A History Of Christianity Part 2

ALTERNATIVE IDENt.i.tIES: GNOSTICISM, MARCIONISM.

Getting to know gnostics has become much easier over the last century thanks to significant archaeological discoveries, the flagship of which was at Nag Hammadi in the Egyptian desert in 1945, when a field-labourer came across a pottery jar containing fifty-two fourth-century texts in the Egyptian language Coptic.35 They are all likely to have been translations from much older texts in other languages, princ.i.p.ally Greek, since one of them is a section from Plato's They are all likely to have been translations from much older texts in other languages, princ.i.p.ally Greek, since one of them is a section from Plato's Republic Republic. Previously we had known of gnosticism through the hostile filter of such biased commentators as Bishop Irenaeus; now we can meet it in its own words. In a set of movements or tangles of thought with such variety, a search for the origins of gnosticism is unlikely to produce one answer. Much of gnosticism is a dialogue with Judaism - that is particularly true of the doc.u.ments from Nag Hammadi - but the dialogue partners were not necessarily Greek. A frequent mark of gnostic att.i.tudes was their dualism, envisaging a cosmic struggle between matched forces of good and evil, darkness and light, and that might suggest acquaintance with the dualism of Zoroastrian religion in Iran (Persia). It would be possible to argue for influence from as far away as India, in the complex of religions now known as Hinduism; after all, Alexander the Great had set Greeks into contact with India, and Roman traders continued a flourishing commerce that far east. Not all texts which belong to the gnostic literary family concern themselves with Christian problems, but despite a.s.sertions to the contrary, there seems little evidence that they predate Christianity itself.36 Amid the different belief systems, some attributed to individuals such as Simon Magus, Cerinthus, Saturninus or Carpocrates, it is worth drawing together common tendencies. Amid the different belief systems, some attributed to individuals such as Simon Magus, Cerinthus, Saturninus or Carpocrates, it is worth drawing together common tendencies.

Implicit in most gnostic systems was a distrust of the Jewish account of creation. This suggests that gnostic beliefs were likely to emerge in places with a Jewish presence and gnostics were people who found the Jewish message hard to take - maybe actually renegade Jews. Gnosticism was a creed for cultural frontiers, for instance, where Judaism interacted with Greek culture, as in Alexandria.37 But anyone imbued with a Greek cast of enquiring mind might raise questions about Jewish insistence that G.o.d's creation is good: if that is so, why is there so much suffering and misery in the world? Why is the human body such a decaying vessel, so vulnerable even amid the beauty of youth to disease and petty l.u.s.ts? Platonic a.s.sumptions about the unreality of human life, or prevailing Stoic plat.i.tudes about the need to rise above everyday suffering, could conspire with dualism from the East to produce a plausible answer: what we experience with our physical senses is mere illusion, a pale reflection of spiritual reality. If the world of senses is such an inferior state of being, then it could not possibly have been created by a supreme G.o.d. Yet the Tanakh said that it had been. But anyone imbued with a Greek cast of enquiring mind might raise questions about Jewish insistence that G.o.d's creation is good: if that is so, why is there so much suffering and misery in the world? Why is the human body such a decaying vessel, so vulnerable even amid the beauty of youth to disease and petty l.u.s.ts? Platonic a.s.sumptions about the unreality of human life, or prevailing Stoic plat.i.tudes about the need to rise above everyday suffering, could conspire with dualism from the East to produce a plausible answer: what we experience with our physical senses is mere illusion, a pale reflection of spiritual reality. If the world of senses is such an inferior state of being, then it could not possibly have been created by a supreme G.o.d. Yet the Tanakh said that it had been.

From such questions and answers, there could follow a train of thought perceptible in various forms in many gnostic doc.u.ments. First, if the G.o.d of the Jews who created the material world said that he was the true and only G.o.d, he was either a fool or a liar. At best he can be described in Plato's term as a 'demiurge' (see pp. 32-33), and beyond him there must be a First Cause of all that is real, the true G.o.d. Jesus Christ revealed the true G.o.d to humanity, so he can have nothing to do with the Creator G.o.d of the Jews. Knowledge of the true G.o.d is a way to contemplate the original harmony of the cosmos before the disaster represented by the creation of the physical world. That harmony is so distant and distinct from physical creation that it involves a complicated hierarchy of beings or realities (lovingly described in mind-numbing detail and variety in different gnostic systems). Those capable of perceiving this harmony and hierarchy are often said to have been granted that privilege by a fate external to themselves: a predestination. It is these people - gnostics - whom Jesus Christ has come to save. And who is Jesus? If there can be no true union between the world of spirit and the world of matter, then the cosmic Christ of the gnostics can never truly have taken flesh by a human woman, and he can never have felt what fleshly people feel - particularly human suffering. His Pa.s.sion and Resurrection in history were therefore not fleshly events, even if they seemed so; they were heavenly play-acting (the doctrine known as Docetism, from the Greek verb dokein dokein, 'to seem').

[image]

4. Christianity in the 2nd century CE century CE Equally, the real nature of the gnostic has no solidarity with the flesh of the human body; we should 'be one of those who pa.s.s by', as the Gospel of Thomas phrases it.38 Mortal flesh must be mortified because it is despicable - or, on the contrary, the soul might be regarded as so independent of the body that the most wildly earthly excesses would not imperil its salvation. Hostile 'mainstream' Christian commentators probably took much more relish in contemplating such excesses than was justified by practice among gnostic believers. Their prurient accounts are to be taken with more than a pinch of salt. In the fourth century, Epiphanius/Epiphanios, an energetically unpleasant Cypriot bishop and heresy hunter, described gnostic rites parodying the Eucharist with the use of s.e.m.e.n and menstrual blood. Mortal flesh must be mortified because it is despicable - or, on the contrary, the soul might be regarded as so independent of the body that the most wildly earthly excesses would not imperil its salvation. Hostile 'mainstream' Christian commentators probably took much more relish in contemplating such excesses than was justified by practice among gnostic believers. Their prurient accounts are to be taken with more than a pinch of salt. In the fourth century, Epiphanius/Epiphanios, an energetically unpleasant Cypriot bishop and heresy hunter, described gnostic rites parodying the Eucharist with the use of s.e.m.e.n and menstrual blood.39 In fact, the austere, ascetic strain in gnosticism is far more reliably attested than any licentiousness, and that makes it unwise to rebrand gnostic belief as a more generous-minded, less authoritarian alternative to the Christianity which eventually became mainstream. Still less plausible is a view of gnostic belief as a form of proto-feminism. In fact, the austere, ascetic strain in gnosticism is far more reliably attested than any licentiousness, and that makes it unwise to rebrand gnostic belief as a more generous-minded, less authoritarian alternative to the Christianity which eventually became mainstream. Still less plausible is a view of gnostic belief as a form of proto-feminism.40 Gnostic hatred of the body would match very uneasily with some modern emphases on the liberating power of s.e.xuality or feminism's physical celebration of all that it is to be female. Gnostic hatred of the body would match very uneasily with some modern emphases on the liberating power of s.e.xuality or feminism's physical celebration of all that it is to be female.

It is nevertheless the case that gnostics opposed the authority structures then evolving in parts of the Church, particularly in relation to one important issue: martyrdom. As we will see (see Chapter 5), this was a crucial issue in a Church which, from the death of its founder onwards, repeatedly faced bouts of persecution from the authorities of both the Roman and the Sa.s.sanian empires. One might have expected gnostic contempt for the flesh to lead gnostics to sacrifice it in martyrdom as did other Christians, but evidently they did not think the body worth sacrificing. Not only is there a total absence of stories of gnostic martyrs, but there is positive evidence that gnostics opposed martyrdom as a regrettable self-indulgence and were angry that some Christian leaders encouraged it. A text discovered at Nag Hammadi, The Testimony of Truth The Testimony of Truth, sneers at 'foolish people, thinking in their heart that if only they confess in words, "We are Christians" . . . while giving themselves over to a human death', they will achieve salvation. The Apocalypse of Peter Apocalypse of Peter, also recovered from Nag Hammadi, says that bishops and deacons who send little ones to their death will be punished. And the recently rediscovered Gospel of Judas Gospel of Judas, which probably a.s.sumed Judas's name to shock followers of the bishops, condemns the Apostles as leading the Christian crowds astray to be sacrifices upon an altar. Small wonder that the Church whose leaders came to regard themselves as successors to the Apostles, and which increasingly celebrated martyrs for Christ, loathed gnostics so much.41 Gnostic contempt for the flesh ran against the whole tendency of Jewish religion, with its earthy affirmation of created things and its insistence on G.o.d's personal relationship with his chosen people. Because of this distancing from Judaism, it was extremely easy for Christians to see the logic of pursuing gnostic solutions to the problem which had exercised Paul so much: how much of the Jewish heritage to jettison from the new faith. The gnostics included people of sophistication and learning - the complexity and frequent obscurity of their literature impressively demonstrated that - and arguably they had a more intellectually satisfying solution to the problem of evil in the world than the mainstream Christian Church has ever been able to provide. Evil simply exists; life is a battle between good and evil, in a material world wholly beyond the concern of the true G.o.d.

Rather distinct from gnostic concerns was the contemporary approach to Christian ident.i.ty adopted by a Christian thinker of the early second century named Marcion. Son of the Bishop of Sinope on the Black Sea, he was successful in the shipping business and used this wealth to pursue a career of theological exploration. After he had come to Rome about 140, he was eventually expelled by the Church there when the full radicalism of his approach to the faith became apparent. Like gnostics, with whom he has often been wrongly identified, he was determined to pull Christianity away from its Jewish roots. He saw the writings of Paul as his chief weapon, but moving on from Paul's own conflicted relationship with Judaism, he came to the same conclusion as gnostics in saying that the created world must be a worthless sham and Jesus's flesh an illusion; his Pa.s.sion and death should be blamed on the Creator Demiurge. In characteristically Greek fashion, Marcion found the Tanakh in its Greek form crude and offensive - 'Jewish myths', in a phrase of the Epistle to t.i.tus, which he would have attributed to the Apostle Paul.42 He saw the Creator G.o.d of the Jews as a G.o.d of judgement, rather than the G.o.d of love whom he saw perfectly revealed in Jesus Christ. Christ had died to satisfy the Creator G.o.d. He saw the Creator G.o.d of the Jews as a G.o.d of judgement, rather than the G.o.d of love whom he saw perfectly revealed in Jesus Christ. Christ had died to satisfy the Creator G.o.d.

It is not easy to reconstruct Marcion's biblical writings and commentary, since they were largely destroyed by his enemies, but it is clear that he was a literalist who despised any figurative or allegorical interpretation of scripture and rather took the first apparent sense. If that sense clashed with his own sense of true religion, he simply rejected the text. The result was that all the Tanakh had to go, even though Marcion still drew on its prophecies to complete his picture of the saving work of Christ. What remained of the New Testament was a collection of Paul's letters (probably the collection which he inherited), together with a version of Luke's Gospel. Perhaps he simply chose this because Luke was the Gospel with which he had grown up, but it may have been because Luke's constant references to the Spirit in the story of Christ and the life of the Church appealed to him, or because of Luke's evident a.s.sociation with Paul through Luke's authorship of the Acts of the Apostles.43 To hammer home his anti-Jewish and ultra-Pauline message, he added a book of To hammer home his anti-Jewish and ultra-Pauline message, he added a book of Ant.i.theses Ant.i.theses, pointing out the difference in approach between his selection of scripture and the Hebrew sacred books. He was no isolated eccentric: references to Christians opposing Marcion come from places as far apart as France and Syria, so it is clear that his teachings had a widespread effect, and there is evidence that congregations with Marcionite beliefs survived until as late as the tenth century in what are now the borderlands of Iran and Afghanistan.44 Marcion fascinated the great German Lutheran Church historian of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Adolf von Harnack, and it must be said that there are curious resemblances in Marcion's thought to the spiritual progress of Martin Luther: the revulsion against the idea of a G.o.d of judgement, the contrast between Law and Gospel, the fascination with Paul and the single-minded search for a core message within the inheritance of sacred writings. Marcion fascinated the great German Lutheran Church historian of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Adolf von Harnack, and it must be said that there are curious resemblances in Marcion's thought to the spiritual progress of Martin Luther: the revulsion against the idea of a G.o.d of judgement, the contrast between Law and Gospel, the fascination with Paul and the single-minded search for a core message within the inheritance of sacred writings.45 CANON, CREED, MINISTRY, CATHOLICITY.

Gnosticism and Marcionism offered two possible futures for the Jesus cult. A gnostic Christianity would have bred immense diversity of belief; indeed, because of gnosticism's general hospitality to mixtures of doctrine, Christianity might have drained into the sands of a generalized new religiosity within the Roman Empire if gnostic beliefs had become dominant within it. By contrast, a Church in which Marcion prevailed would have been a very tidy organization, given boundaries by the new master, just as Paul and the Pauline communities before him had sought to fence themselves in. The Christianity which emerged in reaction to these two possibilities adopted the same strategy as Marcion: it sought to define, to create a uniformity of belief and practice, just as contemporary Judaism was doing at the same time in reaction to the disaster of Jerusalem's fall. That demanded a concept of the Church as one wherever it was: a universal version of Christianity which had taken up Paul's mission to the Gentiles and combined it with much of the rhetoric and terminology of ancient Israel to express its wider unity. From an ordinary Greek adjective for 'general', 'whole' or 'universal', katholikos/e katholikos/e, there developed a term of great resonance for Christianity, despite the fact that the word is not to be found in the Bible. Bishop Ignatius of Antioch provides the first known use in his letter written to the Christians of Smyrna, in the early second century, but he evidently expected his readers to be familiar with it; he certainly did not bother to explain exactly what he meant by 'the whole' (katholike) Church.46 This was a momentous development. Christians have never since abandoned their rhetoric of unity, despite their general inability to sustain it at any stage in the reality of history. Yet they have gone on trying, and have used three main tools to build a 'Catholic' faith: developing an agreed list of authoritative sacred texts (a 'canon' of scripture, from the Greek for 'straight rod' or 'rule'); forming creeds; embodying authority in ministers set aside for the purpose. It is easy (and traditional) to tell the history of all three developments in the early Church as a story of convergence and synthesis, but that story has left many casualties along the way. The last of the three has in fact proved one of the major forces to divide Christianity, as rival systems of ministry split or made their own claims to exclusive Catholic authority; almost equally divisive has been the question of what creeds should actually say. If we seek one explanation of why 'Catholic' Christianity so successfully elbowed aside both the gnostic alternatives and the tidy-mindedness of Marcion, it is to its sacred literature that we should point: its formation of a text which still remains the anchor of Christian belief, and which is held in common throughout the many varieties of Christian Churches.

To begin with, Christians had the Jewish Tanakh, obsessively redirected in its reference towards their efforts to grapple with the meaning of the life and death of Jesus, and when they spoke of 'scripture' at the beginning of the second century CE, it is the Tanakh that they meant. By the end of that same century, 'scripture' was a more complicated word, because by then many Christians would include in the term a new series of books, a 'New Testament' of exclusively Christian works. The construction of a canon of scripture to stand in this New Testament alongside the Tanakh was a gradual process, even given the spur that Marcion was proposing to do the same thing. It is likely that the first collection of biblical 'New Testament' books which would be familiar to modern Christians was made in the middle of the second century, but that is not the same as saying that it was universally accepted by Christians straight away.47 The earliest surviving complete list of books that we would recognize as the New Testament comes as late as 367 CE, laid down in a pastoral letter written by Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria. Even then, parts of the Church continued to argue whether it was really necessary to have four Gospels which did not always agree with each other, and some Churches went on into the fifth century using a harmony (in Greek, The earliest surviving complete list of books that we would recognize as the New Testament comes as late as 367 CE, laid down in a pastoral letter written by Athanasius, the Bishop of Alexandria. Even then, parts of the Church continued to argue whether it was really necessary to have four Gospels which did not always agree with each other, and some Churches went on into the fifth century using a harmony (in Greek, Diatessaron Diatessaron) combining all four, produced by the Syrian writer Tatian at the end of the second century (see pp. 181-2). Besides this, some books drifted in and out of the canon: the Church in Corinth long treasured as scripture the first of two epistles written to them by the Roman Church leader Clement (see pp. 132-3), and elsewhere the strongly anti-Jewish Epistle of Barnabas enjoyed lasting influence. 48 48 Some Christian communities in the eastern Mediterranean regarded the Book of Revelation with suspicion as late as the fifth century. Some Christian communities in the eastern Mediterranean regarded the Book of Revelation with suspicion as late as the fifth century.

What this meant was that from now on there was a large literature of books excluded from the mainstream, both Jewish and Christian in origin, taking the form of 'Gospels', 'Apocalypses', 'Acts' and the like. A few, mainly the oldest, were gathered in the approved secondary character of 'apocrypha' (see pp. 67-8), but others flitted in and out of Christian consciousness, particularly if they provided a good story or memorable images or information not otherwise found in canonical scripture. Thus the name of Mary's mother and Jesus's grandmother, Anna or Anne, is only provided in the excluded books, first the work which is termed the 'Infancy Gospel [Protevangelium] of James'. Likewise the ox and the a.s.s commonly thought of as fixtures of Jesus's birth in the stable in Bethlehem appear only in a text from as late as the eighth or ninth century, although it probably reflects earlier lost apocryphal books (see Plate 25). The same is true of accounts of the beheading of St Paul or of St Peter's martyrdom: according to the apocryphal Acts of Peter Acts of Peter, Peter apparently insisted on being crucified upside down so that his death would be more debasing than that of his Lord. Popular awareness of this vanishing literature was therefore sustained through the vivid pictures which these stories continued to stimulate in Christian art - in the case of the ox and the a.s.s, down to the Christmas cards and carols of the present day.49 The advantage of credal statements was that almost anyone was capable of learning them quickly to standardize belief and put up barriers against speculation or what was likely to be a boundless set of disagreements about what the Christian scriptures actually meant. New believers had probably been given such formulae at baptism from the earliest days of Christ-following; several can be traced embedded in the texts of the epistles both of Paul and of others. However, in the second century these creeds took on a new aggressive tone in response to the growing diversity of Christian belief. Take, for instance, a credal statement set down by Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons in a work of instruction written in Greek in the late second century and now preserved only in an Armenian translation: for ease of remembering, it is fashioned into three articles, dealing with three aspects of the Christian encounter with the divine: G.o.d the Father, uncreated, beyond grasp, invisible, one G.o.d the maker of all; this is the first and foremost article of our faith. But the second article is the Word of G.o.d, the Son of G.o.d, Christ Jesus our Lord, who was shown forth by the prophets according to the design of their prophecy and according to the manner in which the Father disposed; and through Him were made all things whatsoever. He also, in the end of times . . . became a man among men, visible and tangible, in order to abolish death and bring to light life, and bring about the communion of G.o.d and man. And the third article is the Holy Spirit, through whom the prophets prophesied and the patriarchs were taught about G.o.d . . . and who in the end of times has been poured forth in a new manner upon humanity over all the earth, renewing man to G.o.d.50 This creed contains much less matter than subsequent creeds, which were concerned to exclude other challenges to the Church's ident.i.ty, yet practically every clause in it hits at gnostic att.i.tudes. No gnostic could have a.s.serted that G.o.d made everything, or that Jesus was 'tangible', or that the Spirit had inspired Hebrew prophets and taught the Jews about G.o.d.

Above all, there must be a universally recognized single authority in the Church able to take decisions: to choose sacred texts for canonical status or compare the content of local creeds in Churches for a uniform direction in teaching. Such a Church would be 'Catholic' indeed. The second century saw a marked increase in the authority and coherence of the Church's ordained ministry. By 200 CE there was a mainstream Catholic Church which took for granted the existence of a threefold ministry of bishop, priest and deacon, and there would be few challenges to this pattern for the next thirteen hundred years. When the pattern was indeed challenged in the sixteenth-century Reformation in the Western Church, those arguing about the nature of ministry looked for proof of their respective opposing viewpoints in the earliest years of the Church, and in the end no party could find complete satisfaction in the evidence. Let us discover why.

It was not surprising that the Jerusalem Church had a single leading figure in the wake of the death of Jesus, since it was Jesus's own brother, James. He seems to have presided over apostles; they included the remaining figures from the original Twelve but also numbered others awarded this description. The leadership in Jerusalem under James had a group of elders as well: the Greek is presbyteroi presbyteroi, which would descend into the English 'priests', as well into other terms which much later took on polemical overtones, 'presbyters' and 'presbytery'. In addition to these, there was a group of seven deacons: the word is the ordinary Greek for servant, diakonos diakonos.51 So it is tempting to see in this the equivalent in embryo of the later grades of bishop, priest and deacon. A similar picture emerges from one of the earliest major Christian centres, Antioch in Syria, when Antioch re-emerges at the end of the first century, after a hiatus in surviving doc.u.mentation. At this stage, the Church in Antioch had a single leader, overseer or 'bishop' ( So it is tempting to see in this the equivalent in embryo of the later grades of bishop, priest and deacon. A similar picture emerges from one of the earliest major Christian centres, Antioch in Syria, when Antioch re-emerges at the end of the first century, after a hiatus in surviving doc.u.mentation. At this stage, the Church in Antioch had a single leader, overseer or 'bishop' (episkopos), just like the (by then dispersed) community in Jerusalem: Ignatius - interestingly, a man with a Latin name, in the same way that the enduring Antiochene nickname for Christ-followers, Christiani Christiani, was a Latin rather than Greek idiom (see p. 110). Ignatius was also a.s.sisted by presbyters and deacons. It might seem that the later Catholic case for ministerial order is clinched by such foundational examples, but the full story is to be found elsewhere.

Antioch and Jerusalem seem to have found their models for ministry in the organization of the Jewish Temple and its hierarchy, as one might expect from Christian centres so much resonating with the Palestinian past. The Church elsewhere had spread in more h.e.l.lenized settings mainly through the work of Paul and his sympathizers, and all sorts of patterns of ministry emerge from casual references in various epistles and in Acts. Talk of charismata charismata, gifts of the Spirit, is frequent, and these gifts were not confined to the Apostles, posing problems in regulating them (see pp. 101-2). Paul and his admirers list gifts of the Spirit more than once, and comparing such lists as those in I Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4, it is clear that they vary. They should not be considered as rigid technical terms, merely as ways of organizing a mission which constantly demanded improvisation without much possibility of guidance from the past.

Gradually, however, the similar situations which the work of mission produced tended towards standardization of language. The words presbyteros presbyteros (elder) and (elder) and episkopos episkopos (overseer) are found scattered throughout the epistles and Acts, but it is quite clear that at this early stage they often described the same people interchangeably: so, for instance, in Acts 20 Paul is said to have addressed himself to the (overseer) are found scattered throughout the epistles and Acts, but it is quite clear that at this early stage they often described the same people interchangeably: so, for instance, in Acts 20 Paul is said to have addressed himself to the presbyteroi presbyteroi of Ephesus, but to have told them that the Holy Spirit had made them pastors or bishops ( of Ephesus, but to have told them that the Holy Spirit had made them pastors or bishops (episkopoi) over their Church. There is a useful comparison to be made with another effort at improvising oversight in mission conditions: John Wesley's structuring of Methodism in eighteenth-century Great Britain and North America, where a mobile 'itinerant' ministry grew up alongside a settled and locally based one, called local preachers. A similar stage can be detected in the late-first-century Church: a mobile ministry included those known as apostles and prophets, the local ministry in particular places consisted of a grade known interchangeably as bishops or presbyters, together with a separate grade of deacons, who a.s.sisted in performing the Eucharist, the central Christian ritual act, and also in the day-to-day running of church affairs.

It was perhaps not surprising that a mobile and a local ministry should sometimes come into conflict: they represented two different ways of presenting authority handed down from the Apostles, and each form of minister might have their own charisma. This tension is represented in the Didache Didache (see p. 120), which lays down instructions for detecting false prophets who might turn up in a community, and also reminds its readers that the local ministry should be given just as much honour as the mobile ministry: 'despise them not: for these are they which are honoured of you with the prophets and teachers'. (see p. 120), which lays down instructions for detecting false prophets who might turn up in a community, and also reminds its readers that the local ministry should be given just as much honour as the mobile ministry: 'despise them not: for these are they which are honoured of you with the prophets and teachers'.52 It does not take much imagination to see why a community should have felt it necessary to commit such thoughts to writing. How would this tension be resolved? Ultimately the mobile ministry disappeared from the mainstream Church, leaving the local ministry as the only accepted form. It does not take much imagination to see why a community should have felt it necessary to commit such thoughts to writing. How would this tension be resolved? Ultimately the mobile ministry disappeared from the mainstream Church, leaving the local ministry as the only accepted form.

This was probably inevitable as the Church began to settle down around local centres which had their own traditions and way of life, and as wandering teachers with dangerous charisma brought with them the sort of variety of belief and teaching which one finds in the gnostic literature. Despite the comparative brevity of its history, the 'Catholic' Church took its cue from Paul in talking a great deal about 'tradition', continuity. This theme was prominent in an influential doc.u.ment of about 100 CE, a letter sent to the Church at Corinth. Arguments at Corinth had led to the congregation dismissing their leaders and appointing others. Clement, a leader of the Church in Rome, wrote to protest in the most solemn terms, not because the congregation was deviating in any way in belief, but simply because it was endangering a G.o.d-given line of authority from the Apostles, who first preached the Gospel which they received directly from Jesus, himself 'sent from G.o.d'. Break this link, said Clement, and the appointed worship of G.o.d is endangered; by implication, succession is the only way of making sure that doctrine remains the same in Corinth and in Rome and throughout the whole Church. In a creative misquotation, Clement called in aid the prophet Isaiah and made him the mouthpiece for G.o.d's p.r.o.nouncement 'I will establish their bishops in righteousness and their deacons in faith.'53 This is the first surviving formulation of an idea of apostolic succession in Christian ministry. The Corinthians listened and restored their old leaders, so it was also the first known occasion that a Roman cleric had successfully influenced the life of another Church: a moment with much significance for the future of Christianity generally. This is the first surviving formulation of an idea of apostolic succession in Christian ministry. The Corinthians listened and restored their old leaders, so it was also the first known occasion that a Roman cleric had successfully influenced the life of another Church: a moment with much significance for the future of Christianity generally.

Clement actually took as given the twofold order of bishop/presbyter, which can also be seen in the Didache Didache, even though most sources are agreed in regarding him as Bishop in Rome. Another tract from Rome, not much later than the time of Clement, the book by Hermas known as the Shepherd Shepherd, also talks of a collegiate ministry of presbyter-bishops, even though the final version of the Shepherd Shepherd was written when Hermas's brother Pius was Bishop of Rome. This suggests that a twofold and threefold view of ministry could coexist; yet the elevation of one leading bishop figure above other presbyters was virtually complete by the end of the second century. One powerful force in this development was the prestige enjoyed in all parts of the Church by the seven letters written to various Churches and to Bishop Polycarp of Smyrna by Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch. They relate to his journey from Antioch to Rome following his arrest just after 100 CE and were written in the certain expectation (indeed joyful hope) that he would die as a martyr. was written when Hermas's brother Pius was Bishop of Rome. This suggests that a twofold and threefold view of ministry could coexist; yet the elevation of one leading bishop figure above other presbyters was virtually complete by the end of the second century. One powerful force in this development was the prestige enjoyed in all parts of the Church by the seven letters written to various Churches and to Bishop Polycarp of Smyrna by Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch. They relate to his journey from Antioch to Rome following his arrest just after 100 CE and were written in the certain expectation (indeed joyful hope) that he would die as a martyr.54 In these letters Ignatius spoke much of his concern at what are recognizable as forms of gnostic belief, including docetic views of Christ's Pa.s.sion. To combat this, he emphasized the reality of both Christ's divinity and his humanity, which he saw best expressed in the Church's continuing celebration of the Eucharist. But how could this doctrine be guaranteed? Ignatius pointed to what he saw as a standard of doctrine set by the beliefs affirmed by the Church in Rome, which he knew would be the city of his martyrdom; it is worth noting that he made no mention of the Bishop of Rome, simply of the Church. He linked with this the role in each community of the bishop, who should be the one person in every place responsible for handing on the faith and guarding against deviation. The bishop, after all, presided at the Eucharist and should be the automatic source of authority: 'You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ [followed] the Father . . . Let no one do anything apart from the bishop that has to do with the Church. Let that be regarded as a valid Eucharist which is held under the bishop or to whomever he entrusts it. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the congregation be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the whole [katholike] Church.'55 The cynical might say that it was easy for Ignatius to take this line, since there was already one bishop in Antioch and his name was Ignatius. Noticeably, a letter written by his correspondent and fellow martyr Bishop Polycarp of Smyrna does not claim that Polycarp had a similar status as monarchical bishop in his city Church: it describes a collegiate grouping of presbyters there with a grade of deacons and an order of widows.56 But in this contest of martyrs, it was Ignatius's pa.s.sionate account of a monarchical episcopal ministry which set the pattern for the future. That may be because he was deliberately talking in priestly language familiar to converts to Christianity from outside Judaism, who were used to the round of civic religion in the temples of Mediterranean cities. But in this contest of martyrs, it was Ignatius's pa.s.sionate account of a monarchical episcopal ministry which set the pattern for the future. That may be because he was deliberately talking in priestly language familiar to converts to Christianity from outside Judaism, who were used to the round of civic religion in the temples of Mediterranean cities.57 His arguments in any case combined with a discussion of apostolic succession by yet another reputed martyr, Clement of Rome. The advantages of a monarchical leadership were clear: it was much more straightforward for one person to act as a focus for the Church in this way, to resist any widening of its beliefs, just as it made more sense for one person to preside over a community's Eucharist than it did for a committee to do so. If Churches started taking this line on the nature of ecclesiastical authority, it is easy to see why the alternative authority embodied in the mobile ministry should come to seem unnecessary and even a threat to the good order of the Church. His arguments in any case combined with a discussion of apostolic succession by yet another reputed martyr, Clement of Rome. The advantages of a monarchical leadership were clear: it was much more straightforward for one person to act as a focus for the Church in this way, to resist any widening of its beliefs, just as it made more sense for one person to preside over a community's Eucharist than it did for a committee to do so. If Churches started taking this line on the nature of ecclesiastical authority, it is easy to see why the alternative authority embodied in the mobile ministry should come to seem unnecessary and even a threat to the good order of the Church.

It must be significant that there is no surviving debate about the gradual domination of Church affairs in each community by one man in apostolic succession (monarchical episcopacy), with the notable exception, as we have seen, of gnostic texts. The early Christians were not afraid to commit their disagreements with each other to writing, and their disagreements have survived, but not in this case. Soon, big churches had many presbyters under the bishop's authority: deacons were the bishops' a.s.sistants, occasionally themselves rising to be bishops, but never being made presbyters. Much later, the distinctive role of the deacon diminished, and late in the Roman Empire there were already examples of the diaconate being used as the first step in a successful clerical career through the order of presbyters, up to the rank of bishop, just like the various career grades in the Roman civil service.

Amid these developments of a 'Catholic' episcopate in the second century, the episcopal leaders of certain cities stood out as especial figures of authority, what would later be called patriarchs: in the East the predictable centres of Antioch and Alexandria (equally predictably by this stage, not Jerusalem). In the West was Rome. Here in the imperial capital one of the two great martyrs of the first generation who had died there, Christ's Apostle Peter, was later credited not only with having died there but also with having been the city's first monarchical bishop.58 In early centuries Peter and Paul were given more or less equal veneration in Rome, and in early Christian art they were commonly paired together, but in Rome manifestly the balance has now drastically shifted towards Peter. The pope occupies the episcopal throne of Peter; he holds sway in the Catholic Church from a miniature state centring on a vast basilican church built above Peter's shrine. Although Paul is honourably enshrined in a major basilica (San Paolo fuori le Mura), it is sited in a formerly malaria-infested plain, a mile beyond the walls of Rome, and the average tourist could be forgiven for not noticing that the Apostle of the Gentiles had much to do with the city. That was the case long before the catastrophic fire which destroyed most of the historic interest of Paul's shrine-church in 1823 - and it is significant that much of the previous fascination of that church lay in the fact that, in contrast to the strenuous construction history of St Peter's Basilica, no one had bothered to rebuild or much alter St Paul's-outside-the-Walls since its first enlargement in the 380s. Its neglect in the late medieval period was not the least among the scandals of fifteenth-century Rome. In early centuries Peter and Paul were given more or less equal veneration in Rome, and in early Christian art they were commonly paired together, but in Rome manifestly the balance has now drastically shifted towards Peter. The pope occupies the episcopal throne of Peter; he holds sway in the Catholic Church from a miniature state centring on a vast basilican church built above Peter's shrine. Although Paul is honourably enshrined in a major basilica (San Paolo fuori le Mura), it is sited in a formerly malaria-infested plain, a mile beyond the walls of Rome, and the average tourist could be forgiven for not noticing that the Apostle of the Gentiles had much to do with the city. That was the case long before the catastrophic fire which destroyed most of the historic interest of Paul's shrine-church in 1823 - and it is significant that much of the previous fascination of that church lay in the fact that, in contrast to the strenuous construction history of St Peter's Basilica, no one had bothered to rebuild or much alter St Paul's-outside-the-Walls since its first enlargement in the 380s. Its neglect in the late medieval period was not the least among the scandals of fifteenth-century Rome.59 Paul's epistles are the oldest surviving doc.u.ments in the Christian tradition. They shaped the theology of the Christianity which survived as mainstream, and the theology of the Latin West especially reflects Paul's preoccupations, which had brought him into serious conflict with his fellow Apostle Peter (see pp. 105-6). Tensions between the two are also reflected in early apocryphal Christian books.60 By contrast with Paul's literary achievement, we have already noted Peter as being credited with two short epistles in the New Testament which are so different in character that at least one of them cannot be by him, and in any case no one has regarded either of them as especially significant in the life of the Church. Yet Peter has taken the limelight in Rome. The fading of Paul from popular devotional consciousness and from much share in the charisma of Rome is one of the great puzzles of Christian history, but it is obvious that part of the answer to the puzzle lies in a vast expansion of the power and prestige of the Bishops of Rome. By contrast with Paul's literary achievement, we have already noted Peter as being credited with two short epistles in the New Testament which are so different in character that at least one of them cannot be by him, and in any case no one has regarded either of them as especially significant in the life of the Church. Yet Peter has taken the limelight in Rome. The fading of Paul from popular devotional consciousness and from much share in the charisma of Rome is one of the great puzzles of Christian history, but it is obvious that part of the answer to the puzzle lies in a vast expansion of the power and prestige of the Bishops of Rome.

Some time in the 160s a shrine was built for Peter at the place of his burial, perhaps to commemorate a hundred years pa.s.sing since his death. The remains of it, directly under the high altar of the present basilica, were recovered during the twentieth century in a sensational series of archaeological investigations.61 The shrine was a modest structure, but its very existence in a public urban cemetery speaks of a community determined to stake its claim to an open existence in the capital. It is unclear whether Peter had actually played the role of bishop in the Church in Rome, even if he did indeed die in the city, and the names traditionally provided for his successor bishops up to the end of the first century are no more than names. They are probably the result of later second-century back-projection to create a history for the episcopal succession in the era when episcopal succession had become significant. Even in the second century, the evidence suggests that Bishops of Rome were part of a team of presbyters who might also be considered as having the authority of bishops, in a diverse and loosely organized city Church, and what particular prestige and authority were enjoyed by the Church in Rome was a matter of its collective ident.i.ty. The shrine was a modest structure, but its very existence in a public urban cemetery speaks of a community determined to stake its claim to an open existence in the capital. It is unclear whether Peter had actually played the role of bishop in the Church in Rome, even if he did indeed die in the city, and the names traditionally provided for his successor bishops up to the end of the first century are no more than names. They are probably the result of later second-century back-projection to create a history for the episcopal succession in the era when episcopal succession had become significant. Even in the second century, the evidence suggests that Bishops of Rome were part of a team of presbyters who might also be considered as having the authority of bishops, in a diverse and loosely organized city Church, and what particular prestige and authority were enjoyed by the Church in Rome was a matter of its collective ident.i.ty.62 The second-century Roman Church's numbers were substantial, but still it formed a tiny proportion of the city's population, and at that time and for some decades to come it revealed its origins as a community of immigrants by the fact that its language was not Latin but Greek. There is one survival of Greek in the liturgy of the Western Church: a Greek prayer so venerable (though not to be found in the text of scripture) that even after the Church in Rome changed to Latin, Western congregations continued to chant it. The threefold Kyrie Eleison, Christe Eleison, Kyrie Eleison Kyrie Eleison, Christe Eleison, Kyrie Eleison ('Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy') is so intensely used in Orthodox liturgy that its repet.i.tion can almost sound like a mantra; in the Western Church its appearance is much more restricted, but it is one of the fixtures in the preparatory sections of the Eucharist, the inspiration for much sacred music over the centuries. It is a powerful reminder of the era when the 'Catholic' Church throughout the Mediterranean was united by a common language. ('Lord have mercy, Christ have mercy, Lord have mercy') is so intensely used in Orthodox liturgy that its repet.i.tion can almost sound like a mantra; in the Western Church its appearance is much more restricted, but it is one of the fixtures in the preparatory sections of the Eucharist, the inspiration for much sacred music over the centuries. It is a powerful reminder of the era when the 'Catholic' Church throughout the Mediterranean was united by a common language.

The switch to Latin in Christian Rome may have been made by one of the bishops at the end of the century, Victor (189-99).63 He may indeed have been the first monarchical bishop in Rome; he was one of that generation of Church leaders, like Irenaeus in Lyons and Demetrius in Alexandria, intent on creating a Church with a single source of episcopal authority and a single doctrinal standard which would be affirmed by other bishops elsewhere (see pp. 129-30). It was Victor, with the encouragement of Irenaeus, who narrowed the diversity of belief which a Bishop of Rome would consider acceptable, by ending the long-standing custom of sending Eucharistic bread and wine which he had consecrated to a variety of Christian communities in the city - including Valentinian gnostics, Montanists and various exponents of Monarchian views on the Trinity (see pp. 145-6). He may indeed have been the first monarchical bishop in Rome; he was one of that generation of Church leaders, like Irenaeus in Lyons and Demetrius in Alexandria, intent on creating a Church with a single source of episcopal authority and a single doctrinal standard which would be affirmed by other bishops elsewhere (see pp. 129-30). It was Victor, with the encouragement of Irenaeus, who narrowed the diversity of belief which a Bishop of Rome would consider acceptable, by ending the long-standing custom of sending Eucharistic bread and wine which he had consecrated to a variety of Christian communities in the city - including Valentinian gnostics, Montanists and various exponents of Monarchian views on the Trinity (see pp. 145-6).64 This was in effect a punitive action; as such, it was a pioneering form of a favourite device in later centuries, excommunication - cutting off offenders from fellowship with the Christians in a particular place. Nothing could better ill.u.s.trate the new formal role of the bishop as teacher and guardian of discipline. Successive bishops emphasized their unifying role in the vastness of the city by visiting the various places of Christian worship in turn; during the third century, as more churches achieved permanent sites instead of congregations casually meeting in Christian houses, this became the basis of a liturgical rota of 'stational' papal visits which still survives in the liturgical year in Rome. Many other bishops in large and potentially divided cities followed the Bishop of Rome's example later. This was in effect a punitive action; as such, it was a pioneering form of a favourite device in later centuries, excommunication - cutting off offenders from fellowship with the Christians in a particular place. Nothing could better ill.u.s.trate the new formal role of the bishop as teacher and guardian of discipline. Successive bishops emphasized their unifying role in the vastness of the city by visiting the various places of Christian worship in turn; during the third century, as more churches achieved permanent sites instead of congregations casually meeting in Christian houses, this became the basis of a liturgical rota of 'stational' papal visits which still survives in the liturgical year in Rome. Many other bishops in large and potentially divided cities followed the Bishop of Rome's example later.65 Already, therefore, during the third century, the Bishop of Rome was consolidating a role which was likely to give him a special prominence in Western Churches. The first surviving use of the t.i.tle 'papa' in Rome occurs in the time of Bishop Marcellinus (296-304), in a funerary inscription for his deacon Severus in one of the catacombs in the city.66 There was, after all, no other Church in the West which could lay claim to the burial place of two Apostles and pilgrimage was beginning to draw Christians to Rome. The surroundings of St Peter's original shrine are covered in early graffiti from pilgrims, and although these are not easily datable, there are similar graffiti in a shrine out on the Via Appia to the south-east of the city, below the present Church of San Sebastiano. This roadside shrine seems to have sheltered the remains of both Peter and Paul for some time after persecutions of Christians in the mid-third century: the names and the often ill-spelled forms of expression used in the graffiti there suggest that they were made by visitors to the city, and quite humble visitors too. There was, after all, no other Church in the West which could lay claim to the burial place of two Apostles and pilgrimage was beginning to draw Christians to Rome. The surroundings of St Peter's original shrine are covered in early graffiti from pilgrims, and although these are not easily datable, there are similar graffiti in a shrine out on the Via Appia to the south-east of the city, below the present Church of San Sebastiano. This roadside shrine seems to have sheltered the remains of both Peter and Paul for some time after persecutions of Christians in the mid-third century: the names and the often ill-spelled forms of expression used in the graffiti there suggest that they were made by visitors to the city, and quite humble visitors too.67 The only possible rival to the position of Rome was the Church of the North African coast, which was probably the first major centre of Latin-speaking Christianity, but North Africa, despite its many martyrs in the late second and third centuries, did not possess any counterweight to two Apostles. It was a dispute in 256 between Bishop Stephen of Rome and the leading Bishop of North Africa, Cyprian of Carthage, that produced a Roman bishop's first-known appeal to Matthew 16.18: Christ's p.r.o.nouncement to Peter that 'on this rock I will build my Church' might be seen as conferring particular authority on Peter's presumed successor in Rome (see pp. 173-6). This was a claim which met with modified rapture in North Africa, and which likewise would at the time have been greeted with polite scepticism in the eastern Mediterranean. Rome's place in the Christian Church remained subject to many accidents of history, as we will discover.

MONTANISM: PROPHECY RENEWED AND SUPPRESSED.

The disappearance of charismatic wandering Christian teachers or prophets and the a.s.sertion of the authority of bishops were probably sealed by the Catholic Church's confrontation in the later second century with a movement known as Montanism or 'the New Prophecy'. Monta.n.u.s was a native of Phrygia in the mountains of Asia Minor, which was already emerging as one of the earliest centres of Christian numerical strength and enthusiasm during the second century. Asia Minor was, after all, the setting for the prophetic poem of John the Divine, and the hesitant reception of his Book of Revelation into the New Testament may reflect ecclesiastical worries about this recurrent theme of prophecy among Christians in Asia Minor. Like so many converts, Monta.n.u.s pa.s.sionately proclaimed his enthusiasm for his new-found faith, but that extended (at a date uncertain, but probably around 165) into announcements that he had new revelations from the Holy Spirit to add to the Christian message. It was not so much the content of these messages that worried the existing Christian leadership of the area as the challenge which they posed to their authority. By what right did this man with no commission, in no apostolic succession, speak new truths of the faith and sweep crowds along with him in his excitement?

What made matters worse was that Monta.n.u.s was accompanied by female prophetesses who spoke in states of ecstasy. The position of women leadership in the Church had steadily diminished over the previous century, and this combination of female a.s.sertiveness and prophecy seemed dangerously reminiscent of the female seers at ancient cultic centres: the worst possible resonance for a cult seeking to demonstrate its separation from other religions. So the Church in Asia was riven: was Monta.n.u.s a blessing or a danger? Both sides appealed to other Churches around the Mediterranean, and to the great distress of the Montanists, they found themselves condemned by Eleutherius, the Bishop of Rome. As is often the case, opposition and hostility drove them into ever wilder statements about their own mission; their total and final exclusion from the Catholic Church by a council of bishops was sadly inevitable after this. Elsewhere in the Christian world, only in North Africa, which came to have a tradition of high-temperature Christianity, did their pa.s.sionate commitment to the Holy Spirit find a lasting sympathy among prominent Christian activists, especially the distinguished early-third-century Christian writer Tertullian (see pp. 144-7). Yet in their Phrygian homeland, the Montanists persisted obstinately until at least the sixth century. Then in 550 the morale of the proud descendants of the 'New Prophecy' was finally broken when the Byzantine Emperor Justinian sent in his troops to wreck their great shrine of the founder-prophets in the now-venerable Montanist stronghold at Pepouza. Eventually even Pepouza's whereabouts were forgotten and only recently has the enthusiasm of researchers revealed its probable site.68 Yet less than a century after the imperial vandalism at Pepouza a new 'New Prophecy' began tearing at the fabric of the Byzantine Empire, as Muslim armies swept north from Mecca and beat at the frontiers of Asia Minor. Maybe there were still Montanists in Asia Minor to welcome the fervour of the new arrivals. Yet less than a century after the imperial vandalism at Pepouza a new 'New Prophecy' began tearing at the fabric of the Byzantine Empire, as Muslim armies swept north from Mecca and beat at the frontiers of Asia Minor. Maybe there were still Montanists in Asia Minor to welcome the fervour of the new arrivals.

While the Montanists early on became firmly convinced that they were about to see the New Jerusalem descend on earth at Pepouza, their enthusiasm contrasted sharply with the Catholic Church's general abandonment of Paul's original conviction that the Lord Christ would soon be returning. Generally in the next few centuries, such beliefs were to be found in marginal Christian groups. Among the Montanists' contemporaries in the mainstream leadership, only Bishop Irenaeus of Lyons showed positive enthusiasm for a vision of the world's last days coming in his lifetime, and his views on this caused such embarra.s.sment to the next generations of Christians that their original expression in Greek has entirely disappeared and even many of the ma.n.u.script copies of its Latin translation censor out its pa.s.sages on this subject. The Latin translation of what Irenaeus had said turned up only in the late sixteenth century and was then equally embarra.s.sing to the Counter-Reformation Church of Rome, which was not pleased to find one of the bastions of the Catholic faith saying the same sorts of things as contemporary radical Protestants.69 One might regard the Montanist emphasis on new revelations of the Spirit as a natural reaction to the gradual closing of the New Testament canon, but there was little that could actually be described as heretical in what they said. The problem was one of authority. The Church leadership's strong reaction against Monta.n.u.s might reflect tensions between the urban Christianity of the late first century, which was gradually evolving leadership around one man in a city congregation, and a new expansion of Christian enthusiasm out in rural backwaters.70 The Church was settling on one model of authority in monarchical episcopacy and the threefold ministry; the Montanists placed against that the random gift of prophecy. The two models have a long history of conflict in the subsequent Christian centuries: the significance of the Montanist episode is that this is the first time the clash appears. Later it would be seen in the first Protestant rebels against Rome, in the radicals beyond the Protestants, in Methodists and Millerites, in Pentecostals and African-initiated Churches; we will meet them all. And one should not forget the other conflict which has returned as an active issue in the Church after two millennia, well summed up in the dark warning of a Victorian clergyman-professor in a reference work still useful in many respects: 'If Montanism had triumphed, Christian doctrine would have been developed, not under the superintendence of the church teachers most esteemed for wisdom, but usually of wild and excitable women.' The Church was settling on one model of authority in monarchical episcopacy and the threefold ministry; the Montanists placed against that the random gift of prophecy. The two models have a long history of conflict in the subsequent Christian centuries: the significance of the Montanist episode is that this is the first time the clash appears. Later it would be seen in the first Protestant rebels against Rome, in the radicals beyond the Protestants, in Methodists and Millerites, in Pentecostals and African-initiated Churches; we will meet them all. And one should not forget the other conflict which has returned as an active issue in the Church after two millennia, well summed up in the dark warning of a Victorian clergyman-professor in a reference work still useful in many respects: 'If Montanism had triumphed, Christian doctrine would have been developed, not under the superintendence of the church teachers most esteemed for wisdom, but usually of wild and excitable women.'71 Gnosticism and Montanism thus both had a marked effect on the Church, causing it to shut doors on all sorts of possibilities for new Christian ident.i.ties. The most dramatic effect of the fight against gnosticism was to halt Christianity's march away from its Jewish roots, that process which had begun so early and had dominated its life in the first century. From the earliest days Christians had searched the Tanakh in their anxiety to find pre-echoes of their own pa.s.sionate convictions about the G.o.d-Man Jesus Christ. Now even more self-consciously, in quotations in its literature and in the reading of sacred texts in communal worship, the Church vigorously reaffirmed the worth of what it called the Old Testament alongside the New. Nevertheless the new episcopal guardians of doctrine were still faced with the problem of presenting their faith in an urban culture which stretched all round the Mediterranean and beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire, dominated by highly literate elites steeped in Greek learning, literature and ways of thinking. Paul of Tarsus had probably not experienced a conventional advanced education; there is certainly no trace of it in his literary style or the content or shape of his writings. He does not even bother mentioning philosophy; indeed, it attracts precisely one mention in the New Testament, where, in the words of Paul's admirer who wrote Colossians, it is dismissed as 'empty deceit'.72 A hundred years later, such a cavalier approach would not do. A good education was becoming more common among prominent Christians and that would affect their view of their faith. They had now accepted many of the social values of this world; they had also rejected some of the more extreme ways in which gnostics had adapted the Christian message to other systems of thought. That left large questions about the relationship of the Catholic Church to Greek and Roman high culture, which in the work of a series of authors from the later years of the first century CE reached a new peak of literary creativity and self-conscious pride in the Greek cultural past, conventionally now called the 'Second Sophistic'. It was not surprising that thoughtful Christians who listened to the self-confident voices which dominated cultured conversations in the world around them went on to find ways of drawing on the best of this culture for their own purposes. But the problems were great. Could one call on Plato or Aristotle or their new interpreters in contemporary society to help in preaching the Gospel? The Second Sophistic offered wisdom which owed nothing to the Christian revelation in scripture; was its wisdom then worthless? A series of highly intelligent and thoughtful Christians thought that the answers to these questions were obvious: the Greek inheritance was indispensable to the Church. In their efforts to harness it to the Christian message, they can be said to have created or manufactured Christian teaching on a heroic scale, and for good or ill the Church universal has never ceased to look back at and build on what they achieved.

JUSTIN, IRENAEUS, TERTULLIAN.

A series of Christians tackled these questions during the second century, without closing them down. Christianity has never ceased to debate the relationship between truth revealed from G.o.d in sacred text and the restless exploration of truth by human reason, which on a Christian account is itself a gift of G.o.d. It is a mark of how far Christianity had spread by the second century that some of the most prominent in the writings which have survived to us - Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian - worked mainly in Rome and Churches of the western Mediterranean. Two others - Clement of Alexandria and Origen - came from the great intellectual and commercial centre of Alexandria. Nevertheless all of them except Tertullian thought and wrote in Greek: this was still the common currency of the Church throughout the Mediterranean, even in the Latin-speaking West, which is an indication that Western Christianity was still largely dominated by an urban population maintaining ready