Doxology (δοξολογία, only in eccl. Greek)
The name is given to brief forms of praise to God (or to Christ, or to the Trinity) used in early Christianity, the models of which were taken over from Judaism. They sometimes occur as a momentary interruption in the midst of a discourse, a sudden breaking forth of praise at the mention of the name of God, of which 2 Corinthians 11:31 is an example. We shall consider the most important of these in chronological order. 1.Galatians 1:5 .-The appropriate ascription of praise to the Father for His redemption of mankind according to His will, wherein is revealed His attributes of wisdom, holiness, love, in which for us His glory chiefly consists. 2.Romans 11:36 .-The ‘all things’ are the things which have to do only with the kingdom of grace to which He has invited Jew and Gentile, and the doxology is the natural climax of praise for such wisdom and love; the ‘Him’ refers to God, not to Christ; v. 34 is an echo of Isaiah 40:13, and v. 35 of Job 41:11, and the first part of v. 36 cannot have Trinitarian reference, as the context does not suit. ‘It is the relation of the Godhead as a whole to the universe and to created things. God (not necessarily the Father) is the source and inspirer and goal of all things.’* [Note: Sanday-Headlam, Romans 5 (ICC, 1902), p. 340.] 3.Romans 16:27 .-While grammatically the ‘to whom’ (ᾧ, if it be retained) could refer to Christ, and while according to the spirit and even language of the NT there is no objection to such reference, it is quite certain that the pronoun refers to the ‘only wise God,’ as that is in accordance with the whole purpose of the writer. It is the most fitting close to the Epistle, as it embodies the faith from which its central chapters proceed.† [Note: See F. J. A. Hort in JPh iii. [1870] 56; and for a convincing discussion of the genuineness of this doxology See E. H. Gifford in Speaker’s Com., ‘Romans,’ 1881, pp. 22-27.] The dislocation of the language is probably to be explained by the intense spiritual feeling of the writer, who, without waiting to clear the matter up, bursts out into the usual doxology to God. 4.Ephesians 3:21 .-It is the glory which is due to God and befits Him. It is rendered ‘in the Church’ as the special domain where God is interested, viz. in a social brotherhood having organic life in Christ-the praise not being a thing of secular or voluntary ritual, but having its life and reason only in Christ and in a society redeemed and possessed by Him. 5.Philippians 4:20 .-Notice here also the emphasis: the glory, that glory which is His attribute and element. 6. 1 Timothy 1:17 .-Here we find echoes of Jewish forms: To 13:6, 10, Enoch ix. 4, Revelation 15:3 . The thought and phraseology are Hebraic. Bengel thought the AEons had indirect reference to Gnosticism, but this is not necessary. 7. 2 Timothy 4:18 .-‘The Lord’ here refers to Christ (cf. 17), to whom this doxology is addressed.* [Note: See N. J. D. White, EGT, ‘2 Tim.,’ 1910, p. 183.] 8. Hebrews 13:21 .-This doxology may be to the ‘God of peace’ of v. 20, but it is both more natural and more grammatical to refer it to Christ, immediately preceding. Throughout the whole Epistle the latter has been constantly before the mind of the writer. 9. 1 P 4:11 .-Hart well remarks that the insertion of ‘is’ (ἐ στ ὶ ν) changes the doxology to a statement of fact, and thus supports the interpretation of ‘whose’ (ᾧ) as referring to the immediate antecedent, Jesus Christ, which seems also otherwise required. The thought is: already He possesses the glory and victory; therefore (v. 12) Christians endure joyfully their present suffering,† [Note: J. H. A. Hart, EGT, ‘1 Pet.’ 1910, p. 73.] 10. 1 P 5:11 .-This refers to God, and ‘dominion’ is emphasized as a consolation on account of the persecution. 11. 2 P 3:18 .-Here we have another doxology to Christ. ‘For ever’ signifies lit. [Note: it. literally, literature.] ‘unto the day of eternity,’ and occurs only here. Cf. Sir 18:10 . Bigg makes the point that ε ἰ ς το ὺ ς α ἰῶ νας (‘unto the ages’) became so immediately the ruling phrase that this doxology cannot have been written after liturgical expressions became in any degree stereotyped. 12.Jude 1:25 .-‘Majesty’ (elsewhere Hebrews 1:3 only) and ‘power’ are unusual in doxologies, 13.Revelation 1:5 , Revelation 1:6 . -‘The adoration of Christ, which vibrates in this doxology, is one of the most impressive features of the book. The prophet feels that the one hope for the loyalists of God in this period of trial is to be conscious that they owe everything to the redeeming love of Jesus. Faithfulness depends on faith, and faith is rallied by the grasp not of itself but of its object. Mysterious explanations of history follow, but it is passionate devotion to Jesus, and not any skill in exploring prophecy, which proves the source of moral heroism in the churches. Jesus sacrificed himself for us; α ὐ τ ῷ ἡ δόξα . From this inward trust and wonder, which leap up at the sight of Jesus and His grace, the loyalty of Christians flows.’‡ [Note: J. Moffatt, EGT, ‘Rev.,’ 1910, p. 339, also art. in Expositor, 6th ser., v. 302 ff.] 14.Revelation 5:13 .-God and Christ (‘the Lamb’) are linked together in this doxology, as often in thought among the early Christians (John 17:3, 1 Timothy 2:5, Revelation 7:10 : ‘salvation unto our God who sitteth on the throne, and unto the Lamb’). 15, Revelation 7:12 .-It is a fine saying of Rabbi Pinchas and Rabbi Jochanan on Psalms 100:2 . ‘Though all offerings cease in the future, the offering of praise alone shall not cease; though all prayers cease, thanksgiving alone shall not cease.’
A famous passage often Interpreted as a doxology either to Christ or to God the Father is Romans 9:5 . For referring all words after ‘of whom’ (or ‘from whom,’ ἐ ξ ὧ ν) to Christ it may be argued that: (a) it supplies the antithesis which ‘according to the flesh’ supports, and (b) it is grammatically better, for ὁ ὤ ν (‘he being’) naturally applies to what precedes: the person who is over all is naturally the person first mentioned. If we punctuate so as to read ‘God who is over all,’ there are objection: (1) ὤ ν would in that case be abnormal, and (2) ‘blessed’ would he unparalleled in position, as it ought to stand first in the sentence as in Ephesians 1:3 and in the LXX [Note: XX Septuagint.] . Besides, the doxology to God seems here without a motive, without either psychological or rhetorical reason, a solecism which jars on the harmonies of St. Paul’s pen. Then almost all the ancient interpreters, whatever their views, referred the whole to Christ. From consideration of language Socinus consented. Against this Strömann argues* [Note: ZNTW, 1907, pp. 4, 319.] that (i.) ‘God. blessed for ever’ occurs frequently in the OT (though that does not prevent the predicate from being also used for Christ in the NT); (ii.) ‘blessed for ever’ is used for God in Romans 1:25 (but similar expressions are also given to Christ in the NT [See above], and when once the possibility is granted, each case must be judged on its merits); (iii.) where ‘blessed’ is used in the NT it is always used of God (but exactly equivalent expressions are used also of Christ). It is true that the fact of St. Paul’s not calling Christ ‘God’ outright, but even making a distinction (1 Corinthians 8:6), strikes Meyer and Denney† [Note: Meyer, Com. in loc.; Denney, EGT, ‘Rom.,’ 1900, p. 658.] so strongly that they Cannot allow the interpretation here. but to this theological argument it may be replied that passages like 2 Corinthians 4:4; 2 Corinthians 13:14, Colossians 1:13-20, Philippians 2:5-11 ascribe no less dignity to Christ than if St. Paul had used ‘God’ of Him. While a Christian Jew would ordinarily use ‘God’ for the Father, and ‘Lord’ for Christ, he might also use ‘Lord’ for the Father (1 Corinthians 3:5) and ‘Spirit’ for Christ (2 Corinthians 3:17). As soon as the religions idea that meant the Divinity of Christ reacted in the use of names, the word ‘God’ would be used of Him, as we See in John, Ignatius, Acts 20:28 (the two oldest MSS [Note: SS manuscripts.]), and Titus 2:13 .‡ [Note: See Sanday-Headlam, Romans 5, pp. 233-238; Gifford, Speaker’s Com., ‘Romans,’ pp. 18, 168, 178-9. Lepsius, Bischoff, and Strömann (ZNTW, 1907, p. 319, 1908, p. 80) conjecture that the true reading is ὧ ν ὁ (instead or ὁ ὧν): i.e. ‘of whom (of the Israelites) is God over all, blessed for ever.’] There is no impossibility in such a use here, therefore, and we are again driven back to the natural, and grammatical, interpretation.
In the sub-Apostolic Ago we have in Clement of Rome (a.d. 97) ‘to whom (God) be the glory for ever and ever,’ chs. 38, 43, 45, 50 perhaps of Christ, 58 ‘through whom (Christ) is the glory, etc.,’ and 65 ‘through whom (Christ) he glory and honour, power and greatness and eternal dominion unto him (God) from the ages past and for ever and ever. Amen.’ Ignatius uses none of the doxologies. The Didache (c. [Note: . circa, about.] a.d. 100 to 125) adds to the Lord’s Prayer: ‘For thine is the power and glory for ever and ever’ (ch. 8); gives in the Eucharistic prayers twice: ‘Thine is the glory for ever and ever,’ and once: ‘For thine is the glory and the power through Jeans Christ for ever and ever’ (ch. 9). In the post-Eucharistic prayer it gives twice the same benediction again: ‘Thine is the glory for ever and ever,’ and once; ‘Thine is the power and the glory for ever and ever.’ The doxologies in the Martyrdom of Polycarp and in Justin Martyr are too late for this work.
Literature.-Besides the books referred to above, See F. H. Chase, The Lord’s Prayer in the Early Church (= TS [Note: S Texts and Studies.] i. 3 [1891]), 168-178; and, especially for liturgical use, Thalhofer in Wetzer-Welte [Note: etzer-Welte Wetzer-Welte’s Kirchenlexikon.] 2, iii. 2006-10; P. Meyer in PRE [Note: RE Realencyklopädie für protestantische Theologie und Kirche.] 3 v. 593-4; H. Fortescue in CE [Note: E Catholic Encyclopedia.] v. [1909] 150-1; Wolff in RGG [Note: GG Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart.] ii. [Tübingen, 1910] 930ff.; G. Rietschel, Lehrbuch der Liturgik, Berlin, 1900, p. 355f.
J. Alfred Faulkner.