Clement of Rome: Interview with the Bibliovore!

Happy Thanksgiving! Because this month's blog focus is on holiday-related reading, and November 24 is the commemoration of Clement of Rome, I realized I wanted to learn more about him. When I was a child, I read a lot of biographies, specifically of Christians in the 1800s and 1900s. These days, thanks to the influence of C. S. Lewis, I'm trying to read about slightly older people (100s-1600s). Today, due to the proximal commemoration of St. Clement, I interviewed Husband to whet your appetite about Clement of Rome. The bulk of the post is the transcript. Outside links for your additional reference:

• This site has a translation of 1 Clement
• Ligonier Ministries had a brief podcast discussing justification by faith present in this epistle.
• Downs 2013 engages in a more focused, scholarly way on how Clement uses Romans 5-6 in connecting themes of creation, justification, and good works.
• Oxford Bibliographies draws together various sources that provide summaries and orientation to the book

Who Was Clement?

"Clement of Rome lived a couple generations before Clement of Alexandria; the latter flourished toward the end turn of the 3rd century, whereas Clement of Rome flourished at the turn of the 2nd century. Clement of Alexandria’s thought was heavily influenced influenced by Platonism and laced with philosophical reflection, whereas Clement of Rome’s is much more down to earth and practical (for the most part; there’s a section of phoenixes that gets a little odd, but for the most part he’s quite straightforward). . .

"One point that’s frequently dismissed in critical scholarship in Eusebius’s 4th century report that Clement of Rome is the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3, “…help these women, who have labored side by side with me in the gospel together with Clement and the rest of my fellow workers…” Whether this identification was made solely on the basis of the name or wherever there was a tradition behind it isn’t known. Even if Eusebius was just taking a stab at finding Clement of Rome in scripture because the names matched, it still wouldn’t necessarily rule out that this is the same person. True, Clement was a fairly common name, but it is probable that Clement of Rome did in fact personally know Paul as well as Peter. His letter has noticeably Pauline theology, albeit, not as refined as that of Paul himself. The identification of Clement of Rome with the Clement in Philippians 4:3, while not indubitable, is also not improbable.

Clement of Rome was almost certainly a contemporary of Luke, Timothy, Titus, and Mark. His letter was produced in the same period of church history as New Testament books like the Gospels, Acts, Hebrews, and Revelation. When approaching the study of the early church from a historical vantage point, his letter is a source on par with such books of the New Testament, even though it is not itself scripture. (Eusebius and Jerome have helpful discussions as to why it was excluded from the New Testament canon.)"

Why is Clement (of Rome) Important?

"Roman Catholics claim him as an early pope, though early listings of the bishops of Rome differ as to whether he was the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th bishop of Rome. Anglicans, Lutherans, the Eastern Orthodox, and the Oriental Orthodox also hold in extremely high regard—though Lutherans and most Anglicans don’t venerate saints in the same manner that Roman Catholics, the Eastern Orthodox, and the Oriental Orthodox, Anglicans and Lutherans arguably have the better claim to stick to his theology, which will be apparent in the quote I’ll share. . .

"A) Ch. 5, on Peter and Paul:

“(1) But to pass from the examples of ancient times, let us come to those champions who lived nearest to our time. Let us set before us the noble examples which belong to our own generation. (2) Because of jealousy and envy the greatest and most righteous pillars were persecuted, and fought to the death. (3) Let us set before our eyes the good apostles. (4) There was Peter, who, because of unrighteous jealousy, endured not one or two but many trials, and thus having given his testimony went to his appointed place of glory. (5) Because of jealousy and strife Paul by his example pointed out the way to the prize for patient endurance. (6) After he had been seven times in chains, had been driven into exile, had been stoned, and had preached in the East and in the West, he won the genuine glory for his faith, (7) having taught righteousness to the whole world and having reached the farthest limits of the West. Finally, when he had given his testimony before the rulers, he thus departed from the world and went to the holy place, having become an outstanding example of patient endurance.”

(Though I already mentioned that this is our earliest source attesting the martyrdoms of Peter and Paul, there are several other things worth noting about this quote. First, Clement’s Greek term parallels one of Paul’s from Galatians 2 when Clement refers to both Peter and Paul as ‘pillars’, just as Paul said of Peter, James, and John in Galatians 2:9. This strongly suggests that Clement knows of no lasting rift between Peter and Paul as a result of the Galatians 2 incident. Second, in literature of this period, “farthest limits of the West” frequently refers to the Strait of Gibraltar separating Spain/the Iberian Peninsula from Africa and the Mediterranean Sea from the Atlantic Ocean. This seems to be a roundabout way of saying that Paul went on a missionary trip to Spain after his (initial) imprisonment in Rome before a second imprisonment and his execution. Indeed, in Romans 15:24, Paul does overtly state his intent to travel to Spain. Acts certainly doesn’t mention any such voyage, but its absence from Acts certainly doesn’t preclude its occurrence, particularly when we take into account that Acts and 1 Clement belong to the same period of church history, Acts having been produced in the 70s or 80s, and 1 Clement in the 90s. When we consider that Luke was very likely nearing the very end of the scroll he was writing on at the end of Acts, it would be quite understandable if he omitted later details of what happened after Paul’s arrival in Rome (particularly if he’d intended to write a third volume on an additional scroll, but never got the chance—we just don’t know). Lastly, this quotation demonstrates that Clement doesn’t believe that Peter and Paul ceased to exist after their deaths until the future resurrection—he mentions that they “went to the holy place.” He also believed in the resurrection of the body, but he does also demonstrate a belief in an intermediate state of continued existence between bodily death and final resurrection, a “place of glory.” It is not necessarily wrong to call this place heaven—it’s important, but it’s not the end of the world.) B) Chapter 32.3-33.1, On Justification

“(32.3) All, therefore, were glorified and magnified, not through themselves or their own works or the righteous actions which they did, but through his will. (32.4) And so we, having been called through his will in Christ Jesus, are not justified through ourselves or through our own wisdom or understanding or piety or works which we have done in holiness of heart, but through faith, by which the almighty God has justified all who have existed from the beginning; to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen. (33.1) What then shall we do, brothers? Shall we idly abstain from doing good, and forsake love? May the Master never allow this to happen, at least to us; but let us hasten with earnestness and zeal to accomplish every good work.”

(This quotation largely speaks for itself, but it is worth noting that it largely is set within a salvation-historical context relating to God’s covenant with Abraham, which he sets up in chapter 31 and continues in the opening verses of 32, in a manner paralleling the argument of Galatians 3. Clement displays a vast knowledge of the Old Testament as well as the books of the New Testament—part of why this work is dated to around the same time that John was written is the absence of references to that Gospels, as the Synoptic tradition is richly interwoven throughout the letter.) C) Chapter 44, On Bishops and Presbyters

“(1) Our apostles likewise knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be strife over the bishop's office. (2) For this reason, therefore, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the officials mentioned earlier and after. wards they gave the offices a permanent character, to that is, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry. (3) Those, therefore, who were appointed by them or, later on, by other reputable men with the consent of the whole church, and who have ministered to the flock of Christ blamelessly, humbly, peaceably, and unselfishly, and for a long time have been well spoken of by all—these men we consider to be unjustly removed from their ministry. (4) For it will be no small sin for us, if we depose from the bishop's office those who have offered the gifts blamelessly and in holiness. (5) Blessed are those presbyters who have gone on ahead, who took their departure at a mature and fruitful age, for they need no longer fear that someone might remove them from their established place. (6) For we see that you have removed certain people, their good conduct notwithstanding, from the ministry which had been held in honor by them blamelessly.

(There’s a lot going on in the Greek here with the terms used, in addition to overall ecclesiology. Note that the context of 1 Clement is that the Corinthian church had overthrown its bishops/presbyters, and the entire letter is an appeal by Clement for the Corinthians to restore their bishops/presbyters to their rightful office. When he writes, “Those, therefore, who were appointed by them or, later on, by other reputable men with the consent of the whole church,” it doesn’t appear that this indicates that he’s referring to early congregationalism, because if that were so, it would not have been wrong for them to have expelled their bishops/presbyters—that would have been within their authority. The “consent of the whole church” appears to refer to the approval of the leadership of the whole church to consent to or veto the appointment of new bishops/presbyters. Note, also, the lack of distinction between bishop and presbyter/priest.)

Where can you Access Clement's Writings?

"His Epistle of the Romans to the Corinthians, written about the same time as the Gospel of John, is his only authentic surviving work. It is also called 1 Clement to distinguish it from 2 Clement, a work attributed to Clement by some in the early church, but which Eusebius plainly states was not actually written by Clement (it is worth noting that Origen notes traditions attributing Hebrews to either Clement or Luke; both of these are likely untrue, given the stylistic differences. It is our earliest source attesting that both Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome, and also the earliest source attesting that the apostles established some sort of official succession from them. Interestingly, he appears to equivocate between bishops and priests, a point seized upon in the German Reformation, which noted the same equivocation of terms in Acts 20 and Titus 1, and similar phenomena in 1 Peter 5 and Philippians 1 and leading to the thesis that the establishment of mono-episcopacy was a peaceful/non-controversial development of very early 2nd century Christianity (as evidenced in the letters of Ignatius ~15 years later). I.e., the reason the early lists of the bishops of Rome disagree over whether Clement was the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th such bishop may well be because three men were all simultaneously priest-bishops in Rome at the same time, and thus only in retrospect, once mono-episcopacy had established itself, would the need to work out a precise order of the single officeholders arise, leading to confused lists."

Hosting as a Homebodied Introvert

Given all the posts lately about reading, philosophy, and theology/church time, you may be wondering if I ever interact with people at home . . . the answer is yes! Hospitality is close to my heart, in part due to the exhortation to entertain "strangers" in Hebrews 13:2. How do these aspects of life blend?

Hosting as a Christian

For the Christian, hospitality may look a little bit different than it might for the non-Christian. A key difference comes in "whom do you host?" I'm referring to personal hospitality (in one's personal dwelling) as opposed to, say, a hotel owner. Rosaria Butterfield has written in several places about the ins, outs, and challenges of Christians being obedient to their calling to be hospitable.

• What's physically involved: an open home, a larger food/electric budget, and a unified church, an ordinary Christian life (versus "entertainment"), daily time especially when you don't "have" time
• Who does it: all Christians
• Who receives it: Christians and non-Christians, whoever enters our homes
• Whom it benefits: everyone participating!

I will admit that fact-finding for this section of the post was more surprising and challenging for me than I anticipated, as perhaps the following sections will show.

Hosting as an Introvert

One thing I learned after Husband and I started dating was that there are multiple types of introverts.

• Social - like small groups, enjoyable but draining
• Thinking - slow-paced, imaginatively self-reflective
• Restrained - slow-starting, slow-relaxing, fact-finding
• Anxious - very self-conscious around strangers
• Low-Stimulation - need to limit outside stimuli for overwhelm

As a couple, Husband and I form a mix of social and anxious introversion, which leads to some tension when discussing planned hospitality. I'm also more of the planner of us two, while desiring to be more spontaneous. When we host, this means several things: I'm the one doing the inviting and scheduling (generally); I'm the one responsible for changing decorations so I don't do that very much; and potluck-style simple dishes are the way to go!

Here's how our eating area looks this season:

Glimpses: Seasonal, Non-Instagram Hosting

In an ideal world, here's what I aspire to when providing hospitality. In all scenarios, the house is clean enough at least in toilets, sinks, and floors; and piles on seating and table areas are minimal.

Spring

This season is the time for walks in waterproof shoes, garden meandering, and occasional use of the fireplace. Longer days, and especially Daylight Savings Time, make me more optimistic and thus less hermit-like. It's not quite warm enough to eat outside, but couch meals inside are comfortable. Lightly scented candles are my go-to because so many flowers are poisonous to our cats. Library tours of our Christianly-organized library (HT: Autumn Kern of Common Mom) are a staple!

Summer

Dinner on the deck, preceded or followed by a board game and a library tour, uses many of the lovely features of our house and places guests in a comfortable environment where conversation flows. Our backyard is kempt but not manicured; in Zone 5b there grow an abundance of bee balm, sweet peas, and catnip. Things smell nice, there are (usually) few to no mosquitoes, and the evening sunlight puts everyone in a good mood.

Fall

Before the time change, at least, dinner can usually still be outside if one plans and layers properly. Otherwise, staples of our hospitality are the fireplace with rug in front, incandescent lamps, and ample comfortable seating with blankets and usually-cuddly cats. Particularly in fall, a library tour with a segue into theological and/or philosophical discussion facilitated by Husband is a staple of hosting to benefit all involved.

Winter

Due to the limited daylight, winter hosting is almost identical to fall hosting except for scheduling things during the day if I can. In our area, we get anywhere from 6"-6' of snow and ice over the course of winter. I add hot tea and coffee more often, and if mom supplies us with cookies from her greater baking time, some German-style Christmas cookies.

Did you get any new ideas for your hospitality practice?

Birth, Death, and Life In Between

The changing of seasons, the church year, and Husband's current group book study have me thinking about the passage of time as it relates to people's earthly lives. This week, I'd like to explore a few of those concepts more closely. (And, on November 8, please wish the late Conrad Hal Waddington a happy birthday commemoration--he is the unintentional namesake for this blog!)

Birth and New Birth

In the Christian church and elsewhere, birthdays of significant people are celebrated or at least remembered annually. On November 10, many denominations remember Martin Luther’a birthday.

Martin Luther

The father of the Reformation, Luther spent most of his life in his native Germany. Important literary sources for his reinterpretation of the story of Scripture, particularly his understanding of how one is justified (courtroom sense) before God, were Galatians and medieval mystics. At least one recent commentator--I forget who--opined that if Luther had started with Ephesians and not Galatians, the Reformation would have looked much different. Check out New Perspective on Paul (NPP) scholars for more details.

New Birth

Of comparable or greater significance to a Christian’s birthday is his or her baptismal remembrance. No matter your stance on what happens through baptism, if you are baptized, you’re aware that it’s important and that something did happen. 

In my understanding, there is consensus in Scripture and the Church fathers (first generations of Christians) on the following points:

• Baptism is normally associated with the Holy Spirit's creation of faith in the baptized individual; a verbal profession of the learned faith may occur at the same time or at a later time as one is discipled over a lifetime in the faith
• Baptism in the triune God's name means that the focus is on the authority of the One commanding it (i.e., humans "are baptized" and the work is God's through the hands of others)
• Baptism-faith is the boundary marker to the new covenant, that replaces circumcision as bringing one into the family of God
• Infants should be baptized as soon as possible for the above reasons (the fact that infant baptism is almost never mentioned in Scripture and other writings most likely means that it wasn't a controversial issue that needed to be addressed at the time)

Life Before Death

Lately, I've been reading enough theological/philosophical books to make myself automatically think of the Gospel accounts of Jesus' life when this topic comes up. A few common questions that may come up for the thinking reader (Christian or non-Christian), that are somewhat easily answered as long as one is not > 80% skeptical, include

• Why were the four canonical Gospel accounts written?
• To recall for early-generation Christians the key events (from 4 perspectives) of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection. (John's gospel has typically been held to have been written later than the others, but still within well under 75 years from the time of Jesus' crucifixion.)
• Why were the four canonical Gospel accounts, but not others, included in the Scriptures?
• Church Fathers' writings provide the bulk of the explanation.
• Are the Gospel accunts reliable/preserved in essentially the same form as when the original manuscripts were written?
• Yes, Bart Ehrman's nitpicking notwithstanding.
• Why are there differences in the Gospel accounts? Scholar Michael Licona has written a book with essentially this title, with a (predictably) negative review from an Evangelical perspective.
• Ancient biography and historiography had different "rules" than what post-Enlightenment people would expect today in terms of precision and other factors.

What does that mean for your perspective on the Gospels or the rest of the Scriptures? Your stance on apologetics? Your life on earth related to your perspective on Jesus Christ?

Death and Life After

When a Christian dies, the historical/orthodox teaching is that the body rests while the soul goes to be in paradise/heaven with Christ immediately. The Greek word chosen by New Testament writers to express "paradise" connotes a temporary resting place ("mansions" or "rooms" of John 14:2 among others). So, yes, Christians do go to heaven (not a physical place, but more like a dimension that touches our known dimensions) when they die. However, they don't stay there forever (next section)!

One other note on death is that, like birth dates, death dates of various people are also commemorated or celebrated in some way. Martin Luther's death day is February 18. From what I could find, the largest-scale example of this is Day of the Dead (pagan in origin). In the Anglican tradition, the weekly prayers include a petition about the saints who have died in the faith:

We remember before you all your servants who have departed this life in your faith and fear, [especially _____________,] that your will for them may be fulfilled; and we ask you to give us grace to follow the good examples of [N., and] all your saints, that we may share with them in your heavenly kingdom. 

Life After Life After Death

For the Christian, death--and heaven--are not the end! We await the bodily resurrection once God has determined that the new heavens and new earth are fully ready. This is why we steward this creation (people, environment) and give effort and attention toward our vocations in the present.

All Saints' Writings

The Renaissance Biologist is a reader's blog. November 1 is the commemoration of All Saints. So . . . what should you read to learn about saints?

Find Out What a Saint Is

All Saints' Day has been celebrated since at least the 8th century on its present date, but a variation commemorating martyrs at a different time of year since at least the 4th century. As a Christian practice, it is therefore fairly old, not quite to the first few generations of Christians, but once there formed a critical mass of those who had died in the faith, there was a need to regularly remember them.

What does Scripture say?

In the Old Testament, several references (21 in the English Standard Version) contain a Hebrew word or term translated "saint" - most of which occur in Psalms and Daniel. A quick spot check on a few of these indicates the following:

• Psalm 16:3 - Strong's 6918 "sacred, holy, Holy One, saint, set apart"
• Psalm 37:28 - Strong's 2623 "faithful (ones)" among other senses
• Daniel 7:18 - Strong's 6922 "angels, saints" (sense 2)
• Daniel 8:24 - Strong's 6918

The sense shared among these terms is that a "saint" is someone "holy" or dedicated/set apart for a particular purpose. Old Testament scholar John Walton goes more deeply into this concept as it relates to the covenant God established with Israel.

In the New Testament, many more references (link above, 61 in ESV) contain a Greek term translated "saint" - most of which are in Revelation, Romans, and the longer pastoral epistles. A peek at a few of them indicates the following:

• Romans 8:27 - Strong's 40 "set apart by (or for) God, holy, sacred"
• 1 Corinthians 6:2 - Strong's 40
• Ephesians 3:8 - Strong's 40
• Revelation 8:3 - Strong's 40

What do Christians Say?

To keep the scope of this post narrow, I will focus on currently held beliefs of major Christian denominations in the US about sainthood. A recently written guide to denominations lists 17 distinct families, but I will further collapse those by going a step or two back in their family trees.

• Roman Catholic/Orthodox (lumped together by historical proximity): saints are believers and only Jesus can address the Father on our behalf (these teachings have evolved significantly over time); all Christians are saints, but some by performing documented miracles or living entirely in line with orthodox teaching may be canonized. As the Orthodox link says:
• "We glorify those whom God Himself has glorified, seeing in their lives true love for God and their neighbors. The Church merely recognizes that such a person has cooperated with God’s grace to the extent that his or her holiness is beyond doubt."
• Anglican/Episcopal (including Methodist and Pentecostal/Holiness): any faithful Christian; some saints may be canonized or recognized more formally by the church as a whole.
• Baptist (including Adventist, Congregationalist, and Evangelical due to shared beliefs): any Christian who has consciously decided to follow Jesus (which excludes very young children).
• Anabaptist (including Mennonite): Zwingli is given as an example of an iconoclast, which also involved forbidding the veneration of saints.
• Reformed (including Presbyterian and Calvinist): Christians who are "preserved" in the faith throughout their lives.
• Lutheran: all Christians, especially focusing on those who have proclaimed Christ Jesus more thoroughly by their lives, works, and words.

For a perspective of a relatively famous Brit on some errant practices related to All Saints' Day, I would commend you to N. T. Wright's For All the Saints?, a quick read explaining heaven vs the new creation with bodily resurrection, and the truer/broader definition of a saint. Bottom line: Don't celebrate All Souls' Day (Nov. 2)!

Read Primary Sources

Primary sources are directly linked to the experience being described, usually by being written by eyewitnesses or those otherwise immediately present.

What Did Saints Write?

For the purposes of this post, I’m focusing on New Testament-era saints. The records we have from various Christians are (surprisingly to some) robust in quantity and quality. 

Ancient and Modern Autobiography

Modern autobiography, by definition, must be written while its subject is still alive. Ancient biography, while perhaps not as well preserved, is subject to the same limitation. I asked Husband for examples of this, and the only autobiography in his list was that of the Jewish historian Josephus. 

Teaching and Sermons

Perhaps the most obvious examples of saints’ teaching are found in the New Testament epistles. Sermons included (such as Paul’s address on Mars Hill) are, in ancient biography fashion, summarized. 

However, more complete sermons are written in other places. The writings of the Apostolic Fathers are an excellent place to start. From there, the Ante- and Post-Nicene Fathers form a corpus of slightly later (4th century AD) writings. 

Read Secondary Sources

Secondary sources are written by non-experiencers of the event in question. Sometimes writers are contemporaneous, sometimes not. While these sources lose the immediacy of the events and experiences being described, a large benefit is hindsight lent by a different, later perspective. 

Ancient and Modern Biography

As a youngster, I had biographies of modern-day Christians (saints) as part of the family library available to me. In the North American tradition, these included Hudson Taylor, David Livingstone, and others. You can probably find several more on your home shelves!

What about ancient biography? Here are Husband’s recommendations on biography and books about how biography worked in in the early New Testament era:

• Most general: C. W. Fornara's The Nature of History in Ancient Greece and Rome
• NT: R. Bauckham's Jesus and the Eyewitnesses: The Gospels as Eyewitness Testimony
• NT: M. Licona's Why Are There Differences in the Gospels? What We Can Learn From Ancient Biography
• NT: C. Keener's Christobiography: Memory, History, and the Reliability of the Gospels
• Indirect: N. T. Wright's The New Testament and the People of God (methodological/genre-related questions, not referencing genre per se)
• Greco-Roman biographies:
• Plutarch's Parallel Lives
• Diogenes Laertius's Lives of Eminent Philosophers
• NT biographies: don’t forget about the 4 canonical Gospel accounts

Other Source Types

For this post’s purposes, the main type of secondary source about saints is historiography. Per Husband, "Since Greco-Roman biography was so tightly related to Greco-Roman historiography, ancient historiographies would also be recommended, especially

• Herodotus's The Histories
• Thucydides's History of the Peloponnesian War
• Xenophon's Hellenica, Anabasis, and Apology of Socrates
• Plato's Apology
• Polybius's The Histories
• Lucy's From the Founding of the City (excerpts)
• Tacitus's Annals, Histories, and Agricola
• Suetonius's The Twelve Caesars

Sources that best combine historiography and biography include Greek sources (5 major accounts of Alexander the Great's life/campaigns by Arrian, Diodorus Siculus, Quintus Curtius Rufus, Marcus Junianus Justinus Frontinus (Justin-not-Justin-Martyr), and Plutarch (already mentioned--parallel life was Julius Caesar). They also include Jewish historiography + biography:

• 1-4 Maccabees
• Josephus's Antiquities of the Jews and The Jewish War
• Philo of Alexandria's Life of Moses

Hymns are another excellent source of information. As I pointed out last week, hymns and songs teach by their poetry, in rough proportion to how deeply one considers the words. “For All the Saints” (affectionately abbreviated FATS by the cantor who taught it to me) is a prime example. Check out stanza 3:

O blest communion, fellowship divine!

We feebly struggle, they in glory shine;

yet all are one in Thee, for all are Thine.

Alleluia, Alleluia!

Retain the Material

Two strategies I recommend to my students and myself to increase long-term retention of material are (1) taking notes after reading rather than during it (here are 2 short videos of less than 3 minutes each supporting this strategy with expert opinion) and (2) testing yourself with the book/notes closed.

Happy reading!

Enter

Sco