Notes
Ignatius
relating the institutional hierarchy to the heavenly one Ignatius showed how an ethos of submission to local leaders was a compelling duty. He was able to provide such legitimation because of his perceived position as one in special contact with and possessing extraordinary knowledge of the communities' sacred symbols. The interaction between ideas and social structures provides an adequate means of understanding both Ignatius' explication of local leadership institutions and the emergence of monepiscopacy. Hierarchical social arrangements which arose out of worship in the household helped to shape Ignatius' reflection on the relationship between the heavenly and earthly hierachy. That reflection, in turn, reinforced and gave more formal expression to such arrangements, thereby contributing to the development of institutions of authority.
N o t e s 1 For example, Barrett, 1976; Donahue, 1978, pp. 81-93; Swartley, 1973, pp. 81-103,
2 1960, p. 29; she postulates the existence of Essene cells in Asia Minor, but is there any evidence for this which is not circular? See also Trevett, 1983, pp. Iff. who connects Ignatius and the Didache to reconstruct a profile of Christianity in Antioch; again the question must be asked: did the situation in Asia Minor reflect that in Antioch? Brown and Meier, 1983, pp. 74-80 connect Matthew and Ignatius' community in a trajectory, but they admit that this raises several problems which they leave unsolved.
3 We shall assume that Ignatius confronted only one group of opponents. A full discussion of this falls outside our immediate scope. Schoedel, 1985, passim, is the latest scholar to argue for two groups — one docetic, the other Jewish-Christian
(similarly, Corwin, 1960, pp. 52-87; Richardson, 1935, pp. 51-54, 79-85; Bammel,
1982, pp. 83f.). Molland, 1954, pp. 1-6 and Barnard, 1963, pp. 193-206 argue for one group, while Barrett, 1976, pp, 23If., contends that there were two groups but that both were docetic. Chief among the older scholars who argued for one group is Lightfoot, 1885, Pt. 2, Vol. 1, pp. 373-77.
4 Ibid., Pt. 2, Vol. 1, pp. 70-106, 222-66, 315-414; Zahn, 1873.
5 For challenges to the consensus see the discussion in Schoedel, 1985, pp. 5-7.
Davies, 1976, pp. 175-180, presents a compelling argument for placing Ignatius' arrest in A.D. Î13. This does not accord with the traditional dating of Ignatius1 martyrdom (c. A.D. 107), but that date is derived from episcopal lists which are not consistent with each other. For further discussion of these lists, see Lightfoot,
1885, Pt: 2 Vol. 1, pp. 29f.; Harnack, 1897, pp. 70f., 208-13; Downey, 1961, pp.
584C, passim; Bauer, 1971, pp. 114-19 (his theory that Rome was behind the formulation of an Antiochene succession list is unconvincing).
6 Most scholars argue that the Antiochene church was also composed of various household cells: Corwin, 1960, p. 49; Downey, 1961, p. 277.
7 Streeter, 1929, p. 163.
8 Riesenfeld, 1961,pp.315f.
9 Lake (Loeb trans.) and Camelot, 1969, translate έπι τ6 αυτό this way; cf. the identical usage in 1 Cor. 11:20 and Klauck's (1981a, p. 291) argument that this phrase indicates a common meeting of all Christians together. Corwin, 1960, p. 85 argues that Mag. 7:2 may indicate that there was one assembly.
10 Trans, from Schoedel, 1985, p. 108.
11 Lightfoot, 1885, The Apostolic Fathers, Part 2, Vol 2, p. 306.
12 Kümmel, 1975, p. 452, dates them c. A.D. 90-110.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 13 The Johannine influence on Polycarp falls outside the limits of our discussion, but he was probably acquainted with the Johannine letters (cf Bammel, 1982, p. 80) and his community may have had contacts with a Johannine circle. Irenaeus also connects Polycarp with John (Eus. H.E. 5:20.6), but he probably confused the John Polycarp referred to with a different John since there is no evidence in Polycarp's letter of use of the Gospel. Lieu, 1986, pp. 125f, and Meeks, 1972, pp. 44ff. postulate the existence of a relatively self-contained Johannine group possibly existing alongside other Christian groups. If it was isolated this would not affect our argument, since it depends upon the ability to draw analogies from roughly contemporary documents — not the demonstration of continuity between various traditions.
14 Malherbe, 1983, p. 103; see p. 102 for letters of recommendation in the ancient world. Lieu, 1986, pp. 118f. remains unconvinced that the epistle is a letter of recommendation, but she perhaps has too rigid a view of the elements constituting such letters. Kim, 1972, pp. 9-97, notes a variety of constructions and elements within a general form. In the case of Christian letters of commendation, such as Philemon, he argues (p. 124) that they do not necessarily show the same form and structure of pagan commendations. He states (p. 121) that 3 John 12 is a commendation. Anyway, Lieu agrees (p. 113) that επιδέχεσθαι in 3 John 10 refers to hospitality and her conclusions concerning the hospitality of Diotrephes are similar to Malherbe's. Malherbe (p. 96) cites a study byJ.B. Mathews (Hospitality and the New
Testament Church: An Historical and Exegetical Study, Th.D. Thesis Princeton Theological Seminary, 1965, pp. 166-74 — unavailable to me) for the existence of a technical vocabulary of hospitality in the early church. Included in this terminology are
" λαμβάνειν, δέχεσθαι, and πέμπειν and their cognates" (Malherbe provides Mathews's biblical references in n. 11).
15 Malherbe, p. 103; he further argues (pp. 106-7) that the use of the verb έπιδέχεσθαι in v. 9 ("does not acknowledge my authority" RSV) does not refer to the monarchical authority of a bishop over his elders, as several scholars have suggested (cf. p. 93 for references), but to the fact that, in letters of recommendation, request was made that the traveller be received for the sake of the writer. The affront, then, is not to ecclesiastical authority, but to the writer's person; for criticism see Lieu, 1986, p. 119.
16 Thus, e.g., Streeter, 1929, p. 84.
17 For a summary of this interpretation see Kümmel, 1975, p. 448.
18 Malherbe, 1983, p. 108.
19 Ibid., 1983, p. 109; similarly Brown, 1982, pp. 734, 738 and Lieu, 1986, pp. 132,
135.
20 Brown, 1982, pp. 730-32,738.
21 Quasten, 1983, p. 129.
22 Waitz, 1904, p. 249-250.
23 Waitz, 1904, pp. 188f., was an early scholar to argue for this view (according to Jones, 1982, p. 8 this theory originated c. 1844). There is a large body of literature on the sources of the Clementines; most scholars agree that there are earlier documents behind the Homilies and Recognitions. A majority argue that the writers of these two documents used a common source, G (die Grundschrifi), composed c.
200-220 A.D. The passages associated with Praxeis Petrou are connected with G by those who argue for only this source behind the Homilies and Recognitions. We are inclined to agree with those who distinguish earlier sources behind G, but even if Praxeis Petrou is a fiction of modern exegetes, G may be interpreted as an
Ignatius
early testimony to patterns of organization which existed in this period. See Rehm,
1957, pp. 197-206, and Jones, 1982, pp. 1-33, 63-96, esp. pp. 8-20 for an overview of the discussion regarding this literature.
24 For a full account of the history of the redaction see Jones, 1982, and Powell, 1981, pp.113-23.
25 Ibid., p. 10
26 James, 1980, p. 364; Bornkamm, NTA Vol. II (1965), p. 427.
27 Waitz, 1904, p. 244; Powell, 1981, p. Î19. The author was acquainted with the tradition of Peter at Antioch (Ree 10:71; cf Eus. Η,Ε. 3:36.2).
28 Quasten, Vol. 1,1983, pp. 135-36; Schäferdick, NTA Vol. II (1965), p. 214.
29 Schneemelcher, NTA Vol. II (1965), p. 259.
30 James, 1980, p. 337.
31 Davies, 1980, p. 10.
32 Instances of household settings are as follows: hospitality: A. Jn. 25; 62; A PI
2:2,5; A 77?. 81; 131; A Pt 8; 17; 22; A And. 22; Clem. Horn. 3:29 (Ree. 1:73); 4:1
(Ree 4:1); 4:10; 8:1 (Ree 4:2); Clem. Ree. 8:35-38; 9:38; worship or teaching in a household: A Jn. 25; 46; 86; 106-111 (house of Verus?); A PL 2:6, 42 (cf. 23!); 6
(in the house of Longinus?); 7; James, 1980, p. 575; p, 577; A Th. 93; 100; 101 ; A Pt. 1 (at the house of presbyter Narcissus); 19-22; 29; 31; Clem. Horn. 3:29 (Ree.
2:19); 8:8 (Ree. 4:7); Ree. 3:50; 4:6; cf. A Xan. and Pol 10; 11; leadership drawn from hospitable householders: James, 1980, p. 239; A Th. 169; Clem. Horn. 3:63
(Ree. 3:66); 11:36 (Ree. 6:15); Ree, 10:71.
33 Gregory of Nyssa in his Life of Gregory the Wonderworker (c. A.D. 213-270) recounts
(Migne 46, p. 922C) a scene in which a leading member of a city invites the missionary to stay with him; this suggests that the apocryphal stories probably reflect contemporary practices.
34 James, 1980, p. 239.
35 A later state of affairs seems also to be assumed by the Latin fragment (ch. 21) which describes the construction by Aristodemus, a priest of Artemis, of a church
"in the name of Saint John."
36 The (possibly) third century Life of Polycarp presents a setting of the origins of the Smyrnaean community similar to that presented in the Apocryphal Acts. In ch. 2
Paul meets with Strataeas and the faithful are gathered together, presumably at his home, for instruction. In ch, 3 we learn that Strataeas "succeeded to his (i.e.
Paul's) teaching". The use of this document as a source to reconstruct Christianity in Smyrna is a much debated topic (Lightfoot, Vol. 1, Pt.2, 1885, pp. 419-20;
Streeter, 1929, pp. 265-72; Cadoux, 1938, pp. 308f.). The writer claims to have used older documents (ch. 1), but it is impossible to determine the accuracy of his statements and it is most likely that the story of the church's foundation is apocryphal. It is at least possible that both the fragment published by James and the story told by "Pionius" reflect a tradition concerning the earliest practices in these communities but one that is presented in the form of structures of ministry contemporary with the later writers.
37 Waitz, 1904, p. 181 argues that this episode originated with the Clem. Acts of Peter but that there has been some reworking of the tradition — namely, the presentation of Zacchaeus as successor of Peter and a modelling after the Epistle of Clement to James (esp, sec. 3; cf. Horn. 3:60 - Waitz, 1904, pp. 64f).
38 Waitz, op.cit., pp. 182, 191, argues that the Maro legend together with the other similar accounts of the establishment of hosts as bishops originated with the Clementine Acts of Peter.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 39 The argument in ibid., p. 247 that the Theophilus mentioned is the second century apologist is unconvincing.
40 Schoedel, 1985, p. 240.
41 Corwin, 1960, p. 65.
42 See note 14 above.
43 Chadwick, 1961, p. 283.
44 Trans. Schoedel, 1985, p. 65; cf. Lightfoot, Vol. 2, Pt.2,1885, p. 52.
45 The diverse effect entertaining teachers could have on communities is seen in Acts of Peter 8, where Marcellus, a wealthy senator, cast the church in turmoil by ceasing to be its patron after he invited Simon to teach in his house.
46 Brown, 1979, p. 98.
47 A good analogy can be found in the synodal letter of Gangra formulated at the time of the Synod of Gangra in Paphlagonia in northern Asia Minor (c. 350 A.D.).
In section 2 (ed. Hefele, 1876, Vol. 2, p. 326) "Eustathians" (cf. Socrates HE.
12:43; Sozomen 3:14 for description) are condemned for causing "many to forsake the public assemblies for divine service, and to organize private conventicles."
Again, in Canon 5 (p. 329) they are anathematized for teaching "that the house of God is to be despised, and likewise the services there held." In Canon 6 the synod condemns "anyone [who], avoiding the churches, holds private meetings, and in contempt of the church performs that which belongs only to her, without the presence of a priest, without authority from the bishop." Finally, in Canon 11 (p.
331) they are condemned for staying away from private agapes offered by orthodox members of the community.
48 There is ample evidence of the practice of early Christians meeting more than once a day (Pliny Ep. 10:98; Hip. Apos. Trad. cf. 33, 35, - ed. Dix). Justin (Apol
1:67), in his description of a common meeting, seems to distinguish between a period of prayer and the eucharist proper,
49 There is evidence from the Council of Laodicea in Phrygia, probably convened sometime between A.D. 341 and 381, that "bishops1* and "presbyters" were accustomed to offer "sacrifices" in houses; Canon 58 (Hefele, Vol. 2, p. 322) condemns this practice. It is possible that this reflects an earlier state of affairs. The general
Council of Seleucia-Ctesiphon in A.D. 410 perhaps reflects a development of controls over private meetings, for after it had come within the orbit of Nicene orthodoxy, the Syrian church attempted to standardize ecclesiastical practice. In Canon
13 (Chabot, 1902, pp. 266f.), the synod declares that from thenceforth only one "sacrifice" is to be offered in each town, and the practice of celebrating several eucharists in various local private households is to be stopped. Closer to our period, but this time in Rome, Hippolytus in Apos. Trad. 26:11 (ed. Dix) instructs
Christians how to conduct a private agape when a presbyter or deacon is present but a bishop is absent.
50 It is a vexed question in contemporary scholarship, one which falls outside the confines of this discussion, whether the two were originally united. In our opinion, there is no compelling reason to suppose that they were not, even at this date.
Schoedel, 1985, p. 244, noting that in Smyr. 8:2 "baptism and love feasts are juxtaposed as the two cardinal liturgical acts of the church," concludes that the agape included a eucharist. Dix, 1978, pp. 82ff. argues that they were separated by the time of Ignatius, but his case is weakened by generalizing from later evidence.
Keating, 1901, pp. 52ff. lists the evidence for agapes in the second century and argues that the eucharist and agape were still united at the time of Ignatius. The dissertations of Williams, 1978, pp. 70f. and Wagner, 1949, pp. 34f., also make strong cases for the inclusion of the eucharist within the agape.
51 Again, Hippolytus Apos. Trad. 33 assumes that such smaller meetings were the norm in Rome and the evidence from the canons of councils and synods cited above suggests a similar diversity.
52 Schoedel, 1985, p. 235.
53 Bauer, 1971, p. 71.
54 Grant, 1966, p. 119; Grant wonders if he might have been a deacon; it is impossible to be certain which was the case.
55 Schoedel, 1985, pp. 236-37.
56 There is a loose parallel in Irenaeus AM 1:13.5 where Marcus is invited into the home of a deacon. No eucharist is mentioned in this section, but in the preceding sections of 1:13 Irenaeus describes the rituals of Marcus and, given Irenaeus' description of him as a wandering teacher, it is likely that he relied chiefly on the hospitality of what seem (from Irenaeus' description) to have been wealthy women to perform them.
57 Schoedel, 1985, p. 23158 Schoedel, 1985, p. 238 obscures this connection by creating a division between vs.
1 and 2. The exaltation of office and the practices of his opponents were probably closely connected in Ignatius* mind; without the former, the latter could not have occurred.
59 Rehm, 1957, p. 204.
60 Thus, Campenhausen, 1957. Campenhausen's argument is criticized by Barnes, 1968, pp. 51 If, who argues for the historical accuracy of the account (p. 527).
61 For example, 5:1; 6:1; 7:2-3; 8:2,3; 9:2,3; 10:1-2; 12:3; 14:1; 18:1, The parallels and contrasts are further discussed by Reuning, 1917.
62 Barnes, 1968, p. 510.
63 Cadoux, 1938, p. 356. The Life of Polycarp records that Polycarp spent time both at home and in the suburbs or environs (προάστηον) of Smyrna (ch. 7), which may reflect property outside the city.
64 This curious phrase probably indicates that Polycarp is to ensure that every member is present at the common eucharist.
65 Streeter, 1929, p. 168.
66 Moffatt, 1930, p. 171.
67 Campenhausen, 1936, pp. 76-78.
68 Preiss, Î938, pp. 198,234; similarly, Bower, 1974, pp. 1-14.
69 Tinsley, 1957, p. 554.
70 Bultmann, 1961, pp. 267-68.
71 For a wholly theological approach to Ignatius see Meinhold, 1979, p. 1, who accounts for Ignatius' complex character by analysing certain theological conceptions which he argues were at work in his personality.
72 For Ignatius' style as an example of" Asianism" cf. Perler, 1949, pp, 57-61; Riesenfeld, 1961, pp. 315fT. On "Asianism" generally see Norden, 1909, pp. 263ff.
73 See the discussion of travel in Meeks, 1983, pp. 16f.; for a more general discussion see Bouquet, 1959, pp. 95-113; see also Paul's description of hazards of travel in 2
Cor. 11:25-27.
74 Schoedel, 1985, pp. 12-13,213, 75 See above pp, ÎG2Œ 76 Weber, 1968, p. 241.
77 Ibid., p. 1112. It is important to remember that we are dealing here with an ideal type; not all manifestations of charisma are revolutionary.
78 Ibid, p. 241.
79 Weber, 1947, p. 333.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 80 Shils, 1965; Eisenstadt, 1968a, pp. xxivf.
81 Weber, 1968, p. 439.
82 Ibid., p. 450.
83 For further discussion and criticism see p. 131 n. 182 above.
84 Shils, 1965, p. 204.
85 Schoedel, 1985, pp. 11-12.
86 Streeter, 1929, pp. 228-29, was an earlier scholar to note this. Meinhold, 1979, pp.
8f, following the usual categories of German theological scholarship, describes this quality as pneumatic. Behind Meinhold's description is a misleading way of understanding 1 Cor. 12-14, where "pneumatikoi" are described (see above p. 126 n. 70). Meinhold's reduction of Ignatius1 personality into component theological categories (bishop, pneumatic, martyr) seems artificial, and also imports misleading distinctions into the historical data; in Ignatius' mind being "pneumatic" (i.e. prophetic) and being a martyr and bishop may not have been distinct phenomena.
Also of importance is the question of the appropriateness of using theological categories borrowed from different writings to characterize an historical figure not associated with them; the term "pneumatic" is never used by Ignatius to describe himself.
87 Cf. Aune, 1983, pp. 291-93, for the social background of this utterance as an inspired saying. Aune (p. 293) argues that the admonitions at the end of Phld. 7:2 were uttered by several individuals. But there is no reason to suppose that these statements were not his own; as Aune himself notes, the language of these staccato statements is lgnatian.
88 E.g. Luke 1:42; Origen Contra Celsum 6:75; see Dölger, 1936, pp. 218f; Schoedel,
1985, p. 205, n. 6 for further examples.
89 I.e. John 4:10; 7:38; Lightfoot, Pt. 2, Vol. 2, 1885, p. 224, emends the text, but there is not sufficient reason to reject this reading,
90 Schoedel, 1985, p. 185.
91 It is perhaps significant that here also he refers to revelation: Ignatius will send further instruction if the Lord reveals (αποκαλύπτε iv) to him that the Ephesians join together in the common meeting (20:2). Aune, 1983, p. 294, finds evidence here of divine revelation similar to that described in Phld. 7:1-2. Lightfoot, 1885, Pt 2,
Vol. 2, p. 86, following Zahn, rejects the ότι and replaces it with τι (viz." . . . if the Lord should reveal anything to me. Assemble. . . ."), but the MSS support for this is weak and such an emendation seems unnecessary once the passage is understood in a wider prophetic context. His interpretation of συν έρχεσθε as an imperative because it fits in with a dependent εις clause (cf. e.g. Tral 12:3) ignores Ignatius' various uses of εις with the articular infinitive (e.g. Mag. 8:2; 14:1; Pol 7:1).
92 Schoedel, 1985, p. 144.
93 Bauer, 1923, p. 233, notes that praise for martyrs is a common theme in early
Christian literature (cf. Rev. 7:9-10,13-14; 2:7-10,17, 26-28; 3:21 - [note that this is a document connected in some sense with Ephesus, Smyrna, and Philadelphia:
2:1,8; 3,7]; Eus. H.E. 5:2.2-3; t Clem. 6:1; Herrn. Sim. 8:1.18; 8:2.1; 8:3.6. Mart.
Polt a writing composed in Smyrna, also describes the superior position of a martyr (2:1-4; 49:1).
94 Grant, 1966, p. 57; there is evidence in later literature that martyrs were named
Χριοτοφόροι or something similar (cf. Bauer, 1923, p. 191, for further discussion). Campenhausen's (1936, p. 76) interpretation of this title as indicative of a shift from christocentric Paulinism to Catholicism reads too much into the text.
What Ignatius means by Theophorus is most likely synonymous with his descrip-
Ignatius
tion of the Ephesians as χριστοφόροι (see Eph. 9:2 where both nouns appear together).
95 We shall discuss this terminology more fully when we turn to a discussion of Ignatius' references to his unworthiness.
96 Rom. 6:3 and, to a limited degree, Eph. 10:3, indicate the presence of an imitatio
Christi motif, but as Swartley, 1973, pp. 8If. notes, other allusions to imitation do not apply strictly to the passion (Eph. 1:1; Mag. 10:1; Trat. 1:2; Phld. 7:2) and this leads him to argue correctly that Ignatius possessed a broad concept of the imitation of Christ, which included but went beyond imitation of his passion.
97 Weber, 1968, p. 241.
98 Campenhausen, 1969, p. 104; similarly, Meinhold, 1979, pp. 8f.
99 Campenhausen, loc. cit.
100 Bauer, 1971, pp. 61-76 is puzzlingly ambiguous on this point. In some places he argues that the bishops who met with Ignatius represented larger or smaller majorities (e.g., p. 69). In other places he states that they constituted a minority (e.g., pp.
62-63). There is not sufficient reason to doubt that the docetists comprised a minority, although their separation from the common eucharist may have had an impact on the life of the community not consistent with their numbers. If it is true that the divisions were not explicit in each community (see the discussion below), then the picture of majorities and minorities fiercely contending with each other seems misleading.
101 See n. 103 below for references.
102 For further discussion see pp 28f. above.
103 Again, we must be cautious not to make the argument circular. Images in New Testament Eph. support the contention that the suffering and resurrection of Christ were powerful symbols to the Ephesians (1:.7; 2:6, 16); Revelation provides similar testimony for communities in Smyrna, Philadelphia, and Ephesus (e.g.
1:5,7,17-18; 2:8; 5:6-14; 7:10-17; 12:11; 13:8; 19:13). Pol. Phil also contains references to the suffering of Christ which seem to indicate that this was an important symbol for many in his community (8:1; 9:2; cf. 7:1, in a polemical context); cf.
Mart. Pol. 1:1-2.
104 A locative interpretation of these phrases follows from the opening phrase which contains έν, where Ignatius writes that the Philadelphian church is "established in the harmony (έν ομόνοια) of God."
105 For parallels see Schoedel, 1985, p. 37; a more cautious assessment is given by von der Goltz, 1894, pp. 103-105.
106 Bauer, 1920, p. 208; Grant, 1966, p. 40 suggests the influence of 1 Pet. 2:5 but this is unconvincing.
107 We are here following Kleist's 1961, translation, which correctly captures the force of ώς with the participle.
108 Thus, Bauer, 1923, pp. 209-10; Grant, 1966, p. 41; Schoedel, 1985, p. 69. The context and degree of openness to these persons suggests that Ignatius is probably not referring here to the false teachers.
109 Schoedel, 1985, p. 15.
110 Scholars agree that Rom. 3:1 probably contains a reference to 1 Clement (cf. 1 Clem.
5:3-5). For further discussion see Schoedel, 1985, p. 172; Grant, 1966, p. 88; Bauer, 1923, p. 246; Lightfoot, 1885, Vol. 2 Pt. 2, p. 203.
111 For example, the work of Schlier, 1929, and Bartsch, 1940 for the history of religions, and Maurer, 1949, and Berghardt, 1940 for the history of traditions. For criticism of the history of religions method as not addressing the life-world of early Christian groups see Kee, 1982, pp. 42-60.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 112 Meeks, 1972, pp.44-72, esp. pp. 66-72, 113 Ibid., pp. 49,68.
114 In the case of the Ephesians, Ignatius might have found a group which shared some similar convictions. For example, the lgnatian notion of the "prince of this age" has some parallel in New Testament Eph. (cf. esp. 6:12; also, 2:1-3 —note the connection between "the prince of the power of the air" and his work in the "sons of disobedience").
115 Grant, 1966, p. 47; Corwin, 1960, p. 156 notes that when Ignatius uses the term κόσμος, "he means by it the aspect of things that contrasts with the things of God".
116 Richardson, 1967, p. 69 notes that the expression ό άρχων χοϋ αιώνος τούτου is
Pauline in form (1 Cor. 2:6,8; cf, 2 Cor. 4:4; Eph, 2:2), but we agree with Grant,
1966, p. 47, that the expression seems to be more Johannine in content (Jn. 12:31;
14:30; 16:11). If this is the case, Meeks' observation behind concerning the sectarian identity of Johannine imagery forms an interesting parallel with our conclusions here.
117 Endurance is also a virtue Polycarp puts forward (Pol. Phil. 8:2); similarly
Schoedel, 1985, p. 106.
118 Ibid., p. 264.
119 Περίψημα and άντίψυξον were connected as sacrificial terms in Hellenistic usage; cf. Schoedel, 1985, pp. 63-64. At the time of Ignatius the former term was used as a polite expression (e.g. Bar. 4:9; 6:5; cf. Lightfoot, 1885, Vol. 2, Pt. 2, pp.
50-51), but its appearance with other stronger themes of self-effacement indicates that it is to be taken in a stronger sense. Cf. Schoedel, 1985, pp. 63-64.
120 Streeter, 1929, pp. 169f.
121 Schoedel, 1985, pp. 13f; 1980, pp. 36ff.; Swartley, 1973, pp. 81ff.; cf. Harrison,
1936, pp. 84f.
122 The references to the restoration of peace in Antioch (Phld. 10:1; Smyr. 11:2) was interpreted by Lightfoot, 1885, Vol. 2, Pt. 2, p. 277, as referring to the end of persecution. Harrison, 1936, p. 84; Grant, 1966, pp. 107-8; Schoedel, 1985, p. 213 argue they refer to the restoration of unity.
123 Jervell, 1976, pp. 185ff. He applies the term "charismatic" theologically, but the phrase also has a more sociological application. For more detailed discussion see
Schütz, 1975, pp. 238-49.
124 Cf. 1 Cor. 2:3-5; 4:9-13 where similar themes are developed. Jervell, 1976, p. 193 argues that Paul's references to weakness were to physical ailments (cf. Gal.
4:12-14; 2 Cor. 12:7-9).
125 Meeks, 1983, p. 183; Jervell, 1976, pp. 195-98.
126 Cf. Chapter Four for this concept.
127 Weber, 1968, p. 1123.
128 For further discussion see Holmberg, 1980a, pp. 154-58.
129 References to his opponents as possessing Jesus Christ (Mag. 10:3), carrying about "the name with wicked cunning" (Eph. 7:1), and mingling "Jesus Christ with themselves" (Tral. 6:2) also imply this. The allusion in Mag. 10:1 to those who are called by another name, probably does note refer to anything more than a reference to alleged Judaizing characteristics.
130 In Mag. 8:2 he describes a conversation he had, presumably, with some of his opponents. It is quite probable that such a debate occurred during such a meeting with the wider community.
131 Schoedel, 1980, p. 36; if this interpretation is correct then Ignatius' reference to his opponents being filtered out in Phld. 3:1 should be read cumgrano satis — in actual-
Ignatius
ity community divisions appear to have been much more ambiguous than Ignatius' statement would suggest..
132 We are using this term broadly to describe both travelling teachers and local members sympathetic in varying degrees to them. Bauer, 1971, pp. 67f., distinguishes too strongly between local docetists and non-docetists and thus incorrectly posits the existence of two distinct groups opposed to one another. The lines were probably much more blurred than he supposes.
133 Coser, 1965, pp. 67f.
134 Ibid, pp. 69f, 101 f, 135 Ibid, pp. 70-71.
136 Ibid, p. 101.
137 Corwin, 1960, pp. 53-54 argues on the basis of Smyr. 7:1 that Ignatius' opponents had fully withdrawn from the rest of the community, but it is difficult to know whether such a break had occurred before Ignatius' writing and Corwin admits that an alternative interpretation of the passage is that they had until recently still involved themselves in other aspects of community life. It is difficult to systematize events in all the communities to discover one picture of community division; one may speculate that divisions were in various stages of development — in Philadelphia, for example, divisions were probably less explicit than in Smyrna; in Tralles the separation may have been complete since in this letter Ignatius nowhere hints at reconciliation through repentance. Corwin argues that in Smyrna the docetists were part of the community until a crisis precipitated a split.
Is it not possible that Ignatius represents that crisis, through his explicit teaching on church unity and the illegitimacy of eucharistic celebrations apart from the bishop? The Smyrnaean docetists were united with the rest of the community in their reverence for Ignatius (Smyr. 5:2); it seems probable that it is Ignatius, as Schoedel, 1980, p. 32, suggests, "who polarizes the situation."
138 Norris, 1976, p. 28, observes that as groups pressured by the larger culture, even very limited internal opposition may have been interpreted as a threat to their survival. This, according to Coser, 1965, pp. lOOf, is common among sectarian groups.
139 Bergerand Luckmann, 1971,p. 125.
140 Coser, 1965, p. 71.
141 Weber, 1968, pp. 243-44, 1115-17.
142 Friedrich, 1961, p. 21.
143 Loc. cit.
144 Loc. cit.
145 Loc. cit.
146 For this term see pp. 108f. above.
147 See the discussion of this term see pp. 136f.
148 Similarly, Norris, 1976, p. 34.
149 Zahn, 1899, pp. 67, 87-91; similarly, von der Goltz, 1894, pp. 93-98; Camelot,
1969, pp. 25,100-101.
150 Kelly, 1983, p. 14; against Zahn see p. 69; for opinions similar to Kelly cf. Grant,
1966, p. 114; Corwin, 1960, p. 80.
151 Campenhausen, 1972, pp. 241 if.
152 Schoedel, 1985, loc. cit., provides a useful discussion of the possible influence of traditional materials on Ignatius' formulations.
153 Lightfoot, 1885, Vol. 2 Pt. 2, p. 136.
154 Schoedel, 1985, p. 153.
The Social Setting of the Ministry 155 Ibid., p. 61; Lightfoot, op. cit., p. 48. In Pol. 3:2 the order is reversed, but there is evidence that, in this passage, Ignatius was being guided by the use of traditional philosophical categories (cf. Schoedel, op. cit, pp. 266-67 for further discussion).
Nevertheless, it is significant that he ends this passage with a reference to the passion, which in its context functions as parae nesis for Polycarp (note the use of the same verb ύπομένειν in 3:1).
156 Pol. 3:2 is probably an exception to this since the statement is addressed to Polycarp, but here too there are anti-docetic themes.
157 Bauer's, 1971, pp. xxii-xxiii use of the terms "heresy" and "orthodoxy" as "what one customarily and usually understands them to mean," by which he presumably means the full-blown understanding of heresy which developed in the fourth and fifth centuries, hides the significant contribution Ignatius makes in the creation of orthodoxy and the definition of heresy in this early period. By using these terms in this sense Bauer neglects to ask the important question of how the "customary" usage of them developed, and as a result he imports an anachronistic understanding of the term into the early evidence.
158 For discussion of non-Christian usage of the former terms see Simon, 1979, pp.
11 If.; for the latter term see Rengstorf, TDNT, loc. cit.
159 For a summary of non-Christian usage see Simon, 1979, pp. 104f.
160 Ignatius uses the term μερισμός to describe factions (Phld. 3:1; 7:2; 8:1; Smyr.
7:2), although in one passage (Phld. 2:1) this term, too, is associated with false doctrine (κακοδ ιδασκαλ ί α).
161 Thus, e.g., Camelot, 1969, p. 40; Lietzmann, 1961, Vol. 1, p. 248.
162 Thus, Bauer, 1971, pp. 61-76.
163 There is an account of the earlier history of Smyrna in the Life of Polycarp, in which the writer states that he is following information as found in "ancient copies" (1).
But it is difficult to determine whether the narrative of earlier events is reliable
(see Lightfoot, 1885, Vol. 2, Pt. 2, pp. 1012-13). The description of the monarchical bishop Strataeas, who "succeeded to his (Paul's) teaching'1 seems to imply that the later author was imposing a later organizational pattern onto earlier events.
164 See Hemer, 1986, pp. 32-34 for a discussion of the various theories.
165 The discussion of these theories falls outside the scope of this thesis. For discussion of the various interpretations and relevant literature see Brown, 1982, pp.
733f.; Lieu, 1986, pp. 153f.
166 Streeter, 1929, pp. 85f.
167 See pp. 136f. above.
168 For relevant literature see Lieu, 1986, pp. 54f.
169 Ibid., p. 54; Brown, 1982, p. 649.
170 Lieu, 1986, pp. 125-65, esp. pp. 156ff.
171 Lieu argues that Diotrephes and the Elder, representatives of different types of authority, lacked common criteria to assess one another's claims to legitimacy. The Johannine case was probably a unique instance, but it is possible that the authority claims of wandering teachers and of house-church hosts, when they came into conflict, could have presented a similar difficulty. Ignatius' attempt to provide criteria to assess beliefs and practices can be seen as an important step in the clarification of different claims to authority and the development of leadership institutions.
172 See pp. 89f. for a discussion of this phenomenon in contemporary sects.
173 The noun συμβούλιον is an official term and may refer either to a summoning of presbyters or the whole church; cf. Schoedel, 1985, p. 278.
Ignatius
174 This is evident in Mag. 7:1 where Ignatius links ίδια with the plural ύμίν ("by yourselves"); cf. Schoedel, 1985, p. 116.
175 See ibid., p. 109 for references.
176 This interpretation is supported by the use of the term καιροί (i.e. critical or difficult times) here and in PoL 2:3; in the latter passage Ignatius employs καιρός to refer to the situation brought about by docetic teaching; ibid., p. 264.
177 Ibid., p. 237.
178 Streeter, 1929, p. 173.
179 Compare, for example, the third century Didascalia (4; 19 {Connolly pp. 28, 86,
96]) and the fourth century Apostolic Constitutions (2:25; 3:19-20) where the bishop is more sharply distinguished, 180 For further discussion of this distinction see Schöllgen, 1986, pp. 146-51; Staats,
1986, pp. 134f 181 Bauer's, 1971, p. 70, interpretation of this as a reference to those presbyters allied with Polycarp as opposed to those who are not is unconvincing.
182 Bauer and Paulsen, 1985, p. 113; cf. Schoedel, 1985, p. 237.
183 Dassmann, 1974, p. 77.
184 Idem, 1984, pp. 90f. recognises the influence of the household in the creation of monepiscopacy in these communities but does not sufficiently explain the role of ideas in helping to shape their leadership institutions.
185 Berger and Luckmann, 1971, pp. 1 lOff 186 Schlier, 1929, pp. 82-124.
187 These terms appear as follows: ε νωσις - Mag. 1:2; 13:2; Tral. 1\ :2; Phld. 4:1; 7:2;
8:1; Pol, 1:2; 5:2; ένόω-Epfi. inscr.; Mag. 6:2; 7:1; 14:1; Rom. inscr.; Smyr. 3:3; ενάτης - Eph. 4:2; 5:1; 14:1; Phld. 2:2; 3:2; 5:2; 8:1; 9:1; Smyr. 12:2; Pol. 8:3.
188 Preiss, 1938, p. 229.
189 See Corwin, I960, pp. 247Γ 190 Bauer, 1923, p. 257, commenting on Phld. 4:1; Schoedel, 1985.passim, esp. p. 105.
191 Schoedel, 1985, p. 98.
192 Chadwick 1950, pp. 169-72.
193 Ibid., p. 170; similarly, Moffatt, 1936, p. 35; Preiss, 1938, pp. 230f.; Bartsch, 1940;
Bieder, 1956, pp. 38-43; von der Goltz, 1895, pp. 62-66.
194 See pp. 104f. above.
195 Consonant with this conception is the description of those who are not "in the sanctuary" (θυσιαστήριον) as impure, (Tral. 7:2), or lacking "the bread of God1'
(Eph. 5:2), 196 See also Pol Phil. 6:3, where the apostles are referred to as historical figures.
197 See pp. 66f. above.
198 Similarly. Corwin, 1960, p. 195; for a systematic discussion which agree with what is argued for here see Schoedel, 1985, pp. 113-14, n.7.
199 See pp. 66f. above.
this page intentionally te fi blank
Chapter Six Epilogue "Christianity was from the beginning not a mere doctrine but also a church."
This statement, written by George La Piana1 some sixty years ago can be read as both a reminder and a warning to scholars who embark upon the precarious and often elusive task of reconstructing from the fragments which have been preserved for them the social shape and setting of the early Christian ministry. It is a reminder that the early church was situated in a certain society, in a particular time and place, and that the expectations, beliefs, and values of those who populated it were in varying degrees shaped by such factors. Some, like Ignatius, were remarkable; others, like the businesspeople against whom Hermas railed, were more commonplace; but all alike shared a world different in many respects from our own.
Few scholars would deny this. Yet in our evaluation of the theories concerning the origins and development of structures of leadership in the early church we have found that while much of the scholarship devoted to this topic often explicitly states the necessity of recognizing the social and historical factors which contributed to the shape of the early ministry, its practical effect is to minimize their importance in favour of more theological concerns. Whether it be the more extreme form of the "early Catholicism" thesis as propounded by Rudolf Sohm, or its more moderate expression as represented by Eduard
Schweizer, the result is to leave behind too quickly the flesh and blood of history and focus on ideas as the true determinants in the development of the early church.
Our treatment of early Christian structures of leadership has not attempted to supplant the role of ideas played in the development of the early church with social explanation. To assert the opposite version of a history of ideas approach — perhaps a modified materialist view — would be equally unsatisfactory. We have instead sought a middle ground which at once seeks to take account of ideas and social structures together, the one affecting the other, neither necessarily in all instances being primary.
More particularly, we have argued that the development of the early ministry in the communities chosen for investigation cannot be understood fully without reference to the power wielded by relatively wealthy household owners who invited the church to worship in their homes; and that a set of beliefs or a way
Notes to this chapter appear on p. 201.
The Social Setting of the Ministry of stating Christian belief also made such a setting possible. We have not questioned the legitimacy of attempts by contemporary scholars to evaluate those beliefs, only their one-sided emphasis on ideas as the sole determinants of early ecclesiastical structure (or at least the only ones worth comment).
This is why we have argued that method is so important By making explicit the ideal types and models employed to recover and interpret historical phenomena, the historian is able to control his or her own interests in the interpolation of data. Of course, no historical reconstruction is "value-free," but some are more value-laden or value-conscious than others. In a topic such as the early ministry, where, since the Reformation scholars have fiercely and forcefully put forward radically differing theses, often to justify broader more contemporary theological concerns, the need to recognize one's own prejudice is especially acute — if only to assess the multitude of early church portraits which scholars of the last five hundred years have painted.
The way common people viewed the church is usually different from the way its theologians do — that is probably as true for the early church as it is for the contemporary one. But such a factor becomes especially important in attempting to determine the form of the early ministry, because what common people thought about their leaders and leadership probably affected to a great degree the development of governing institutions. Ideal types and models have helped us to identify the kinds of beliefs and values the early Christians possessed. Of course, Ignatius' letters, like Paul's, may have been judged as containing "some things hard to understand" (2 Pet. 3:16), but there must have been some point of contact between such writers and their audience. That overlap has not always been easy to identify; it is often implied in what is or is not stated explicitly, and sometimes we have been able to offer no more than an educated guess. But not to attempt to identify the common ground between writer and reader has led to scholarship which sometimes oversimplifies the role of theological conceptions of the church in the shaping of early Christian institutions.
As well as a reminder, the statement by La Piana with which we began can also be interpreted as a warning. The early Christian movement presents to the historian all the ambiguity, complexity, and subtlety of any historical phenomena. And so it should, for the early Christians were neither the embodiment of successfully applied ideas, nor were they cogs in a social machine, moving along a predetermined course. Again, few scholars would adhere to either of these positions as stated in this extreme form, but the effect of much scholarship is to oversimplify the early church and impose upon it a homogeneity which it probably did not possess. The claims of the preceding pages are specific to the communities chosen for investigation. In some cases we have assumed that similar or analogous structures of leadership existed in communities not represented by the documents chosen for investigation. But this should not be mistaken for a broad or generalizing claim. The problem with reconstructions which attempt to reconstruct the rise of the early ministry from the work of apostles or their delegates, or the extension of synagogue structure, or the fusion of presumed
Jewish and Pauline structures, or the decree of Jerusalem Christians is not only that the evidence is often fragmentary and spread across a vast Empire, but that it is open to many differing interpretations. The reconstruction of the church's