No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Forty Variations on an Unpopular Theme
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2009
A Somber Theme:—Ever since Eusebius sought with dedicated zeal to prove the survival of the Church by blazing a trail back to the Apostles, the program of church history has been the same: “To give a clear and comprehensive, scientifically established view of the development of the visible institution of salvation founded by Christ.” To describe it—not to question it. By its very definition church history requires unquestioning acceptance of the basic proposition that the Church did survive. One may write endlessly about The Infant Church, l'Eglise naissante, die Pflanzung der Kirche, etc., but one may not ask why the early Christians themselves described their Church not as a lusty infant but as an old and failing woman; one may trace the triumphant spread of The Unquenchable Light through storm and shadow, but one may not ask why Jesus himself insisted that the Light was to be taken away. Church history seems to be resolved never to raise the fundamental question of survival as the only way of avoiding a disastrous answer, and the normal reaction to the question—did the Church remain on earth?—has not been serious inquiry in a richly documented field, but shocked recoil from the edge of an abyss into which few can look without a shudder.
1. Bihlmeyer, K., Kirchengeschichte (Paderborn, 1951), I. Teil, 1.Google Scholar
2. “There is always danger of a metaphor once adopted becoming the master instead of the servant,” writes Payne, E. A., commenting on K. S. Latourette's “Unquenchable Light” in Jnl. of Theol. Studies, XLVII (1946), 151.Google Scholar
3. While suspecting the worst, the Fathers could not bring themselves to admit it, according to John, , Bishop, of Bristol, , Ecclesiastical History of the Second and Third Centuries (London, 1894), 48–51Google Scholar. See below, note 138.
4. The tension is discussed by Marlé, R., “Le Christ de Ia Foi et le Jésus de l'Histoire,” Etudes, CCCII (1959), 67ffGoogle Scholar. Cf. Grant, R. M., “The Appeal to the Early Fathers,” Jnl. of Theol. Stud., N.S. XI (1960), 14, 23.Google Scholar
5. Arnobius, , Adv. gentes, ii. 76Google Scholar, in Migne, , P.L., V, 934AGoogle Scholar; II Cor. iv: 8–18; Tertullian, Scapul., i, iii; Cyprian, Ep. lvi, in P.L., IV, 362.Google Scholar
6. Matt. xvii:12; xxi:37–39; xxiii:31–37;Mark xii:6–8; Luke xvii:25; John I:5, 10–11; iii:11f, 19, 32; v:38, 40–47; vii:7; viii:19, 23f, 37f, 40–47; xv:22–25; cf. Acts iii:13–15.
7. Matt. ix:15; Luke ix:41; xiii:25–27; xvii:22; John vli:33f; xii:35f; xiii:33; xiv:30; xvi:16; cf. Acts iii:21.
8. John ix:4f; vix:30. Evil triumphs from Abel to the e8chaion: Matt. xxiii:35–39; xvii:12; Luke xi:51; Clementine Recognitions, iii. 61.Google Scholar
9. Matt. x:24f; Mark xlii:13; Luke x: 16; John xv:18–21; xvii:14; Actsxxviii: 26f; Grant, F. C., “The Mission of the Disciples,” J.B.L., XXXI (1916), 293–314.Google Scholar
10. Matt. x:16–22, 28; xxiv:9; Mark xiii:9; Luke x:3; John xvi:1–2, 33; I Cor. iv:9; II Clement v.
11. Matt. xxiv:14; xxviii:20; Mark xiii:10. Below, notes 17, 21.
12. Jas. v:10–11; I Pet. iv:12–14, 1; i:6–7, 24: Rem. viii.
13. I John iii:1; I Pet. v:1; John xvii:25.
14. Matt. xvi:24–26; II Cor. iv:8–16; Phil. iii; Luke xii:22–34.
15. Jude 4–11, 16–19; Matt. xiii:13–30; Rom. i:16–32; II Cor. xi:3f; II Thess. ii:7–12; I Tim. iv:1–3; vi:20f; II Tim. iv:3f; II Pet. ii:1–22.
16. It ends only with the second coming. Matt. xiii: 30, 39–43; Mark xii: 9; II Thess. ii: 8; Didache, xvi; Justin, , Dial., li. 2.Google Scholar
17. I John iii:1; John xvii:25; I Pet. v:8.
18. John xiv:30; Matt. xxi:38; Mark xii:7; Luke xx:14.
19. Matt. xiii: 24–30, 38. Both syllegein and synagogein are used.
20. II Tim. iv:2–4; II Thess. ii:9–12; Rem. i:21–31.
21. Matt. xxiv:14; cf. x:23; xxviii:20, where aeon refers to that particular age. Cullmann, O.. in Davies, W. D. & Daube, D. (eds.), The Background of the New Testament and Its Eschatology (Cambridge Univ., 1956), 417Google Scholar; cf. Messel, N., Die Finheitlichkeit der jüdischen Eschatologie (Giessen, 1915), 61–69, 44–50Google Scholar. See below, note 181.
22. Mark xiii:9f; Acts ii:16f, 33; Origen, , In Mt. Comm. Ser. 39Google Scholar, in P.G., XIII, 1655BGoogle Scholar, concludes that, strictly speaking, jam finem venisse: so also Chrysostom, John, In Ep. Heb. xi, Homil. xxi. 3Google Scholar, in Migne, , P.G., LXIII, 1655B.Google Scholar
23. Scorp. ix-x, xiii-xv; Ignatius, , Polycarp, iiiGoogle Scholar; Ephes., ix.
24. Heb. vi:11; Phil. iii:8–10; I Pet. i:4–6, 9; II Clem. v. 2–4; Barnabas, viii. 6; Justin, , Apolog. i. 57Google Scholar; Tertull, ., Apolog. i.Google Scholar
25. Mark xiii:34–37; I Pet. iv:12f. Like soldiers, each to remain at his post, I Clement, xxxvii, xxi; Tertull, ., Admartyr. iiiGoogle Scholar; II Clem. v; Ignat., Polyo. iii; Magnes. spv; Barnabas, ii. 1.
26. Pauci remaneant certantes pro van- tate usque ad finem, qui et salvandi sunt soil… Origen, , In Mt. xxivGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XIII, 1654DGoogle Scholar. There were few martyrs, de Ste. Croix, G., “Aspects of the ‘Great’ Persecution,” H.T.B., XLVII (1947), 104Google Scholar, and countless betrayers, Frend, W. H., “Failure of the Persecntions…” Past & Present, XVI (11 1959), 15f.Google Scholar
27. Early sources speak of two factions within the Church, and of the “seducers” completely exterminating the righteons party, Schmidt, C., Gespräche Jesu… in Texte u. Unters., XLIII (1919), 196–8Google Scholar; cf. Brandon, S.G.F., The Fail of Jerusalem and the Christian Church (SPCK, 1951), 54.Google Scholar
28. Luke xiii: 25ff; Matt. xxiii:29. There is a time limit to the promise (Heb. xii:17), and “when the tower is finished, you will wish to do good, and will have no opportunity,” Hermas, , Pastor, Vis. iii. 9.Google Scholar
29. Justin, , Dial., cxGoogle Scholar; Hilary, , Contra Constant. Imp., ivGoogle Scholar, in P.L., X, 581B.Google Scholar
30. Gal. iii: 1–4. Ignatius describes the corruption with striking imagery as of pleasing and plausible wolves (Philad., ii), a goodly label on a bottle of poison, a deadly drug mixed with sweet wine (Trail., vi), counterfeit coin (Magnes., v), cleverly baited hooks (id., xi), etc.
31. “History and Eschatology in the N.T.,” New Test. Stud., I (1954), 8.Google Scholar
32. A mixture of “Freude, Sehnsucht, und bange Furcht…” Rud. Knopf, Die Zukunftshoffnungen des Urchristentums (Tubingen, 1907), 7–11Google Scholar. Cf. Didache, xvi.
33. I Clam. xli. 4; xxi. 1; Barnab. iv. 9, 14; Ignat, ., Ephes, xi. 1Google Scholar. “The last stumbilng-block approaches…” Barnab. iv. 3, 9; I Clem. vii. 1; II Clem. viif; xvi; Hermas, , Vis., ii. 2Google Scholar; iv. 1.
34. I Clem. xv. 4–6; viii; xxxix; lvii; II Clem. vi; Barnab. iv-v; xiii-xiv.
35. I Clam. lviii. The promise of the Paraclete is no guarantee, II Clem. vi. 9.
36. So I Clem. iii-vil; Barnab. ii-vi; xvi; Const. Apostal., vii. 32Google Scholar; Lactant, ., Div. Inst., vii. 17.Google Scholar
37. I Clam. i; iii; xix; xli; xlvii; lii; lxv; II Clam. xiil; Barnab. ii; Ignat., Ephes., xvii; Philad., ii; Hermas, , Vis., ii. 2Google Scholar; iii. ix; Simil., vii; ix. 21, 25f; x. 1.
38. II Clam. xv; Didache, x. 5Google Scholar; Ignat., Polyc., i. 2Google Scholar; Ephes., xvii; Philad., i; Hermas, , Vis., vGoogle Scholar; Mand., iv; Simil, ., ix. 14Google Scholar; Barnab. ii. 1;xxi.
39. I Clem. xv; xxx; II Clem. iiif; xiii; xvii; Barnab., x. 4; Ignat, ., Ephes., xvGoogle Scholar; vii; Magnes., iv; Trall., vi; Polycarp, , Phil., xGoogle Scholar; Harmas, , Vis., i. 3Google Scholar; Simil. ix. 13, 21.Google Scholar
40. Polycarp, Phil., vii; Hermas, , Mand., xi. 1.Google Scholar
41. Ignat, ., Magnes. vGoogle Scholar; II Clem. vi; Barnab. v; xviil; sea Lake's, K. note on Hermas in his Apostolic Fathers (Loeb ed., 1912), ii. 21, n. 1.Google Scholar
42. I Clam. i; iii; xxiv; xix; Ignat, ., Trall., viiGoogle Scholar; Ephcs., xvii; ix. 5Google Scholar; Hermas, , Vis., iii. 3, 10Google Scholar. Cf. Test, of Hezekiah, ii 3B-iv. 18.Google Scholar
43. Didache, xvi. 3Google Scholar; Barnab. xvi; Enoch lxxxix; lvi; lxvif; Logion No. xiv, in Patrologia Orientalis, IV, 176fGoogle Scholar; cf. IX, 227f.
44. Hermas, , Vis. iii. 3–7.Google Scholar
45. Hermas, , Sim. iiiGoogle Scholar; iv; ix; I Clem. lviii; Euseb., H.E., III. xxxi. 3Google Scholar; V. xxiv. 2.
46. Nock, A. D., “The Vocabulary of the N.T.,” J.B.L., LII (1933), 135.Google Scholar
47. Lib. contra Auxent., iv, in P.L., X, 611B.Google Scholar
48. Holl, K., in Ztsehr. f. system. Theol., II (1924), 403–5Google Scholar; Dietrich, S., Le Dessein de Dieu (Neuchatel, 1948), 19Google Scholar, finds only one case (Mark v:19) in which Christ did not avoid publicity.
49. Origen, , C. Cels. ii. 76Google Scholar; iv. 28; Felix, Minuc, Octav. viii–xiGoogle Scholar; Lactant, ., Div. Inst. v. 7.Google Scholar
50. Felix, Min., Octav. ixfGoogle Scholar; Justin, , Dial. xc. 2Google Scholar; lii (the Parousia a secret); Tertull, ., Apol. viiGoogle Scholar; Clem, . Recog. i. 52Google Scholar; Alex, Clem.., Strom. i. 12Google Scholar; v.10.
51. Matt. xiii:9–17; Clem. Recog. ii. 60Google Scholar; iii. 1; Tertull, ., Praescr. xxv–xxviGoogle Scholar; Origen, , C. Cels. I. i. 1ffGoogle Scholar; Ignatius, , Trall., v.Google Scholar
52. Peri Archon i. 2, 4, 6–10Google Scholar; cf. Irenaeus, IV. xxxiii. 8; II. xxvii. 1–2.
53. Origen, , C. Cels. ii. 70Google Scholar; Schweitzer, A., Leben-Jesu-Forschung (Tübingen, 1951), 396Google Scholar; Gunkel, H., Zum religionsgesch. Verständnis des NTs (Göttingen, 1903), 78fGoogle Scholar; Lake, K., Intr. to the N.T. (1937), 37.Google Scholar
54. Irenaeus (loc. cit.) insists that nothing has been lost (cf. I. viii. 1, etc.), yet speaks with awe of the knowledge of the Apostles, I. xiii. 6; III. ii. 2, which Iguatius implies far exceeds his own, Ephes. iii; Magnes. v; Rom. iv. Later Fathers were intrigued by the great unwritten knowledge of the Thomasius, Apostles D., Dogmengesch. der alten Kirche (Erlangen, 1866), I, 209, 297f.Google Scholar
55. Jesu Verheissung für die Völker (Stuttgart, 1956), 15f, 61f.Google Scholar
56. Dufourcq, A., Hist. de la fondatios de l'Eglise (Paris, 1909), 220Google Scholar; Jeremias, op. cit., 17, 21, 60f. Above, note 38.
57. Didache, x. 5; Ignat, . Rom. viiGoogle Scholar: deuro pros ton patera — literally.
58. Discussed by Linton, O., Das Problem d. Urkirche (Uppsala Univ., 1932), 198ff.Google Scholar
59. Eisler, R., Iesous Basileus, etc. (Heidelberg, 1930), II, 237.Google Scholar
60. Brandon, S., Fall of Jerusalem, 7–11.Google Scholar
61. Clern Homil. xvi. 21Google Scholar, in P.G., II, 384AGoogle Scholar; ‘Hippolytus,’ De consum. mundi. x-xi, in P.G., X, 913A–CGoogle Scholar; Athanasius, , Vita Antonii lxxxiiGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XXVI, 957.Google Scholar
62. Acta Pilati xv, in Patrol. Or., IX, 108fGoogle Scholar; Harris, J. R., Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, 28, 33, 35, 38Google Scholar; Budge, E. A. W., Contendings of the Apostles (London, 1899–1901), II, 62, 53–55, 59.Google Scholar
63. Intr. to the N.T., 62.
64. Grant, R. M., Second Century Christianity (SPCK, 1946), 9.Google Scholar
65. Eusebius, , H.E., III. xxxii, 7–8.Google Scholar
66. Milburn, R. L. P., Early Christian Interpretations of History (London, 1954), 25f.Google Scholar
67. In Revue des Sciences Religieuses, XII (1932), 1.Google Scholar
68. Les onigines des églises de l'age apostolique (Paris, 1909), 111.Google Scholar
69. E.g., Hermas, , Vis. I, iiiGoogle Scholar; II. ii; III. ix; Sim. IX. xixGoogle Scholar; Mand. xi-xii; I Clem. xxi. Cf. Euseb, ., H.E., V, xxviiiGoogle Scholar; Clem. Recog. i. 1–5.Google Scholar
70. See Marie, R., in Etudes, CCCII (1959), 65ff.Google Scholar
71. Origen, , C. Cels., viii. 74, 72Google Scholar end; Tertull, ., Apolog. xxxviiiGoogle Scholar; Const. Apostol. vii. 39Google Scholar; Barnab. ii; iv; I Cor. vii: 29–32.
72. Origen, , C. Cels. viii. 17–20Google Scholar; Zeno, Lib. I, tract. xiv, in P.L., XI, 354B–358AGoogle Scholar; Felix, Minuc., Octav. xGoogle Scholar; Jerome, , Ep. cxxx. 15Google Scholar, in P.L., XXII, 1119AGoogle Scholar: Arnobius, , Adv. gentes, vi. 1Google Scholar, in P.L., V, 1162B.Google Scholar
73. Hermas, , Sim. i. 1Google Scholar; II Clem. v; Cyprian, , De mortal. xxvGoogle Scholar, in P.L., IV, 623B.Google Scholar
74. Gesch. d. alten Kirche (Berlin, 1932–1934), II, 41fGoogle Scholar; Käseniann, E., Das wandernde Gottesvolk (Göttingen, 1939), 51ff.Google Scholar
75. De praescr. xxvii-xxix; Polycarp, , Phil. ixGoogle Scholar; II Clem. xix.
76. Acts xviii:6; II Tim. iv:6–8. Conversion not the object, I Cor. i:17.
77. In Davies & Daube, , Background of the New Testament, etc., 415.Google Scholar
78. I Cor. ix:16; John xv:22; Matt. xxiii:34f; xxvii:25; Luke xi:49–51; Acts v:28; xviii:6; Clem. Recog., I. viiiGoogle Scholar… tacere non possumus.
79. Cullmann, O., Urchristentum u. Gottesdienst (Zürich, 1950), 39–46Google Scholar;
80. Ignat, ., Rom. vi–viiiGoogle Scholar; Ephes. xi. 1Google Scholar; Ep. de mart. s. Andr., in P.G., II, 1244B–1245AGoogle Scholar; Passio s. Perpetuae, vi; xviii; xxi. Quote from Apost. Const., V. v.Google Scholar
81. Euseb, ., H.E., VI. xlv.Google Scholar
82. Tertull., Apolog. 1Google Scholar; Cyprian, , De mortal. xiiGoogle Scholar, in P.L., IV, 611f.Google Scholar
83. Norden, A., Die Antike Kunstprosa (Leipzig, 1898), II, 418fGoogle Scholar, contrasts the early and later Christian concepts of martyrdom. The transition is clear in Cyprian, who must warn, non martyres Evangelium faciant, Ep. xv, in P.L., IV, 293A.Google Scholar
84. Cyprian, , Ep. viiiGoogle Scholar, in P.L., IV, 255AGoogle Scholar; De duplici mart. xxv, ib., 982A; Alex, Clem.., Strom. iv. 7Google Scholar; Leo, , Sermo xlvii. 1Google Scholar, in P.L., LIV, 295B–C.Google Scholar
85. So Asterius Urbanus, Contra. Montan., frg. iii; vi, viii, in P.G., X, 149B, 153A–B.Google Scholar
86. So Optatus, , De schis. Donat. xviiGoogle Scholar; xxiv-xxvi, in P.L., XI, 968f, 979B–986A.Google Scholar
87. Iren., IV. xxxiii. 10; Cyprian. Ep. ad Fortunat., Praef., in P.L., IV, 678–682.Google Scholar
88. Craig, C. T., The Beginnings of Christianity (N. Y., 1943), p. 328.Google Scholar
89. van Stempvoort, P., in Het Oudste Christendom en de antieke Culture (Haarlem, 1951), II, 331Google Scholar: Brandon, S., Fall of Jerus., 9–11Google Scholar. The imagery goes back to Eusebius. H.E., I. 1. 3.Google Scholar
90. op. cit., 10; Ed Schwartz, , Kaiser Constantin u. die christl. Kirche (Leipzig, 1913), 17fGoogle Scholar; Lietzmann, H., Ki. Schr., I. 97.Google Scholar
91. Die Kirche im Wandel der Zeit (Leipzig. 1933), 79.Google Scholar
92. E. C. Blackman, in Davies & Daube, op. cit., 13.
93. Bardy, G., La conversion au christianisme … (Paris, 1949), 29f.Google Scholar
94. Dufourcq, A., Fondations, 250Google Scholar: Goguel, M.. Les premiers temps de l'Eglise (Nenchatel, 1949), 139Google Scholar, and in R.H.R. CXXXVI (1949). 36f.Google Scholar
95. Euseb, ., H.E. III. xxxviiGoogle Scholar; xxxix; I Clem. xlvii; Polycarp, . Phil. iiiGoogle Scholar; Ignat, ., Rom. vGoogle Scholar; Iren., III, iii. 4: Methodius, . Lib. de resum. viGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XVIII, 313B.Google Scholar
96. Euseb, ., H.E. III. xxxixGoogle Scholar. 1–4: V. x. 4; xi. 3–5; Justin, , Dial., lxxxiiGoogle ScholarOrigen, , C. Cels, II, 8.Google Scholar
97. Euseb, ., H.E., III. xxxiiGoogle Scholar. 7: II. xxvii. 7: II. i. 3: Irenaeus. I, Praef. i.
98. Polycarp, , Phil. iiiGoogle Scholar; Barnab. i. 5; the case of Ignatius is discussed by Reville, J., in R.H.R., XXII (1890), 285ff.Google Scholar
99. In Recherches de Science Relig., XXIV (1934), 431.Google Scholar
100. G. Bardy. op. cit., 306: Grant, R. M., Second Century Christianity, 9.Google Scholar
101. … singuli quique coetus haereticorum se potissimum Christianos, et suam esse Catholicam Ecclesiam putant, Lactant, ., Div. inst., IV. xxxGoogle Scholar end; Euseb, ., H.E., V. xiii–xviiiGoogle Scholar: Sozom., v. 9, 20; vi. 26; viii. 20, etc. Origen, , C. Cels., III. x–xii.Google Scholar
102. Justin, , Apol. viiiGoogle Scholar: Dial. xxxv, xlvii, lxxx; cf. Origen, , C. Cels., VI. xi.Google Scholar
103. Iren., I. xiii. 1–7; xxiii. 1, 3: xxv. 3; xxix. 1, etc. Euseb, ., H.E., V. xviGoogle Scholar; ‘Justin’ Quaestiones, Nos. 100, 5, in P.G., VI, 1344f, 1256AB.Google Scholar
104. Sulpic. Sever., Eccl. Hist., ii. 46, 50Google Scholar. Eusebius worried too, Völker, W., in Vigiliae Christianae, IV (1950), 170f.Google Scholar
105. Harnack, A., Lehrb. d. Dogmengesch. (Tübingen, 1931), I, 250Google Scholar; Euseb, ., H.E. V. xvf.Google Scholar
106. The Reformation itself attempted revival of “prophetic, eschatological Christianity,” Bornkamm, H., Grtriss zum Studium der Kirchengesch. (Gütersloh, 1949), 63.Google Scholar
107. Harnack, A., Das Mönchtam (Giessen, 1895)Google Scholar, passim. The Church Fathers did not encourage pilgrimages, Kötting, B., Peregrinatio Religiosa (Regensburg, 1950), 421.Google Scholar
108. Goguel, M.. in R.H.R., CXXXVI (1899), 192–4, 180.Google Scholar
109. Conversion au christ., p. 304; so Lietzmann, H., Gesch. d. alten Kirche, I, 226Google Scholar: Harnack, op. cit., 25.
110. Frick, R., “Die Gesch. d. Reich-GottesGedankens …” Z.N.T.W., Beih. vi (1928), 152fGoogle Scholar; M. Goguel, op. cit., 35; Harnack, loc. cit.
111. Bultmann, R., in N.T. Studies, I, 15.Google Scholar
112. Op. cit., 191.
113. Milburn, R., Christian Interpretations of Hist., 26.Google Scholar
114. Bardy, G., L'Eglise et les derniers Romains (Paris, 1948), 48.Google Scholar
115. Braun, F. M., in Revue Biblique, 1940. 53Google Scholar; Leclercq, H.. Dict. d'archaeol. chret. et de liturgie, IV, 2281.Google Scholar
116. In Melanges Goguel, 278.
117. Tertull, ., De pudicit. xxiGoogle Scholar, in P.L., II, 1080B.Google Scholar
118. R. Bultmann, op. cit., 15.
119. Gesch. der griech. Litteratur (Munich, 1920), 955.Google Scholar
120. “In the end therefore, it was the Christian doctrine and practice which underwent the change, and society which remained.” Lake, K.. in H.T.R., IV (1911), 25.Google Scholar
121. Duchesne, L.. Origines du culte chrétien (Paris, 1898), 52f.Google Scholar
122. Lake, K., Intr. to the N.T., 22Google Scholar; Dufourcq, A., Fondations, 221.Google Scholar
123. Goguel, M.. Premiers Temps, 209Google Scholar; Seeberg, R., Hist. of Chr. Dogma (Grand Rapids, 1956), I, 118Google Scholar; Adam, K., Das Wesen des Katholizismus (Düsseldorf, 1934), 194.Google Scholar
124. Antike Kunstprosa, II, 479–481.Google Scholar
125. Linton, O., Prob. d. Urkirche, 160, 164ffGoogle Scholar; Kuss, O., “Zur Senfkornparabel.” Theol. u. Glaube, XLI (1951), 40ffGoogle Scholar; Jeremias, J., Jesu Verheissung, 58f.Google Scholar
126. So Bardy, G., Conversion au chr., 6, 259Google Scholar; H. Bornkamm, op. cit., 20.
127. Bonner, S. F., Roman Declamation (Liverpool Univ., 1949), 59.Google Scholar
128. Animae emptae a Christo non potuerunt vendi… Optatus, De schis. Donat. iii, 11Google Scholar, in P.L., XI. 1024fGoogle Scholar; Fascher, E., in Zt. f. Theol. u. Kirche, XIX (1938), 108Google Scholar; Chrysostom exposes the fallacy, In Gal. iii. 2Google Scholar, in P.G., LXI, 649f.Google Scholar
129. G. Bardy, op. cit., Ch. viii entire. Refuted by Chrysost., J., In Heb. v, in P.G., LXIII, 73Google Scholar, and Salvian, , Cub. Dei, IV. i. 61.Google Scholar
130. Justin, , Dial., xxxvGoogle Scholar; Origen, , C. Cels., iii. 12Google Scholar; v. 61; Tertull, ., Ad nat., iii.Google Scholar
131. Matt. vii:22; xxiv. 5; Mark ix:39; xiii:6; Luke xxi:8; Acts xvii:15.
132. E.g., the gloating attacks on the dead Julian, Norden, op. cit., II, 563.
133. Ibid., II, 460–2, 465, 476f, 529ff, 680–3; Frend, W., “Failure of Persecutions in the R. Emp.” Past & Present, XVI (1959), 12 & passim.Google Scholar
134. Hippolytus, , In Dan. v. 7Google Scholar, in P.G., X, 681DGoogle Scholar; De Chr. & Antichr. xxix, lviif, ib., 749B, 776B-777A; De consum. mundi xi, ib., 913C.
135. De trinit. x. 55Google Scholar, in P.L., X, 387AB.Google Scholar
136. Quote is from Chrysost, John., In Mt. homil. xlvi. 1Google Scholar, in P.G., LVIII, 476.Google Scholar
137. Chavannes, P., in R.H.R., IV (1899), 349Google Scholar; Straub, J., in Historia, I (1950), 64.Google Scholar
138. Basil, , Ep. cl. ii, No. 139Google Scholar, in P.G., XXXII, 584AGoogle Scholar. Tertull, ., De praescr. xxviifGoogle Scholar, must console himself with the argument of numbers. Even before Eusebius (Praep. ev., I iiiGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XXI, 33Google Scholar), Hegesippus sought “to reassure himself that there was… an absolute continuity…” according to Duchesne, L., Liber Pontificalis (Paris, 1886–1892), I, iGoogle Scholar, who vainly seeks the same assurance, Leclercq, H., Dict. d'arch., VI, 2697.Google Scholar
139. Euseb, ., H.E., X. iv. 12–16Google Scholar; VIII. i. 8-li. 1–3; cf. Sozom, ., H.E., III, 17Google Scholar. The Church was overcome by its own sins, Cyprian, , Epist. vii, in P.L., IV, 246–251Google Scholar, cf. Liber de lapsis, in P.L., IV, 478–510Google Scholar. On the Restoration motif, see Seidlmeyer, M., in Saeculum, VII (1956), 405–7Google Scholar; Sandys, J. B., History of Classcal Scholarship (N.Y. 1958), I, 513f.Google Scholar
140. Ambrose, , Hexaemeron, iv. 32, 217fGoogle Scholar; Methodius, , Conviv. X virg., viGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XVIII, 148BGoogle Scholar; Jerome, , In Is. xviii. 66Google Scholar, in P.L., XXIV, 674DGoogle Scholar; Lactant, ., Div. Inst., v. 7.Google Scholar
141. Discussed by this writer in Western Political Quart., VI (1953), 241–6.Google Scholar
142. The surprise is expressed by Chrysost, John., In Ps. cxlviii. 4Google Scholar, in P.G., LV, 483fGoogle Scholar, and Contra Jud. & Gent. xii, in P.G., XLVIII, 829fGoogle Scholar; the perplexity in ‘Justin,’ Quaestiones, No. 74, in P.G., VI, 1316A.Google Scholar
143. Sermo ante exil., lf, in P.G., LII, 429fGoogle Scholar; Vidi Dominum, homil., iv. 2Google Scholar, in P.G., LVI, 121.Google Scholar
144. Völker, W., in Vigil. Christ., IV (1950), 161ff, 180Google Scholar. J. Burckhardt calls Eusebius “the first thoroughly dishonest hitoriarn…” cit. Hadas, M.J.Q.R. XLI (1950), 423.Google Scholar
145. See Nibley, H., in Western Political Quarterly, VI (1953), 644–6.Google Scholar
146. Lactant, ., Div. Inst., v. 24.Google Scholar
147. Euseb, ., In Luc. xvii. 27Google Scholar, in P.G., XXIV, 584D–585A.Google Scholar
148. Hilary, , In Matt. xxvi. 4Google Scholar, in P.L., IX, 1057B.Google Scholar
149. Euseb, ., In Luc. xiii. 32Google Scholar, in P.G., XXIV, 601D–604A.Google Scholar
150. Chrysost, John., In X mil, talent., homil. iiiGoogle Scholar, in P.G., LI, 21B.Google Scholar
151. First suggested by Origen, , In Matt. comm. ser. 39Google Scholar, in P.G., XIII, 1653D.Google Scholar
152. Hilary, , In Matt. xxv. 8Google Scholar, in P.L., IX. 1055CD.Google Scholar
153. Ibid., xxvi. 6, in P.L., IX, 1058B.Google Scholar
154. Euseb, ., In Is. xi. 6Google Scholar, in P.G., XXIV, 172C–173A.Google Scholar
155. Optatus, , De schism. Donat., vii. 2Google Scholar, in P.L., XI, 1085B–1086A.Google Scholar
156. A favorite theme with Chrysostom, e.g., Vidi Dominum, iv. 2Google Scholar, in P.G., LVI, 121Google Scholar; Sermo post redit., ii, in P.G., LII, 440, 442Google Scholar; Sermo Sever. de pace, id., 425; cf. Athans, ., De semente homil. vGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XXVIII, 149C.Google Scholar
157. Chrysost, John., De nov. dieb., viGoogle Scholar, in P.G., LVI, 277fGoogle Scholar; Basil, , De grat. act. homil., ivGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XXXI, 228AGoogle Scholar; Hilary, , De trin., xxxix–xliiiGoogle Scholar, in P.L., X, 374–7.Google Scholar
158. Chrysost., loc. cit.
159. Gibbon, Decline & Fall, Ch. xxvi, at note 101; Norden, , A.K., II. 623ff.Google Scholar
160. De capto Eutrop., i, viGoogle Scholar, in P.G., LII, 397f, 402Google Scholar; De expuls. sua, ib., 433; Exp. in Ps. cxlviii. 4Google Scholar, in P.G., LV, 483Google Scholar; Vidi Dominum, iv. 2Google Scholar, P.G., LVI, 121Google Scholar; In Matt. homil., liv. 2Google Scholar, in P.G., LVIII, 535Google Scholar; In Matt. lxxvii. 1, ib.,702.
161. In I Cor. xxxii. 1Google Scholar, in P.G., LXI, 265Google Scholar; In I Cor. hom. vi. 3–4, ib., 51–53.
162. De pentecoste homil., i. 4Google Scholar, in P.G., L, 459, 453Google Scholar; De laud. s. Pauli, iv, ib., 488; In Act. ii,. 3, P.G., LI, 81f, cf. 85Google Scholar; In I Cor., xxxii. 2Google Scholar, P.G., LXI, 265Google Scholar; In Coloss. iii, Hom. viii, in P.G., LXII, 358f, etc.Google Scholar
163. Chrysost, ., In Ps. cv. 4Google Scholar, in P.G., LV, 285Google Scholar; Jerome, In Is. liv. 1, in P.L., XXIV, 516BGoogle Scholar; In Is. xiii, Ibid., 627B-629A; Origen, , C. Ceis., iv. 80Google Scholar; P. Archon, II. iv. 3.Google Scholar
164. Athanas, ., De incarn. Verbi, liiiGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XXV, 189CDGoogle Scholar; Jerome, , Ep. lxvi. 4Google Scholar, in P.L., XXII, 641Google Scholar; In Is. lx. 1, in P.L., XXIV, 588D–589A.Google Scholar
165. Jerome, , Contra Joan. Jerus., xifGoogle Scholar., in P.L., XXIII, 3800–3810.Google Scholar
166. Stendahl, K., “Problems in biblical Hermeneutics,” J.B.L., LXXVII (1958), 34.Google Scholar
167. Cotter, A. C., “The Eschatological Discourse,” Cath. Bibi. Quart., I (1939), 205.Google Scholar
168. C. H. Dahl, in Davies & Daube, op. cit., 422.
169. Schweitzer, A., Leben-Jesu-Forschung, 375.Google Scholar
170. “Development’ in early Christian Doctrine,” Jnl. of Relig., XXXIX (1959), 120.Google Scholar
171. Jesu Verheissung, 47.
172. So Weiss, Joh., “… Entstehung des Christentums,” Arch. Rel. Wiss., XVI (1913), 435.Google Scholar
173. Fawkes, A., “Christian Institutions and Beliefs,” H.T.R., X (1917), 115f.Google Scholar
174. Linton, O., Prob. der Urkirche, 121, 159.Google Scholar
175. Feuillet, A., in Rev. Biblique, III (1950), 180ffGoogle Scholar; Burrows, M., Outline of Biblical Theology (Philadelphia, 1946), 199ff.Google Scholar
176. van Stempvoort, P., in De Oudste Christendom, II, 250Google Scholar; Glasson, T. F., in Hibbert Jnl., CCI (1952), 128, 131fGoogle Scholar; Spencer, F. A. M., in Ch. Qt. Rev., CXXVI (1938), 6.Google Scholar
177. Goguel, M., “La seconde generation…” Rev. Hist. Relig., CXXXVI (1949), 190Google Scholar; Bornkamm, H., In Memoriam K. Lohmeyer (1946), 116, 118, 121Google Scholar; E. Stauffer, in Davies & Daube, op. cit., 281f.
178. lesous Basileus (Heidelberg, 1929), I, xxviGoogle Scholar; cf. Franck, S., in Dieu Vivant, XVII (1951), 17–34.Google Scholar
179. I Clem. xxiii; II Clem. xl-xii; Barnab. iv. 16; cf. Luke xviii:7.
180. Petry, R. C., in Church History, IX (1940), 55Google Scholar; Bäthgen, F., Der Engelpapst (Halle, 1933), 76.Google Scholar
181. The old dispensation theory: Origen, , C. Cels., iv. 11fGoogle Scholar; B. Milburn, op. cit., 29–31. The Jews had lost and regained the Temple more than once.
182. Epiphanius, , Adv. haeres., III. ii. 6Google Scholar, in P.G., XLII, 784Google Scholar; Lactant, ., Div. Inst., IV. i.Google Scholar
183. Clavier, H., in Rev. Hist. & Philos. Relig., XXXI (1951), 292Google Scholar; O. Linton, op. cit., 132f; N. A. Dahl, “Christ, Creation and the Church,” in Davies & Daube, op. cit., 422–443.
184. Ambrose, , Exp. in Luc. lib. ii. 88Google Scholar, in P.L., XV, 1667fGoogle Scholar; Chrysost, John., In noviss. dieb., vGoogle Scholar, in P.G., LVI, 276.Google Scholar
185. Origen, , In Matt., lviGoogle Scholar, in P.G., XIII, 1688DGoogle Scholar, attacks this view, held by Brunec, M., in Verbum Domini, 1952, 265, 269, 277, 323f.Google Scholar
186. Hippolyt, ., De cons. mundi, xxiv–vGoogle Scholar, in P.G., X, 937B–CGoogle Scholar. So Eusebius.
187. Bruce, F. F., in London Quart. & Holborn Rev., 1958, 99Google Scholar, with a survey of the literature, 101ff.
188. Florovsky, G., “Eschatology in the Patristic Age,” in Studia Patristica II, in Texte u. Unters., LXIV (1957), 234.Google Scholar
189. Cullmann, O., “Bultmann's Concept of Myth and the N.T.,” Concordia Theol. Monthly, XXVII (1956), 24Google Scholar; Burrows, M., “Thy Kingdom Come,” J.B.L., LXXIV (1955), 28.Google Scholar
190. In Davies & Daube, , Eschatol. Background of the N.T., 123.Google Scholar