Church and Sacraments
CHAPTER X
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
THE CHURCH
TueE New Testament writings and the early post-apostolic literature bear witness to the expansion of the Christian Gospel during the first two centuries A.D. From its early beginnings in Jerusalem the Church rapidly made converts and gained a footing in many prominent cities of the Graeco-Roman world.
However, the actual intensity of the spread of the Gospel is largely undocumented and we have to rely, in the main, on general statements and the consciousness of growing strength which is found in early Christian literature. The only exceptions to this before the time of Justin are: (a) Acts xxi. 20, which states that at the time of St Paul's last visit to Jerusalem?
Christians were to be found, in their many thousands, among the Palestinian Jews. (5) Pliny Ep. ad Traj. xcvi-xcvii which testify to the spread of the Church throughout Bithynia and Pontus even into villages and country areas so that 'many of all ages and ranks, and even of both sexes, are in risk of their lives, or will be'.? The Church had clearly found, in this area, congenial soil for its expansion.® Justin speaks of the diffusion of Christianity in strong though general terms. Christians were 'men of every race'4 and comprised both educated and ignorant people.' There were more
Christians from among pagans than from the Jews or Samaritans.® 'All the earth has been filled with the glory and grace of God and his Christ.'? In the Eucharist the sacrifice of thanksgiving was offered 'in all places throughout the world'. .
For there is not a single race of human beings, barbarians, Greeks, 1 Or, if one adopts the arguments of Formgeschichte, at the time when Acts was written.
2 multi enim omnis aetatis, omnis ordinis, utriusque sexus etiam, vocantur in periculum et vocabuntur.
% See Harnack, The Expansion of Christianity in the First Three Centuries (Edinburgh, 1908), 1, 148-9, 172-3. Cf. also Clem. Rom. vi and Tacit.
Annals xv. 44.
4 I Apol. i, xxv, xxxii, xl, liii, lvi inter alia.
5 II Apol. x. a Apol. lil.
* Dial. xiii.
"™~
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
or whatever name you please to call them, nomads or vagrants or herdsmen living in tents, where prayers through the name of Jesus the crucified are not offered up to the Father and Maker of the universe."! Justin's language tells us little of the actual numerical strength of the Christians although his reference to the herdsmen living in tents seems to refer to nomadic Arabs.
Clearly some of his statements are the product of a belief that the Gospel must already have spread over the whole earth and his language is not to be taken too literally. What is significant is his statement that Gentile Christians already outnumbered
Jewish Christians, for this accords with a similar statement in If Clement u. 3 which comes perhaps from the same period as Justin.? Justin was conscious of the growing strength of the Church in his day, for he believed that the Gospel had already spread through the different classes of society and had representatives among many nations. His language, idealised though it is, would have sounded hollow unless Christianity had already adapted itself to the races within and beyond the confines of the Empire. Justin, like most other early Christian writers, gives no figures, but the fact of the Church's considerable expansion from its Jewish cradle is presupposed by his writings.
What information does Justin give concerning the internal constitution and doctrinal beliefs of the Church as he knew it?
The writings of Ignatius of Antioch witness to an early rise of the monarchical episcopate, at least in Syria, and notices from the last decades of the second century show, not only the near universal spread of episcopacy, but the emergence of more developed doctrinal beliefs. What light does Justin throw on the character of the Church in the mid-second century ?
It is, I believe, important to note that Justin openly claimed that he was a representative of the great body of Christians and that he had received his Christianity from the Church of the preceding age. It is necessary to stress this, as a cursory study of his writings—and especially the Apology—might suggest that he was fundamentally a Middle Platonist philosopher who incorporated into his philosophic presuppositions a smattering of Christianity. Nothing could be further from the truth. We have
1 Dial. cxvii. Nomads= Scythians; cf. Horace, Odes m1. xxiv. g f.
2 Zonuos éSdxe1 eivar dito To feo 6 Aads HudVv, vuvi Sé TOTEVOAVTES trAcioves éyevoueda Tév SoKouvToy exe Oedv.
JUSTIN MARTYR
already seen! how his philosophy did, in fact, modify the biblical basis of his faith, but Justin himself was unaware of this. He presented his Apology in the name of all true Christians and he makes the point that they should not be confounded with Christians falsely so called.2 The doctrine which Justin represented was, he believed, the traditional belief of the Church:
'We have learned from tradition that God has no need of material offerings from men...we have been taught and firmly believe that he accepts only those who imitate the good things which are his. . .** So likewise the rite of baptism and the reason for its observance had been received from the Apostles ;* and the evident desire of Justin to adhere to the apostolic commands is revealed when he says of the Eucharist that the Apostles, in the 'Memoirs', delivered what was enjoined on them.® In opposition to heretical Christians he classes himself with those 'who are disciples of the true and pure doctrine of Jesus Christ'.6 He admits however that 'many who are of the pure and pious faith' reject chiliasm.' Justin, however, chooses not to follow men's doctrines but God and the doctrines which come from him, and states that he and those who agree with him are 'in all respects right-minded Christians'.®
It is evident from these statements that, for Justin, Christianity was a body of beliefs which he had received from the Church, to which the main stream of Christians in his own day subscribed. This body of beliefs had been handed down from the Apostles. Justin's philosophy, important though it was to him, had not made his Christianity. Rather he understood and interpreted the Christianity which he professed by the aid of Middle Platonism. And this Christianity had been delivered to the Church at the beginning of its existence by Our Lord's
Apostles, The above interpretation is confirmed by Justin's attitude towards the heresies. Justin was aware, no doubt from his sojourn in Rome, that heretical and semi-heretical beliefs were being propagated by teachers who claimed the name of Christian. He regarded these as novelties introduced by daemons to destroy the work of Christ. Thus he states that Simon
1 See chapters vi and vu.
2 I Apol. iv.
Sel Apolex.
4 I Apol. \xi.
5 I Apol. \xvi.
6 Dial. xxxv.
" Dialsisexse 8 [bid.
=~ 128 ~
CHURCH
AND SACRAMENTS
Magus, Menander and Marcion had been put forward by the daemons to deceive men.! The former two were magicians while
Marcion was a real heretic who was alive in his day and sought to cause many in every nation to blaspheme the Creator of the universe. Justin, usually the apotheosis of reason, even states that the slanderous tales circulated about the Christians might be true of the Marcionites.? Justin shrewdly points out that the heretical groups bear the names of their founders, such as the Marcionites or Valentinians or Basilidaeans or Saturnilians,' while the Church, he implies, bears the name of no human founder: 'With none of them do we hold communion, who know that they are godless and impious and unrighteous and lawless, and instead of worshipping Jesus acknowledge him only in name.' Justin, in no uncertain terms, repudiates these heretics as recent perverters of Christianity who stand outside the pale of the Church. He is conscious that the Church, as he knew it, held to the apostolic teaching and was separate from the heretical groups. It had not come into being from a fusion of pagan philosophy with earlier Christian teaching but was the bearer of the doctrines handed down from the Apostles.
This Church knew Gnosticism to be a novelty and considered Jewish Christianity to be, at the best, a pardonable weakness.
Justin has no developed doctrine of the Church such as we find worked out in St Paul's Epistles to the Colossians and the Ephesians. He accepts, with most second-century Christian writers, that the Church is a supernatural society founded by the apostles in Christ's name.® This did not require argument.
Moreover, since his writings were directed, in the main, to nonChristians there was no need to state a doctrine of the Church.
However, incidental references in Justin's writings give a clear idea of his belief in the spiritual unity of Christians belonging to different Christian communities. Expounding Psalm xlv Justin
1 J Apol. xxvi, lvi, lviii.
2 I Apol. xxvi.
3 Dial. xxxv.
4 Dial. xxxv. 5.
5 See the important remarks of M. Goguel, The Primitive Church (London, 1963), p. 78: '...the idea of the Church, as a supernatural society founded by the apostles. .., is now no more open to question than the conception of the Church as a depository of a doctrine of salvation. By the end of the first century and the beginning of the second, there seems to have been fairly wide agreement as to the conception of the Church and the character of the ministries exercised within it.'
BJM
JUSTIN MARTYR
writes: 'And they likewise proclaim that them that believe on him, as men of one soul and one synagogue and one Church, the Word of God addressed as Daughter, namely the Church which came into being from his name and shares his name, for we are all called Christians.'! Again Christ 'hath made us a house of prayer and worship'.? Christians are 'the vine planted by God and Christ the Saviour',? and are 'the robe of Christ' because in them the seed of God, the logos, dwells.* They have believed 'as one man' in God, and 'being inflamed by the word of his calling, are the true high-priestly race'.® They are the true Israel.6 The prophet Isaiah had predicted' that the wicked shall become subject to Christ 'and that all shall become as one child'. 'Such a thing', Justin adds, 'as you may witness in the body; although the members are enumerated as many, all together are called one, and are a body. For a populace too and an assembly,® though they are many men in number, yet as forming but one thing are called and addressed by one appellation.'
It is evident that behind Justin's language is the earlier belief that Christians form a spiritual temple or body united to Christ as the Head. The unity of Christendom in Christ is, for him, a fact and follows from his belief that the Church held to the apostolic teaching.
As to the organisation of the Church in his day Justin gives but little information. It was no part of his apologetic purpose to expound the nature or function of the Christian Ministry. He throws light on the subject only when describing the public worship of the Church and the celebration of baptism and the eucharist. And even then, as a result of his evident desire to emphasise the simplicity of the Christian sacraments, Justin does not give an accurate description of the officers of the Church or their relations to one another and the whole body of Christ. The sum of Justin's information is this:
After describing the rite of baptism® Justin says that the adult candidate is led to those called brethren where they are i Dial. \xiii. 5.
2 Dial. Ixxxvi.
Se Dialacx.
I Apol. xxxii; cf. Dial. liv, Ixxxvii.
5 Dial. cxvi.
Dial. cxix, cxxv, CXXX, CXXXV.
Dial. xiii. This chapter is fundamental to Justin's belief in the Church. exkAnoia. Justin uses the analogy of a legally-summoned gathering of Greek citizens.
® FApol. Ixi.
130"
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
assembled,! that is, in the house-church or meeting place. After common prayers and the greeting of one another with a kiss the eucharistic elements are brought to the ruler of the brethren (1
TIPOEOTAT1 TOv &SeApdv). After the prayers and thanksgiving, offered by the ruler, those called deacons (8idxKovo1) give to each of those present a portion of the consecrated bread, wine and water, and later take this to the absent. In J Afol. Ixvii
Justin describes the ordinary Sunday worship of the Church at which the ruler instructs the assembled Christians. This is followed by the eucharist which the ruler celebrates.
A voluntary alms collection is taken and deposited with the ruler who is responsible for charitable distribution to orphans, widows, the sick and other needy persons.
What is the exact meaning of the term 6 tpoeotas or 6 TrpCEO TAS TOV &SeAQHv which is found five times in J Apol. lxv and Ixvu? T. G. Jalland, in an important article,? has argued forcibly in support of the translation 'ruler' or 'ruler of the brethren' instead of the usual English translation 'president' ,? or the Latin zs qui fratribus praeest.* He points out that treoeotas, the 2nd aorist participle active, with intransitive sense, of 1rpoicThu, used asa substantive, is found in Herodotus, Thucydides and Plato in the singular with a meaning analogous to 6 &pywv.®
In the LXX the verb trpoiotnui is used with reference to an official appointment. Jalland shows that the sense 'be at the head (of), rule, direct' has a continuous tradition behind it from classical usage onwards and by way of the LX X and New
Testament itself.6 He suggests that the term 6 trpoeotas Tdv &5eApaHv in Justin means not merely 'he who presides over the brethren' but 'he who is at the head of the brethren' or 'the ruler of the brethren', i.e. most probably the bishop.
Why then did Justin describe the chief officer of the Church in this way and not as 6 éttioxottos? Jalland believes that 1 I Apol. Ixv.
2 Studia Patristica, v (1962), 83-5.
3 Rendered 'President' by M. Dods
(A.N.C.L.),
C.C. Richardson (Library of Christian Classics), Bettenson (Documents of the Christian
Church), Stevenson (A New Eusebius), Gwatkin (Selections from Early Christian Writers).
4 J. C. Otto, Opera, 3rd ed., p. 179.
5 Jalland, Studia Patristica, v (1962), 83-4.
6 Rom. xii. 8; I Thess. v. 12; I Tim. v. 17. The N.E.B. translates 'leaders' in each context.
I3I 9-2
JUSTIN MARTYR
Justin deliberately avoided the technical term éioxottos out of deference to pagan susceptibilities to whom the expression might have been obscure or misleading. Hence his choice of a word capable of a non-technical interpretation. Jalland's linguistic arguments as to the correct translation of 6 TpoeoTtas may be accepted, but his further view that Justin was deliberately using a non-technical term is open to the serious objection that Justin, in this same account,! mentions the order of deacons who have the definite function of distributing the consecrated elements at the eucharist. Moreover in his account of the rite of baptism he uses the technical term 'regeneration' with marked emphasis? and he also defines the bread, wine and water as 'this food we call eucharist'.2 We should not assume that the technical terms 'bishop', 'presbyter' would have been unfamiliar to pagans. Hadrian, in his letter to Servianus, which is to be dated c¢. A.D. 134, knew of the existence of both bishops and presbyters* although he had no high regard for the office.
What then is the explanation of Justin's use of 6 TpoeoTtHs?
It may be significant that the same term is found in Hermas, but it is there applied, expressly in one instance, and probably in others, to the presbyters.® It is also an interesting fact that the term 6 étioKottos is not applied to the chief officer of the Roman Church until a period later than that of Justin although in Syria and Asia Minor it had been used some forty years earlier.6 Hegesippus however applied the term to Symeon of Jerusalem' as Polycrates did to Polycarp, Thraseas and other
Church leaders in Asia Minor.' But not only does Clement of Rome use 'bishop' and 'presbyter' interchangeably,® but Ignatius himself is silent, in his Epistle to the Romans, as to any
'bishop' in Rome, as is also Polycarp, in his Letter to the Philippians, as to a ' bishop' at Philippi. On the other hand, ata time a little later than that of Justin, Dionysius of Corinth wrote
1 T Apol. xv.
2 I Apol. \xi.
3 I Apol. xvi.
* Vopiscus, Vita Saturni 8. See L. W. Barnard, C.Q.R. cixiv (1964), 286-8.
° Vis. ii. 4, neta THV TreecBuTépwV TEV TrpcioTapéveoy Tis exKANotas. Cf.
Vis. il. 2 and iii. g.
® See Ign. ad Polyc., ad Eph., ad Magn., ad Trall.
¢ DEE JEM sng OD SDR J OI Dp Sie Yin ® Ad Cor, xxi, xlii, xliv. oS) T3INS
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
to the Roman Church and spoke of 'your blessed bishop Soter' ;1 but Irenaeus, who was familiar with Church organisation in Asia Minor and Rome, calls Polycarp in one place a 'bishop? and in another a 'presbyter'* and, in his Letter to Victor of Rome, speaks of 'the preshyters preceding Soter in the government of the Church which thou dost now rule'.4 Moreover, none of the extant epitaphs of the Roman bishops gives the title
Episcopus during the second century.
It would therefore seem that Justin's 6 tpoeotas was a permanent officer of the Church—the 'ruler of the brethren'— whose function included leading public worship, the celebration of the eucharist and the administration of Church finances.
But because the title applied to this officer (although not necessarily his functions) varied in Justin's time in different localities (and perhaps even in the same locality) he deliberately refrained from specifying this further.5 In an Apology primarily intended for the non-Christian world® Justin did not wish to give more particulars than were necessary and he accordingly uses a term, which implies rulership and a permanent status, without going further into the matter. We are therefore not strictly justified in stating categorically that Justin's 6 Tpoeotas was the bishop, although this may have been the case.'
There are reasons for doubting whether the Church in Rome was an organisational entity in Justin's day. There were in Rome numerous groups of resident aliens, some of whom became Christians, and a number of congregations of a semiheretical tinge. Some of these heretical teachers were anxious to capture 'the Church' for their views. There is also the fact that no trace of an indigenous Latin Christianity is found in Justin's time. Converts came mainly from orientals and until the end of the second century the Roman Church was pre1 Eus. H.E. tv. 23.
2 Adv. Haer. m1. 3. 4.
3 Eus. HE. v. 20.
+ Hus. HE 24).
> Note that Justin nowhere refers to 'elders' or 'presbyters'.
6 Many pagans knew quite a lot about the Church. They would have soon queried Justin's information if incorrect. Moreover if the Apology was also intended for circulation as a manual for inquirers Justin's strict devotion to the truth would have prevented his portraying the Ministry other than it was.
7 Eusebius uses tpoeotas as a synonym for étickotros with reference to Publius, bishop of Athens; H.E. tv. 23.
JUSTIN MARTYR
dominantly Greek-speaking and oriental in character. L. E.
Elliott-Binns suggests that there may have been a number of bishops or presbyter-bishops ruling different congregations in the city until well on into the second century. Be that as it may it is likely that the residences of prominent Christian teachers might be the only 'publicly' known Christian places of worship.2 In J Apol. lxv-Ixvi Justin may therefore be describing a Christian baptismal-eucharist as he knew it in Rome while in I Apol. \xvii he is describing regular Sunday worship as he had known it in several different places. That is why he states: 'And on the day called Sunday there is a meeting in one place of those who live in cities or the country, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits.' This is a reference to a general gathering of the church of a city or of the surrounding countryside—which certainly
Justin did not know in Rome. The wonder is that he was so conscious of the Church's being the Body of Christ and a spiritual unity—the bearer of the apostolic doctrine and faith.
He believed that he was a fair representative of the great body of Christians and that he taught only the apostolic doctrine which he had received. Such is the faith which moves mountains.
THE SACRAMENTS
Justin's account of the Christian sacraments of baptism and the eucharist, in his First Apology,* is of great importance and is the fullest description we possess of the second-century rites. Indeed apart from the Afostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome his is the most detailed account to come down from pre-Nicene times. This is all the more remarkable in view of the fact that the Apology was primarily intended for a non-Christian public.
Justin clearly wished to emphasise the harmlessness of the Christian rites and to assure his readers that no horrors were perpetrated at Christian gatherings. This is why he introduces
1 The Beginnings of Western Christendom (London, 1948), p. 102.
2 Justin, according to Acts of Martyrdom 3, states that Christians meet in a number of places 'where each one wishes to and is able'. He then adds
(significantly) that during the whole of his second visit to Rome he has known of only one place of meeting—' above a certain Martinus at the baths of Timotinus'.
3 I Apol. \xvii.
/ I Apol. Ixi-lxvi.
134 *
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
his account almost incidentally and without warning. It is however significant that he uses the technical terminology of the Church in his description of both dominical sacraments and assumes that, with a suitable exposition, this terminology will be intelligible. Of a doctrine of reserve, such as was later to come into prominence, Justin knew nothing and even if he had it is unlikely he would have agreed with it.
Recent study has shown! that it is a mistake, at least in regard to the early centuries, to treat the rite of baptism in isolation. It was part of a complex of ideas comprising instruction, repentance, forgiveness of sins, the gift of the Spirit, layingon-of-hands, death and resurrection, salvation, conversion and the first partaking of the eucharist. What to us are separate rites, namely baptism, confirmation and first communion, were, in the earliest age of the Church, regarded as one whole—one baptism for the remission of sins. The usage varied in different centres—sometimes only two elements in the complex appearing
—and the order varied as between Syria, Africa and Rome.
Yet there was no divorce between the rites as is the case with us.
This is illustrated by the long debate over the interpretation of the symbols used in early Christian paintings in the catacombs.
Most of these have some clear reference to baptism or eucharist or to both and they are usually signs of salvation. But all attempts to gain a consensus of scholarly opinion have failed, for to some they mean baptism, to others the eucharist and to others simply the Gospel.?
The fullest account of the baptismal ceremonies to come down from the early period is that found in the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus ¢. A.D. 215 which may represent earlier
Roman usage. Other traditions are found in the Didascalia Apostolorum, which represents Syrian usage ¢. A.D. 250, and in Tertullian's De Baptismo, which is to be dated c. a.p. 206. Justin's account contains fewer elements of the complex than appear in the later documents. This is possibly to be accounted for by his desire to stress the simplicity of the Christian rites. What is
1 F, L. Cross, I Peter: A Paschal Liturgy (London, 1954); G. Every, The Baptismal Sacrifice (London, 1959). One of the first to investigate this question was F. E. Brightman, 7.7.S. xxv (1923-4), 254-70.
2 T owe this observation to G. Every, The Baptismal Sacrifice, p. 32, quoting W. Weidle, The Baptism of Art (1949), pp. 16-17.
JUSTIN MARTYR
significant is that Justin describes fully the baptismal-eucharist before he speaks of the weekly Sunday eucharist. The way in which he compares and contrasts this baptismal-eucharist with initiation into the pagan mysteries suggests that it is, for him, the greater mystery. We must now look at Justin's account in detail. In J Aol. lxi Justin says:* Those who are persuaded and believe that the things we teach and say are true, and promise that they can live accordingly, are instructed to pray and beseech God with fasting for the remission of their past sins, while we pray and fast along with them. Then they are brought by uswhere there is water, and are reborn (&vayevvroews) by the same kind of rebirth by which we ourselves were reborn; for they are then washed in the water (TO év TO UdSaT1 TOTE AoUTPOV
To1ouvtal) in the name of God the Father and Master of all, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit.
After quoting John iii. 3, 4 and Isa. i. 16-20 Justin goes on:
And we learned from the apostles this reason for this (rite). ..So that we should not remain children of necessity and ignorance, but (become sons) of free choice and knowledge, and obtain remission of the sins we have already committed, there is named at the water, over him who has chosen to be born again and has repented of his sinful acts, the name of God the Father and Master of all. Those who lead to the washing the one who is to be washed call on (God by) this term only. For no one may give a proper name to the ineffable
God, and if anyone should dare to say that there is one, he is hopelessly insane." This washing is called illumination (pwtiopds), since those who learn these things are illumined within. The illuminand is also washed in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, and in the name of the Holy Spirit, who through the prophets foretold everything about Jesus.
In J Apol. lxii Justin states the parallels and contrasts with pagan worship which, he holds, was a pale imitation of the Christian rites. And in J Apol. lxiii Justin digresses on the fact that the Word of God, who is God's Son, is also called 'Angel' and 'Apostle'. It is perhaps significant that this section contains a 1 J have used C. C. Richardson's translation.
2 Justin is aware that the Old Testament Divine name had been used for magical purposes in Gnostic circles.
~ Do65=
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
credal statement embracing the Incarnation, death and resurrection of Christ. In J Apol. Ixv Justin continues his description of the baptismal-eucharist:
We, however, after thus washing the one who has been convinced and signified his assent, lead him to those who are called brethren, where they are assembled. They then earnestly offer common prayers for themselves and the one who has been illuminated and all others everywhere, that we may be made worthy, having learned the truth, to be found in deed good citizens and keepers of what is commanded, so that we may be saved with eternal salvation. On finishing the prayers we greet each other with a kiss.
There follows a description of the baptismal-eucharist which is celebrated by the 'ruler of the brethren'—this we shall consider later.
There are several interesting features in Justin's account. A period of pre-baptismal instruction is presupposed, as in the Didache.2 The prayer and fasting, in which members of the Church join as witnesses, seem to be the immediate prelude to baptism although no period for this is specified. It is significant that Justin speaks in the plural of both witnesses and baptised.
. . we teach. ..they are instructed...we pray and fast along with them. ..they are brought by us...they are then washed in the water. This suggests a collective baptism on a certain day of the year with possibly a number of officiants. This may possibly be the Pascha which commemorated, in the pre-Nicene period, the whole complex of Christ's birth, incarnation, death and resurrection, and the gift of the Spirit. In the time of Tertullian baptism was administered only at the Pascha or at 1 In I Apol. lix-lx (immediately before Justin's description of baptism) and in J Apol. lxii-Ixiv (between the baptism and the baptismal-eucharist) the figure of Moses is very prominent. The position of these chapters is probably not fortuitous as the mysteries of Genesis and Exodus formed part of the baptismal ritual from the beginning. In baptism Egypt is left behind and the land of promise entered.
2 vii. 1. The catechumenate received definite form c. A.D. 200. On its introduction in Rome see the important article of B. Capelle in Recherches de
Théologie Ancienne et Médiévale, v (1933), 129-54. Recent scholarship has traced baptismal forms of instruction behind the New Testament Epistles.
See especially P. Carrington, The Primitive Christian Catechism, and E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of St Peter (1946), pp. 363-466.
3 Did. vii. 4 limits this to one or two days before baptism.
JUSTIN MARTYR
Pentecost.1 However, later in J Apol. Ixi and in I Apol. Ixv Justin uses the singular in speaking of the candidate (although not of the witnesses) who is brought to the baptismal-eucharist, but this may have been due to a desire to write from the point of view of the individual convert.
The actual baptism, according to Justin's account, is in the threefold name of the Trinity? and is accompanied by a confession of faith? which may have been in answer to questions, although this is not specifically stated. Unfortunately Justin does not tell us what this confession embraced although it appears to have included assent to the three persons of the Trinity and the phrases 'who was crucified under Pontius
Pilate' and 'who through the prophets foretold everything about Jesus'.4 Perhaps we have here a trace of a baptismal creed?
Oscar Cullman's investigations have shown that in the New Testament period candidates for baptism were asked if there was anything which hindered their being baptised, that is, whether they had fulfilled the conditions demanded.® We are not told, in the sources, who put this question. But it is clear from the Didache's account,® as from Justin's, that members of the Church took some part in the baptism. This included prayer and fasting with the candidates, presence as witnesses during the actual baptisms, and the subsequent leading of the candidates back to the place where the Christian brethren were assembled.' It is not unreasonable to assume that these witnesses put questions to the baptised, heard their confession of faith, and baptised them. Their function, in Justin's time, was similar to that of the disciples of the rabbis in Judaism who,
1 De Baptismo xix.
2 Justin does not appeal to Matt. xxviii. 19.
3 I Apol. \xi. 2: 6001 dv treio8do1 Kal trioteUwoi GANGA Tatta Ta Ug'
Adv SiSacKkdpeva kal Aeyoueva eivan, Kal Biot oUTtas SUvacba1 UTIoyvavTat; cf. I Apol. Ixy. 1: feis 8 peta TO OUTS AoUCaI TOV TrETTEIOLEVOV Kal ovuyKaTaTedeivevov éttl TOUS Aeyouévous KTA.
4 I Apol. \xi. 13. It is not clear, from Justin, whether exorcism was connected with the baptismal rite. According to Dial. xx. 3, lxxvi. 6,
Ixxv. 2, IJ Apol. vi. 6 the ritual of exorcism culminated in the recital of a creed.
® 'Les traces d'une vieille formule baptismale dans le Nouveau Testament', R.H.P.R. xv (1927), 424-34; Baptism in the New Testament (London,
1950), pp. 71-80.
8 Did. vii. 1-4.
Justin, J Apol. Ixv. 1.
138 \
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
when a proselyte received baptism, reminded him of the commandments of the torah.
Where was baptism administered? Justin implies that the group of candidates were baptised at a distance from the regular Christian meeting place: 'Then they are brought by us where there is water'. ..'We, however, after thus washing the one who has been convinced and signified his assent, lead him to those who are called brethren, where they are assembled."
According to the Didache baptism was preferably to be in living, that is running, water, by immersion although, if running water was not at hand, other water could be used; if however neither was available then affusion could be used as second best.3 Justin does not specify where or how baptism takes place.
This may have been in a stream or river or in a primitive baptistery although, if the latter, we should have expected it to have been situated in or near to the regular Christian meeting place. Justin merely states that the candidate is washed three times in water and the name of each person of the Trinity pronounced over him at each washing.' There is no mention ofa laying-on-of-hands preceding or following baptism before the candidates receive the eucharist for the first time, neither is the bishop specifically associated with baptism, as in the Ignatian
Epistles, although the 'ruler of the brethren' celebrates the baptismal-eucharist immediately following the actual baptism.
The agreement of Justin's account with that of the Dzdache is 1 See J. Leipoldt, Urchr. Taufe, p. 16, quoted in M. Goguel, The Primitive
Church, p. 323. Inscriptions in the Jewish catacomb of Monteverde in Rome (third century A.D.) mention patroni and patronae, evidently sponsors of proselytes. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Creeds (London, 1950), pp. 73-4, points out that in Justin there are no instances of a declaratory creed but only baptismal interrogations. But side by side with this baptismal Trinitarian confession (in answer to questions) Justin knew a simple Christological kerygma of the type found in the apostolic age.
2 I Apol. \xi and Ixv.
8 Did. vii. 2-3. It should be noted that the writer does not contrast baptism in running water, i.e. in a stream or river, with baptism by affusion, i.e. sprinkling, but baptism in running water or static water with sprinkling.
Perhaps he has in view the use of a pond or water in a tank in certain circumstances. The latter is suggested by the qualification 'if thou canst not in cold, then in warm'. Have we here a trace of a rudimentary baptistery ?
4 I Apol. 1xi.
JUSTIN MARTYR
remarkable.! Both seem to reflect a more primitive stage of development than that found in Tertullian and Hippolytus.
How did Justin regard baptism? His main thought is that baptism is a new birth (&vayévvnots). This is in line with the earliest baptismal tradition of the Church—indeed he explicitly states that the reason for the rite had been learnt from the apostles and quotes John iii. 3-4, 'Unless you are born again you will not enter into the Kingdom of heaven', It is in the rite of baptism that the new birth literally takes place and candidates receive forgiveness of their past sins of which they have repented. In the Dialogue Justin says that the old rites of Judaism were broken cisterns, for they were performed without a turning from evil doings: 'Baptise your soul (free) from anger and from covetousness, from envy, from hatred—and behold your body is clean." The spiritual circumcision which alone is of any value Christians receive in baptism which is a laver of repentance and of the knowledge of God. Baptism, for Justin, is the normal way of becoming a Christian and the new birth or spiritual circumcision occurs in the rite. It would, however, be pressing his words too hard to say, with Kirsopp Lake, that Justin connected forgiveness explicitly with the water, and the new life with 'the name'.* Repentance, forgiveness and the new birth are part of a single complex of ideas and cannot be partitioned. It is also significant that in Dizal. xxix. 1 Justin connects Christian baptism with the Holy Spirit: 'What account should I, to whom God has borne testimony, then take of circumcision? What need of that other baptism® to one who has been baptised by the Holy Spirit ?' This connection does not occur in I Apol. lxi-lxv although it was part of the received tradition of the Church. Instead, in I Apol. lxi. 12-13 Justin describes baptism as illumination (gwtioyds) and states that the candidates who have faithfully received baptismal instruc- * The Didache however does not give any description of the introduction of the newly baptised into the public worship of the Church. See P. Carrington, The Early Christian Church, u,
118-19, who points out that Justin was not giving instructions for carrying out the rite but giving a short account of it to show there was nothing unseemly going on. Carrington says Justin's omission of any mention of laying-on-of-hands or anointing does not prove they were not in use in his day (p. 118). Neither does it prove it!
2 Dial. xiv. 1-2.
ID ral Sanya, Tie
4 E.R.E, 0, 386.
® Le. Jewish proselyte baptism.
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
tion are illumined within. Although this term had a long usage behind it Justin appears to have been the first to have associated the noun specifically with baptism,! although the association of light with baptism is very old.?
What did this pwtiopes imply? Justin believed that in baptism men were empowered with a divine force which will enable them to live a truly moral life. The whole logos had now come into a man's life with which he must co-operate for the attainment of salvation: 'They then earnestly offer common prayers for themselves and the one who has been illuminated and all others everywhere, that we may be made worthy, having learned the truth, to be found in deed good citizens and keepers of what is commanded, so that we may be saved with eternal salvation."* It may justly be claimed that Justin has succeeded, perhaps better than any other second-century writer, in disassociating the rite of baptism from a 'magical' view of regeneration by emphasising that it is the beginning of a new life during which a man must strive to make his soul a habitation for the Spirit. His chances of doing so are immeasurably strengthened by the illumination, the presence of the whole logos, which came to him in his baptism. The test of the tree is
1 See J. Ysebaert, Greek Baptismal Terminology: Its Origin and Early Development (Nijmegen, 1952), pp.
157-78, who shows that it is by no means certain that gwrtizeiv, patiouds ever formed part of the technical vocabulary of the Mystery Religions. In the LX X portizew gained popularity as it translated 'wr (to be light, to shine) in almost all its meanings. The noun gwrTiopds is used in the poetical writings of the LXX both literally and metaphorically. In the New Testament both verb and noun are used metaphorically of Christian belief as enlightenment; cf. II Cor. iv. 4, Eph. i. 18, II Tim. i. 10. In Heb. vi. 4, cf. x. 32, the verb is used in the passive of the enlightenment received at baptism. gwtize1v however only became a technical term for baptism from the second century onwards, cf. Ign. ad Rom. Inscript. Justin clearly uses gpwrtizev in this technical way, cf. I Apol. lxi. 13, Ixv. 1, Dial. xxxix. 2, cxxii. 1, 3 (cf. also Clem. Alex.
Paed. i. 26. 1, Strom. v. 15. 3), but he is the first to use the noun pwtiopes specifically of baptism, I Afol. lxi. 12. By the time of Clem. Alex. it is used of baptism without further explanation, cf. Protr. xciv. 2.
2 Selwyn, The First Epistle of St Peter, pp. 375-82, on the New Testament evidence.
3 I Apol. Ixv. 1; cf. I Apol. lxi. 10: 'So that we should not remain children of necessity and ignorance, but (become sons) of free choice and knowledge and obtain remission of the sins we have already committed...'
JUSTIN MARTYR
in the quality of the fruit and not only in the quality of a man's faith. In stating this so forcibly Justin is in line with the best
Catholic tradition of the Church.
Justin, in his Apology, gives a short account of what the Eucharist was in the mid-second century. In the Dialogue he supplements this account by stating that the Eucharist is a sacrifice and a commemoration of Christ's sufferings. How far Justin's account of the rite, in the Apology, represents the liturgical usage of the Roman Church in his day is not certain although the information which he gives, although rudimentary, fits in with that found in the more developed rite of Hippolytus'
Apostolic Tradition c. A.D. 215. It is possible that Justin attended, in Rome, the liturgy of the Asian community and that there were local variations in the liturgy which may not have been of any great importance.' In his second account of the Eucharist, which he sets in the context of the regular Sunday worship of the Church, Justin may simply be presenting a picture of the rite as he had known it in several Christian centres and which, he believed, was offered everywhere.
We now turn to Justin's text. He describes two celebrations of the Eucharist: The first, in J Apol. lxv, is a baptismaleucharist celebrated by 'the ruler of the brethren' in the presence of the assembled Christian community, the newly baptised and their witnesses. After common prayers for the new members of the Church and Christians everywhere, and the exchanging of a kiss,? bread and a cup of water and of wine mixed with water' are brought to the celebrant, who takes them and offers a prayer of praise and glory to the Father of the universe through the name of the Son and the Holy Spirit and offers further thanksgiving at some length. The people assent by saying Amen which, Justin explains, means 'so be it'. The deacons then give to each of those present a portion of the eucharistised bread and wine and water and later take these to the absent. It is significant that there is no mention, in 1 Goodenough, Theology of Justin Martyr, p. 269, has some good remarks on this.
2 P. Carrington, The Early Christian Church, 1, 120.
* This is the kiss of peace. It is found in the same place in Apost. Trad.
Xx. 6.
4 On Harnack's theory that, in Justin's time, the Eucharist was celebrated with bread and water only and not water mixed with wine, see Appendix 4.
142 ~
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
Justin's account, of presbyters or elders taking part in the service.?
In I Apol. lxvii Justin gives another and similar account of the Eucharist celebrated at the regular Sunday worship of the Christian community. Christians, he says, hold a common gathering every "day of the sun'—'this first day on which God transforming darkness and matter made the universe, and Jesus Christ our Saviour rose from the dead on the same day'.
At this gathering the 'Memoirs' of the Apostles or the writings of the prophets are read as long as time permits. Then the ruler gives an exposition of the reading which is followed by prayers said in a standing position. Then the bread, wine and water are brought and the ruler offers prayers and thanksgivings 'to the best of his ability'. Then follows the distribution to, and reception of, the eucharistic elements by those present and the sending to the absent by the deacons. This description is the same as that in IJ Apol. lxv, save that Justin mentions a voluntary collection of alms which is deposited with the ruler who is responsible for the care of orphans, widows, the sick, visitors and other needy persons.
In J Apol. lxvi, between his two descriptions of the rite, Justin explains its meaning:
This food we call Eucharist (evyapiotia), of which no one is allowed to partake except one who believes that the things we teach are true, and has received the washing for forgiveness of sins and for rebirth, and who lives as Christ handed down to us. For we do not receive these things as common bread or common drink; but as Jesus Christ our Saviour being incarnate by God's Word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus. (OU yap as Koivov Gptov ovSE KoIVov TrOUa TatTa AcUPBdvouEev' GAA' Sv TpdTrOV Bic Adyou Oeot capKoTroinbels *Inoots Xpiotds 6 owTHp hudv Kal odeKa Kal aipa
Utrép cwTnpias Hudv ~oyev, OUTS Kal Thy 61' evy7js Adyou TOU Trap' auToU evyapioTnbeioav Tpopryy, é 7s ata Kai odpKes KATH HETAPoATY
TpépovTar Hudv, ékelvou TOU capKoTrOINBévTos *Inoot Kal odpKa Kal aia é515dyOnuev eivor.) For the apostles in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, thus handed down what was com1 The contrast with Apost. Trad. is marked.
JUSTIN MARTYR
manded them: that Jesus, taking bread and having given thanks, said, 'Do this for my memorial, this is my body'; and likewise taking the cup and giving thanks he said, 'This is my blood'; and gave it to them alone. This also the wicked daemons in imitation handed down as something to be done in the mysteries of Mithra; for bread and a cup of water are brought out in their secret rites of initiation, with certain invocations which you either know or can learn.
There are three passages in the Dialogue which supplement the accounts in the First Apology. In Dial. xli. 1-3 Justin describes the Eucharist as the antitype of the offering of fine flour for the purification of lepers:
For Jesus Christ our Lord ordered us to do this in remembrance of the suffering which he suffered on behalf of those who are being purged in soul from all iniquity, in order that we should at the same time give thanks to God for having created the world with all that is in it for man's sake, and also for having set us free from the evil in which we had (hitherto) been, and for having destroyed the powers and the authorities with a complete destruction by means of him who became liable to suffering according to his will.
This Eucharist is the pure sacrifice of which Malachi speaks (Mal. i. ro-11). In Dial. Ixx. 3-4 Justin quotes Isa. xxxiii. 16:
'Bread shall be given him and his water is sure.' This, he says, refers to 'the bread which our Christ taught us to do in remembrance of his incarnation for those that believe on him, for whom he became even liable to suffering; and also of the cup which he taught us as we give thanks to do in remembrance of his blood'.
Lastly, in Dzal. cxvii. 1, Justin says that the Eucharist is a sacrifice offered by Christians in every place on earth. In v. 3 he says, 'for these alone were Christians taught to make, even at the remembrance of their food, both dry and liquid,! in which also the suffering which the Son of God has suffered for their sake is brought to mind'. Although God accepts prayers and thanksgivings offered by worthy men at any time the Christian
Eucharist, according to Justin, is the only one which has been worthy to be truly called a sacrifice.
There are several points in Justin's references to the Eucharist which deserve comment:
* The Jews distinguished the form of their 'grace' according to the type of food partaken. Mishna, Berakoth yi. 1-4.
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
(a) The Eucharist is for him, as for the writer of the Didache and Ignatius, the central act of Christian Sunday worship. Only the baptised are allowed to partake of it! and they must be living in accordance with the precepts of Christ. Justin strongly emphasises the corporate? and ethical nature of the Eucharist which is offered by Christians throughout the world. Such is the bond of charity engendered that Christians gladly contribute to a voluntary collection? on behalf of the needy which the leader of the community administers.
How far does Justin's 'liturgical' language imply the use of a fixed liturgy in his day? Lietzmann,' as is well known, derived all extant eucharistic liturgies from two types—the Roman and the Egyptian—both of which date from the beginning of the third century. The first is found in the Afostolic Tradition of Hippolytus of Rome and the second in the offertory prayer of Serapion, bishop of Thmuis in Egypt. Lietzmann, from his study of these two liturgical traditions, inferred that, prior to the beginning of the third century, there existed two types of liturgy. The first, the Roman, found in Hippolytus, is ultimately derived from St Paul's liturgical material; the second, found in Serapion's anaphora, had its origin in that of the Didache. Lietzmann's theory has received strong criticism, particularly at the hands of Dom Gregory Dix,® which need not concern us here. What is significant is that Lietzmann discovered it was impossible to recede further into the period before the beginning of the third century and was forced to rely on inference or conjecture when interpreting the scattered liturgical material from that period.
1 This was a universal Christian tradition; cf. Apost. Trad. xxxii. 2.
= And with them every spirit blest, From realms of triumph or of rest, From him who saw creation's morn, Of all the angels eldest-born, To the poor babe who died today, Takes part in our thanksgiving lay.
J. Keble, Christian Year, 'Holy Communion'.
8 It is interesting to note the voluntary collection at the Eucharist—' each one as much as he chooses to'. The assessment of people's ability to contribute according to their income had not yet cast its shadow. There is no suggestion however, in Justin, that Christian Stewardship was any less real for this omission.
4 Messe und Herrenmahl (Bonn, 1926).
5 The Shape of the Liturgy (London, 1945).
BJM
JUSTIN MARTYR
Gregory Dix has however sought to prove that the structure of the eucharistic prayer in Hippolytus' Apostolic Tradition
¢. A.D. 215, and some of its wording, were traditional in Rome and were indeed an inheritance from the days of the Jewish apostles 'which the Roman Church with its usual conservatism had maintained more rigidly in the second century than some other Churches'.1 Justin knew, he believes, this traditional eucharistic prayer. Dix? cites Justin's reference to the ruler sending up praise and glory to the Father of the universe through the name of the Son and of the Holy Spirit (J Apol. Ixv) and the association, in Dzal. xli, with the creation of the world.
He also cites the anamnesis passages in I Apol. lxvi and Dual. xli. However, it is significant that, later in his book, Dix wrote these words:
It is quite true that we have already established that there is nothing in the contents of the second half of Hippolytus' prayer which would not have been accepted by Justin sixty years before him. But this is not necessarily quite the same thing as saying that it was all in the prayer in Justin's day...The expansion of the prayer may quite well have taken place in the generation between Justin and Hippolytus, a period about which we know very little. ..all that we can safely say is that Justin's language is quite consistent with the idea that the Roman prayer in his day consisted only of an Address and 'Naming' of God followed by a series of ' Thanksgivings' for creation, redemption etc., and nothing more. If his prayer contained other elements, he has not mentioned them.?
This is a clear admission that there was no fixed liturgy with a "structure' known to Justin. The address and 'naming' of God followed by a series of thanksgivings is not a fixed liturgy per se but an example of how the original thanksgiving of the Last Supper had been expanded by Justin's time through the use of liturgical material deriving from Judaism. It is surely significant (and Dix fails to note this in his desire to systematise
Justin's evidence) that Justin states that the Ruler at the Eucharist sends up prayers and thanksgivings 'to the best of his ability' (Gon SWvais avTG),4 i.e. extempore. This reflects a 1 The Shape of the Liturgy, p. 160.
2 Ibid. p. 159.
3 Ibid. p. 224.
4 I Apol. \xvii. 5; cf. also Did. x. 7: 'suffer the prophets to hold Eucharist as they will' (Tois 5& mpogrytais émitpétreTe evyapioteiv dca OéAouoIv). An element of extempore prayer however remained in the liturgy; cf. Apost. vadaxads Be.
146-°
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
fluidity appropriate to a time before the eucharistic prayer had become fixed or of a definite structure.! In this connection
M. Goguel's remark cannot be bettered: 'It must be added that while the principle of the permanent nature of the liturgy is indisputable, it is not certain that it was a factor at the time when the liturgy was in process of being formed as at a later date.'* But Justin does show how the original thanksgiving at the Last Supper had been expanded in his day. We are on the way to the first liturgies.
(b) The theology of the Eucharist: Justin's language marks an advance on that of the Didache and Ignatius. He describes the eucharistic gift with greater precision and applies the word evxapiotix to the consecrated elements which he identifies with the body and blood of Christ. It is no longer 'common food' after the thanksgiving has been pronounced over it, but has acquired a sacred character. The passage which has caused most difficulty is that quoted above: 'But as Jesus Christ our
Saviour being incarnate by God's word took flesh and blood for our salvation, so also we have been taught that the food consecrated by the Word of prayer which comes from him, from which our flesh and blood are nourished by transformation, is the flesh and blood of that incarnate Jesus.'** The interpretation of this passage has been bedevilled by denominational considerations. It would seem an error to interpret it apart from Justin's theory of the logos. Justin refers explicitly in this passage to the incarnation of the divine logos in the flesh and blood of Jesus for our salvation. So in the Eucharist there is a further action of the logos such that the elements of bread and wine become united with the logos and so become the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus. How this occurs Justin does not state apart from saying that the food is consecrated 'by the Word of prayer which comes from him', which could refer to a thanksgiving deriving from the evyapiotioas of the institution
1 Ts it significant that Justin makes no reference to the singing of Psalms although he was much interested in the Psalms as texts for his exegesis and is said to have written a book called Psaltes? Apost. Trad. xxvi. 28-32 mentions the singing of Psalms at a Private Agape.
2 The Primitive Church, p. 329 n. 5. Note also the remark of R. P. C. Hanson: 'The search for the early liturgy of the Church may well, therefore, be a search for a mare's nest' (Tradition in the Early Church, p. 172).
8 I Apol. \xvi.
10-2
JUSTIN MARTYR
narratives. To go beyond Justin's words into an explanation as to how the elements become the flesh and blood of Christ is to go beyond the evidence. And to state that the mere recital of Christ's words effects transubstantiation of the elements is to read later theories into Justin.1
Justin says nothing in the Apology about the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist although he quotes the words "Do this for my memorial' from the institution narratives in the Gospels. However, in the passages cited above from the Dialogue he dwells at greater length on these words and interprets 'do' and 'remembrance' as having a sacrificial meaning. This conception of the Eucharist as a sacrifice and a memorial of the Passion, which is based on the Pauline words of institution, is peculiar to Justin among second-century writers? although, as in the Apology, he gives no real explanation or theory of the Eucharist.
He was content to accept its spiritual blessings without questioning how the elements had become the flesh and blood of Christ.
(c) The reference in the Afology to the sending of a portion of the consecrated elements to absent members of the Church is the earliest reference to a practice which received considerable extension in later ages. There is however nothing in Justin's account to suggest more than the spiritual sustenance of the sick, aged, and those unable, for one reason or another, to attend the Christian assembly for worship. By the time of Tertullian? Christians were allowed to carry away and keep the 1' It is interesting to compare Justin's theory of the Eucharist with that of Irenaeus. Irenaeus emphasises, more clearly than Justin, the composite character of the Eucharist. While retaining Justin's realism he introduces an invocation of the elements (éikAnois) and states that a heavenly element
(reGyua ovpdviov) is added to them and operates through them (Adv. Haer.
Iv. 18. 4). He also stresses, more than Justin, the effects of the Eucharist as a means of imparting life to the body and soul of man (cf. Ignatius' 'medicine of immortality').
» The idea of the Eucharist as a sacrifice is, of course, found; e.g. in I Clement and Ep. Barnabas. But it is not explicitly connected with the anamnesis. This conception came from the assimilation of Christian Worship to that of Israel and from the offerings which, from an early time, accompanied the celebration of the Eucharist (Goguel,
The Primitive Church, Pp. 356).
° Ad Uxorem ii. 5; Apost. Trad. xxxii. 2 seems also to refer to this practice.
Dix, The Apostolic Tradition of St. Hippolytus (London, 1937), p. 84.
~ 14675
CHURCH AND SACRAMENTS
sacrament in private for their own use. This custom, which was open to abuse, became widespread but is not now allowed anywhere. The ancient practice of reserving a portion of the consecrated elements for those unable to receive them in Church is however practised today throughout Eastern and Western Christendom although the administration is restricted to those in authorised orders.! The practice of using the reserved sacrament as a centre of devotion and worship did not begin until the eleventh century? and has no support in the earliest Christian writers.
Justin's doctrine of the Church and sacraments is not systematised. He belonged to a period when considerable fluidity of doctrine and practice still prevailed. What is significant is that he accepted that the Church was a supernatural society founded by the Apostles in the name of Christ which held to the apostolic teaching. Justin was not conscious of being an innovator in doctrinal or practical matters. His Christianity he believed, rightly or wrongly, he had received from the Church of the preceding age. Justin's descriptions of the sacraments of baptism and the Eucharist are of high value—the more so since they were introduced into his writings almost incidentally. These two sacraments, he believed, were essential to the fullest Christian life although he did not deny that the fruits of the Spirit were sometimes seen outside the Church.
Christian Sunday Worship, without the Eucharist, was unknown to him although the celebrant in each community had a certain amount of freedom in the form of prayer used at this service.
Although he faithfully reproduces the Church's technical terminology Justin stresses strongly the ethical and religious aspect of the sacraments and disassociates them from a magical view of their operation and efficacy. The sacraments are, for him, life-giving and the spiritual life and illumination which Christians receive must issue in good Christian lives. He manages to avoid many of the pitfalls to which later Christian thinkers succumbed. It is unlikely that any fixed or structural form of the liturgy existed in his day, although his liturgical material represents a stage further advanced than that of the 1 C. B. Moss, The Christian Faith: An Introduction to Dogmatic Theology,
Pp. 375-81, has some interesting remarks on the practice of Reservation.
2 It is still unknown in the Eastern Churches.
JUSTIN MARTYR
New Testament and makes the emergence of the later developed liturgies intelligible. Justin's exceptional honesty prevented his stating that the bishop was everywhere the leader of the local
Church and the celebrant of the Eucharist. He knew, as historical investigation shows, that in his day in some parts of the Christian world the title applied to this permanent officer varied. Accordingly he designated him simply 'the ruler of the brethren'.
BROWS