 Canons. In the peace of thes Lore. 7 auien.

These are the laws of the presbyters. ‘Let those that minister aright be held worthy of double honour and especially those that labour in the word and teaching’;! because that they are not appointed of the bishops for (payment of) anything at all; wherefore they must needs be honoured with all godly honour. © For when Moses served the altar worthily, God did grant unto his countenance a splendour greater than all.? And this did God make for a sign unto them that serve the altar aright in holiness, even as he. For he was the faithful presby- ter,’ who ‘laboured in the word and in doctrine’ and established the law for that obstinate people and bore their burden ¢

and their weeping and their irreverent murmuring wherewith

a The whole formula > Mp.

6 The title in M. These be the Canons of the church that our father, the holy Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria, set in order. God grant us the blessing of his prayers. Amen.

§ Mv. in margin, ‘their hypocrisy’.

52 Lim; .ا‎ 7 2 Ex. XXXIII. 9, XXXIV. 209 ff. 3 Cf. Ex. XXIV. 1 (®).

6 The title in M. These be the Canons of the church that our father, the holy Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria, set in order. God grant us the blessing of his prayers. Amen. § Mv. in margin, ‘their hypocrisy’. 52 Lim; . ا‎ 7 2 Ex. XXXIII. 9, XXXIV. 209 ff. 3 Cf. Ex. XXIV. 1 (®).

they murmured against the Lord, and the curses that they uttered against Him. Yet was not all this a burden unto him because of the beauty of the altar whereof he was the minister and which was an image of the Word.° Wherefore he was honoured more than any, in that he tasted of the sweetness of God; he, the first that spake of the Church and gave unto her the form of the tabernacle, that by this fixed design the Church might be called to mind. For the tabernacle which followed him was an image of the Church. And not only did he make it, but he also set therein in order the ordinances of the sacred service, that he might teach us the fear of God that doth surround the altar, albeit we see it not. For he made bells round about the hem of the raiment of Aaron his brother, ” that, when the chiefs ؟‎ “at the holy place heard him enter the tabernacle, they might step aside, lest he should die. Hor every onc. that shall venture to approach the altar, without observing the law of God, shall die a. wretched death, even as the sons of Els the priest of the Lord. For none that serveth the altar in impurity or with neglect shall die a good death.

(§ 1). 4 He saith also unto the priests which draw nigh unto the Lord, that they sanctify themselves, lest the Lord destroy certain of them. For this befell the sons of Aaron ®, when they sanctified not themselves according to the bidding of their father’s brother, to perform their priesthood in the fear

of God. For Moses said, ' ‘I fear and tremble, for this is

h M. For. k R. Contents: Of the priests, the ministers of the altar.

4 Num. XI. ro—14, Deut. I. 12. 5 Adyos. Cf. R. 99d.

8 Ex. XIX. 22. 5 Lev. X. 2, 10 Ex. III. 6(?).

R f. 95a

the place wherein the Lord dwelleth’, as He said unto Mo- ses,'! ‘I will appear unto thee in this place, between the wings of the cherubim, and will speak with thee’. For a

12 “No man seeth

Contents: Of the priests, the ministers of the altar. 4 Num. XI. ro—14, Deut. I. 12. 5 Adyos. Cf. R. 99d. 8 Ex. XIX. 22. 5 Lev. X. 2, 10 Ex. III. 6(? ). R f. 95a

the place wherein the Lord dwelleth’, as He said unto Mo- ses,'! ‘I will appear unto thee in this place, between the wings of the cherubim, and will speak with thee’. For a

12 “No man seeth

word went forth from His mouth saying, my face and liveth’. David knoweth this when he saith, ذ!‎ ‘Dreadful art thou, © God; who can stand before Thee?’ And the prophet 7 David never ventured to draw nigh unto the Lord or, like a priest, to offer sacrifice, albeit he longed so to do, as he saith, ' ‘I love Thy dwellings, © Lord of Hosts, and my soul longeth for the courts of the Lord’. His desire to approach the altar and to be a priest was greater far than (his desire for) the glory of his kingdom. For by no means have all men authority to approach the altar, rather for him only whom the Lord hath chosen for this duty; and he must (then) perform his service in fear and trembling. For David had (himself) seen how Saul, 5 who without right or authority 77 made an offering, instead of a blessing, received therefor a curse and fell into great grief. For God took from him his glory when he ventured to approach the sanctuary, being but a layman, and to take upon himself the office of Samuel, the faithful pricst. For this cause did God take from him his kingdom and gave it unto David, because that he reverenced the altar. He saw also the destruction which God performed upon Uzzah, '° because Uzzah did without authority put forth his hand and lay hold upon the ark of the covenant of the Lord. For as the calf which bore the ark caused it to lean aside, Uzzah laid hold upon it; wherefore the Lord destroyed him and he died forthwith before the Lord. And when David beheld that, his heart was oppressed '' and albeit he desired to

11 yddpuycev, 2 Sam. VI. 8.

For as the calf which bore the ark caused it to lean aside, Uzzah laid hold upon it; wherefore the Lord destroyed him and he died forthwith before the Lord. And when David beheld that, his heart was oppressed '' and albeit he desired to

11 yddpuycev, 2 Sam. VI. 8.

bring the ark unto his house, yet durst he not, saying, ‘How and in what manner should the ark of the Lord enter into my dwelling’? And when Dara !5 received the ark, his state of poverty ceased and he became rich, as it is said, ' ‘The Lord blessed the house of Dara z the Chaldaean, 5 and all that he had, because of the ark of the Lord’. For who shall even draw nigh unto an altar with little fear and be safe? King Uzziah! also coveted the outward form 2? of the priesthood, for verily it is a thing to be desired. Yet where- fore do I call to mind a single man, that alone suffered through the Holy Ghost? Did not the most of the sixty myriads which followed Moses die through the Holy Ghost? As the Israelites said unto Moses, 2 ‘We are become few and are perished’, because that the earth had swallowed up Dathan and Abiram with their men. This befell them be- cause that they had desired the honour of the priesthood. Korah also and his multitude, in all two hundred men, died in wrath before the Lord, as it is written 23, ‘To him that hath shall be given, that he may have abundance; but from him that hath not, the little that he hath shall be taken away’. For God would teach us the fear that belongeth unto the altar and unto all the vessels that are upon the altar. It is said,° ‘The Lord spoke thus with Moses and Eleazar saying, Take the brazen vessels, which have been brought before the Lord, from the midst of the men that were burned, because they had sanctified (them) with a

18 For “APeddapa, cf. Holmes-Parsons. 19 2 Sam. 012 12.

23 Num. XVII. 12. 24 Num. XVI. 1 ff. 25 Mat. XXV. 29. 26 Num. XVI. 36—38.

It is said,° ‘The Lord spoke thus with Moses and Eleazar saying, Take the brazen vessels, which have been brought before the Lord, from the midst of the men that were burned, because they had sanctified (them) with a

18 For “APeddapa, cf. Holmes-Parsons. 19 2 Sam. 012 12. 23 Num. XVII. 12. 24 Num. XVI. 1 ff. 25 Mat. XXV. 29. 26 Num. XVI. 36—38.

(§ 2).7 Wherefore he commanded them in every place, saying, 27 ‘Reverence my holy places’. Hor the: ora 16 proveth priestss also, saying, 28 ‘They have defiled the Lord’s holy place and have turned aside from my law’. And in Ezekiel He saith, as one that is sad at heart be- cause of the princes, 2° ‘They build them houses beside the altar, wherein to eat and drink. For they have set their dwellings beside my dwelling and their wall standeth betwixt me and them, that they (szc) with their whoredom may be put far from me’. The wise Paul also doth blame such as these, saying, 2° ‘Have yew no houses wherein ye may eat and drink, that ye should despise the church of God and put them to shame that have not?’ And again the holy Gospel saith, ?! ‘He made a scourge of cords and cast out all the sellers and buyers, saying, Make not my father’s house a house of merchandise’, teaching us thereby that God’s house is the church and the altar the table of the Lord, as He saith in the prophet w Malachi, ‘Woe unto him that saith, The table of the Lord is defiled’, as He Sait, = ‘Woe unto you also, ye scribes and Pharisees, because ye say, Whoso shall swear by the temple and altar, 11 nothing; but whoso shall swear by the gold of the temple and by the offering which is upon the altar, he is thereby bound’. Now no man may draw nigh unto the temple and the holy altar but those that have sanctified themselves as befits the holy place’. He saith, ‘Fear and know that I am God’. For this cause, O priest, it is given unto thee that thou have power over all this. Doth not God require

yr R. Contents: Likewise concerning the work of the priests at the altar.

s M. His priests. uM. Ye have. w Mv.>. 27 Lev. XIX. 30, XXVI. 2. 28 Zeph. III. 4.

29 Ezek. XLIII. 8, 9. 30 1 Cor. XI. 22.

31 Joh. II. 15. 32 Mal. I. 7, 12.

33 Mat. XXIII. 16. 34 Lev. XXV. 17?

of thee that thou shouldst be without sin? Wherefore keep thyself far from receiving and from presents, for thereby come sins.

s M. His priests. uM. Ye have. w Mv. >. 27 Lev. XIX. 30, XXVI. 2. 28 Zeph. III. 4. 29 Ezek. XLIII. 8, 9. 30 1 Cor. XI. 22. 31 Joh. II. 15. 32 Mal. I. 7, 12. 33 Mat. XXIII. 16. 34 Lev. XXV. 17? of thee that thou shouldst be without sin? Wherefore keep thyself far from receiving and from presents, for thereby come sins.

(§ .رق‎ O thou levitical priest, wherefore dost thou sell or buy? Unto thee are given the first fruits of all, unto thee are given the offerings for the dead and the living and thou dost eat the sins of the people, even as Hosea saith, 35 ‘They do cat the people’s sins’, May that not befall thee which is said, ° ‘Their souls are seized away through iniquity’. When the priest doth evil, what then shall the people do?®? The priests are chosen y that they may be more holy than the people and that unto them the offerings may be given, that they may be holy, praying for the people, entreating for their sins, even as Moses saith of them, 35 that they are those whom ‘the Lord God hath chosen’. And when the priest shall sin like the people, who than shall pray for them: For a people and priests that are impure, the same have no prayer which goeth up to God for the people, as it is said, ’ ‘The Lord heareth not the prayer of the sinner’. For ten times did the wrath of the Lord come upon the people in the desert, that he might root them out. But Moses prayed for them and the Lord turned away His wrath from them and had pity upon the sinful people, for aa just man’s sake, because that he had not grieved the heart of God.

(§ 4). So now none shall be made a priest but men of d understanding, loving God, loving men, such as are able

worthily to stand before the altar. For many in these times R. Contents: Likewise concerning the priests, the servants of the altar.

y Mv. are instructed. a M. for a single. 6 R. Contents: Likewise concerning the priests. 4 M. the men of. 35 Hos. IV. 8. 36 hid, 3? Cf. Hos. IV. 9.

kR 1 g6a

R f. 6

For many in these times R. Contents: Likewise concerning the priests, the servants of the altar. y Mv. are instructed. a M. for a single. 6 R. Contents: Likewise concerning the priests. 4 M. the men of. 35 Hos. IV. 8. 36 hid, 3? Cf. Hos. IV. 9. kR 1 g6a

R f. 6

chose not the holy for the priesthood, by reason of their poverty, and (rather) they chose the rich that (live) without law, ° to entrust them with the Lord’s flock, though they be not faithful unto themselves; ! of whom the Lord saith, ? ‘I have given mine inheritance into their hands, yet have they done unto me no good, but have laid a heavy burden upon the aged’./% Woe unto him that draweth nigh unto the altar being unclean. They have entrusted unto thee these men and have set thee over these offerings, as one in trust and as one that doth set in order, O levitical priest, that many may seek help of thee at God’s service and that thou mayest win the souls of them for whom thou shalt be answerable, as it is said, 45 ‘He is answerable for all the flock.’ Wherefore God hath placed the people under your feet, ye priests, ye great men in God’s house, as he saith unto the people, ‘Obey your chief men and submit yourselves unto them,z for they it is that pray day and night for your souls’. If thou dost keep watch for the people and prayest for them, thou shalt surely redeem the souls of them whose offerings thou eatest. But if not and thou art slothful, how and in what way wilt thou give account of them? If thou be not found the intercessor for them in their troubles, then is it not meet thou shouldst eat their offerings.

(§ 5).4 The bishop must be in all thing blameless, married to one wife, seeking his profit rightly, humble of heart, sound / in faith, in love and in patience, ® not money loving, no

drunkard, a lover of strangers, apt to teach, perfect. If thou

/ R. but have burdened me with too much.

2 RMp. and gather yourselves unto them.

k R. Contents: Of the bishop and his keeping watch for the people. 2 M. sound in heart and in faith.

If thou

/ R. but have burdened me with too much. 2 RMp. and gather yourselves unto them. k R. Contents: Of the bishop and his keeping watch for the people. 2 M. sound in heart and in faith.

art not able for this, wherefore art thou loaded with this great judgeship? Is it for the sake of shameful gain? Truly on account of this x shameful gain many do become bishops, and many presbyters also and deacons likewise. And on account of such He saith, ‘The priests which draw nigh unto God must keep themselves holy, that God destroy not some of them’. 47 Why lookest thou upon the altar and the incense with irreverent eye: Why bindest thou thyself by these curses and these tears, while there be in the world many trades whereby thou mightest live and so be saved from this fearful punish- ment that befalleth them that devote themselves not worthily unto the service of the altar. Blessed is he that shall prove worthy to attain unto honour at the hand of the mighty and merciful Lord. Of such works (it is said) thus,g 4° ‘I fear not to fall into the hand of the living God’, and so again, 9 ‘Blessed is he that receiveth from Him a blessing’. Whoso therefore would belong untoy the dread altar, let him be diligent, as is worthy of the holy place. If He had no mercy upon the sons of Eli the priest, because their father in his highpriestship had not trained them up aright, so that they should observe the priesthood, but rooted them out and likewise destroyed the priests’ town Nob (Nowa), with the edge of the sword, from man to woman and from young to old, they and their cattle, and not that only but also the men that bare the banners, ! so that the number was three hundred and fifty men of those that fell beneath the feet of Saul, as it is said, ‘I went forth from my dwelling in Shiloh, because of the sins of the priests and the iniquity

n M. such. p M. unto the altar. g M. And so are these things (that it is said) thus. r Mv. cleave unto.

R f. 976

so that the number was three hundred and fifty men of those that fell beneath the feet of Saul, as it is said, ‘I went forth from my dwelling in Shiloh, because of the sins of the priests and the iniquity

n M. such. p M. unto the altar. g M. And so are these things (that it is said) thus. r Mv. cleave unto. R f. 976

of your (sec) fathers’: ¢ if He did this in the place where His name first dwelt and destroyed them, they and all their multitude, what then shall He do unto us, if we sin against the place of His holiness? Once already have I said, 55 No man that hath served the altar in impurity hath died a happy death, but rather all that did despise the altar died a wret- ched, fearful death. The altar, that is to say, the offering, z is a place of joy for whoso holdeth fast unto His laws, by reason of the fear that is His; but for him that is slothful He is destruction. If ye can not be humble, stand afar off, lest ye be burned; for that which is upon the altar is an unquenshable fire, as God hath said, 5 ‘The fire of the altar shall not die out’. Thou hast power to walk in the canons® of the Apostles that thou mayest attain with them unto honour. 39 But if thou have not the power, then flee afar off; for Amos saith, 57 ‘When I beheld the Lord standing upon the altar, He said unto me, Smite the place of forgiveness, 55 that the outer doors may be shaken’. By this place of forgiveness He meaneth not the (thing of) wood, but the servants that are about the place of forgiveness and stand at prayer by the place where sins are forgiven. It is said, 5” ‘Teach the priests that they may teach the people’. w For whoso is not of the presbyters and deacons, the same is not (szc) 556 called people; wherefore the priest prayeth for

2 R Mv. your prophets (cf. Lam. IV. 13), Mp. your sons. wu M. the strength (?). w M. teach the people thereof.

As Ode. ECV ay le Oe 200245):

55 This refers, not to the so-called ‘Apostolical Canons’, but to the injunc- tions of S. Paul in the Pastoral Epistles and of 1 Pet. V. 1, 5, as the sub- sequent development (§ 6) shows. Or the reference might be, still more ge- nerally, to ‘the apostolic tradition’ (cf Larsow, Festbr. d. heil. Athan. 69).

56 So the Arabic translation. But the original sense is perhaps, ‘If thou hast the power to walk according to the canons of the Apostles, thou shalt attain unto like honour with them’. Cf. the following sentence.

5% Am. IX. 1. 58 fAaorypiov. 59 Cf. Deut. XXXI. 9. Lev. XVI. 7.

the people. But the rest of the people also must pray for the priest, as it is written, 50 ‘Give strength unto him whom تك‎ thou hast prepared for us, that they y be not found in sin’: