Hippolytus' Commentary on the Song of Songs in Social and Critical

HIPPOLYTUS’ COMMENTARY ON THE SONG OF SONGS IN SOCIAL AND CRITICAL CONTEXT by Yancy Warren Smith Bachelor of Arts, 1984 Abilene Christian University Abilene, TX Master of Arts, 2003 Graduate School of Theology Abilene Christian University Abilene, TX Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Brite Divinity School in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Biblical Interpretation Fort Worth, TX May 2009 ABSTRACT This dissertation presents the first translation in English of the Georgian text of Hippolytus’ commentary On the Song of Songs and discusses the authorship, provenance, rhetorical features, social setting, and hermeneutical proclivities of the In Cant. It argues for the traditional assumption that Hippolytus was a culturally eastern writer in Rome. This study builds upon previous musings by some scholars that the In Cant. is a work of baptismal instruction, arguing more precisely that it represents a mystagogy centering on the post-baptismal rite of anointing with oil as a symbol of receiving the Holy Spirit. The In Cant. should be imagined as performed in the convi- vial setting of a Paschal banquet. Such rites suggest a western provenance. Particular attention is given to the Greco-Roman context and Valentinian influences on the commentary. Hippolytus used New Testament passages, the Logos theology he inherited from Irenaeus, and also popular images of Greco-Roman domestic art as inspirations for his interpretation of the Song. Hippolytus used the Song to reinterpret popular images of Dionysus and Ariadne, the chariot of Helios and the zodiac, the Dioscuri Castor and Pollux, and Heracles and the Hesperides in the fabled Garden of the West. Themes of the commentary selected for discussion are Hippolytus’ Logos theology, the attitude displayed by Hippolytus toward women, the synagogue, and heretics. HIPPOLYTUS’ COMMENTARY ON THE SONG OF SONGS IN SOCIAL AND CRITICAL CONTEXT APPROVED BY DISSERTATION COMMITTEE: Carolyn Osiek Dissertation Director David L. Balch Reader Jeff W. Childers Reader Edward J. McMahon Ph.D. Director Nancy J. Ramsay Dean COPYRIGHT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT As author of this paper, I grant permission to the Mary Couts Burnett Library, Texas Christian University, to provide a photocopy of the paper to any requesting institution or individual, with the understanding that it be for scholarly use only. Yancy W. Smith Signature 2 April 2009 Date WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted materials. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish photocopy or reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research. If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judg- ment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. To Nona† and Lanette ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my committee members for the time and effort they have spent working with me on this project: to David L. Balch whose inspiring lectures opened up for his students the interpretive potential of the conjunction of art and ancient Christian texts; to Jeff Childers whose teaching on oriental Christianities and languages laid the foundation of this work. His particular blend of patience and exacting, careful critique improved my translation of the Georgian text and saved me many an embarrassing gaffe. Of course any errors that remain are my own. Above all, thanks to my committee chair, Carolyn Osiek, whose profound knowledge of the social backgrounds and movements of early Christianity brought a transformation in in how I read Scripture. Her patient teaching, inspiration, helpful guidance, and the collegial environment she fosters will never be forgotten. I can only hope that this dissertation honors her effort. Also, special thanks to Jost Gippert and the team at Thesaurus Indogermanischer Text- und Sprachmaterialien, an on-line joint project of the Institute of Comparative Linguistics of the Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität, Frankfurt am Main, the Ústav starého Predního východu of Charles University, Prague, the Institut for Almen og Anvendt Sprogvidenskab of the University of Kopenhagen and the Departamento de Filología Clásica y Románica (Filología Griega) de la Universidad de Oviedo. This repository of otherwise difficult-to-find texts and helps is an invaluable resource for students of eastern European and central Asian languages and texts. Also, I am grateful to the Department of Slavic Languages and Literatures and the Summer Workshop in Slavic, East European and Central Asian Languages at Indiana University (SWSEEL) that provided a generous summer fellowship making possible an intensive study of the Georgian language. A travel grant from Brite Divinity School facilitated the time I spent in Bloomington at Indiana University, for which I am grateful as well. Dale Randolph and A. Brian McLemore, both of World Bible Translation Center, provided encouragement and financial and moral support as well as office space during the research and writing phases of this project. Thanks also to Brendan McConvery, of St. Patrick’s College, Maynooth for helping me locate Ide M. Ní Ríain, translator of the nearly-impossible to-obtain English version of Ambrose’s Exposition on Psalm 118 (119), which allowed me to check the accuracy of my own translations of the Ambrose’s quotations of Hippolytus. Her kind letter arrived on St. Patrick’s Day. Finally, I am grateful to my friends and co-workers, John Andersen and Brian McLemore, who provided keen copy editing skills and went the extra mile in the final stages of this project. CONTENTS ABBREVIATIONS.........................................................................................xi Major Textual Witnesses of On the Song of Songs by Hippolytus .................xiv INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................1 1 AUTHORSHIP, DATE, AND PROVENANCE.................................................8 The Date, Setting, and Inﬂuence of the Commentary .............................8 The In Cant. and the Hippolytus Question ..............................................14 The Case for a Western Provenance of the In Cant................................33 The Commentary on the Song of Songs and the Two Authors Theory ..109 Summary....................................................................................................110 2 GENRE, RHETORIC AND SOCIAL CONTEXT .............................................111 Speaker and Audience in the In Cant. .....................................................112 The Genre of the In Cant..........................................................................153 Hippolytus in his Social Context ..............................................................210 Summary....................................................................................................238 3 ANNOTATED TRANSLATION .......................................................................240 Introduction to the Commentary ..............................................................240 Texts and Translation of the Commentary on the Song of Songs ..........249 4 THEMES AND HERMENEUTICAL APPROACH .........................................375 Invective, Community Boundaries, and the Inner Chamber ..................375 Hermeneutical Starting Points .................................................................382 Hermeneutical Process: Typology, Mystery and Divine Economy .........427 Selected Theme: Women and the Synagogue in the In Cant. ................451 Chapter Summary .....................................................................................473 5 CONCLUSIONS .................................................................................................475 APPENDIX 1 EUSEBIUS AND JEROME ON HIPPOLYTUS....................485 APPENDIX 2 A HOUSE-CHURCH STATUE OF ROMA .........................493 Archaeological Evidence Linking Hippolytus to Rome...........................493 More Archaeological Evidence Linking Hippolytus to Rome.................510 APPENDIX 3 EUCHARIST AND AGAPE IN TRAD. AP. .........................512 WORKS CITED..............................................................................................531 Chart 1: Structural Outline Introduction to In Cant. ......................................170 Chart 2: Outline of the In Cant. ......................................................................173 Chart 3: Works of Hippolytus Listed in Eusebius and Jerome .......................489 Chart 4: Statue List Compared with Lists in Eusebius and Jerome ................498 Chart 5: The Community Meals of the Therapeutae and Roman Christians..518 ABBREVIATIONS 1 AEG Abingdon Essential Guides ADW Heinz Fähnrich and Zurab Sarjveladze, Altgeorgisch-deutsches Wör- terbuch. Lexicographia orientalis 5, Hamburg: H. Buske Verlag, 1999 AJA American Journal of Archaeology Antichr. De antichristo ASMA Aarhus Studies in Mediterranean Antiquity Ben. Is. Jac. De benedictionibus Isaaci et Jacobi Botte La tradition apostolique de Saint Hippolyte: essai de

Load more