6

The Liturgical Setting of

The Institution Narrative in the
Early Syrian Tradition
Emmanuel J. Cutrone
SINCE THE 1966 PUBLICATION
1
OF THE MAR ESA "lA TEXT OF THE ANAPHORA OF
Addai and Mari by William Macomber, debate has continued over the
presence of an institution narrative in the early Syrian eucharistic
prayer.
2
Macomber, comparing Addai and Mari with Maronite Sharar
concludes that the ancient eucharistic prayer did have the narrative
which was removed at a much later date.
3
Others have argued that the
Mar Esa 'ya text of Addai and Mari is a true representation of a tradition
which did not originally have the narrative.
4
Recently E. Mazza has add-
ed his voice to those who maintain that the Syrian eucharistic tradition
knew an anaphora which did not contain an institution narrative. He
concludes that as late as 392 in Antioch Theodore of Mopsuestia com-
ments on a eucharistic prayer without any mention of the words Christ
spoke at the Last Supper.
5
Since Sharar, an anaphora which shares antiquity with Addai and
Mari, and Apostolic Constitutions VIII, which is contemporary with Cyril
of Jerusalem and Theodore of Mopsuestia, are two Syrian anaphoras
which certainly have the narrative, it must be demonstrated that in the
same liturgical tradition some anaphoras had the narrative while others
did not. If this cannot be done, then it seems that those who argue for the
continual presence of the narrative must be correct, and the evidence of
105
106 THE INSTITUTION NARRATIVE
Cyril of Jerusalem and Theodore of Mopsuestia must be read differently
from above.
J.-P. Audet sparked a new line of inquiry with his structural analysis
of Jewish prayer forms as the basis for Christian eucharist.
6
Many have
amplified and redefined this line of research? Thomas Talley's clarifica-
tion of the distinction between eulogein and eucharistein, and his structu-
ral and thematic analysis have made major contributions to the under-
standing of the early evolution of Christian eucharist.
8
As profitable as
this has been, there still is not agreement on the place of the institution
narrative in the early development of the anaphora. The research seems
to indicate that there is nothing in the structure of the prayer which ei-
ther demands or eliminates the inclusion of the narrative. While strong
arguments have been made in both directions,9 it seems necessary to
move the investigation elsewhere.
Beginning with the New Testament,10 it seems clear that, from the very
start, the institution narrative was part of eucharistic worship. X. Leon-
Dufour is the latest voice to present a strong argument that the institution
narratives come into Scripture from two different liturgical traditions: the
Antiochene: I Corinthians 11:23-26/Luke 22:15-20 (Pl/Lk) and the Mar-
kan: Mark 14:22-25/Matthew 26:26-29 (Mark/Matthew).l1 This is biblical
that in the most influential center of the Syrian church, Antioch,
the Institution narrative was used in a liturgical setting prior to the com-
position of I Corinthians. But this does not necessarily mean that the nar-
rative was incorporated into the eucharistic prayer. Even though Leon-
does discuss various types of religious meals and gives special
Importance to the todah meal, he refuses to specify the liturgical manner
in which the narrative was used or to suggest any particulars of the struc-
ture of the eucharistic prayer. Of course, the passages as given are not
blessings or any other form of prayer; they truly are narratives.
12
But
since they are descriptive of a salvific event, they could have been incor-
porated into a larger prayer context as an embolism, but they could not
have stood alone as a prayer. As an embolism the use would have been
limited to special occasions, but not the weekly eucharistic liturgy,13 Bou-
ley suggests that they first functioned as Christian haggadah. 14
Whereas Ignatius of Antioch15 makes reference to both eucharist and
agape, he does not even allude to the institution narrative. Didache 9 and
10 give texts of prayers which most agree have the structure and content
of a valid eucharistic prayer, yet the narrative is not found. Since Addai
and Mari does not have the eucharistic words, this means that in the Syr-
ian tradition the first time the institution narrative appears outside of
Scripture is in the anaphora of Sharar which is a companion prayer to the
anaphora of Addai and Mari dating from at least the third century.16
The Narrative in Sharar
If the liturgical setting of the institution narrative in the Syrian tradi-
tion is the eucharistic prayer, the earliest witness to that narrative should
reflect strong influence of the Antiochene tradition (Pl/Lk). The text of
the narrative as it appears in Sharar follows:
In the night in which you were betrayed to the Jews, Lord, you took bread
in your pure and holy hands, and lifted your eyes to heaven to your glori-
ous Father; you blessed, sealed, sanctified, Lord, broke, and gave it to your
disciples the blessed Apostles, and said to them, "This bread is my body,
which is broken and given for the life of the world, and will be to those
who take it for forgiveness of debts and pardon of sins; take and eat from
it, and it will be to you for eternal life." Likewise over the cup, Lord, you
praised, glorified, and said, "This cup is my blood of the new covenant,
which is shed for many for forgiveness of sins; take and drink from it, all of
you, and it will be to you for pardon of debts and forgiveness of sins, and
for eternal life." Amen. As often as you eat from this holy body, and drink
from this cup of life and salvation, you will make the memorial of the
death and resurrection of your Lord, until the great day of his coming.
17
Obviously this text does not come from Scripture, nor does it appear
to be a simple expansion of the Antiochene (Pl/Lk) tradition. An analysis
of the text indicates the following: (1) The bread and the cup statements
are constructed so that the description of the action is parallel. Both state-
ments have a relative clause after the identification: "... my body which is
broken and given ... my blood of the new covenant, which is shed for
many ..." Both statements say that the elements are for the "forgiveness of
sins" Both statements are accompanied by a directive, "take and eat from
it, and it will be to you for eternal life ... take and drink from it all of you
and it will be to you for pardon of debts and forgiveness of sins, and for
eternal life." Neither the Antiochene (Pl/Lk) nor the Markan (Mk/Mt)
narratives parallel their statements in this fashion. (2) The account draws
from all four of the biblical narratives, and not just one tradition, and at
times includes things that are found in none of the four accounts. The
bread statement, "took ... blessed ... broke ... and gave to your disciples
... " is closer to the Markan tradition (Mk/Mt). ''This bread is my body"
is in none of the biblical accounts. And the statement which follows,
"which is broken and given ..." is from the Antiochene tradition (Pl/Lk).
The cup statement definitely favors Mark/Matthew. Sharar's "This cup
is my blood of the new covenant ... " is closer to Mark's, "This is ... blood
... " than to Paul/Luke which has, "This is ... covenant ... " Nowhere in
Sharar is found anything close to the command, "Do this for my remem-
The passages agree that it is proper to assign an important liturgical
function to a visiting bishop. But the passages also differ because the
cup described in Didascalia 12? First the text of the passage: in Funk the
Latin reads, "Et in gratia agenda ipse dicat; si autem, cum sit prudens et
honorem tibi reservans, non velit, super calicemdicat.,,21 Brock translates
the section as follows:
... if a bishop, let him sit with the bishop, and be allowed the same honor
with himself; and thou, 0 bishop, shalt desire him to speak to the people
words of instruction ... Thou shalt also permit him to offer the Eucharist;
but if, out of reverence to thee, and as a wise man, to preserve the honor
belonging to thee, he will not offer, at least thou shalt compel him to give
the blessing to the people.
26
109 EMMANUEL J. CUTRONE
And if he (the visiting minister) is a bishop, let him sit with the bishop,
who should accord to him the honor of his rank, even as himself. And do
you, the bishop, invite him to give a homily to your people ... And when
you offer the oblation, let him speak the words; but if he is wise and gives
the honor to ifu, and is unwilling to offer, at least let him speak the words
over the cup.
The passage calls for proper respect to a visiting bishop, who is to be
offered a very important function within the liturgical celebration. Brock
does not comment on the passage, but his translation suggests this mean-
ing: when the eucharistic prayer is said the visiting bishop should be in-
vited to speak that portion of the prayer which recalls the words of Jesus
at the Last Supper, but if he prudently declines this honor, he should at
least speak the cup statement of the eucharistic prayer. This suggests a
concelebration. F.x. Funk interprets the passage differently. He thinks it
means that the visiting bishop should be invited to recite the complete
eucharistic prayer, but if not the whole prayer, then at least the words
over the chalice.
23
Connolly thinks that this cup blessing is in a totally
different liturgical celebration. He says that the tactful visiting bishop,
who refuses to offer the eucharistic prayer, should at least offer the bless-
ing over the cup at the agape.24
The parallel passage in Apostolic Constitutions II,7 can be helpful in un-
derstanding the nature of this cup blessing. Books I-IV of Apostolic Consti-
tutions are, for the most part, a reproduction of Didascalia, with minor
changes reflecting liturgical evolution.
25
As a rule, then, when Apostolic
Constitutions agrees with Didascalia there has been a continuation of the li-
turgical tradition. They disagree when there has been a liturgical change.
The parallel passage to Didascalia 12 is as follows:
brance ..." which is unique to Paul/Luke. On the whole, then, the narra-
tive as it appears in Sharar does not come under the heavy influence of
the Antiochene biblical narratives as might be expected.
Conclusions. There is widespread agreement among biblical scholars
that the institution narrative (Pl/Lk) has a liturgical setting in Antioch
prior to the writing of I Corinthians. Our analysis of the anaphora of
Sharar strongly indicates that the narrative was not originally in the eu-
charistic prayer from New Testament times because if it were we would
expect to find the early textual tradition of the anaphora heavily influ-
enced by that Antiochene tradition (Pl/Lk). But as we have seen above,
that is not the case. It is possible, then, that the original setting of the in-
stitution narrative was outside the eucharistic prayer. A suggestion will
be made below. At a rather early date under influences beyond the Anti-
ochene tradition a narrative was incorporated into the anaphora of Shar-
ar, but not into the Addai and Mari, so that at one and the same time the
Syrian liturgy knew a eucharistic tradition which sometimes did and
sometimes did not include the narrative in the eucharistic prayer. Indica-
tions are that this condition remained down through Cyril in Jerusalem
18
and Theodore in Antioch.
19
Liturgical Use of the Narrative-Another Possibility
While several Church Fathers do appeal to the institution narrative as
they discuss the eucharist, none of these early authors clearly place the
narrative within the eucharistic prayer. When Justin Martyr quotes the
words, "this is my body ... this is my blood ... ,,20 he is not describing the
baptismal eucharist found in I Apology, 65, or the Sunday celebration
elaborated in I Apology, 67, but he is explaining the special character of
the elements received at communion. If I Apology, 66 has any ritual con-
text, it must be the communion rite, and not the eucharistic prayer. Simi-
larly, the direct references to the narrative in Cyril's Mystagogical Cateche-
ses IV and Theodore's Mystagogical Catecheses IV, 1-14 also address the
nature of the elements and the food of communion. When Cyril and The-
odore discuss the eucharistic prayer no reference is made to the narra-
tive. Like Justin, their comments are independent of the anaphora. This
suggests that the earliest liturgical setting of the institution narrative was
in o ~ t i o n with the communion rite and not the eucharistic prayer.
There 1S some further evidence that points in this direction.
. Didascalia Apostolorum 12 and the parallel passage in Apostolic Constitu-
tions II give witness to a blessing which should be allowed only to a visit-
ing bishop. In Didascalia the blessing is over the cup, and in Apostolic Con-
stitutions the blessing is over the people. What is this blessing over the
108 THE INSTITUTION NARRATIVE
When the bishop has concluded the Eucharistic Prayer in this way, he bless-
es the people and wishes them peace; all present make the usual response with
heads bowed in due reverence. When the prayer is completed and all are in-
tent on receiving Holy Communion, the Church herald proclaims: 'Let us at-
tend' ... The bishop announces: 'What is holy for the holy.' For our Lord's body
and blood, which are our food, are indeed holy and immortal and full of
holiness, since the Holy Spirit has come down upon them ... This is why
the bishop says: 'What is holy for the holy,' and urges everyone to recall the
dignity of what is laid on the altar ... 30
What was previously a blessing over the cup for communion has now
become a blessing of the people which Theodore describes as for peace.
If I am correct that the original blessing over the cup served the purpose
of identifying the nature of the elements, a change in that practice would
be possible if the elements were sufficiently identified at another place in
the eucharistic liturgy. As-we know from Apostolic Constitutions VIII, the
eucharistic prayer now has an institution narrative which offers very spe-
cific identification of the elements as the body and blood of Christ for for-
giveness of sins and for covenant. The conclusion of B. Spinks on sacri-
fice in the East Syrian anaphora is also very suggestive. He sees a
ing, or memorial. This prayer, over the bread and the cup, is a commun-
ion prayer. The theme of the prayer is the Passover of Christ to which the
communicant can identify by receiving the elements. As such it serves
the important function of identifying the eucharistic elements in much
the same way Justin did in I Apology 66, and Cyril and Theodore did in
the Mystagogical Catecheses. The themes here are similar to portions of the
narrative that appear in Sharar, " ... my blood of the new covenant which
is shed for many for forgiveness of sins; take and drink from it, all of
you, and it will be to you for pardon of debts and forgiveness of sins,
and for eternal life." Such a prayer would fit the category of a blessing
over the cup that is described in Didascalia 12. Even though there is no
textual evidence, a variation on this communion prayer could very well
have included the institution narrative. If this is the case, the early Syrian
eucharistic tradition knew a communion blessing which at least con-
tained themes from the Passover of Christ and possible the institution
narrative.
As indicated above, by the time of Apostolic Constitutions this blessing
of the cup became a blessing of the people. In the Mystagogical Catecheses
of Theodore there is specific mention of a blessing of the people after the
eucharistic prayer and before communion. The explanation of that bless-
ing by Theodore contains themes similar to those found in the prayer of
Jude Thomas.
111 EMMANUEL J. CUTRONE
blessing over the cup in Didascalia has become a blessing over the people
in Apostolic Constitutions. The context indicates that this blessing takes
place within the eucharistic celebration, and not at another liturgical
gathering. Even though the agape is still practiced at this time
27
there is
no indication in Apostolic Constitutions that the blessing refers to the
agape. In Book VIII there is further evidence that a visiting bishop was
assigned four eulogies at the eucharistic celebration.
28
Thus, it is not unu-
sual to have the presiding bishop share different prayers of the eucharis-
tic liturgy with a visiting bishop, a condition already practiced at the
time of Didascalia. This l s s i n ~ originally of the cup and later of the
people, must have taken place dUring the eucharistic celebration, and not
during the agape. On the strength of the parallel passage in Apostolic
Constitutions 11, Didascalia 12 can be interpreted as follows: the visiting
bishop is invited to pray the eucharistic prayer, but if he refuses to say
the eucharistic prayer, let him then at least say the blessing over the cup,
which is a blessing that takes place at another time, but still within the
eucharistic celebration. Is it possible to identify this blessing further?
There is evidence in the Syrian liturgical tradition of prayers and
blessings which are directly related to the distribution of the elements.
First of all, the Acts of Jude Thomas gives a description of a blessing at the
table with the newly baptized.
And after they had been baptized and were come up, he brought bread
and the mingled cup; and spake a blessing over it and said: ''The holy
Body, which was crucified for our sake, we eat, and Thy life-giving Blood,
which was shed for our sake, we drink. Let thy Body be to us for life, and
thy Blood for the remission of sins. For the gall which thou drankest for us,
let the bitterness of our enemy be taken away from us. And for thy drink-
ing vinegar for our sake, let our weakness be strengthened. And (for) the
spit which thou didst receive for us, let us receive thy perfect life. And be-
cause Thou didst receive the crown of thorns for us, let us receive from
thee the crown that withereth not. And because Thou wast wrapped in a
linen cloth for us, let us be girt with Thy mighty strength, which cannot be
overcome. And because Thou was buried in a new sepulchre for our mor-
tality, let us too receive intercourse with thee in Heaven. And as Thou
didst arise, let us be raised, and let us stand before Thee at the judgment of
truth." And he brake the Eucharist, gave to Vizan and Tertia, and to Mana-
shar and Sifur and Mygdonia and to the wife and daughter of Sifur and
said: "Let this Eucharist be to you for life and rest and joy and health, and
for the healing of your soul and of your bodies." and they said, "Amen;,,29
110 THE INSTITUTION NARRATIVE
This prayer, which is a series of petitions, does not correspond to any
known structure of a eucharistic prayer. There is no blessing, thanksgiv-
Notes
now be understood as the first anaphora in the Syrian tradition to incor-
porate the institution narrative into the eucharistic prayer. But for a long
time the Syrian tradition was satisfied to leave the narrative as a com-
munion statement. This explains a tradition known by Cyril of Jerusa-
lem and Theodore of Mopsuestia who seem to be the last witnesses of
an earlier form of the eucharistic prayer. By the fifth century the narra-
tive migrates from the communion statement into the eucharistic prayer.
Only the Anaphora of Addai and Mari remains as a vestige of an an-
cient tradition.
1. William F. Macomber, ''The Oldest Known Text of the Anaphora of the
Apostles Addai and Mari," Orientalia Christiana Periodica 32 (1%6) 335-371.
2. For the bibliography on Addai and Mari prior to 1966, confer my article,
''The Anaphora of the Apostles: Implications of the Mar Esa 'ya Text," Theological
Studies 34 (1973) 624642; and for a good presentation of the present issues see,
Brian D. Spinks, Addai and Mari-the Anaphora of the Apostles: A Text for Students,
Grove Liturgical Study 24 (Bramcote Notts, 1980).
3. William Macomber, ''The Maronite and Chaldean Versions of the Anaph-
ora of the Apostles," Orientalia Christiana Periodica 37 (1971) 55-84; ''The Ancient
Form of the Anaphora of the Apostles," East of Byzantium: Syria and Armenia in
the Formative Period (Dumbarton Oaks Symposium, 1980) (Washington D.e,
1982) 73-88.
4. Herman Wegman, "Genealogie hypothetiques de la priere eucharis-
tiques," Questions liturgiques 61 (1980) 263-278.
5. Mazza concludes, "Non abbiamo elementi per dire che la liturgia com-
mentata da Teodoro avesse il racconto dell'istituzione, inteso come racconto
dell'ultima cena che comporta le parole stesse del Signore." Enrico Mazza, "La
Struttura dell'anafora nelle Catechesi di Teodoro di Mopsuestia," Presiedere alIa
Caritti: Studi in onore di S.E. Mons. Giberto Baroni, E. Mazza e D. Gianotti, eds. (Ge-
nova, 1988) 66-93. I have argued that Cyril's Mystagogical Catecheses demonstrate
the same condition existed in Jerusalem toward the end of the fourth century. RJ.
Cutrone, "Cyril's Mystagogical Catecheses and the Evolution of the Jerusalem
Anaphora," Orientalia Christiana Periodica 44 (1978) 52-64.
6. J.-P. Audet, "Literary Forms and Contents of the Normal eucharistia in the
First Century," Studia Evangelica (1957) 643-662.
7. The list of scholars is very long. It includes: Botte, Bouyer, Ledogar, Ligier,
Talley, Cuming, Wegman, Spinks, Giraudo, Mazza, just to mention a few.
8. Two of the more significant articles of Talley on this subject are: "From Be-
rakah to Eucharistia: A Reopening Question," Worship 50 (1976) 115-137; "The
Literary Structure of the Eucharistic Prayer," Worship 58 (1984) 404-420.
9. Enrico Mazza, The Eucharistic Prayers of the Roman Rite, trans., Matthew J.
O'Connell (New York, 1986) 22-29.
10. In 1973 L. Ligier suggested that it might be possible to begin with the
113 EMMANUEL J. CUTRONE
Summary
112 THE INSTITUTION NARRATIVE
connection between offering and the recital of the words of institution in
both the anaphora of Nestorius and that of Theodore of Mopsuestia.
31
It
could be that the motivation for the introduction of the narrative into the
eucharistic prayer is related to greater attention to the themes of offering
and sacrifice. A cup statement similar to that found in Jude Thomas or
one that contained an institution narrative would be redundant. Rather
than eliminate the blessing altogether, since it is not normal liturgical ev-
olution to simplify, the blessing takes on a new function which still
stands in relation to communion-the people, not the elements are
blessed.
From the sources it is possible to establish the following. (1) The insti-
tution narrative has a liturgical setting in the Syrian tradition from the
very earliest times. (2) The first instance of the institution narrative in a
Syrian anaphora (Sharar) does not demonstrate heavy influence from the
Paul/Luke narrative. (3) At an early time there was an important bless-
ing over the cup which took place dUring the eucharistic liturgy. (4) The
Syrian tradition also knew a communion blessing over the elements
which has strong themes of the passion of Christ. (5) By the end of the
fourth century the communion blessing changed to a blessing over the
people. (6) The Mystagogical Catecheses of Cyril of Jerusalem and Theo-
dore of Mopsuestia make direct reference to the institution narrative
only when they discuss the elements and/or communion.
In light of the above, and because of the strong evidence that the Syri-
an tradition did know a eucharistic prayer without an institution narra-
tive (Addai and Mari, and the witness of Cyril of Jerusalem and Theo-
dore. of Mopsuestia), I suggest the possibility of the following: the
blessmg over the elements before communion originally contained the
institution narrative. This prayer served the function of specifying the
nature of the elements and of communion. Toward the end of the fourth
century the narrative migrates from the communion blessing into the eu-
charistic prayer, possibly to further highlight the sacrificial character of
eucharistic worship. The blessing before communion is redefined as a
blessing of the people.
. While the evidence to support the above suggestion is rather tenuous,
It does help clarify several nagging problems in the Syrian eucharistic
tradition. First, it explains how the narrative could have been in the Syri-
an liturgical tradition from the very beginning and not part of the eu-
charistic prayer. Second, it offers a further explanation of the absence of
the narrative from the anaphora of Addai and Mari. Third, Sharar can
114 THE INSTITUTION NARRATIVE
narrative as it appears in the anaphora and attempt to trace its function back to
the New Testament. But Ligier admitted that such an approach has serious limi-
tations. Louis Ligier, "The Origins of the Eucharistic Prayer: From the Last Sup-
per to the Eucharist," Studia Liturgica 9 (1973) 161-185.
11. Xavier Leon-Dufour Sharing the Eucharistic Bread: The Witness of the New
Testament (New York, 1986) 82-101.
12. Bouley, From Freedom to Formula 73.
13. Roger Beckwith, Daily and Weekly Worship: Jewish to Christian, Alcuin/
Grow Liturgical Study 1 (Bramcote Notts, 1987) 32.
14. Bouley, From Freedom to Formula 74.
15. Smy. 7.
16. Bryan D. Spinks, "The Original Form of the Anaphora of the Apostles: A
Suggestion in Light of Maronite Sharar," Ephemerides Liturgicae 91 (1977) 146-161.
17. R.eD. Jasper and G.J. Cuming, Prayers of the Eucharist: Early and Reformed,
third edition, revised and enlarged (NewYork, 1987) 48.
18. Cutrone, "Cyril's Mystagogical Catecheses and the Evolution of the Jerusa-
lem Anaphora," Orientalia Christiana Periodica 44 (1978) 52-64.
19. Mazza, "La Struttura ... di Mopsuestia."
20. I Apology 66.
21. EX. Funk, Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum (Paderborn, 1905) 168.
22. Sebastian Brock and Michael Vasey, The Liturgical Portions of the Didascalia,
Grove Liturgical Study 29 (Bramcote Notts, 1982) 16.
23. "Episcopus peregrinus ergo, si non eucharistiam totam celebrabat, saltem
calicem consecrare debeat." F.X. Funk, Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum
(Paderborn, 1905) 168-169, nt.
24. R. Hugh Connolly, Didascalia Apostolorum: The Syriac Version Translated and
Accompanied by the Verona Latin Fragments (Oxford) liiL
25. See David A. Fiensy, Prayers Alleged to be Jewish: An Examination of the Con-
stitutiones Apostolorum, Brown Judaic Studies 65 (Chico, CA, 1985) 20-21.
26. AC 11,7,58. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7, 422. Also found in Funk, Didascalia et
Constitutiones Apostolorum 168.
27. Roger Beckwith, Daily and Weekly Worship: Jewish to Christian, Alcuin/
Grow Liturgical Study 1 (Bramcote Notts, 1987) 35-36.
28. "Those eulogies which remain at the mysteries, let the deacons distribute
them among the clergy, ... to a bishop, four parts; to a presbyter, three parts; to a
deacon, two parts; and to the rest of the sub-deacons, or readers, or singers, or dea-
conesses, one part. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God that every
one be honored according to his dignity;" VIII, 31. Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 7, 494.
29. No. 158. Ads ofJude Thomas, A. Klijn, ed. (Leiden, 1%2) 149-50.
30. V, 22. From Edward Yarnold, The Awe-Inspiring Rites of Initiation: Baptismal
Homilies of the Fourth Century (London, 1971) 251.
31. Bryan D. Spinks, "Eucharistic Offering in the East Syrian Anaphoras,"
Orientalia Christiana Periodica 50 (1984) 362-365.