CHAPTER 4
Reading the Early Church Fathers with Clement of Rome. See Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical
History 6.13.
41. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks 2.
Clement said that "superstition" (or paganism) is the worship of too many gods, but atheism admits to no gods at all. The happy medium between the two dangerous "extremes of ignorance" is monotheism.
42. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks 6.
43. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks 9. The word I have translated as "light" in the second verse is actually the word beams. Apparently, a popular analogy for the Trinity in the early
Church was the image of the sun, the beams of light from the sun, and the heat from the sun.
44. Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 2.10. See also the Apostolic Constitutions 6.5 (6.28). This attitude was at least partially a reaction to the promiscuity and rejection of childbearing in some of the gnostic sects. Since it came to be believed that heretics avoided having children but advocated an orgiastic lifestyle, the Church would promote the opposite view, that sex, even within marriage, was only for the purpose of having children. Cf. also
Athenagoras, A Plea for the Christians 32-33, in which Athenagoras even worries about the kiss of peace, saying that only one kiss was allowed; a second kiss crossed the line into sin.
45. For example, see Novatian, On the Benefit of Purity 7.
46. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 1.5. See also The Instructor 1.6, 1.11.
CHAPTER 4
1. According to the Apostolic Church Order 19, the office of "evangelist" was the person who reads the gospel. Other lists of church officers include "readers." Even though the authority of the teaching office would be reserved for the bishops (and delegated to the priests), it was assumed that the bishop might be illiterate.
Therefore, the evangelist was the reader.
2. Didache 11.3.
Notes 3. The Greek word presbyteros can be translated either "priest" or "elder." In some documents, however, the term seems to have a technical meaning referring specifically to the second generation of Church leaders, the ones whom the apostles chose to succeed them. The letters of 2 John and 3 John are probably by a John "the Elder," not the apostle John but possibly his successor.
See Papias 4-7, and Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 2.22.5, 5.5.1. Note that Papias believed that the Book of Revelation was also by John the Elder.
4. Didache 15, 1 Clement 41-42. Note that the bishop and priest are considered equals, with the deacons occupying a lower place on the hierarchy. The word pastor simply means shepherd, a concept that seems to go back to Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 1.6, but is clearly based on the concept of Jesus as the Good Shepherd, combined with John 21:15-17.
Peretinas ive povepvera. 3.5.1.
15.1, 102.2, sin, ie Shepherd, priests are called teachers. As long as the terms bishop and priest are interchangeable, the resident pastor was, of course, the teacher of the house-church. Once the office of bishop emerged as an "overseer" of the other priests, the teaching authority would ultimately rest with the bishops, but would be granted to the priests for their churches as long as their teaching was consistent with the bishops'.
6. Note that in the Martyrdom of fustin, Justin Martyr tells the Roman authorities that the Christians of Rome do not have a single meeting place because there are too many of them to fit into one space.
7. This was the case in Rome during Clement's time. See also Hermas, The Shepherd 8.3. As long as the apostles were alive, they functioned as bishops, as the authority over a region, or over a group of churches, such as the apostle Paul over the churches he founded, or the apostle John over the churches of Asia Minor
(mentioned in Revelation 1—2). By the time the apostles were gone, there were likely multiple house-churches in each city, so that the bishop would again have authority over multiple churches, but within a city rather than regionally. Eventually, certain cities would be designated as metropolitans, the bishops there having authority over a region, even over the other bishops in that region.
Reading the Early Church Fathers 8. Even when the office of bishop came to be an authority over the rest of the priests, it was always assumed that the bishop remained a priest and in that sense was "first among equals." In the third century, Cyprian assumes that bishops are priests, and that bishops and priests are copresiders of the sacraments (Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 51.7, 54.20).
9. 1 Clement 40.5-41.1. It does not appear that church leadership becomes an occupation (with pay) until the late second century. By the time of Tertullian, who wrote at the turn of the third century, he can criticize some heretics because their leaders have to have secular jobs to make a living. The implication is that if their sects were legitimate, they would be able to support their leaders, (Tertullian, The Prescription Against the Heretics 41).
According to the Didascalia Apostolorum 8-9, when bishops do receive pay for leading their churches, they are to consider themselves as sharing the resources of the church with the needy. It appears that offerings were collected and entrusted to the bishop, who distributed money to those in need, keeping some for himself as a salary. The Didascalia also includes a schedule of clergy stipends; however, this represents a later development, no earlier than the third or fourth century.
10. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians 3, Letter to the Magnesians 3.1, 6.
11. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians 2, 20, Letter to the Magnesians 2, 7, Letter to the Trallians 2-3, Letter to the Philadelphians 4.
12. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Philadelphians 4.1, Letter to the Trallians 3.1. Note that the word for "bishop" here is singular.
13. Note that in the middle of the second century, Justin Martyr, though not a bishop, was the leader of a philosophical (catechetical?) school in Rome. It appears to be just one of a number of such schools, though we do not know how many, nor do we know whether each school had a different teaching authority over it, or whether the leaders of all the schools would answer to the same bishop.
14. Acts 20:7-12 may point to an early tradition of evening Eucharist, which would be understandable considering the fact that
Notes the Last Supper was in the evening. See Ralph P. Martin, Worship in the Early Church (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1964), 33.
15. Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 67. Note also that in the Martyrdom of Justin, it is clear that there are multiple church meetings in Rome.
16. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to Polycarp 5.2.
17. Cyprian of Carthage, On the Lapsed 25.
18. Didascalia Apostolorum 12. In Rome, however, there was a separate office of doorkeeper.
19. Didascalia Apostolorum 16. As the Christian population in a city grew, the deacons could also be charged with communicating with the bishop on behalf of the people, acting as a secretary to the bishop, so that the bishop's time did not become consumed by the needs of individuals.
20. Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 65, 67. The deacons were to act on behalf of the bishops in visiting the sick and shut-ins. According to the Didascalia, they would also bring food to those in prison and were authorized to bribe the guards to treat the Christian prisoners well. They might also use church money to ransom kidnapped
Christians or even buy the freedom of Christian slaves or prisoners (Didascalia Apostolorum 18-19).
21. Didascalia Apostolorum 16. As we will see below, the church of Rome in the third century had seven deacons, which corresponded to the division of the city into regions.
22. See Ignatius of Antioch, preface to the Letter to the Philadelphians, and the Martyrdom of Polycarp 6. On the restriction of presiding to bishops and priests, see also the Apostolic Tradition 8,
28. On the other hand, deacons (and deaconesses) did play a more central role in baptism in some places. See the Didascalia
Apostolorum 16.
23. Apostolic Tradition 14.
24. David Rankin, Tertullian and the Church (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 1995), 191.
25. Worshiping Christ in the early Church included praying to him (asking for his presence and intervention, cf. Acts 7:59-60 and the prayers of the early martyr acts), calling him "Lord" in confessions of faith that make him the object of faith (cf. Rom 10:9-13,
1 Cor 12:1-3, 15:3-5), conducting sacraments in his name, and
Reading the Early Church Fathers singing hymns in praise of his divinity. See Pliny the Younger,
Letter to Trajan, where Pliny tells Trajan that the Christians have a habit of singing songs to Christ "as to a god," and Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, 3.33.1-3, 5.28.5-6, where Eusebius says, "All the psalms and hymns which were written by faithful
Christians from the beginning sing of the Christ as the Word (Logos) of God and treat him as God." See also Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 11-12, 19, 24-27, 57-60. The practice of worship in the early Church was based on current Jewish practice and included praise, prayer, and instruction. The experiences of the disciples in the ministry of Jesus, as well as their understanding of his life, death, and resurrection, all resulted in the institution of sacraments, but even these have their Jewish precedents. The concept of worship itself assumes two aspects: service and submission. 'Io worship God (and Christ) means to submit to his will and serve him in the world.
26. Hymn singing in the early church followed the practice of the synagogue (cf. Matt 26:30) and was more like melodic chanting, or singing with a melody of limited range (cf. Tertullian,
Apology 2.6). Christian hymns probably began as a kind of intoned reading, at a time when it would be hard to distinguish between unison recitation, chanting, and singing.
27. Early Christian melodies probably used a limited number of notes orbiting around a tonic, something close to a Phrygian
(pentatonic) scale, and not unlike medieval chant. Their musical intervals were not exactly like ours, so most of their scales would probably sound like minor keys to us, though they may have eventually developed the use of different modes for different liturgical seasons. The Oxyrhynchus hymn, from the third century, is our earliest example of Christian music with notation. It has a range of one octave (see Ralph P. Martin, A Hymn of Christ [Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1997], 4, 7). At the beginning, in the house-churches, it seems that anyone might bring a song (1 Cor
14:26), which was then led by the one who composed it. At some times and places, spontaneous hymns may have been seen as a charismatic gift, like a musical version of speaking in tongues; however, this would have gone by the wayside along with prophecy, especially if it became more of a solo rather than including partici-
Notes pation by the congregation. A hymn would usually have been sung as a call and response, possibly based on a psalm or some biblical parallelism, with the leader singing a line alternating with the assembly echoing the same line, or repeating a refrain. See Tertullian, Apology
2.6, 39, and Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 2.17.22. See also Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 40-41; and A Hymn of Christ, 3-4, 6, 13. Possible examples of antiphonal singing in the Bible include Ezra 3:11, Nehemiah 12:24, 31, and Revelation
22:17. Cf. also Didache 10.6 and Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 63.
28. Odes of Solomon 14.8, 26.3. See also Revelation 5:8. These songs may have been accompanied by a lyre, though probably not by flutes, horns, or percussion instruments, because those were used in the pagan mystery cults and the Christians did not want to be mistaken for these cults or be perceived as imitating them
(Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 41). Note that the Essenes also used lyres. The lyre was a sort of cross between a guitar and a small harp. The closest-modern equivalent is probably the autoharp. References to harps in the Book of Revelation (14:2, 15:2) probably indicate that lyres were used in Christian worship (cf. also
1 Sam 16:23). But see Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 2.4, where Clement allows the use of the harp but not the playing of songs or tunes that are "secular" (love songs) or that imitate the chromatic melodies of pagan music.
29. This close connection between the incarnation and the Eucharist was typical of the early apologists and theologians. The manna in the wilderness is the bread that came down from heaven, and is interpreted as a foreshadowing of the coming of Christ (John
6). This was the basis for early eucharistic theology, in which authors such as Justin Martyr and Irenaeus connected the incarnation ("the Word became flesh," John 1:14) with the Eucharist, using the same language of becoming to describe their understanding that the elements of bread and wine became the flesh and blood of Christ.
30. Odes of Solomon 19, 28, 36. Note also that Clement of Alexandria refers to God as both Father and Mother in Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved? 37.
31. Odes of Solomon 33.5ff.
Reading the Early Church Fathers 32. Odes of Solomon 27, 42.1-2. See also 1 Clement 2.3. The usual prayer position seems to be the so-called "orans" position
(orans is simply the Latin word for praying). This would be standing with arms out, though not stretched out as in a cruciform position, with head and hands raised (Clement of Alexandria,
Miscellanies 7.7). Note that Clement says there is some movement of the feet, possibly a swaying back and forth, though he may be saying that at the end of prayer, the true Christian "sets the feet in motion," meaning that prayer leads to action out in the world.
According to Tertullian, Apology 16, and the Didascalia Apostolorum 12, the one who prays should face east.
33. Ordination is a ritual by the time of Tertullian, The Prescription Against the Heretics 41.
34. Apostolic Tradition 2. In the Apostolic Tradition, which contains layers of material that cannot be dated with any certainty, it appears that early on, laypeople participated in the elections.
However, this could simply mean that the priests voted and the laity ratified the vote by their assent in liturgy.
35. Apostolic Church Order 16. See also Didascalia Apostolorum 4.
36. When it came to choosing a bishop, it was preferable if he were unmarried, but if he was married, he must be married only once. If he was married, his wife must also be a believer and be morally above reproach. He should be at least fifty years old, unless the congregation in a particular city is so small that no one over fifty is acceptable; then a younger man might be chosen (Didascalia
Apostolorum 4).
37. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians 7.2, 8.2, Letter to the Trallians 9.1-2, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 1.1-2. Aristides,
Apology 15.
38. Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 61.
39. In Mark 10, the concepts of "cup" and "baptism" are used symbolically to refer to Jesus' death. We can see in this how the early Christians connected the sacraments to sacrifice.
40. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks 10.
41. Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 61.
42. 2 Clement 7.6, 8.6, Hermas, The Shepherd 11.5, 72.34, 93.4. See also 2 Corinthians 1:22, Ephesians 1:13, 4:30, 2 Timothy
Notes 2:19. Cf. Romans 4:11, in which Paul refers to circumcision as a seal. Note also that in the Book of Revelation, the mark of the beast is contrasted with the ones who are marked for God. No doubt the concept of being marked for God refers to baptism.
43. Hermas, The Shepherd 32.4, 49.2, 60.3—4. Justin Martyr, I Apology 61.
44. For example, see the Didascalia Apostolorum 5, 20.
45. Hermas, The Shepherd 6.5, 32.4, 33.3, 41, Irenaeus of Lyons, Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching 3, Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 54.13, 75.16, On the Unity of the Catholic Church
20-21, and the anonymous On Rebaptism 12.
46. Hermas, The Shepherd 29.8, 31.6, Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 2.13, Who Is the Rich Man That Shall Be Saved? 39-40.
47. Didache 11.
48. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 8.2. See also Clement of Alexandria, The Instructor 2.1.
49. In the Apostolic Tradition 25-27 we can see a separation of the Eucharist (in the morning) from the meal (in the evening).
Cyprian would write that even though the Last Supper of Jesus was in the evening, it is appropriate to celebrate the Eucharist in the morning because the resurrection occurred in the morning (Cyprian of Carthage, Epistle 62.16). On the other hand, as we have seen, the opposite could be the case. In a city that had too many housechurches for one bishop to cover, the Sunday morning meeting may have gone on without the Eucharist, which waited until all the Christians of the city could gather in one place in the evening. The combination of meal and sacrament probably lasted the longest in the celebrations held at the cemeteries.
50. It was only the Gnostics who interpreted the Eucharist as strictly symbolic. Since they did not believe in the real flesh of Christ, they could hardly see the Eucharist as in any way the real presence of Christ's flesh. The Gnostics interpreted John 6 metaphorically, but most of the Church did not. Even Irenaeus, who is famous for interpretation using typology, did not see the Eucharist as a type or metaphor. For him, the eucharistic bread becomes the body of Christ. See Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies
5.2.23.
51. Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 66.
Reading the Early Church Fathers 52. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 5.2.2-3.
53. Didache 14.1.
54. 1 Clement 57.2, cf. 1 Cor 5:1-11.
55. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Philadelphians 8.1.
56. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks 2.
57. It is a difficult thing to distinguish that element within the universal Church that would come to be called orthodoxy, without relying on anachronisms. While admitting that history is written by the winners of the debates, and terms such as orthodoxy and heresy can only be defined in hindsight, this treatment takes the approach that, on one hand, what comes to be the orthodox definition of doctrine represents the majority position in any given age of the Church (see Tertullian, The Prescription Against the Heretics 1), and at the same time, this treatment accepts by faith the reality of providence and the work of the Holy Spirit in guiding the outcome of doctrinal debates (Matt 16:18). It must be admitted that at some times and places, the orthodox position was not, in fact, the majority, such as was the case in Augustine's North Africa, or the eastern empire of the fourth century under the emperor Constantius. In the bigger picture of worldwide Christianity, however, it was still true that what came to be defined as orthodoxy was the position held by the majority of bishops. Therefore, while admitting the limitations of such usage, I will fall back on the concept of a "mainstream" Church, when that seems to be the most useful designation, to denote the trajectory of orthodox doctrine that ran from the apostles through the ecumenical councils. Furthermore, I maintain that this "mainstream" Church represents a middle way between the extreme (and mutually exclusive) alternative interpretations that emerged in the history of the Church.
58. It is entirely possible that there were more than two groups, and that the different divisions mentioned in 1 Corinthians reflect multiple factions. In fact, there are many theories that attempt to explain the historical situation in Corinth, and what is presented here is just one of them, arguably the simplest, which attempts to place everyone in Corinth into one of two groups.
However, theories that propose more than two or three different groups probably overestimate the size of the Corinthian church in the mid-first century. It is clear from 1 Clement 38 that similar
Notes divisions of rich/poor, wise/humble, strong/weak still existed in Corinth even in the early nineties of the first century. Contemporary scholarship on 1 Corinthians also includes theories that suggest that the document we know as | Corinthians is actually a composition of fragments from more than one letter. While my interpretation assumes that 1 Corinthians is a single letter, it must be acknowledged that it is probable that the Corinthian correspondence as a whole originally included more than two letters (2 Cor
10:9).
59.
1am indebted to my colleague K. K. Yeo for this insight.
60. The philosophical group never would have practiced speaking in tongues, since charismatic worship would violate the Stoic principle that virtue entailed suppression of the passions. The philosophical Christians of Corinth may have complained to Paul about disorder in worship and thus prompted Paul to address the issue. Paul had corrections for both sides of the disputes, however.
61. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 1.16.
62. Philo of Alexandria seems to have taken the concept of dualism further than Plato, and therefore he may be one of the links between Platonic dualism and docetism. The Neo-Pythagoreans also taught an extreme dualism, which may provide part of the explanation for docetism.
63. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 8.3.
64. While early Christian writers tended to trace all docetism back to Simon Magus (Acts 8:9-24) and the Nicolaitans (Rev 2:6,
15), there is no evidence of a direct connection between these New Testament figures and later heretics. It does seem that the Nicolaitans were libertines, but that in itself does not necessarily make them Docetics. Some also connected the Nicolaitans to the deacon
Nicolas, mentioned in Acts 6:15, but this is pure speculation based on the similarity of the names. See Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.23.14, 1.26.3, Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies
6.14-15, 7.24, and cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 21, 25.
65. There is probably an intentional triple meaning in this statement of Paul: (1) The human body matters, and what you do with your body does affect your spirit (1 Cor 6:19-20); (2) the Church is the body of Christ, and the philosophical group was disrespecting their brothers and sisters in Christ, fellow members of
Reading the Early Church Fathers the body of Christ; and (3) the body of Christ is in the eucharistic bread.
66. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 2.14.2.
67. The elements that make up docetism may predate Christianity, as can be seen by the fact that it is present in those who opposed Paul's thinking; within the Church, however, gnosticism emerged as the result of the combination of docetism and syncretism, and then as it evolved, it eventually separated from the Church.
68. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.1. For possible references to early gnosticism (called "false knowledge"), see 1
Corinthians 8:1, and 1 Timothy 6:20.
69. Gordon D. Fee, Pauline Christology: An Exegetical and Theological Study (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007), 516-17.
70. For example, see Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 2.22.4, Tertullian, Against the Valentinians 26, and Novatian, On the Trinity 10.6. See also Larry W. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ: Devotion to fesus in Earliest Christianity (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2003),
S14.
71. Polycarp of Smyrna, Letter to the Philippians 7.1. Polycarp connected the Docetics of his time (the first half of the second century) with the "antichrists" of 1 John 4:2-3. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 41.1.
72. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Trallians 10, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 4.2.
73. Tertullian, On the Flesh of Christ, 16. Tertullian responded that it was the likeness of sinful flesh in which Christ came. In other words, he had real flesh, but no real sin.
74. Novatian, On the Trinity, 10.9. Novatian responded that Paul was talking about the sins of the flesh, not the human body per se.
75. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.10, 4.11.2.
Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 41.
76. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.10-11.
77. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.10-11.
78. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.5.4. See also Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 257.
79. Hurtado, Lord Fesus Christ, 255.
Notes 80. Arland J. Hultgren and Steven A. Haggmark, eds., The Earliest Christian Heretics: Readings from Their Opponents (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 106.
81. Tertullian, Against Marcion 1.2.1-3.
82. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 554.
83. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.14.7.
84. We must always be careful when we use a writer's theological opponent(s) as a source for understanding his thought. We cannot assume that the opponents' assessment is completely accurate or fair.
85. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 10.15.
Cf.
Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 42.
86. Tertullian, On the Flesh of Christ 5; Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 8.3. See also Hurtado, Lord Fesus Christ, 556-57.
While Marcion may well have believed in the crucifixion, he would still have rejected the idea that Jesus suffered, or that his suffering had any atoning significance. Marcion would have interpreted the death of Christ as a demonstration of the true goal of humanity, that of escaping the prison of the flesh.
87. The letters of Paul have an inherent distinction between flesh and body. For Paul, flesh has a negative connotation, not because it belongs to the material world, but because of its connection to sin and temptation. There is no similar negative connotation with the word body in Paul, and in fact for Paul the Church is the body of Christ. Marcion would have applied Paul's specific pejorative use of flesh to the human body in general.
88. Hurtado, Lord fesus Christ, 551 ff.
89. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians 5, 20, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6.1-2. Ignatius presents the issue as though the Docetics rejected the Eucharist, but some probably actually had their own Eucharist in which they rejected the use of wine because they did not believe Jesus had any blood. When Ignatius says they rejected the Eucharist, he means that they separated themselves from the unity of the one legitimate Eucharist of the Church under the authority of the bishop. The use of water instead of wine in the Eucharist is referred to as aquarianism. Ignatius is not directly addressing Marcionites (since Marcion did not arrive on the scene until after the time of Ignatius), but Cyprian also confronts the Ze
Reading the Early Church Fathers practice of aquarianism. Apparently, those who practiced it claimed that they did not want anyone to smell wine on their breath, which might lead to their condemnation during persecution. But Cyprian considered this an excuse and chastised them for being ashamed of the blood of Christ. Cyprian said that the sacrament must contain wine, not water alone, since Jesus used wine (and even turned water into wine), and Melchizedek used wine. In fact, the Old Testament calls wine the "blood of the grape" (Gen 49:2, Isa 63:2), so no wine means no blood, which means no salvation (Cyprian of Carthage,
Epistle 62).
90. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.7, 11. See also Hultgren and Haggmark, The Earliest Christian Heretics,
112-15. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 42.
91. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 2.14.1-2. Some have called Marcion a Gnostic; however, Marcion does not seem to have subscribed to the idea of secret knowledge, the hallmark of gnosticism. Therefore, it is more accurate to call Marcion a Docetic, not a Gnostic. By calling gnosticism "a whole new religion" I do not mean to imply that it was a unified or connected organization. It is more appropriate to speak of the many gnostic systems that existed side by side with no uniformity.
92. Since Marcion's belief system did not include this secret knowledge, he cannot be called a Gnostic. Technically speaking, he was a Docetic, but not a Gnostic. Marcionite docetism continued in Marcion's followers and existed alongside gnosticism throughout the second century.
93. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.23.5. See also Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.2. Hippolytus knew of some
Gnostics who said that the secret knowledge was handed down through James, the brother of the Lord. This teaching was probably an answer to Irenaeus's critique that if there was a secret knowledge, the bishops would know it, since they were the successors of the apostles. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 22.
94. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.24.1-2, Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.16.
95. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History, 4.7, Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.25.1. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion
27. See also Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, 7.20. Hippolytus
Notes believed that there was some interdependence of influence between the Ebionites' angel Christology and the Carpocratians. While
Hippolytus may be confused about certain aspects of distinction between angel Christology and what Carpocrates taught, one interesting aspect of Carpocratian gnosticism seems to be the belief that the reason Jesus could bring secret knowledge to earth was because he was able to remember his past lives as well as his conversations with God in the time before his journey to earth. Many of the philosophers had believed in reincarnation, and Plato had taught that the reason we make mistakes (sin) in this life is that we cannot remember the lessons learned in our past lives. Plato seemed to believe that if we could only remember the time before this present life, we would not sin. Apparently, Carpocrates picked up on this idea and incorporated it into his Christology.
96. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies 3.2.5-10. See also Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 26.42. According to Epiphanius, the Gnostics had a secret handshake so that they could recognize fellow "swingers." It entailed tickling the palm of the other person while shaking hands. Note that these libertine Gnostics practiced orgies but rejected children. They prohibited procreation, believing that sexuality was for pleasure only. The mainstream Church's response to this was to take the opposite position, that sex was for procreation only.
97. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.20.
98. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 8.13, Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.7. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis,
Panarion 23, 47.
99. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.16, Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.28-29.
100. Irenaeus criticized vegetarianism as a sign of ingratitude toward God for the gift of meat (Against Heresies 1.28.1). The asceticism of the Encratites, and in some cases the Ebionites, probably influenced several of the early apocryphal Acts, which present marriage as sinful because it involves sexual intercourse (see Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 30). These second-century documents often portray the apostles preaching a message of abstinence for all true believers, to the extent that for them following Christ means rejecting marriage. See the Acts of Thomas (which has gnostic elements)
Reading the Early Church Fathers and also the Acts of Paul and Thecla (which does not seem to be enostic, though it does advocate celibacy as the only true Christian calling).
101. For their use of water without wine in the Eucharist, see Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 8.13, and Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 47.1.5-7. For the possible use of oil without water in baptism, see the Acts of Thomas.
102. Irenaeus of Lyon, Against Heresies 3.2.2. Cf. the gnostic Letter to Flora. See also John Behr, The Way to Nicaea: The Formation of Christian Theology, Volume 1 (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's
Seminary Press, 2001), 40.
103. See Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 45.
104. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.6.1, 1.7.2. See also Novatian, On the Trinity 10.6.
105.Some Gnostics who held a hybrid Christology (for example, Apelles) did reject the birth of Jesus altogether, saying that Christ simply created for himself a "soulish" or spiritual body.
See Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.26.1, Tertullian, On the Flesh of Christ 10, and Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.15,
7.21. Irenaeus and Hippolytus knew of some Gnostics (including Cerinthus) who allowed for a kind of resurrection of Christ, though it was only the resurrection of this "soulish" body.
106. This is similar to, but not the same as, the mainstream tendency to assign impassibility to the divine nature of Christ and passibility to his human nature. The mainstream Church did not separate Jesus from the Christ, and of course the human nature of Christ was truly human. The gnostic separation of Jesus from the Christ was specifically meant to avoid attributing any real humanity to him, even the part called "Jesus."
107. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.7.2, Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.21. See also Hultgren and Haggmark,
The Earliest Christian Heretics, 34ff. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 28, Although this may sound similar to the Ebionites'
Christology (see below), even those Ebionites who admitted to a preexistent Christ maintained that this Christ was a created being, while the gnostic version saw the Christ as a divine being. It is true that in gnostic hybrid Christology the Christ might be described as an angel, but remember that Gnostics regard angels as divine
Notes beings, albeit a lower level of divinity. The closer we look at these alternative Christologies, the more difficult it becomes to distinguish between some of the intricacies of their systems. For example, the difference between the Ebionites' understanding of a created angel and the Gnostics' understanding of a lower order of divine being called angel can be hard to pin down. In the gnostic system, even these lower divinities are often described as born out of some prior procreative act, so that we cannot simply say that ascribing divinity to them means that they are eternal. The main difference seems to be in the difference between creator and created. For the Ebionites (and indeed the mainstream Church), angels are created beings and are not creators. For the Gnostics, even if the divine angels (or aeons) have a beginning to their existence, they are the offspring of divine nature, and are therefore the creators of what comes after them. Therefore, the point is not whether Christ is called an angel, but whether he is understood to be divine or created, or some combination of the two.
108. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.7. Cf.
Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 24.
109. Virtually every philosophical concept becomes deified in the gnostic system, and yet these deities are so personified as to be made in the image of humanity, including procreation by coupling. Irenaeus criticized the Gnostics for anthropomorphizing their deities, even while they rejected the God of the Old Testament because of the anthropomorphisms found there (Against Heresies
DEVOY 110. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.15.
111. Since salvation is an escape from the body, even those Gnostics who believed in some kind of resurrection of Jesus did not assume that Jesus' resurrection implied a resurrection for humans.
The Pauline doctrine of the resurrection of the body (1 Cor 15) is antithetical to gnostic dualism. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion
44.14.
112. In the Apocryphon of James, Jesus says, "I have taught you what to say before the archons." Though it is clear that the secret knowledge must have included some kind of "password" to ascend through the heavenly "tollbooths," there is no extant gnostic document that records any of the gnostic secrets. However, it probably
Reading the Early Church Fathers had to do with knowing and reciting the names of the aeons (or archons), which are an important feature of Basilidean and Valentinian gnosticism.
113. Irenaeus had criticized the Gnostics on the grounds that they had no apostolic succession. Their response was apparently to claim that they had their own succession of teaching, which originated with Jesus through Matthias (Irenaeus of Lyons, Agamst
Heresies 3.3.1-2, Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.20.1).
Other Gnostics taught that the secret knowledge was handed down through James. See Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.2.
114. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 24.5.4-5.
115. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.24.3—7.
116. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.6.2. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 459, 462.
117. Hurtado, Lord Fesus Christ, 458, 477. Cf. Gospel of Thomas 3.
118. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.29, Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 5.9-12.
Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 39-40.
119. Hurtado, Lord Fesus Christ, 634. The second century Apocryphon of Jobn and the Gospel of Fudas are Sethian documents.
Note that in the Gospel of Fudas, Judas is actually an archon (demon), so it is not as though he is the hero of the story. See April D.
DeConick, The Thirteenth Apostle: What the Gospel of Judas Really Says (London: Continuum, 2007).
120. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 4.11. Cf.
Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 31.
121. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 525.
122. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.6.2. This seems to be based on the ancient anthropology that understood the human as being made up of three parts: the spirit (or rational soul), the soul
(or animal soul), and the body. The spirit, or rational soul, was thought to include the mind, while the animal soul was simply the "life force" that drove the instincts, bodily functions, and physical desires of the human.
123.Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.25.2, 2.19.3, 232.5%
Notes 124. Hultgren and Hagemark, The Earliest Christian Heretics, 82.
125.It would be impossible to know what the original version of the Gospel of Truth was like, since the text that is part of the Nag Hammadi collection is a later, and certainly edited, version. It is important to note that the gnostic gospels were written no earlier than the second century, at a time when the Gnostics were already separating themselves from the mainstream church (1 John
2:19), and so the gnostic gospels were never considered for inclusion in the New Testament canon. Irenaeus called them a deception and a fantasy (Against Heresies 1.8.1).
126. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 473, 484.
127. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 587.
128. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.25.2, 2.19.3, 2205; 129. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, 7.26.
Cf.
Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 44.
130. Hurtado, Lord fesus Christ, 256.
131. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.7.2.
132. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies, 7.26.
Cf.
Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 44.
133. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.6.24, 2.14.5.
134.See Hultgren and Haggmark, The Earliest Christian Heretics, 37-38. See also Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 483-84. Cf.
Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 26. The reader must keep in mind, however, that there was great diversity of thought among those we now call Gnostics, and we should not assume that there was one consistent gnostic movement.
135, Hurtado, Lord Fesus Christ, 367-68.
136.Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.25.2, 2.19.3, 2.3223"
137. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 3.11.9. Irenaeus, writing in the late second century, knew that the gnostic gospels
(especially the so-called Gospel of Truth) were recent productions.
138. Gospel of Thomas 13. Thomas actually says to the other disciples, "If I tell you one of the sayings he spoke to me, you will pick up rocks and stone me, and fire will come from the rocks and devour you."
Reading the Early Church Fathers 139. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 3.3.2, 2.11.9.
140. Hurtado, Lord Jesus Christ, 166.
141. There are some hints in the Old Testament that the Messiah would be more than human, such as Daniel 7:13, but not until after the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus did these begin to make sense in a Christian context. There were also some hints in extrabiblical Jewish prophetic writings that the Messiah would be more than human, or even superhuman (such as 2 Esdras 13), but these were not universally accepted nor were they consistently interpreted. The average Jewish believer would not have expected the Messiah to be divine, and even the followers of Jesus did not understand his divinity until after the resurrection. This is, in part, why he was killed—he surpassed all expectations and in the end was not the kind of Messiah that the people expected, or even wanted.
142. Behr, The Way to Nicaea, 53, 57-59.
143. Hurtado, Lord Fesus Christ, 119.
144. Hurtado, Lord Fesus Christ, 127.
145. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians 8-10, Letter to the Philadelphians 6-9, cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 30.
There was also a group called the Nazareans, mentioned by several early writers. While some have assumed that this was a separate group of Jewish Christians, it is more likely that they are two names for the same group of people (see Jerome, Epistle 112). But cf.
Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 29-30. Epiphanius mistakenly thinks the Ebionites are named after a person called Ebion, who was originally a Nazarean, yet he talks about them as if the Ebionites split from the Nazareans making two separate groups.
The name Ebionite does not derive from a person, so Epiphanius is certainly mistaken. Still, it must be said that the label Ebionite as it is used now is an umbrella term for any group that denied the divinity of Christ. We cannot assume that all early Christians who leaned in this direction agreed on all points, nor did they constitute a separate, organized ecclesial body. When there were individual house-churches that leaned in this direction, it would be just as likely to have been because they followed a particular Ebionite, as that they were organized around that Christology.
146. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 30.2.7. Although Epiphanius is mistaken on other points of the Ebionites' origins,
Notes this seems plausible given the connection of the Judaizers to the Jerusalem church. See Hultgren and Haggmark, The Earliest
Christian Heresies, 116.
147. Some early Church writers thought the name was actually first used as an insult by their opponents, as if it meant that they were intellectually poor, or that they had a poor view of Christ (see
Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.27). It is more likely, however, that they chose the name for themselves. The belief that Jesus was poor probably comes from his own words in Matthew
8:20, "Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head." While this may be an argument for the fact that Jesus was not married, it does not mean that he was homeless. It simply means that he was itinerant. In fact, as the son of a skilled laborer, he came from the working class and would not have been what we would call poor, in the sense of malnourished. Even during his ministry he seems to have lived with Peter's family, and made his headquarters there (Matt 4:13). Note that the Christologies that overemphasize the humanity of Christ also tend to understand salvation in terms of following his example.
148. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 6.16. There was a general consensus among the orthodox and heretics alike that part of the very definition of divinity included the concept of immutability, the conviction that God does not change. This was based on the assumption that what is divine is also eternal and therefore uncreated. To be uncreated must also mean immutable, since mutability is related to corruptibility. See Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus 1.4, 2.4.
149. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.22-24, 35-36, 10.23-24. According to Hippolytus, Theodotus taught that Jesus had been converted from a life of promiscuity (cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 54). Epiphanius said that Theodotus had denied
Christ to save his life during the persecution, and that he later taught that Christ was not divine as an excuse for his apostasy.
Epiphanius implies that Theodotus gained followers because his Christology allowed people to deny Christ in times of persecution, since they believed he was only a man.
150. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 5.28.6.
151. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.24.
Reading the Early Church Fathers 152. Aloys Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition, Volume 1:
From the Apostolic Age to Chalcedon (451) (New York: Oxford University Press, 2004), 78. Other known disciples of Theodotus were Asclepiodotus and Symmachus. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis,
Panarion 55.
153. Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition, 46. Note that this is not to be confused with the orthodox tendency to interpret Old
Testament appearances of the "angel of the Lord" as the preincarnate Christ. The Ebionites' angel Christology denied Christ's preexistence; therefore, he could not be present in the Old Testament.
Hermas's The Shepherd is one possible example of angel Christology.
This second-century document describes Christ as an angel, and salvation is by keeping the law (see Hermas, The Shepherd 69.5).
154. Cf. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 30.3.7. The socalled Gospel of the Nazareans may have been an Aramaic version of Matthew, while the so-called Gospel of the Hebrews may have been the edited version of Matthew in Hebrew. Epiphanius refers to a Gospel of the Ebionites, though it is not clear whether that is the name of a gospel they used or simply a reference to one of these other gospels no longer extant. On the other hand, Eusebius says that they rejected the Gospel of Matthew altogether, though this probably is a reference to their rejection of the way Matthew connects
Jesus to Old Testament messianic prophecies (see Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 6.17).
155. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 3.27. That the mainstream Church interpreted Isaiah 7:14 as a miraculous conception, see Justin Martyr, J Apology 33, and Irenaeus of Lyons,
Against Heresies 3.21.6-10. Irenaeus says that since Adam had no father, Jesus (the second Adam) also had no biological father.
156. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 5.8.
157. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastical History 6.16.
158. Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition, 77.
159. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.22. In the case of angel Christology, the spiritual indwelling would be thought to take place at Jesus' conception rather than his baptism, which is why they accepted the idea of a miraculous birth.
160. Martin, Worship in the Early Church, 90.
Notes 161. Grillmeier, Christ in Christian Tradition, 67. Although he was rewarded with an exalted status and adopted sonship, he was not thought to have been made divine at his baptism (see
Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.23). Some Ebionites may have believed that Jesus was rewarded with divine status after the resurrection, perhaps at the ascension. Later, the Arians would extend the exalted status of Jesus to a kind of divinity.
162. Athanasius of Alexandria, Against the Nations 46.1.
163. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.22-24. Hippolytus says the Ebionites believed that Jesus "received Christ," who descended on him like a dove.
164. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.12-13, 22.
165. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 3.19.1, Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.22.
166. Hippolytus, Refutation of All Heresies 7.22.
167. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 1.26.2.
168. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 5.1.3, cf. Hippolytus, Refutation of Heresies 8.13.
169. Epiphanius of Salamis, Panarion 30. On the apocryphal acts, see Helen Rhee, Early Christian Literature: Christ and Culture in the Second and Third Centuries (New York: Routledge, 2005).
170. Tertullian, On Baptism 17.
171. See also the Martyrdom of Perpetua and Felicitas 7-8.
172. See also the Apostolic Constitutions 8.4 (8.29).
173. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks 1, 10.
174. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians 11.1. See also Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 3.19.3.
175.2 Clement 9.1, Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 12.2.
176. Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrnaeans 5.2.
177. Irenaeus of Lyons, Against Heresies 3.20.3.
178. Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks 1, 11.
179. Theophilus of Antioch, 7o Autolycus 2.18.
180. Justin Martyr, 1 Apology 36, 44, 62, 63. Since God is invisible, anyone in the Old Testament who thinks they are seeing
God is really seeing the preincarnate Christ. Also, since the Divine is omnipresent, it was believed that God the Father could not be localized, or circumscribed, in one place. Therefore, any time the