1 Corinthians 11:24

A Text-Critical and Syntactic Examination of κλώμενον in 1 Corinthians 11:24

This exegetical study of ‘A Text-Critical and Syntactic Examination of κλώμενον in 1 Corinthians 11:24′ is based on a b-greek discussion from February 18th, 2014. The initial inquiry concerns the syntactical propriety of the phrase τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον in 1 Corinthians 11:24. It questions whether arguments for its un-Pauline nature, based on its perceived uniqueness within Paul’s writings, are primarily issues of textual criticism rather than inherent Greek syntax.

The central exegetical issue revolves around the presence or absence of the participle κλώμενον (‘being broken’) in 1 Corinthians 11:24. The debate encompasses both textual criticism, examining the manuscript evidence for its inclusion or omission, and grammatical analysis, evaluating whether its presence aligns with typical Pauline syntax or creates an awkward construction. The discussion contrasts Paul’s presumed omission of a verb with Luke’s explicit use of participial verbs (διδόμενον, ἐκχυννόμενον) in parallel Last Supper accounts (Luke 22:19-20), suggesting that Paul may have deliberately omitted what he considered self-evident, while others find the longer reading syntactically acceptable. This variation significantly impacts the understanding of the nature of Christ’s body in the eucharistic institution.

Greek text (Nestle 1904)

1 Cor 11:24 καὶ εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ εἶπεν· τοῦτό μού ἐστιν τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν· τοῦτο ποιεῖτε εἰς τὴν ἐμὴν ἀνάμνησιν.

Key differences with SBLGNT (2010):

• The Nestle 1904 text omits the participle κλώμενον after ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν.
• The SBLGNT (2010) includes κλώμενον after ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν.

Textual criticism (NA28), lexical notes (KITTEL, BDAG):

Textual Criticism (NA28): The Novum Testamentum Graece, 28th edition (NA28), includes κλώμενον within square brackets [κλώμενον], indicating that while the reading is well-attested, there is significant doubt regarding its originality. The manuscript evidence for 1 Corinthians 11:24 is complex. Major early uncials (e.g., א, A, B, C) include κλώμενον, while others, particularly those from the Western text-type (e.g., D, F, G, some Old Latin and Old Syriac witnesses, alongside some Church Fathers like Marcion and Irenaeus), omit it. The omission is sometimes argued as original due to the principle of lectio brevior potior (the shorter reading is stronger), the argument from Pauline style (that the phrase τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον is syntactically unique for Paul), or the possibility of scribal assimilation to Luke 22:19 (which has διδόμενον). Conversely, the inclusion is strongly supported by the sheer weight of manuscript attestation and could be argued as original, with the omission being a result of scribal theological reservation (e.g., concerning the “breaking” of Christ’s body) or haplography. The original discussion notes the challenges in tracking manuscript evidence, citing issues with Codex Claromontanus (D06).

Lexical Notes (KITTEL, BDAG):

• KITTEL (TDNT), s.v. κλάω: The verb κλάω (root of κλώμενον) fundamentally means “to break.” In biblical and Hellenistic Greek, it is predominantly used for breaking bread, a common act in shared meals. In the context of the Eucharist, `κλάσις τοῦ ἄρτου` (breaking of the bread) is a significant term for the communal meal. The passive participle κλώμενον thus means “being broken” or “that which is broken.” Kittel emphasizes the deep-seated Jewish tradition of breaking bread, especially at the Passover, which Jesus adapted for the Last Supper. The act signifies distribution and sharing, often with sacrificial connotations in the eucharistic context.
• BDAG, s.v. κλάω: BDAG similarly defines κλάω as “to break.” It notes its primary use for breaking bread, particularly in descriptions of meals and the Eucharist (e.g., `ἔκλασεν τὸν ἄρτον` ‘he broke the bread’). The participle κλώμενον, therefore, semantically reinforces the action of breaking associated with the bread, which represents Christ’s body. The phrase `τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον` would thus emphasize the brokenness of Christ’s body for the sake of the believers, aligning with the sacrificial interpretation of the Supper.

Translation Variants

The presence or absence of κλώμενον profoundly affects the grammatical and rhetorical force of 1 Corinthians 11:24. If κλώμενον is omitted, the phrase τοῦτό μού ἐστιν τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν becomes a nominal sentence with a simple appositional or attributive phrase: “This is my body, the one for you.” The emphasis lies on the identity of the body and its redemptive purpose, without explicitly stating the condition or action of the body. The original discussion highlights that Paul might simply omit what is assumed, which would lead to a more concise, elliptical statement.

If κλώμενον is included, the phrase becomes τοῦτό μού ἐστιν τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον. Here, κλώμενον functions as an attributive participle, modifying τὸ σῶμα. The double article construction (τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον) draws attention to the participle, specifying the nature or state of the body: “my body, the one being broken for you.” This construction is syntactically sound in Greek, although its alleged rarity in Paul’s corpus is sometimes raised as a text-critical argument against its originality. Rhetorically, the inclusion of κλώμενον explicitly links the act of breaking the bread to the suffering and sacrifice of Christ’s body, creating a vivid image of his atoning work. The parallel with Luke 22:19 (διδόμενον) and 22:20 (ἐκχυννόμενον) reinforces the idea that an active or passive participle describing the state or action of the body (or blood) would be expected in the institution narrative.

The grammatical analysis of the phrase τὸ σῶμα τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν κλώμενον reveals a standard Greek construction where a noun (τὸ σῶμα) is followed by a definite article and a prepositional phrase or participle functioning as an attribute. The concern in the discussion is whether Paul himself would employ such a lengthy attributive phrase with a participle here. However, parallels in 2 Corinthians 7:12 (τὴν σπουδὴν ὑμῶν τὴν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν) and 2 Corinthians 9:3 (τὸ καύχημα ἡμῶν τὸ ὑπὲρ ὑμῶν), while not identical in having a participle, show Paul’s use of a double article with a prepositional phrase, suggesting that complex attributive constructions are not entirely alien to his style. Thus, from a purely grammatical standpoint, κλώμενον is a plausible, albeit debated, component.

Conclusions and Translation Suggestions

The textual evidence and grammatical considerations suggest that while the omission of κλώμενον presents a more concise reading potentially reflecting an early Pauline form, its inclusion is strongly supported by the majority of manuscripts and offers a fuller theological expression consistent with the Last Supper narratives. The debate highlights the tension between preserving textual brevity and embracing thematic richness. For translation, the choice depends on the textual variant adopted and the desired nuance.

1. “This is my body, which is for you.”
   This translation reflects the shorter reading, omitting κλώμενον. It is concise and focuses on the redemptive purpose of the body without specifying the act of breaking.
2. “This is my body, broken for you.”
   This translation includes κλώμενον and renders it as a perfect passive participle, emphasizing the completed state of Christ’s sacrifice. It is a common and meaningful translation.
3. “This is my body, being broken for you.”
   This translation also includes κλώμενον, rendering it as a present passive participle, highlighting the ongoing or present reality of Christ’s sacrifice and its implications. This more closely reflects the Greek present participle, emphasizing the process or state contemporaneous with the speaking.