einen ist dies die nachdrückliche Erinnerung an die Materialität der biblischen Überlieferung. Angesichts der Präsenz großartiger und unverzichtbarer kritischer Editionen kann der Umstand, dass wir das Neue Testament (und die Bibel insgesamt) nur in der Form vielfältiger Manuskripte „besitzen“, leicht in Vergessenheit geraten. Die biblischen Manuskripte sind keineswegs bloßes Rohmaterial, aus dem nur das Eigentliche des auszulegenden Textes zu gewinnen ist, vielmehr kommt ihnen eine eigene historische und theologische Dignität zu, die durch eine Neuausrichtung der Textkritik in den letzten Jahrzehnten wieder verstärkte Beachtung gefunden hat.1
Zum anderen macht Trobischs Entwurf hinsichtlich des 2 Petr darauf aufmerksam, dass sich in diesem Brief weit mehr als ein bloßer Randtext des Neuen Testaments erkennen lässt. Auf der Basis der wahrgenommenen Vielfalt seiner intertextuellen Verknüpfungen stellt sich nun die Aufgabe, 2 Petr, dessen intensive polemische Prägung eine bleibend schwierige hermeneutische Herausforderung bildet, noch konsequenter als Text des zweiten Jahrhunderts zu lesen, dessen nächste Verwandten2 sich nicht nur unter den später kanonisch gewordenen neutestamentlichen Schriften befinden. Als ein bemerkenswerter Text, der geschätzt, benutzt und überliefert, jedoch auch bezweifelt und scharf abgelehnt wurde, wird 2 Petr weiterhin die spannende Erforschung der Geschichte des neutestamentlichen Kanons in besonderer Weise begleiten.
No Liturgical Need for a Gospel in the Second Century
Clemens Leonhard
1 Questions and Presuppositions
One of the most important arguments against the assumption that the canonical Gospels were composed in the latter half of the second century (based upon an original text written by a well-known author Marcion of Sinope) would emphasize that the Gospels had already been used in the performance of Christian liturgies.1 While it may be argued that the weekly meetings of Justin’s group in Rome contained readings of the Gospels, no earlier text even hints at this idea.2 It may be claimed that these texts were written in order to be read in liturgies. Thus, first century origins of these texts seem to point to first century liturgies where they were read. At the same time such ancient liturgies require the early existence of the Gospels. The mutual confirmation of these two groups of assumptions is not, however, more persuasive than any other bit of circular reasoning. Even though the scarcity of extant data occasionally justifies such arguments, the following paper is designed to show that the history of Christian liturgies does not require the existence of the Gospels in any form or precursor before the later second century. The assumption that there was no need for a Gospel text in the first and early second centuries C.E. does not prove that the Gospels did not exist. However, it prohibits the argument from liturgical use in order to support an early date of the Gospels.
At the same time, the following paper puts theories to the test that argue for second century origins of the Gospels. While it shows that some developments of Christian liturgies can be explained in this paradigm, it does not support, but presuppose it. This line of reasoning requires, nevertheless, a reversal of the burden of proof. It requires good reasons to claim an e.g. first century reading of Gospel texts in Christian groups.
The essay proceeds from two basic assumptions. First, eligible cases must hint at ritualized (formalized, standardized, repeated, etc.) performances of Gospel readings.3 A ritual use of a text can only be inferred from other sources than the text itself. Second, a ritualized use of texts par excellence is the “Service of the Word” or the “Liturgy of the Word”—modern designations for the sequence of ritual acts preceding the celebration of the Eucharist (as the first part of the mass in the Catholic Church or the Divine Liturgy of the Oriental Churches). The reading of a passage from the Gospels is the point of culmination of the Liturgy of the Word. Such ritualized Gospel readings did/do not play an important role on other occasions than the Liturgy of the Word, although structures like the Liturgy of the Word were attached to various liturgical performances much later.4 Thus, the following inquiry will start with the search for Liturgies of the Word (as combined with the celebration of the Eucharist) which contain a proclamation of the Gospel by definition.
2 Celebrations of Liturgies of the Word
When (and why) did Christians begin to perform ritualized readings of Gospel texts within liturgies of prayer and Scripture readings? A cursory glance upon the ancient sources allows one to map the development.
2.1 East of Byzantium in the Fifth Century
Reinhard Meßner observes that the East Syrian churches of the Sassanian Empire adopted the Western custom to celebrate a Liturgy of the Word as preceding the celebration of Eucharists in the early fifth century.1 Texts from Eastern synods hint at the fact that Eastern congregations continued to celebrate the Eucharists as (more or less stylized) banquets without preceding Liturgies of the Word. The adoption of the Western custom to add a Liturgy of the Word to every Sunday celebration of the Eucharist and to stop the performance of sympotic Eucharists in houses and apparently also in church buildings led to the dissemination of the Liturgy of the Word East of Byzantium.
Gerard Rouwhorst claims that the practice of reading the Holy Scriptures links Judaism and Christianity, because no other community of the ancient world would perform such services.2 This is indisputably true as long as one understands reading services in terms of highly ritualized performances in Christianity and Judaism as they are attested at the end of late Antiquity. Taken in a broader perspective which comprises also less ritualized activities than Christian and Jewish Liturgies of the Word—activities like study sessions of groups of philosophers—Jewish and Christian liturgies lose this kind of uniqueness. Second century Christian as well as Rabbinic groups were firmly rooted within their cultural environment. Groups like Justin’s (who did not know a Liturgy of the Word in a strict sense) understood themselves as philosophers. They occupied themselves with important texts and composed and extemporized pieces of explanatory rhetoric.
Meßner’s analysis is important for the present purpose, because it shows that the connection of the Eucharist with a Liturgy of the Word was not ubiquitous in the first half of the first millennium C.E. Furthermore, reading of texts from the (canonical) Gospels (and apparently not from the Diatessaron etc.) was regarded as a typical if not indispensable component of Liturgies of the Word.
2.2 The Apostolic Constitutions (Late Fourth Century)
Somewhat further to the West—from Seleucia-Ctesiphon towards Antioch—the second and eighth books of the Apostolic Constitutions contain obvious attestations of a standardized form of the Eucharist preceded by a Liturgy of the Word.1 It mentions the reading of “the Law and the Prophets, our [i.e. the Apostles’] Letters, the Acts and the Gospels”2 by a presbyter or deacon and “Moses, Joshua, Judges, Kings, Chronicles, the Return (from the exile, i.e. Ezra); then the writings of Job and Salomon and the sixteen Prophets” followed by the singing of the “hymns of David”, the Acts of the Apostles, Pauline Letters concluded by the Gospels, whose reading is elevated over the other scriptural texts by different liturgical means;3 “the Law, the Prophets, and the Gospel”4, or “Prophets and Gospel”5. Each of the readings is followed by the singing of Psalms. A sermon may be added.6 After the dismissal of the catechumens,7 the assembly prays. The deacons prepare the gifts and men and women exchange the kiss of peace separately. The deacon pronounces intercessions and the bishop blesses the people. The celebration of the Eucharist follows.
These texts assume that the bishop’s church owns a considerable series of books for the performance of the liturgy. They do not address the question how less affluent congregations celebrated Liturgies of the Word. Its representativity is (as often in this genre) debatable. In this system, mostly Old Testament readings precede the reading of the Gospels—the obvious point of culmination
