Harnack on the Elements used in the Eucharist
APPENDIX 4
HARNACK ON THE ELEMENTS USED IN
THE EUCHARIST
A. voN HARNACK, in his learned monograph Brod und Wasser, die eucharistischen Elemente bei Justin, T. G U. vu, ii (1891),
117-44, sought to show that in Justin's day the Eucharist was celebrated with bread and water only—no wine being used.
Harnack placed great emphasis on Justin's references to the Blessing of Judah (Gen. xlix. 8-12) which he comments on five times without any allusions to the Eucharist (Dial. lii, liv,
Ixiii, Ixxvi, I Apol. liv). Harnack thought that this was significant as, had wine been used, he would have drawn the parallel between the reference to wine in Gen. xlix. 11 and the Eucharist. This omission would however only be convincing if other early Christian writers fad used this text as a type of the Christian rite. But Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Hippolytus and Origen all quote the Blessing of Judah without connecting it with the Eucharist [see Zahn, Brod und Weinim Abendmahl der alten Kirche (1892), p. 74; Jiilicher, <ur Geschichte der Abendmahlsfecer in der dltesten Kirche (1892), p. 218; Veil, Fustins des
Philosphen und Martyrers Rechtfertigung des Christentums (1894), p. 99]. Harnack also made play with the parallel which Justin draws between the rites of initiation in Mithraism and the Christian Eucharist [J Apol. Ixvi. 4: 'This also the wicked daemons in imitation handed down as something to be done in the mysteries of Mithra; for bread and a cup of water are brought out in their secret rites of initiation, with certain invocations which you either know or can learn']. It is however pressing
Justin's language too far to argue that because bread and water were solely used in the Mithraic initiation then the Christian
Eucharist likewise only used these elements. There is another explanation of Justin's reference to Mithraism as we shall see.
We are thus left with three passages in the Apology which specifically refer to wine at the Eucharist (I Afol. lxv. 3, 4,
Ixvii. 5). In his attempt to get round these Harnack fell back on textual emendations.
In J Apol. lxv. 3 Justin says: éeita I2 ee) BJM
APPENDIX 4
TpoogépeTat TH TrpccoTSt1 Tdv dSeApdv Aptos Kai ToTrplov USatos Kal Kopduarros. Harnack proposed to eliminate
Kal KpduaTos as a gloss (it is missing in C. Ottobianus)—the original reading then referring only to bread and a cup of water. This emendation was adopted by a number of German critics.
Jiilicher, however (p. 221), Zahn (p. 14) and Goguel (The Primitive Church, p. 360) have held that the omission of Kai
Kpduartos in C. Ottobianus was due to a copyist who was deceived by the similarity of the ending of the words UBartos
Kal Kpd&patos. It must of course be recognised that Justin's language is rather unwieldy (in the other two references in I Apol. Justin has the easier &etos—olvos—USwp). KpGua is a mixture of water and wine (Liddell and Scott give Tim. Locr. 95£,
Plut. 2. 1109£, Plut. 2. 140F, LXX). In modern Greek it has come to mean wine alone. Justin's words as they stand definitely imply that at the Eucharist the elements were bread, a cup of water, and (a cup of ?) water mixed with wine. This would certainly fit in with Justin's other two references to bread, wine and water as if they were three separate elements.
It is interesting, in this connection, to look at Hippolytus'
Apostolic Tradition xxiil. 1-7 which is worth quoting in full:
And then let the oblation (at once) be brought by the deacons to the bishop, and he shall eucharistise (first) the bread into the representation of the Flesh of Christ; (and) the cup mixed with wine for the antitype of the Blood which was shed for all who have believed in him; and milk and honey mingled together in fulfilment of the promise which was (made) to the Fathers...water also for an oblation for a sign of the laver, that the inner man also, which is psychic, may receive the same (rites) as the body. And the bishop shall give an explanation (Adyos) concerning all these things to them who receive.
And when he breaks the bread in distributing to each a fragment he shall say: The Bread of Heaven in Christ Jesus. And he who receives shall answer: Amen.
And the presbyters—but if there are not enough (of them) the deacons also—shall hold the cups and stand by in good order and with reverence: first he that holdeth the water, second he who holds the milk, third he who holds the wine.!
1 T have used Dix's translation.
~178 a
APPENDIX 4
In this account of the baptismal-eucharist there are three cups —water, milk and honey—and mixed wine. Justin does not mention the cup of milk and honey, but he does refer, in J Apol.
Ixv, to the two other cups—and in the same order as Hippolytus.
It therefore seems not improbable that Justin's separate cup of water alluded to the baptismal washing which the catechumen had recently received. This is also the explanation of Justin's reference to the bread and cup of water found in Mithraism, which, he says, 'are brought out in their secret rites of initiation'. This was a pale daemonic imitation of the Christian baptismal-eucharist where bread and the cup of water (representing Christian initiation) were received by the communicant
—although he also received the cup of mingled wine as the blood of Christ. 'This is a better explanation of Justin's account than the usual one! that, writing for non-Christians, he wished to show that calumnies against Christians, as to their sobriety at the Eucharist, were unfounded—hence the stress on water.
Harnack is thus right in stating that bread and a cup of water were used at the Eucharist in Justin's day—although wrong in excluding the cup of mingled wine which was Christ's blood. The use of the cup of wine is also demonstrated by Justin's quotation, in I Apol. |xvi. 3, of the dominical words of institution, which specifically mention the cup, and the words, 'This is my blood.'
If the Christian rite had been celebrated only with bread and water (and nothing else) in Justin's day what sense would these words have made to Christians—let alone intelligent pagans?
Justin believed that the sacraments celebrated in his day had come down from the apostles. We have no evidence in the main stream of Christian literature prior to Justin, nor in that immediately following him, that bread and water alone were used as the eucharistic elements.? This fact, in view of Justin's adherence to tradition, is sufficient to throw the gravest suspicion on Harnack's theory quite apart from the doubts which his textual emendations raise.
1 E.g. M. Goguel, The Primitive Church, p. 360.
2 Irenaeus condemns the Ebionites for rejecting the mixed chalice and says that when the mixed cup and broken bread receive the Word of God they become the Eucharist of the body and blood of Christ (Adv. Haer. v.
1-2). Cf. also the mention of the mixed cup (képacyua) in the epitaph of Abercius c. A.D. 160 and by Cyprian Ep. Ixiii.
12-2