Wednesday, June 16, 2004
First Epistle of Clement
Text here.
Eusebius tells us that Dionysius, bishop of Corynthus, writes in ca. 150 to Soter, bishop of Rome, that 1 Clement was read in the church:
On the other hand, Ireneaus, who wrote before Origen, says that
Note that authorship of the letter to the Corinthians is given by Irenaeus to "the Church in Rome", not directly to Clement (and that is what is explicitly stated in 1 Clement 1: "The Church of God which sojourns at Rome, to the Church of God sojourning at Corinth"). Unity of content and style suggests a single author, though. Anyway, Irenaeus does not seem to identify Clement of Rome with Clement of Philippi.
Tertullian also does not identify him with the Philippian Clement (and informs us that he had been ordained bishop by Peter):
R.Knopf: [the letter is] extremely verbose in giving a great number of admonitions about the main issues of Christian conduct and life above and beyond the immediate occasion for the writing, so that one cannot see precisely what relationship these admonitions have to the real purpose of the letter.
As a matter of fact, the letter seems to be a sermon, concluded by a solemn liturgical prayer.
It is not clear from the letter what exactly caused the removal of the Corynthian presbyters (44.6). But certainly the matter must have substantially worried the Church of Rome. So, a first point is to understand the developments of the Church in Corynth. We know from Paul's letters that different patterns of Christianity developed there.
It could then be possible that the letter attests to the building up of an orthodoxy, against the gnosticizing Christians (attracted by the hellenistic world). The fact that some orthodox presbyters were deposed by the people (the young taking over the old) proves that the opposing faction enjoyed quite some support. The abundant references to OT history in the first part of the letter seems to reinforce the idea of a Christianity directly inheriting from Judaism, rather than a new (gnostic) religion.
Apart from perhaps ahistorical considerations of Roman supremacy, the Church in Rome was also worried about its own isolation from the eastern Churches. See Bauer.05. The assumption here is that gnostic developments in Rome were marginal.
This idea of the letter reinforcing orthodoxy and the importance of apostolic succession can be seen very clearly in the passage from Irenaeus above.
Now, we should probably not stretch this too much to mean that the Church in Rome, at the time of 1 Clement, was making claims to monarchical episcopate and primacy (since nothing is said in the letter about this). Certainly it is somewhat surprising to see how the Church in Rome at that early stage takes explicit side with a faction of another, distant Church. Interesting: one should remember that at this time "the Roman church possessed neither the means nor the position to effect such an intervention [to exile the younger persons who had raised the rebellion, 1 Clement 54:1ff]. That the author did not possess the authority he claims is evident from the rhetorical character of the letter: He must persuade by argument and induce by example; that is, it is not yet his to command." (AB)
Certainly to some extent the Church in Rome is acting as a leader Church ("modeled on the relations of the capital to the provinces", or mother-city to colony). The letter is to situated in a Greco-Roman context, and one of its main concerns is the exhortation to the Roman ideal of "peace and concord" (which underlines also the cosmic order as depicted in 1 Clement 20). The structure of the intervention of the Church of Rome (letter, witnesses sent to present and defend arguments in an attempt to bring back peace, invitation to exile as a mean to avoid trials) is modeled after the Roman state.
Some say that 1 Clement contains "the first patristic affirmation of the divine right of the hierarchy", referring to 1 Clement 42 and 44. What this means is that the priestly office derives, through apostles, bishops and deacons, from uninterrupted continuity from Christ, as mentioned above. Note that, in 1 Clement 42, the text purports to give biblical support to this by quoting apparently Isa 60:17:
Categories: Church_History
Eusebius tells us that Dionysius, bishop of Corynthus, writes in ca. 150 to Soter, bishop of Rome, that 1 Clement was read in the church:
In this same epistle [Dyonisius to Soter] he makes mention also of Clement's epistle to the Corinthians, showing that it had been the custom from the beginning to read it in the church. His words are as follows: "To-day we have passed the Lord's holy day, in which we have read your epistle. From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement." (Hist. Eccl.4.23)Again Eusebius:
In the twelfth year of the same reign [Domitian [81-96], so the year would be 92 CE] Clement succeeded Anacletus after the latter had been bishop of the church of Rome for twelve years. The apostle in his Epistle to the Philippians informs us that this Clement was his fellow-worker. His words are as follows: "With Clement and the rest of my fellow-laborers whose names are in the book of life." [quote from Phil 4:3]It is not clear at all that this Clement from Philippi mentioned by Paul is the Clement author of 1 Clement. In addition to Eusebius, Origen supports this view (Origen is speaking of the death of the martyrs):
There is extant an epistle of this Clement which is acknowledged to be genuine and is of considerable length and of remarkable merit. He wrote it in the name of the church of Rome to the church of Corinth, when a sedition had arisen in the latter church. We know that this epistle also has been publicly used in a great many churches both in former times and in our own. And of the fact that a sedition did take place in the church of Corinth at the time referred to Hegesippus is a trustworthy witness. (Hist. Eccl. 3.15-16)
Among the Gentiles, too, it is recorded that many a one, when pestilential disease broke out in his country, offered himself a victim for the public good. That this was the case the faithful Clement assumes, on the faith of the narratives, to whom Paul bears witness when he says, "With Clement also, and the others, my fellow-labourers, whose names are in the book of life." (Commentary on John, 6.36)The reference Origen is making here is to 1 Clement 55: "Many kings and princes, in times of pestilence, when they had been instructed by an oracle, have given themselves up to death, in order that by their own blood they might deliver their fellow-citizens".
On the other hand, Ireneaus, who wrote before Origen, says that
The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome despatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spake with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. (Haer. 3.3.3)The reference to Linus here is 2 Tim 4:21 (and it does not seem it can be accurate, as it would assume monoepiscopacy in the 1st century).
Note that authorship of the letter to the Corinthians is given by Irenaeus to "the Church in Rome", not directly to Clement (and that is what is explicitly stated in 1 Clement 1: "The Church of God which sojourns at Rome, to the Church of God sojourning at Corinth"). Unity of content and style suggests a single author, though. Anyway, Irenaeus does not seem to identify Clement of Rome with Clement of Philippi.
Tertullian also does not identify him with the Philippian Clement (and informs us that he had been ordained bishop by Peter):
But if there be any (heresies) which are bold enough to plant themselves in the midst of the apostolic age, that they may thereby seem to have been handed down by the apostles, because they existed in the time of the apostles, we can say: Let them produce the original records of their churches; let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner that [that first bishop of theirs] bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostolic men,-a man, moreover, who continued stedfast with the apostles. For this is the manner in which the apostolic churches transmit their registers: as the church of Smyrna, which records that Polycarp was placed therein by John; as also the church of Rome, which makes Clement to have been ordained in like manner by Peter. (De praescr. haeret. 32).Why is the text thought to be so authoritative in the early church? What is the purpose of the letter?
R.Knopf: [the letter is] extremely verbose in giving a great number of admonitions about the main issues of Christian conduct and life above and beyond the immediate occasion for the writing, so that one cannot see precisely what relationship these admonitions have to the real purpose of the letter.
As a matter of fact, the letter seems to be a sermon, concluded by a solemn liturgical prayer.
It is not clear from the letter what exactly caused the removal of the Corynthian presbyters (44.6). But certainly the matter must have substantially worried the Church of Rome. So, a first point is to understand the developments of the Church in Corynth. We know from Paul's letters that different patterns of Christianity developed there.
- The personal disciples of Paul.
- The followers of Apollo.
- Jewish Christians who identified themselves with Peter: they hold fast to their Jewish practices but do not demand the same from non Jewish Christians.
- Jewish Christians who demanded gentile Christians to become circumcised.
- Perhaps a gnostic pattern: according to this view, having gnosis would have permitted "everything", including "food sacrificed to idols" (cf. 1Cor 8:1ff). Cf. also the difference Paul makes between the strong and the weak believers.
It could then be possible that the letter attests to the building up of an orthodoxy, against the gnosticizing Christians (attracted by the hellenistic world). The fact that some orthodox presbyters were deposed by the people (the young taking over the old) proves that the opposing faction enjoyed quite some support. The abundant references to OT history in the first part of the letter seems to reinforce the idea of a Christianity directly inheriting from Judaism, rather than a new (gnostic) religion.
Apart from perhaps ahistorical considerations of Roman supremacy, the Church in Rome was also worried about its own isolation from the eastern Churches. See Bauer.05. The assumption here is that gnostic developments in Rome were marginal.
This idea of the letter reinforcing orthodoxy and the importance of apostolic succession can be seen very clearly in the passage from Irenaeus above.
Now, we should probably not stretch this too much to mean that the Church in Rome, at the time of 1 Clement, was making claims to monarchical episcopate and primacy (since nothing is said in the letter about this). Certainly it is somewhat surprising to see how the Church in Rome at that early stage takes explicit side with a faction of another, distant Church. Interesting: one should remember that at this time "the Roman church possessed neither the means nor the position to effect such an intervention [to exile the younger persons who had raised the rebellion, 1 Clement 54:1ff]. That the author did not possess the authority he claims is evident from the rhetorical character of the letter: He must persuade by argument and induce by example; that is, it is not yet his to command." (AB)
Certainly to some extent the Church in Rome is acting as a leader Church ("modeled on the relations of the capital to the provinces", or mother-city to colony). The letter is to situated in a Greco-Roman context, and one of its main concerns is the exhortation to the Roman ideal of "peace and concord" (which underlines also the cosmic order as depicted in 1 Clement 20). The structure of the intervention of the Church of Rome (letter, witnesses sent to present and defend arguments in an attempt to bring back peace, invitation to exile as a mean to avoid trials) is modeled after the Roman state.
Some say that 1 Clement contains "the first patristic affirmation of the divine right of the hierarchy", referring to 1 Clement 42 and 44. What this means is that the priestly office derives, through apostles, bishops and deacons, from uninterrupted continuity from Christ, as mentioned above. Note that, in 1 Clement 42, the text purports to give biblical support to this by quoting apparently Isa 60:17:
Nor was this any new thing, since indeed many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scripture in a certain place, "I will appoint their bishops [overseers] in righteousness, and their deacons [servants] in faith."In reality the Isaiah text reads "I will appoint Peace as your overseer and Righteousness as your taskmaster", and the LXX has "I will make your princes peaceable, and your overseers righteous." (actually the Hebrew has "overseer" in the sense of "oppressor" or "tyrant" and the overall context of Isa 60 seems rather extraneous to the point being made here by 1 Clement.) In any case, the introduction of the deacons here is due to this misquotation.
Categories: Church_History
