jdl

To avoid derailing the other discussion, I want to discuss the date of First Clement in this thread.

There's no need to keep things too tightly focused. Relevant issues include:

• Was Domitian a persecutor of Christians?
• Does the first line of First Clement refer to persecution, internal strife, or is it merely a customary excuse for not intervening sooner?
• What are the latest and earliest possible dates for First Clement?
• What works show knowledge of First Clement and vice versa?

Let's start this off with a quote from everyone's favourite contemporary scholar.
-- Bart D. Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers, Volume 1, 24

That describes where I stand on that issue, and coincidentally Ehrman and I appear to be reliant on the same article, L. L. Welborn's "On the Date of First Clement". Where I depart from Ehrman is at his insistence that the letter can still be dated to Domitian's reign. His mechanism for dating is to take at face value claims in the letter that members of the church had been appointed by apostles and that Peter and Paul had died in their own generation. I don't find those claims compelling. They seem akin with many other false claims in the early church that were made with an eye towards basking in apostolic approval.

[HR][/HR]

The backstory:

GakuseiDon

jdl, what date does Welborn give for 1 Clement?

For this, I suspect it is both internal strife and persecution. 1 Clement spends a lot of time on the theme of "envy" and "jealousy". Note how the martyrs die:

Through envy, those women, the Danaids and Dircae, being persecuted, after they had suffered terrible and unspeakable torments, finished the course of their faith with steadfastness, and though weak in body, received a noble reward...

Take up the epistle of the blessed Apostle Paul. What did he write to you at the time when the Gospel first began to be preached? Truly, under the inspiration of the Spirit, he wrote to you concerning himself, and Cephas, and Apollos, because even then parties had been formed among you... It is disgraceful, beloved, yea, highly disgraceful, and unworthy of your Christian profession, that such a thing should be heard of as that the most steadfast and ancient Church of the Corinthians should, on account of one or two persons, engage in sedition against its presbyters. And this rumour has reached not only us, but those also who are unconnected with us; so that, through your infatuation, the name of the Lord is blasphemed, while danger is also brought upon yourselves.

Note that the theme is not just one of envy, but envy that brings danger and persecution. E.g. "Through envy, those women, the Danaids and Dircae, being persecuted, after they had suffered terrible and unspeakable torments..." I think that this is the key. In the letter of Pliny the Younger, there is no active persecution of Christians, yet once denounced to Pliny, he had no problem putting those Christians who didn't reject Christ to death, for theirstubborness. This envy might have been members within the churches denouncing one another, resulting in persecution. We also see this in the Ascension of Isaiah, which refers to the elders of the church envying one another. If merely being a Christian was enough to be sentenced to death, then it would be a good though dangerous way for those involved in internal strife to clear out their enemies. (The above is entirely my own speculation)

It doesn't help with the dating, though Peter and Paul are called "noble examples furnished in our own generation", suggesting a date a generation or so after Peter and Paul's death.

Vorkosigan

The letter writer refers to them in cautious generalities. He obviously writes from a much later date when their legendary exploits were still coalescing. Their mention is to fix a false early date for the letter.

The letter was also written before the gospel tales appeared as the numerous silences and use of the OT for examples appear to show. This suggests a date ~2 decades later than the 100 AD date.

Another indicator -- the letter essentially calls for women to be silent in Church, meaning that it is from a later period after the establishment

• 1Clem 21:7
  let them show forth their lovely disposition of purity; let them prove their sincere affection of gentleness; let them make manifest the moderation of their tongue through their silence; let them show their love, not in factious preferences but without partiality towards all them that fear God, in holiness. Let our children be partakers of the instruction which is in Christ:

The letter also envisions a Church which must be disciplined and unified, suggesting it comes from a period when the Bishop system had been set up which goes back to the Apostolate. Again this is a political situation of a later era. The letter is aimed at discord and jealousy caused by the elevation of members into the System of status and power in the growing proto-orthodox Church. Did not God appoint suchlike for Moses, etc, it asks? For example...

• 1Clem 54:2
  Let him say; If by reason of me there be faction and strife and
  divisions, I retire, I depart, whither ye will, and I do that which
  is ordered by the people: only let the flock of Christ be at peace
  with its duly appointed presbyters.

This is a document from a later era when this system was being consolidated, not from the first century.

sotto voce

How very circular.

And yet, contradiction.

GakuseiDon

What is the false early date that the author is trying to fix, based on the mention of Peter and Paul, IYO?

jdl

It's not absolutely clear. I'll quote what I think are the relevant parts of the article.
Joseph

mountainman

Also see the Clementine forgeries.

jdl

First Clement uses the titles "presbyter" and "bishop" as if they are synonymous. Ehrman sees this as evidence that the letter must date to before there was a bishop who stood above presbyters in a hierarchy. I find that mildly persuasive.

But on the other hand it assumes a particular progression in the development of church structure that I don't think it's safe to assume. The arguments Welborn makes about the letter's "ideological affinities" seem much better anchored in history to me.

Joseph

sotto voce

As is found in the NT.

How, then, does one explain the total inversion of a polity based on the democracy of Israel into one that Adolf Hitler admired and copied?

jdl

The NT was not written all at one time. If an arbitrary collection of documents spanning the better part of a century can cast light on the problem of First Clement, please describe the method to me.

I don't necessarily believe this happened.

Joseph