CANONS OF).
The Constitutions fall into three main divisions. (I) The first of these consists of books i.–vi., and throughout runs parallel to the Didascalia. (2) Then follows book vii., the first 31 chapters of which are an adaptation of the Didache, while the rest contain various liturgical forms of which the origin is still uncertain. (3 ) Book viii. is more composite and falls into three parts. The first two chapters, irepi xapeaµaTCov, may be based upon a lost work of St. Hippolytus, otherwise known only by a reference to it in the preface of the Verona Latin Fragments; and an examination shows that this is highly probable. The next section, cc. 3-27, rrepi and cc. 28-46, rep' KavovWP is twofold, and is evidently that upon which the writer sets most store. The apostles no longer speak jointly, but one by one in an apostolic council, and the section closes with a joint decree of them all. They speak of the ordination of bishops (the so-called Clementine Liturgy is that which is directed to be used at the consecration of a bishop, cc. 5-15), of presbyters, deacons, deaconesses, sub-deacons and lectors, and then pass on to confessors, virgins, widows and exor cists; after which follows a series of canons on various subjects, and liturgical formulae. The third section consists of the Apostolic Canons already referred to, the last and most significant of which places the Constitutions and the two epistles of Clement in the canon of Scripture, and omits the Apocalypse. They are derived in part from the preceding Constitutions, in part from the canons of the councils of Antioch, 341, Nicaea, 325, and possibly Laodi caea, 363.
Who, then, is the author of the Constitutions, and what can be inferred with regard to him ? (i ) By separating off the sources which he used from his own additions to them, it at once becomes clear that the latter are the work of one man : the style is unmis takable, and the method of working is the same throughout. The compiler of books i.–vi. is also the compiler of books vii. and viii. (2) As to his theological position, different views have been held. He betrays a strong subordinationist tendency, together with a denial of a human soul to Christ, and the like, which suggest not indeed Arianism but an inclination towards Arianism; and his polemic is directed against the dying heresies of the 3rd century. All this points to the position of a "conservative" or semi-Arian of the East, one who belongs, perhaps, to the circle of Lucian of Antioch and writes before the time of Julian. It is hard to think of any other time or circumstances in which a man could write like this. (3) The indications of time have been held to point to a different conclusion. In the cycle of feasts occur the names of several which are probably of later date—e.g., Christmas and St. Stephen, which were introduced at Antioch c. A.D. 378 and 379 respectively; and Epiphanius (c. A.D. 374) appears to be un acquainted with it; he still quotes from the Didascalia, and elabo rately explains it away where it is contrary to the usages of his own day. But as regards the former point, it is possible that the Apostolical Constitutions gave rise to these festivals; or, on the other hand, that the two passages were subsequently introduced either by the writer himself or by some other hand, when the last book of the Constitutions was being used as a law-book. And as regards the latter, the fact that Epiphanius does not use the Constitutions is no proof that they had not yet been compiled. (4) As to the region of composition there is no real doubt. It was clearly the East, Syria or Palestine. Many indications are against the latter, and Syria is strongly suggested by the use of the Syro-Macedonian calendar. Moreover, the writer represents the Roman Clement as the channel of communication between the apostles and the Church. This fact both supplies him with the name by which he is commonly known, Pseudo-Clement, and also furnishes corroboration of his Syrian birth ; since the other spu rious writings bearing the name of Clement, the Homilies and Recognitions, are likewise of Syrian origin.
It seems clear, then, that the compiler was a Syrian, and that he also wrote the spurious Ignatian epistles; he was likewise probably a semi-Arian of the school of Lucian of Antioch. His date is given by Harnack as A.D. 34o-36o, with a leaning to 340 343 ; by Lightfoot as the latter half of the 4th century; by Bright man, 370-380; by Maclean, 375; and by Funk as the beginning of the 5th century.