Contents:
Thus the epistle cannot have been written before the last decades of the 1st century.
There are references to the letter by the middle of the next century in the works of Hegesippus and Dionysius of Corinth apud Euseb. Thus one may place the composition of 1 Clement between A.
Loisy maintains that the author of 1 Clement was a distinguished Roman elder who flourished and that this Clement was named in the Shepherd of Hermas Vision, 8: Notably, a writing is mentioned in 1 Clement Other indications of lateness include the tradition in chapter 5 that Paul traveled to the extremities of the west i.
Most notably, there is stated to be "a rule of succession" for bishops and deacons who have "fallen asleep" This suggests a second century date for 1 Clement.
On the other hand, as is pointed out with Hebrews, a mention of the Temple cult in the present does not prove that the author was writing before 70 CE. The reference to "our generation" is simply a contrast between the Christian era and the previously mentioned era of ancient Judaism. Finally, the supposed reference to persecution may be a literary device, as pointed out by Welborn. Besides, there were also persecutions under Domitian, Trajan, and other emperors. Help us launch a revival in Catholic Scripture study, bringing countless Catholics into an encounter with the life-transforming power of God's Word in both the Liturgy and life.
Clement and the Early Church of Rome: The product is already in the wishlist! Product Details Author s Msgr. You may be eligible for a discount. Make sure you're logged in or create an account and complete your profile to ensure you're getting the best price.
Modern scholars affirm as much, although many have called into question whether Clement was a direct disciple of Sts. Peter and Paul, arguing instead that he lived and wrote many decades after the martyrdom of the apostles. Herron asks, "Is it reasonable that 1 Clement, writing in the middle nineties, would still think of the death of the Apostles Peter and Paul thirty years ago as 'very near'? Apostolic succession was doctrine already by the time of 1 Clement.
This is also clear in Paul when he went to Jerusalem, showing that "the apostolic stamp of approval was already a value for Paul" p Herron compares 1 Clement to both the Didache and the letter of Ignatius of Antioch, and concludes that 1 Clement shows evidence of coming from a much earlier time. I like to take the safe approach to most things in life but there comes a time when nothing else but take the jump will do. This is one of those times! Given the opportunity to review this particular book, I could not pass it as like most of us interested in the Early Church, there is still so much for me to be learned.
I will say first of all this is an intelligent written compilation of historical facts showing clearly an amazing amount of research. And yes, despite the challenges of reading it and researching these facts, I had a hard time to put it down. The Appendix and the Selected Bibliography alone are a treasure of information!
Reverend Herron's approach to an earlier dating of I Clement Epistle to the Corinthians is nothing but convincing and certainly thought provoking! Many historians agrees that I Clement was written circa AD yet Reverend Herron lists events and dates showing it could well have been written as early as AD Originally printed in and republished by the St Paul Center for Biblical Theology this book will challenge scholars and laypersons who believe this letter was written after the fall of the temple in the year AD In fact though the letter was written after the deaths of the Apostles Paul and Peter, the author sets out to prove that Clement was very familiar with the workings of the Temple and writes seemingly in the present tense as he describes rituals such as offerings and sacrifices for i.
I would imagine he certainly would not have written this way if the Temple had already been destroyed thus reinforcing the thought, however provoking, that the letter dates prior to AD Albeit not a scholar and having little knowledge of Theology myself, I find this book to be a fresh approach to what might well remain an excellent conversation topic I give it 4 stars!
I was not asked to write a positive review and the opinions expressed are entirely my own. The Theological Basis of the Majoral View. Now, thanks to the St. Emmaus Road, [Nov 9, ]; pp. This work is simple in structure and argument, complex and meaningful in conclusion. The ordinary lay reader may or may not profit much from this book.
It is, after all, a doctoral dissertation conveniently bound in paperback form. It is full of substantial quotes in their original languages - Koine Greek, Latin, German, and French - most of which are in the footnotes, and this might turn off some readers intent on getting in the reading of the Apostolic Fathers. This should not dissuade those who are eager to get their hands dirty with a fine piece of scholarship.
Those comfortable reading long, scholarly essays and those with some background in theological writing and the languages of scholarship would be quite at home in Fr. Regardless of one's background, anyone who sets out to read this book ought to have a copy of I Clement on hand or should have, at least, read this work before and understood Clement's need to write to that local Church which merited at least two disciplinary letters from St. Clement and the Early Church of Rome's three chapters and one appendix direct us to the four-fold argument in favor of Herron's thesis, namely, that I Clement was composed much earlier than generally held by modern and many ancient scholars, that is, prior to A.
Chapter 1 concerns discerning an early date for I Clement based on internal evidence, of which Herron enumerates eleven distinct pieces of evidence from the document itself. Here one finds the most persuasive arguments in favor of an early dating, especially in two points which I share here to whet the appetites of potential readers.
Clement of Rome s First Epistle to the Corinthians is a supremely valuable historical document. It is one of the very few Christian texts that have survived from the. Clement of Rome's First Epistle to the Corinthians is a supremely valuable historical document. One of very few noncanonical Christian texts to reach us from the.
The single most important allusion is in I Clement 40, where Jewish sacrifices at the Jerusalem Temple are mentioned" p. After a deep examination of this particular issue, Herron concludes that, "no one issue is of itself going to be determinative, but it must be admitted that the very datable destruction of Jerusalem shall have to figure significantly in any plausible dating hypothesis" p. His treatment of I Clement's portrayal of the Temple still standing and therefore written before the autumn of A. However, he continues on, and the next point examines the opening line of I Clement which states, "Owing to the sudden and repeated misfortunes and calamities which have befallen us.
Herron lays out the case that, as even ancient Roman historians pointed out, there was, in fact, no persecutions of Christians during Domitian's reign. It seems that Melito of Sardis, writing at the end of the second century, accused Domitian of bringing false accusations against Christians, a point which Tertullian elaborates upon but which, in terms of Tertullian's portrayal, should actually be applied to the emperor Nerva A.
The year 69 was known as the year of the four emperors in which Nero, Galba, Otho, and Vitellius were either assassinated or were killed by their own hand. Indeed, the vague reference to "misfortunes and calamities" would be understood by anyone in the Empire, if I Clement were written in A. Chapters 2 and 3 consider I Clement's relationship with other pieces of first-century Christian literature and the theological implications of an early dating of I Clement, respectively.
The second chapter includes one of the things I find most interesting in researching the early Church, namely, the hierarchical structure of the Church in the apostolic age. Like the New Testament writings, I Clement uses episkopos as "the conceptual equivalent of presbyteros" p. As we see in Acts 20, during the time of the apostles, episkopos was not the equivalent of a monepiskopos, or "bishop," that is, one who has "individual personal oversight of the local church" p. Luke records, "And from Miletus he [Paul] sent to Ephesus and called to him the elders [presbyteroi] of the church Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers [episkopoi], to care for the church of God which he obtained with the blood of his own Son" Act While the apostles were still alive, they were what we would today call bishops.
During the first years of the Church, Paul can write: The apostles, of course, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, left the Church the three-fold grades of Holy Orders: The apostles transcended these hierarchical roles, being ordained directly by Jesus Christ, not sacramentally i.
Applying this to I Clement we see that the author is not writing as a monepiskopos, that is to say, not writing like the monarchical, single bishop of Rome, and therefore, not during the reign of Pope Clement, c. If Clemens Romanus is the author of I Clement, then he wrote it before he was elected as the successor of St.
Peter and did so as a kind of secretary!