What did leaders do in the early church?

The past couple of days I've been looking at some work Allen Brent has done on Ignatius and the development of church structures through the second century. He's a bit of a maverick scholar which makes him really interesting (and exasperating in equal measure!)

Following a conversation with Parush Parushev a couple of days ago, I have been reflecting on what leaders actually needed to do rather than just on how they were labelled. Parush spoke about the need for people to embody the message, once the apostles had died.

Brent argues that the so-called three-fold ministry - bishops, presbyters and deacons - in Ignatius' letters were the τυποι (the Greek word for mark, impression or type). He suggests that leaders represent God and the Spirit-filled council of the apostles - that is to say, the three-fold ministry together embodied the gospel, they were in effect the continuing incarnation. This is why they mattered so much and why Ignatius urges his readers to obey them.

It's a fascinating idea. But I have a couple of questions.

Brent seems to assume a single church group in each city that Ignatius wrote to led by a single bishop. But in the case of Rome this is almost certainly not the case (as Jeffers and Osiek have persuasely argued in various monographs). So, how would Brent's model work in small houshold-based congregations of the kind we're familiar with from Paul's letters?

And Brent seems to assume that the pattern of church life Ignatius argues for was the norm in every city. Yet Ritva Williams has argued that Ignatius may well have been prophetically arguing for this model in churches that had not adopted it (and wouldn't adopt it for a good hundred years).

I am very interested in the idea of leadership/ministry as the embodiment of the good news, not just the vehicle for its communication; that leaders taught as much by their lifestyle as by their words. This is certainly what Paul argues about himself when he calls on churches to imitate him (1 Cor 4, 11; Phil 3 etc). Is it also what the apostolic fathers are arguing in their letters - not so much in their words but in how they construct their arguments and how they encourage their readers to view them? I'm not sure whether this makes sense but I will explore it more and maybe blog in due course if I can think of something intelligent to say!

Cherry Ghost and 2 Clement

Took a break from church and studies to go to to see Cheery ghost at Koko on Friday evening. It was a good night.

I'd never been to Koko before. It started life as the Camden Theatre built by Ellen Terry in 1900 - at the time the largest theatre in London. Now it's a club and gig venue with a really great atmosphere.

Cherry Ghost emerged as our favourite band on our summer holiday in France this year, Simon Aldred's bitter-sweet take on life, love and politics wrapped up in great hooks and singable tunes proved to be ideal touring music.

Live he was equally irresistible, mixing songs from the album - Thirst for Romance - with new ones and keeping up a banter between songs that was affable and amusing. For some reason the last time he played London, the Evening Standard described the gig as gloomy. It just goes to show you should believe what you read in the papers!

Yesterday I sorted things in my study - mainly to get papers and books in suitable piles for my studies. I discovered a very interesting-looking paper by David Horrell on leadership in the early church and read a fascinating introduction to 2 Clement (which was neither a letter nor was it by Clement - apart from that it's well-named!) where the author argued that the work - a homily or sermon from the mid-second century - was calling its audience - probably Christians in Rome - at a time of relative peace and calm to pull up their moral socks not so much by more prayer and fasting, but by being more generous. The author says: 'Almsgiving is a good thing, as is repentance of sin. Fasting is better than prayer but almsgiving is better than both.' In other words, part of his message is that piety is ok but the Christian life is meant to change things for people.

The preacher talks a lot about Christ's fleshly existence - no doubt to counter the effects of that strong strand of second century teaching that suggested that the flesh was evil and that Jesus as God's Son couldn't have sullied himself with it - but uses it to stress the importance not just of doctrinal purity, but of what we Christians do in and with our bodies.

The simple message is that we need to live together in honesty and integrity. Obviously a good message for second century Rome - but a pretty good one for us too.

As Cherry Ghost sings on People help the People: 'People help the people/and if your homesick, give me your hand and i'll hold it/People help the people/and nothing will drag you down/oh and if i had a brain/oh and if I had a brain/i'd be cold as a stone and rich as the fool/that turned all those good hearts away...'

Getting to grips with the Apostolic Fathers

I've finally begun to do some serious reading for my MA assignment on the language of leadership in the later New testament and the immediate post-New Testament writings, often known as the Apostolic Fathers.

I'm discovering all sorts of things I don't know, such as 'what constitutes the later New Testament?' since, depending on one's view of authorship and dating, any of the books in the collection could be later than others. This normally wouldn't matter but if one is tracing the development of leadership structures and language through the first century, it's fairly important to have a view about which order your sources arrived in.

When we get to the Apostolic Fathers, this issue becomes even more pressing. Did 1 Clement predate the Didache? Do Ignatius and Clement agree on how churches should be led? Do any of these sources really argue for a single authoritative bishop in each town or city or are later generations of Episcopalians just reading their preferences into the sources?

It's all absolutely fascinating. One thing I am discovering is just how little I know about the post-New Testament world.

In the midst of this, we're making plans for Christmas - surprisingly smooth so far - and looking forward to welcoming Nick Lear for our anniversary morning service on Sunday (in the evening, we're having a party with balloons, games, party food and lots of fun - so if you're passing drop in).