J. A. Cerrato: The Association of the Name Hippolytus With a ChurchOrder Now Known as the Apostolic TraditionSt. Vladimir's Theological Quarterly 48:2 (2004) 179-94It might be helpful, especially for the yet-to-be initiated, to begin by taking a long view of the problem underdiscussion. A widening of the vistas can cast into relief the relative grandeur of the question, and perhapsserve to offer some resourceful perspectives. Doubts and uncertainties about the literature of Hippolytus[=H] were not born yesterday. In fact, they are at least as old as Eusebius of Caesarea (+339). The documentnow known to us as the Traditio apostolica [= TA], including its multiple versions and related texts, as late-comers to the Hippolytan corpus (added in the early 20th C.), are not exempt from the same questions thathave surrounded the wider corpus for centuries. What follows is an attempt to set some of the currentdiscussion about TA in the context of issues related to the literature of H in general, with a particular interestin H as the supposed author of its core materials.The Riddle of HippolytusThe current state of scholarship cannot establish with certainty the community or the author of the churchorder TA. This is related, in part, to the fact that we do not know with full certainty the identity of, and thecommunity of, the ancient church father referred to in ecclesiastical tradition as H. The doctrinaire approachof some scholars over the years, as they have discussed this early Christian writer's profile, and the self-assurance with which they have spoken of his community of origin, is unfortunate. An overview of theliterature and its associated archeological evidence as it is currently known can only produce caution whenapproaching the figure of H. This is not an overly skeptical view of Hippolytan studies, but one borne outtime and again by researchers working at the most basic textual, epigraphic, and archeological levels of thefield. This is as much as to say: the "H Q...