Pseudo-Titus letter

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
First lines of the Pseudo-Titus-Brief, Folio 84r of the manuscript Mpth.f.28 of the Würzburg University Library.

The pseudo-Titus letter or the letter of the pupil of Paul Titus is a pseudo- epigraphic Christian script. The letter to Titus in the New Testament must be distinguished from him .

The pseudo-Titus letter presents itself as a letter from Titus and contains numerous quotations from Apocrypha and the Bible . The author attaches particular importance to the virgin life and is downright hostile to marriage. The writing originated in ascetic circles and is based on other ascetic writings from the environment of Hieronymus and Cyprian . These circles are said to be to be found in the Priscillian movement of the 5th century in Spain, which arose in the wake of Priscillian. The Latin text has errors that distort the meaning and is incomprehensible in places, so that a translation without conjectures is not possible.

Lore

The text is preserved in a single manuscript from the last quarter of the 8th century, in the so-called Homiliar of Burkard . The script contains the homilies of Caesarius of Arles . The manuscript was probably in the possession of Burkard, who was an Anglo-Saxon missionary in the retinue of Boniface and the first bishop of Würzburg . It is kept in the University Library of Würzburg under the signature Mpth.f.28. It comprises 99 sheets of sheep parchment in the format 26.2 × 18 cm.

exploration

Beginnings

As early as 1729, Johann Georg von Eckhart noted in his comments a deviating piece that protrudes from the rest of the text in the manuscript. Germain Morin drew attention to the piece in 1896, but only Donatien De Bruyne realized the importance. In 1907, De Bruyne first published a series of quotations including some comments, including on the Manichaean origin of writing. Carl Schmidt denied the Manichean character in 1924 and considered a Priscillian origin to be likely.

Donatien De Bruyne

It was not until 1925 that De Bruyne published the - as far as possible - exact text and an accompanying treatise. He complained about the "dreadful text form, about the barbaric copyists and about the difficult to understand meaning". He considered a Greek original to be likely, "translated by a barbarian who understood just as little Greek as Latin," and assumed a North African origin. The script was written as a sermon by Titus, a student of Paul, and was circulated as an epistle . The forgery goes back to the author. The letter is addressed to people who clung to the apocryphal Acts and who used an unauthorized Bible text. The script would have had a single purpose: to forbid male ascetics and consecrated virgins from living together. The authors and readers are heretics . A number of observations suggest that Manichaeans were the origin, but nothing definite can be said about the time of origin.

Adolf Harnack

In 1925, Adolf Harnack advanced research significantly . He was particularly interested in the more than 120 quotations from the Bible and the Apocrypha. Harnack speaks of a text quality "which is an excellent sample not only of the later vulgar Latin , but also of the ignorance of barbaric copyists (with reading and hearing errors)". The copyist already writes in the heading “Epistala” instead of “Epistula”. The work is full of exclamations , "which do not bring anything special, one is only amazed at the author's ability to vary the same thought thirty times". According to Harnack, writing has only one purpose and is aimed at a circle of like-minded people, not outsiders. The coexistence of male and female ascetics is being fought. The scriptures go beyond the most hostile church fathers, even through Jerome . Only ascetics are true Christians and marriage is not compatible with true Christianity. The document came from a Christian conventic community that was heretical at least in terms of marriage, but did not want to break completely with the church. The form of the document appears as a letter from Titus, but it is neither a letter nor does it have anything to do with Titus. Everything that belongs to a letter is missing: author, addressee, greeting, etc. The font is "undoubtedly designed as an admonitorial sermon that is neither a letter nor wants to be one". Harnack states that the Scriptures contain no reference to or have anything to do with Paul or Titus. This leads Harnack to the conclusion that the title was later suppressed - according to a statement by Hieronymus in a comment on Tit 2,7  EU that Titus remained a virgin. The title could also come from the Catholic tradition and would have originated sometime up to the 8th century. Harnack proves that the script is not a translation from the Greek, but a Latin original. De Bruynes' arguments for African origin are not valid. Harnack assumes the Occident as the place of origin.

Scripture quoted by Harnack following apocrypha : Apocryphon of Enoch , Noah story , the books of the patriarchs, Apocalypse of Elias , Apocryphon of Solomon , Apocryphon of Isaiah, Didache , Acta Pauli cum Theclae , Acta Petri , Acta Andreae , Acta Joannis , Epistula Apostolorum , as well as from the New and Old Testament. The author had a large number of apocryphal writings at his disposal; he regarded them as a fully valid authority alongside the canonical writings; many of the quotations are nowhere else attested. The biblical quotations do not come from the Vulgate , but from an old Latin translation . The subject matter of the work allows only one conclusion: the writing is either Manichaean or Priscillian. Manichaean cannot be, because the scriptures use quotations from the Old Testament, which is an exclusion criterion for Manicheanism , and there are no references to Manichaean teachings or customs. The Priscillians are accused of preferring apocryphal writings to canonical and that they base their errors on them. The so-called "spiritual marriages" denounced by this script were also found among the Priscillians. Harnack assumes the earlier period of Priscillianism as the time of origin, but the font was not written by Priscillian, which can be seen in the completely different style. The “perfect ones” of the sermon do not live monastic, monasticism is completely left aside, and so with some caution he dates it between 400 and 450 rather than between 500 and 550. The apocryphal acts of the apostles had authority up to the 5th century, were in the Church services read out and only disappeared towards the end of the 5th century.

Aurelio de Santos Otero

Aurelio de Santos Otero examined the literary environment, the anti-Tisyneis literature, that is, literature that speaks out against coexistence, and found relationships with the Latin works of pseudo-Cyprian, Hieronymus and pseudo-Hieronymus. However, the Greek authors Basilius the Elder were not used . Size , Gregor von Nazianz and Johannes Chrysostom , which would be obvious in the case of a basic Greek script on this topic and thus largely excludes a basic Greek script. Otero found close relationships with like-minded Catholic scriptures and attested the scripture “fundamental orthodoxy” despite exaggerations and generous use of the Apocrypha, and also complete agreement with the official Spanish Church in condemning the Priscillian bad habit. De Santos Otero therefore pleads against inclusion in the Priscillian scriptures and sees only a loose connection with the Priscillian movement. There is an old ascetic tendency in Spain that originated from Cyprian and Hieronymus and was manifested in the decisions on priestly celibacy at the Synod of Elvira . Like Harnack, he sets the date of origin to be between 400 and 450. Against Harnack, Otero considers the heading to be genuine, because Pseudo-Hieronymus Ep. 42 uses the authority of Titus, so that the title is taken from there.

literature

Web links

Remarks

  1. ↑ Hans Thurn : The parchment manuscripts of the former cathedral library. (= The manuscripts of the Würzburg University Library, vol. 3, half 1) Harrassowitz, Wiesbaden 1984, pp. 19–21 ( full text ).
  2. ↑ Commentarii De Rebus Franciae vol. 1, p. 837 ff. In particular p. 845, para. XXXVIIIhttp: //vorlage_digitalisat.test/1%3D~GB%3DQJJnn-oAT4wC%26hl~IA%3D~MDZ%3D%0A~SZ%3DPA845~ double-sided%3D~LT%3DS.%20845%2C%20Abs.% 20XXXVIII ~ PUR% 3D .
  3. ↑ Germain Morin: L'Homéliaire de Burchard de Würzburg , p. 110 to section XLIII. He notes that the text contains pieces from various apocrypha.
  4. ↑ Harnack, p. 181.
  5. ↑ Harnack pp. 181-182.
  6. ↑ Harnack, p. 182.
  7. ↑ Harnack, p. 185.
  8. ↑ Harnack pp. 189-190.
  9. ↑ Harnack p. 211.
  10. ↑ Harnack pp. 191-192.
  11. ↑ Harnack is based on a quote from an otherwise unknown script.
  12. ↑ Harnack pp. 192-205.
  13. ↑ Harnack, p. 205.
  14. ↑ Harnack p. 210.
  15. ↑ The titles are: Pseudo-Cyprian: De Singularitate Clericorum ; De Centesima ; Jerome: Ep 117; Pseudo-Hieronymus: Ep 42 Ad Oceanum .