TaEOLOGICAL MmBOD II

SAINT PQ·LYCARP· S PtlILIPPIANS

by

Jame. C. Moore, B.A.

A Th •• is submitted to the F.~Ul'y of the Graduate School, Marquette lJniveJ'llty, in

Part1al Fulf11lment of tbe Re. qUirements for tbe Dearee

ot Kestel' of Arts

Milwaukee , Wiaconsin December, 1968

PREFACE

The Io'ent of the Study. r-1y intent is to develop an under-

st.nding or the approaches and te.chlliques for discerning theo-logical method in tbe wr1tlng8 of Christ1an theologians. By

'theological method' 1 mean t he diacernible prooess, end

1ts in'rinsic prinCiples, by which the theologian produces

theology. The application of these d.iscel'ned prinoiples 1s

theological criticism. Critlcal1y composed theology contribUte'

to a mol" reasonable and accurate pre.entatlon. of t he Word .

In 'bi' thes1s, two subject, are lnvo1vet. my proceSs t o

discern a process; 1 . e ., t he .earoh for theological method

In Polycarp's 1ett.r; and the .earch tor the prinCiples under-

lying. particul.el' theologian'S method. My approaoh takes

a docUlllent in whioh t be author quotes or alludes to Scripture;

analyze. how tbe author used 80r1pt.ure, dlscerns the patterns

and structures (method) interrO

11.

88800i8'\10n with some ot the Apo8tl,es ,1 (3) be08use be used

80me oanonloal book.' 80U1'OeS expllcltlyeod by allusion;

(It) an4 "Pb11l,pplans" is the most con.lstent pre.entat10n ot

Polyoarp 's thought available to us . IntWll, the letter

exe.plitle, tt)e orthodoxy ot the Apostoll0 Cburch and 1t.

emerlin. theology.

The tbesis will pre8ent 8 more t ,horoughly ana11zed under-

.tandlng ot POI10aI"P ' $ tbeology than currentl1 ava1lable,

a. well a., an under.tanding of Polycarp ' s m.ethod and det1,ni tlon et theologloB~ thought.

Tb. S09P' ot the Studr. !he dec1810D was made to limlt

the aDalysls to the f trst nine chapters ot the epistle because

the laRlua,e and tbeorilln of the text have 8 oonslstent

hi.tol'Y, where •• the remalnder ot tbe ep1sUe's text 1s in

dispute e1ther beoause of reoonstruction at the Latin text in

the tenth through the twelfth and the tourteenth ohapters, or

because ot dating in the thirteentb cbapter. Anyone of the

commentaries on Polycal'p .t least cii.cuas : tbis mattera the

key work is Percy Neale Harrison ' s fpl:yc,rp" be !piltl" .2

His ana,lysls 1. heavily cri tieed by BernaN in "The Problem

of St . ,Pol10.8 21> , s .Epi.,tle to the Philippiaal, 113 because ot

IJohn A. !;ow.on ~ ~:etpglc'l and Histpripal Intrp4~gtiPQ to the ApR,tollc. bihv; "N'''I"., Maomillan, 19~n, p. 1 ~3. Lewson dates tne e,plst18' about 107 A. D. I p. 15'7.

2p. N. Herr1son, Pellgalp ' s Two Epi""l" to the Pb111pplans (Climbridse, 1936).

31..W • . Barnardln tee S'bgrcb QulrterlyRty.1IV, vol. 163 (1962, London), pp. ·21-.30.

i1i .

arrison ' s unpl'oven (a ccol"1_" 1ng t o 13a1'na1'(1) hypotheses f or t

two epistle theory . Harrison ' s t besis 1s su,pported by Lawson ,

leist , Lake, and Torrance; not supported by Cioodspeed ; an

rnentioned by Quas t en .4 In this paper, the f irst nine chapters

ro meant when Polyoarp ' s epistle 1s mentioned .

The Methcd of the Study. Tho "To ble of Contents" provides

broad schema of t he p.aper .

The .f irst chapter developed from en analyt ical study of t he

.lIl ost f requently employed, Greek t er ms in all the chapters (see

Appendix B) , relatIng Latin terms (cc . 10- 12; 14) t o Greek

terms (cc . 1- 9 ; 13) wberever possible . That study produoed

listing of appr oxima tely f orty Greek terms (the approximat1on

v8r1.es .acoording to the number of variables of a word inoluded

tn t he count) . Tbe st udy demonstrated sufficiently t ha t

the La t1nconcepts did not rela t e to the Gr eek concept s , and

that conclusion fostered the deci sion not to include more

than tha f irst nine chapters 1n the paper ' s scope . These f orty

t erms were charted according to line number , grouped w1th t heir

rele ted .conoepts , end t he mej or srees or the analysis wera

plot t ed from t his ohart . The i mmedia te r es ult or the analys1s

4Lewson , A Theological and Historical Intrpdgction , pp . 153 fe .

James A. K1e1st, SJ The Oidnche ••• (UAncien t Christian Writers" series , vol. 6; Westminster , Md. ; Newman, 19lfi;) , pp . 67- 82 .

Ki rsopp LISke , 'l'he A'postol1c FfJther s (N. Y. : Pu tnam , 19191 , pp . 280-301 .

Thomas F. Torrance , The DOSitr1~ yt Grace 1n the Apostplic ~8thers (London: Oliver & Boyd, 1 8 , pp . 90- 99 , see footnote 1 , p. 90. •

gar J . Goodspeed! Tbe Appsttlcc Fa t hers (London : Independent Press , 19, 0 ) , pp . 237- 4.

Johannes Questen , pa ~rolog;y {Westminster , Hd . ; l,'II ewman , 1950> , vol . 1 . , pp . 76- 42, esp . p . 80 .

iv.

is the l"u tl.ine and SUl$.ilary 1n Appendix A. The next procedu r e consisted of discerning the over all

r elatio.ns among~all the concepts charted . This resulted in

the classification of all the concept s into anyone of three

areas (see the tnnjor d1v ':"slon titles 1n the Appendix, and

the d'ivision tl tle s under liThe Teaching" in chepte'r one) .

l'h1s level of analysi s also indica t ed t hat the epistle ' s

integral teach1ng could be revealed sy8tematically by f irst,

considerine. the teacbings about the divine being , then the

teachl.ngs about those gifts and actions related to th

d.lvine belng , followed by tbose actions of the diVine bei.ng

among men.

Chapter one 1s a colleotion of theologIes whi ch Polyca r p

orRah,izes to support his letter' s religious , pastoral teach-

19. - )~ ~ ~ ~ ing . He empl oyed e theology of'.!'4S' , o1:'

v.

Beneatb Polycarp ' . Bub-th.eologies is 8 methodical arrange-

ment of tbe early Christian churches ' oe1'1onlc811y- det'ined

teacbing, tbe Nev Testament . The question In chapter tvo Is,

bow dId he use tbeae ev1dent 80ttreea? What 1s b1s method?

The second chapter present,s Polycarp ' a usage 0.1: the 081'10.01 -

ealsource,. or more ot't en, present , a comparison of express-

ion 1n Polycarp and 1n the c8110nic8:1 .ourees from another

source COlllnOD t u botb . The PUl"po •• ot the obapter 1s to

demonstr •. te a8 much 8:8 possible t he conscious methods of

Po11carp's thought tn. relatlon t o his trad1t10n.

The t 11"s:t and seoond chapters prepar edi'or the thIrd, 11'1

\Ib1ch t be express10n Itselt (chapter one ) and the sources of

tbe expression (chapter tvo·) ere f urther analyzed. for t he

yet '·de.per cognItive processes beneath Pol ycarp ' s express.ioo,.

Chapter three summ.arizes the met hod. noted 1n the praceed-

lng chapters,. and t ben, uslng Po1yeer p ' s employment of' tbe

GQspel tradlt10n as an open1llg , aDmine. t be unconscious

and uncrltical principles of Polycerp's t heology. By contras t-

ing tbe key' words witb t be Scriptural concepts IS two separate

trad1tions, common tralts and difterences are noted. The

common tbeme of s.chof tbe ttl"'se s eot1ons 1s marked 8.S a

t1'18010C1081 pr1nc~ple. The ditterenoe. ei'enotet1 as tbe base.

or tb..oloaloal crit1cism or Polyoar p's theolocy • .Rtf"Ug. M.teri.1.. .nd Aggepdlg.. . Greek text and Englllb

translation troll Polroarp Is from the Ki:rsopp Lake text.

Line cumber I 1n reter.nce to Polyoazop ' s eplstle are incl~ed

t .hrougbout tbe th.sis Ce.g., (18» and are according to tbe

enum.ration 1n the Greek tert provided in Appendix B. The

s7Dlbol "Pol.u wIll be used for Poly-carp's epistle to

preventoontu8ion with Paul 's Pbi1.1Q:Qians.

vi.

The two other appendices provide Greek and EnglIsh text

;for all reterences to Poly-earp and tne New 1'estament

source •• S

'Greek and English t or the New Te.tarnent are froM the New T.stamlllt Students" Workbopkl Greek, LotIo! English, trom Lltu.rgicel Press at Collegeville, 1

Chapters

I . THE THEOLOGY (..

The Audience The Teaching

'1' AIlLE () F CD NTENT S

::g EPI ST.LE •••• •••• ••••••

II . POLYCAap ' BE OF THE N'B.1V TES'rA~UliNT ••••••

The Ap proach to Polycar p ' s Methods 1 Peter end Polycarp ' s Style Paul ' s Ph111ppisns in Polycerp ' s Context The Synoptic Tr adItion Summary

I I:r. . METne, D, tJ NDErlSTAN.DI NG , ." CRITICISM •••••

Methods Poly-carp ' s Understandi,ng of 1'heol ogy Understrmdlng Polycarp ' s Understanding Theolo~lcal Cri ticism

Page

1

20

42

IBLI OGRA.PHY. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • .• • • • • • • • • 57

ppend.lces

A. Outline and Summar y of Polycerp ' s Epistle 61

B. Ch.rts for Key Words. .. . ................. 64

c. Kirsopp 4ke ' s. Greek Text ................ 67 D. Charts for Heferen~es f rom 1 Peter

and 1 Corinthians ... .. ................ . .. 7-

• Cherts on Reterences to t he Synoptic Tred1t1on................................ 84

Cl:IAPTEH I

THE TltEOLOGY OF J;PI STLE

The Audience

Tbe epistle was addressed to the church at Philippi (line

5) , sometime shortly after the event when the Cburch ai ded some of their persecut ee Chris t ian brethren (13 , 15) .

The letter is f r om Polycar p , the ruling presbyter , l and

the other presbyters at, Sliyrn8 , to the churcb of' God

sojourning atPhilipp1 . Polyc8r p expressed his deep ossocl~-

tio.n with the Philippians. He used th~ r oot concept, < ''1 « t

j oy, s nd be reJ o,iced (9, 15) vith the l'hillpp1ans, who share

the unspeakable j oy of fal th in Chrlst(20) .

The epistle 1s not 8 t heological trect like the ep1stle t o

the Hebrews, or a Pauline self-revelation, bu1; Is en emphet-

icelly ecclesiel or pastorel document.

Polycerp addressed t he l'h1l1pp18ns directly 8S ~O-:Cj¢

2

relate the community' sgroup. to .b1s teaching. We were to

t •• ahoul'selv •• (66) , tne lI1ve8 (69). the 'Widow. (71+), tbe

(1ell~ons (81+) , the YOWliel- men (94) , virgins (loa..) , and ' he,

presbyter. (106) Ii

As be opened section II

3

as 4t?f d.p,¢K" t employed tWice 8S the "KIngdom, ot God" (lines lt6, 100). The .teaching of thepromI8e of the resurrect-

ion was totally integrated into the notion of Ood's Kingdom.

Polyoarp maintained oOQslstent rete,enoe throtlgbout the

letter to tbe oommunity he addressed. ne associated their 'mut-

ual llfe in the joy of te1th. with the eternal oommunity in

God. The member. ot tbat et'ernal Klncdom were Marked in this

11te in theirsutrer1-ngs.

The oco.,lc;m or event of tho, letter in Po1yoarp' s mind was

the maroh ot saint s tovard ul~lmste Ylotory, f or he stated

tbet chains of tho.e persecuted are a. diadems, ind10ating

they vere truly chosen by God and Cbr18t (lines 12-14). He

tollowed thi.s vith the parallel ot Christ' sown suttering,

deltb, end resurreotion (17-19>, and, further, with t he

theological formula expressing the vll1 ot Ood end the

total,.1ft ot salvatIon (22-23) . Moreover, Polyoerp expressed

tbe promise of' resurrection W t he PlUlippians {lines 33-37},

presented the .1gns of the promise In tbe (37-1+7), olosing

with the divine blessing on those who .utfered tor righteous-

ness - ire introdUce this co.ncept .s tbe key idea. Section

III 010.8. (lines 156 tt.) with t .he affirmation that the

.aints r~n 1n"ts1 th end r1gb'teou8nes." J that they arewl th

the Lord, 'with whom they.utfored . 'These saint·, were the

model tor' the commun1ty of l1steners.

~hus, Poly-carp took this event, the Ph111pp1ans' oere tor

the persecuted, 8S the ,occaston to .tate the meaning of thet

event and the meen1ng ot the Philippians' Christian lite

together. This wes t be stated historical oon.t.at for the

l.tt.r ....

'.the obJect in Pollcs!'P ' ! viev' was the community. ~h.

subJeot V., r.quest.d by the cODlDlun1tTI Polycarp was to wrl te ot'i r lgbteousnesa ff (line 1t9).S

AbeT"cWD,

Th. terms about divInity characterize any theological

docUDIent , end under.tending s theologian involve8 under-

stending theae terms. Out of t heae term. oame the dlvine

actloDa of l'es'urrect'lon and endurance wbich characterize

bow dlvine llte came into history. The second catecory,

dlvine gitts and actions in history, centers aboud the

It

verb, "to welk ," to identify or to b. with the Lord through

his' glft. of his lite to us . The tbird category, mants status

with God, collects those term,s tor how w. are saved .

)/ ... 4 / / ntU21t. r -e(cttr9·r

The Divine Being

Jesu. 1s our savior (line 7) and, the mediator or salvation

by grac. ln the brlef the,ologlcal formula I IJby grace you are

s8'Yed, Dot by workS but by the vill of God througb Jesus

ItAnoth.r historical dimenslon, the address to the Docetlsts!. must be presupposed f rom .xt.rnal evidence . The text in Itsel1' does Dot reveal that the here., is a concerD without the Cml-pel'etive h1.'orlca,l 1ntorm.atl on to atd elucidatlon ot the em.pha.l. 1n aect10n III .san ettack on. Moreion. Our conCem bere 1. the .yidence from the text •

. 5HwU;.hout ••• any spacial l1tereryor th.eologlcal ch8r8cte~, thelP11~jy S~l~;:,: 1.;! wrlltan 8t theJaquest of the Phll-1pp1ans .4 r. so ~ ;,dti:If'1r { mi ssp.lled • Th1. gives us the key to the Whole work whl eb 1s Dobl. end eS.D:lest but thougb "of' a ss.tlsfsctory ne turel1 to Irenaeus i.. Adv. Heel' . 3. 3.ltJ, Is .. 11ttle disappointlng to tbe student of h.1st-or1c8l tneology. '1 Torrence, Gnoe, p. 91.

5

Christ came 1n the f l esh (t27- 21'L .

/(;./' ~ - ¥ -'f4~N 4cr{l""s ~tTro ~ Tbe Lord Jesus enrist 1s our fa ith (9- 10 , 15) , Itwbo endured

for our sins, even to the suf f ering of death, Irwborn God

r R: ised Up ••• 1f (17-19) . " God gave him glory (30 /.

Because of the r esurrection , we mey also shEire in God ' s

life : "Now II he who raised him" f rom the dend "vill al s

raise us up ••• " (34-35) . tI And this promise 1s r e stat ed: nFor

if we please hi m in this pr es ent world we shall receivo f rom

him that which 1s to come; even as he promised us t o r 818e

us from the dead ••• " (92) . The r esurrection is E.l Christian

belief (132) , and the sal~ts died l oving him -whom God ra1san

f or our sekes

6

with the prom1se of the r esurr ection. The uLord Jesus Christ"

was used to associate us w1th t he resurrection , and the prom-

i se was .r epea'ted in referenoe to t he term, "the Lora . " /

(~C(d'''-s

In se,ct10n 1, t he Lord is identified w1th Jesus Chr ist, as

noted a bove. The Lor d and God chose the s a1nts (13); t he Lord.

t aught, "Judge not lest you be j udged, ( 42) .11

In section 11, we ar e urged to wAlk in the commandmen t of

the Lord (68) . Wi dows are to be sober- minded 1n t he fa1 th of

the Lord (74-75) . Deacons ar e t o wal k in t he truth of the

Lor. (89) .

In 88ct1.on III, we are to pray t o t he Lord for forgivenes;s

(116 ) befo r e the eyes of t he Lord and God (117 ) . We are t

remember that the Prophets foretolo the coming of the Lord

(124) ; t08t we ar e t o stay away from IIlI"n who u:se the name 0

the Lord in hypocrisy (126), and from him 'Who woUlld pervor 't

the oracles of thle Lord for his own l usts (131). nelly ,

the Lord sa i d th~ t the sp1rIt 1s willing , but the f lesh 1s

weak (139,.

No other ti tle 1s so systemat1cally used by Poly-ca rp in

t r.8 t Polycarp docs once all.ud e to forgiveness , end to mercy and peace end election as comi ng f rom God and Christ; and t hroughout t her e is an emphasis on FA Ith. Still In SPite of such Psuli.ne l anguage he mode slB.vetlon conditional L ref . Phil. 212-1. Perseverence 1n t he work of r ight eousness 1s t heref ore e real part of Christian salvation (P. 93)." Torranoe , Grnce . I n cri t ic i sm, I t hlnk Torrt'lnce overstresses. the morelistlc view. tie does DDt integrs t e Polyca r p' s concef:t-10n of f a lth 8S a ,1f t with his judgment on the moralistic view. Torranee states these concepts as opposi t es . see p.

7

•• ob ma~or a.01&1:on. of tho .. p1.118. end, as LillY be noted from

tbe r efereDce .• , in 8$ meny varying contexts. Tbe three. 'beste

O&teeori •• , 'Of Po11oe~p ' l$ t bougnt - ttl. divine belng,divine

,1ftsand ao'\10" in hi.tory, Gndaan' 8 s 'tltus 1n raitt,tion to

God .. are bound togetb.er in pa:rt by 'hi,s d1V1.ne tltle.

¥',,"TQ.( Love f.OJ! Qod and Cbr1s't end nelghbo,r goes betore faith

and fUlf1lls the ' c,ommanci: of righteousness (59-60> . 1he

eacona 81'8 servants of Clod and Cbr1st (85-86) , 30d the

deecons are tDDe Itee,ected .8 Chri.t in the oommuni t1 (103-

101+) . I' i. befo,r 'etbe judlement seat of' Ohrl" tthat ve sre

to render oUl"account (U6-120,. ~ \)/ ....,

() I frrP-Ir I '9tO

8

btlt rerers 1mplialt1y to t he Father. In those contexts God

appear. a8 the supreme divine be,lng' God 1s called "al mighty"

(7) snd "all-a.alngn (138) . We ere t o lerV'a God .in 1'oer (26) ,

t ,aRcb ttle ohildren fear of God ( 73) • Xhe Will of Gpd lathe

key _1_ent of I .. lv,a ti tm (23) . 7 'God 1. not mooked ( 82) , sna

God vi~l require Christ ' s blood from t bose who disobey him

(33 ) . W. prs;y t o 0 00 (138 ) to j01n God 10 the Klngd Olil (1+7 ,

100). Lastly, God 1'8.1,.,d lesus Chr i at f r om the dead (19,

26-28 , 33, ~63) .

In sUlDJl'&8ry, PollctU'P presented 8 hierarchy o·f terms. !lGodu

is the pt,nn&ole figure; lesus Christ (ond variants of that

phrflse) 18 the dIvine example among. men , and he is not

, .paoUlcally i dentif1ed & ,8 GOG, altbougb "Jesus Cbrlst U 1s

used with "our Lord . tJ The Lord 1s the term used 61S Illed istor,

.nd be operat.1 8.0.0g us through oertaln div,1ne actions

tnrougbd1v1ne, glfts. The Spirt t 1. Itent1l)nedonoe (lines

99) , but only 8 .1 8 reference to tradition . ( ,, (

VTT'!Uevn., l.IY

9

with ¥bom they suttered ( e:vv €Z"K ~4(/- )

10

1

11

-is presence 1s cOfllx'nunicated in his cOlEl!!landments , 1n his

truth , and 1n love and the word . It 121 i mportant that

t he flLord" 1s directly associated with the fol~ng terms, I ~ " £(/ro~" ,71I{7Ti.$" , dtda &c& , aI ~ 1

12

word of truth (5,). In the oredal statement, tbis word 1s f J ,. theoommuni tl word of confess 10n ,9+f"-(?rvt7 ~ I the

confession that Jesus Chr1st ctuno 1n the f lesh (127-28) ;

the oonf.sslon of the wltne,ss of the c",ss (128- 29). 1'hl s word

1s the oracle of the Lord (131 ) . We, are to r eturn to the word

(136) as it was given '0 us in the 'beginni ng. We are to obey the word o;f' righteousness (153).

, ,,-SUBlmarl of '1lJiRCeW

To walk With the LOl'd,in his commandment, end in his

truth, 1s to love end to heed his word . We communally con-

fess the word (the credel stetement). Tbe word in common

forms our thinking abou t Christ and our relationsh1p to him,

for it 1s to him that we are t o ,render our aocoo.nt, .Javor ~ r

(12Q) . His word 1s to be our word, for nothing £if our reason-

ings LJ",V/~M ) are hidden from God (80). To walk wl th the Lord 1s to be aWII I'e of the meaning of ChrIst '. example

told to us 1n the word 8S it was given to us 1n tbe beginning .

Xh1s word 1s • oommandment to U8, end the content of that

oommandment is true love aeeording to the truth of who the

Lord 1" Je.su8 Christ who has d1ea tor our sins and brought

the promise of the resurreotion to U.8 . .,,-

Brieny, the terms associated with ~4';.ElW form Poly-carp 's

theololY ot Ireoe .• Truth; love, the word, are termswbiob

expressed the life of the Lo.r d among us.

KOUlI,s , ,

13

.... n t s Status with Go

; "'X ' " b~

The Lor c:t1vely rel to en in judgin£ . The Lord

Jesus Christ will come as the Judge of tho living and the

ead (32) . Polycarp's vision of f91th included Christ's

e-xtlmple as the nom of history and of the life ot tb

contemporary community . Judgement ond j udY-luft are actions

t the heart of the communityts life . The Lord taught:

"udge not lest you be judgedU (1.2) , and t presbyters a1'

warned to ret'rain froGl unjust jud ant, Bnd not to be hasty

in ju6gclnent (112, 114). trl0 are warned to at aves from

who UiSe the oame ot the Lord i ,a hypocrisy, t ha t 1s , 11 tar-

DIly , as it they were above judgement (126) . The creed

£firmed r esurrection and judgement (132) .

One of the characteristics of the leaders of the cOllllTltm1 ty ,

the p:r'esbyters, was tbis shere 1n judgement . Polyoar

admooished the younger men to be "subject to the deacons oJlc

presbyter,g as to Chris t ana to God lf (lO}- lOlt) . The pl~esbyters

were to provide ell that 1s good betore God and man (110) .

Yet they vere not to believe evil of anyone (113) , and t hey

ere to be aware thet "we all owe the bt of sinll (114- 15, .

~1s authori ty (103- 104) 1s partielly charl)cterlzed by

servi oe , f or the deaQon is the servant of nod nod Ctrlst (e6" .

c4oreov'er, the 'Lord is toe servant of all (89) . Tbe deacon

is s~bjeot to dIvine Judgement , for he Is to be blameless

t ore Ood ' s righteousness (85) .

This authority of service pI'ovides that which 1 ood (110)

ltt.

which involves the judgement o.f the presbyters . As a pres-

byter,. Pol.'lcarp stated that it is tlgo to be out oft from

t he lusts of' t he world" (91>,

for good" (124) .

t ha t 'We 9~e to be "zealous

olycarp d1st1nEu1shed between what is good Gno our desires

(97) . For wh11G we sire the unspeekable joy o.f belief in

Christ (22), elso cles of the Lord tor our

esires (131) . Our dosires ( t!'7T16o'U«!. ) vrr Dgalnst tho

Suir1 t (96- 99) . \~hl1e the spirit is willing ( 7r 4;' tPt.-'HeK ), , > the fl esh 16 "'leak . 'rte t11111 ( ~eA. tJ«tt< ) of God sev us,

no we ar e pro tho resnrrection i f wo do his Will (35).

'bi s is the context of judgement, of' t be Lord ' s aoti on of

judgine . Tbis judgement was emphasized in t he teech1hg to

"~erve God in fear ~nd truthU (26); to teach the children tear

of God (73); to II serve him with fe~r and reverence" (120-') ",

121 ) . The concepts of' purity , rX)t.//t:.I.ti. ('70, 95 , lOtt.), and >-' )/

blamelessness , ~o/&(,t2S. (lOlt.); W~ n..s- (b4 , 94) _ remind t r conf'l'ontetiotl '{\11 t h Go\.(.

Whi le tho Lord 6ctively judges 8l11ong men through his word

nne: t ruth !i'ud their contrast with sin, man hims&lf is

ivided . Not only is he e1viJ~~ by his dosires, but he 1

confrontod by Et deeper vision of rer lity, a vision of

net ho!' world .

~t1iyoG rp. uBed libl r oot t erm, £i(l , "to sea , " in contex t

'I.(Pich reveal his vision of tho faith vhieh cannot be seen

(20) . In t his first referenco, Polycerp mentioned t he dis.

tinc t i on bet \.1een t he cert;.\int ies of' bel ief end t he visual

1, world. His f llrther us e of the term vas in the context of

the f ·n1 ttl communi ty, and Ut o see" shif t s to !tto know, II

f or we are speaking of the knowledge of fa ith.

Knowing that "by gr ace you a re s aved" ( 22) , snd knowing

the t "we brought not hing into the wOrld and weC8.n t ake

nothing out of ;1. til (65 ft .), end 'knowlru;: t ha t ffGod 1s not

mocked" ( 82 ) , end kn oWing t he deht of sin we all OW'6 (114) ,

we are t o "obey t he WOi."c'i of rlghteou.sness, It and to endur e - )/ / -

"wi th all the endur ance which YOU ••• S8W L ,flop(rt;_1

bef ore your eyesU (l 52-54) . ,/

71/{Trc:V'w

ltl though we did not see (20) tbe Lor« Jesus Christ, we

"believed in unspe~ka ble and. glorified Joy" (21). We a re

urged to believe lion him who r a ised up our Lor d Jesus Chri st

from the d,eaa ft (28 f t . ) . I f we bel i evi' (

WtTT£VW, t o t he lest, the most cUfricult a rticle in

Pollcerp ' s counsels.

16

The v ision 0.1' fa1 th whi ch judged also enablee Chris tians

'to distingQiU h between two worlds, and the rnean1ng of each .

Judgement stood at the crux of the distinction between

vision and beliet. - ~ ;" 77/q-r,5 & Ko(/ol?'0VJr'7

There can be no doubt, the subject of this epistle 1s

cV 1

17

Second ~ fa,i th is 8 gift from God and present to the

community. Wives vere to reme in in the fa ith given to them

(70). Widows were to be discr .. ' in the fa ith of the Lord

(75'/.

The third meaning of faith is in relation to r1ghteousness.

This relationship presumes that we see faith as the communal,

joyous e~perlence of the vision of the Lord Jesus Chr1st.

With1n that experience 1s the visionot truth, the meaning of

the Lord. who has come to die and to rise fDr our sins. Since

that incarnate life was 8 human experience of suffering ,

death, and resurrection, the accept.nceef the meaning of

feith involves an 8ssociati,on in those human acts. Since

those ;.,,.ots are redemptive, fa1 th requires 8 co-principle

to enable the faithful to fulf1ll their understanding of God. ll

Righteousness was the divine gift (85) for thi s purpose.

The divine gifts of the lite of faith and their relation

to righteousness illustrate this. The command of righteous-

ness (61) wes love (62).12 The armor of righteousness comple-

mented the oonun1 tment. to 1i8lk in the commandment of the Lord

(67-68). We were to obey the word ot righteousness (153).

Th1s righteousness is 8 divine g1ft given in f aith; Itwes

, llGottfrled Quell end Gottlob Schrenk , 9+ghtapucmes't vol . IV, ("Bible Key Words" serles, trans. by . R. C08tes, t"rom Gerhard Klttel, Theo1ogl'§hes wort~r'~uCb !ai Neuen Testament; London; Adem snd Charles lsck, 19 1 , p. • , etc.

l2Beuer 's Lexicon offers the following notes on dJl(ooQ -gW?: "S1nce d . const1 t utes the speo1!. virtue of Christ-ians, the word becomes .almost equ1v. t o Chr1stlanlty ••• Pol. 2.3; 31111 p. 196, vol. 2. " ••• rigbteou.nesI, uprlghtg!'s 8S ' t he compelling moti va for the conduc't of one is whole 11fe: ... v. 'jT1q-n.s ... Pol . 9 :2" p . 195, col. 2 .

-

18

God 's ri ghteousness (8,). To s uf f er for righteous ness merit-

ed the Kingdom of God (46-1+7),. This righteous ness enabled us

t o live and to suffer' as Christ, tor he was the Itpledge of

our righteousness" (11+2~. ". _I ".,,-

These two terms, 71%117~ and (7(1(

19

be "justified withr' (the literal meanIng of right,eousness

him. Polycarp t S relationship t 'D fai ttl, to toe Lord Jesus

Chrl.st, was in the' divine gift and presence of righteousness .

CBAPTER TWU

PvLYCARP ' S USE OF THE Ne.W

Polycarp ' s llse of' the Ifew Testament , 1ts books, a nd its

oral or written sources, appears unmethodical, in the sense

of 8 oonsoiously exercised set of norms for the employment

of Scriptural references . Risuse of Scripture has two

charact eristics whicb may be discerned. from 8 comparison of

similer t exts in Polycarp and the New Testament , especially

whe~ the texts are campa,red in their respective contexts .

lrst, t he Oxfor d Commi ttee! refers to Polycerp ' s use of

memory. "The quot ations have the appearance of having been

mede from memory; rar el y, if ever from book •• " 2 • • ,eferring

l i\. Comm1ttee oi' the 6xford Society of IU stor1cal Theology, Ahe ~eY ~st8ment in the Apostpli"c Fathers (Oxford , 190; ) , pp . -1 on "The E,pistle of Polycerp. " This ch8pter relies upon t his s,tudy because the study is unique i n its presenta-tion of the references f rom ScrIpture in relation to Poly-carp ' s epistle . While 8 more elaborate and similar study is offered 1n Barr ison ' s Pplycarp ' s Tvo Epistles (specific ref-erencesl pp . 28;- 310) and he cor,rects t he Oxford Committee 11s t (Harrison, p . 288) , his correct1ons ond his study suffer from elther his heste (1n the correct i ons) and/ or his prejudices t o develop his thesis for two epistles . The Oxf ord Commit t ee study .was not concer ned with Harrison ' s purposes and therefore stancis as the unique document on this pnrticu-lor s ubject . To p,rovide for l.ncreesed probe bill t 1 for the r eferences 1n this study , the (;xford Committee references wer e cr oss- checked with the references in the epistle t exts of J .-P. Migne , ed . , pafr010glae Cl!!SU8 comp~et~s ... Lfi!tin-orum ••• Graecorum, v . s: PariS , 189 , p. 100 - 2 , and of Joseph B. Lightfoot , AppstollcFethers , vol . 1 (Lo·ndona

20

21

to Pol. 5.3 1n relation t o 1 Peter 2.11, t he Oom.mittee concludes , tI ••• the quotetioo wes probably ••• made from mef!lOry .n3

Second, where tbe Committee discerned. t ha t Polycarp was

consciously quoting, n~ principle could be noted . In refer-

ence to the seme passages, 1t notes: "These pessages agree

verbally , except for omissions in Polyoarp . The lest words

cited f r om Polycerp suggest that he IDey beve been conscious

of making omissions in h1s quotation, but these omissions

do not appear to proceed 00 any fixed principle •••• ,,4

The Committee' s general statements

Tbere are meny 'places where t he lenguage of the 0 .'1:. may have inf luenced Polycerp , but the Quotations , if they are such, ere generally ally,iye end forked into the Itructure pf the niter s sentences. Polycarp ' s use of G. T. is in fact very Similar in its general phenomena to his use of those parts orN .T. in which he relies most frequently.

Macmillan, 1898) , pp . 16,-181. The more specific stanoards of probebilitl for each reference w111 be noted further 1n this chapter. A d1stinction must be made between the purpose of t he Oxford. Committee study and that of' this chapter . The xt'ord Committee set Dut to establish the specific re·ferenees

to ' the" New Testament books 1n the writings of the Apo~tollc thers in acoord.snce with degrees ofprobebility. Presuming

that this reference ha" been established by that study (and verified by Migne snd Lightfoot), this chapter studies the differences between the two sources, Polycllrp ' s epistle and tbe New Testament reference. It is not this chapter's purpose to further verify the Oxford Committee . Further, it is not its purpose to judge wbether or not the N.T. reference wes the direct source for Polycarp . Tbe Oxford study serves to relate one source's expression of an identicslor similar teaching in Polycarp to Polycarp ' s epistle. With tha t rea80n-bly established! the purpose 1n t his chapter is t o demon-

strate the slgn1ricance of the differences , end to summarize those differences as an indicat10n of Polyearp's thought in writing h1s epistle . •

20xford Committee , p. 81+ .

-

I b' his uncoubted quotet l ons f r om N. T. we find tha t , while short collections of word.! er' sometime. repea ted exactly., in longer passages t he order is treated ver y freely , omissions occur tor wbich no, ree-son can be assigned! and the spirit r &ther t han t he actual words is somet ime.s reproduced . ,

22

The Ct.1mmittee ' s r eport empha sizes Polycarp ' s use 01' some

N.T. s ources , mos t notably, 1 Cor 1nthians ,6 aDd 1 Peter , 6

ana yet notes t hat Itthe smal l amount of verlfi abl e influence

is vorthy of notice . "?

The report does offer an initial approach t o t he problem:

"1 Peter 1s alm ~;st certain1ypreaupposed by Polycar p here

30xtor d COf.llm1ttee, p . 85.

40xford Committee, p . 85.

' Oxfor d Committee , p. 84 (my emphas:tr) .

60xtord Committee , p . 86.

?vxtor d CommI t tee, p . 86 . The s t andar ds of probabi11ty in the Oxforc study ore eJipressed in the plan of t he book z

I t was deCided t o e r renge the books of the New Testament in f Olll]" cle,8ses , cUst!nguished by the letters A, B, C, 0, eccQrciing to the degree of probability of their use by the several But nors . Class A included those books

bout which there can be no 1'e980n&b1e doubt , eitber because they ere expr essly mentioned , Dr because t here ere other certain indicat10ns for their Ul8e. Cl ess B comprises those books the use ot whi ch , in t he jUdgment of tbe edi t or s , reaches 8 bigb degree of pr obability. WIth c1888 C we come t o l owe.r degree of pr obebili ty; snd 1n class

sre placed those books which may possibly be r eferred to , but in r egar ' dto which the ev1denoe a ppear ed too uncertain to alloy BOY re11ance to b~ placed upon it •••• Onder

23

L-referr ing t 'o Pol. 8 .1,2 end 1 Peter 2. 21J, bu.t the pOints

of dU'ference between t he passages are instructive tor Poly--

car p ' s met hod of quottl~lon. ,,9

In thlssect1on, 11nes 'l'+3-150 i n Po1ycer p , the apostol1c

fa t her has taken one portion (11ne 145) verba tim from

1 Peter 2.21s

Pol. 8 .1, 2 1 Peter 2.21 ( ,; ( ,/ )

()S tFjU0/2 "elK OllK ) /' ) .../'

£ lTt:JI It; o-&-v, 0 e (/ ~ t1./' ( ,/' ') S ofuep7ftt'V

24

The change in word order , part1cularly the shift in

placing the verb end pronoun, "our," before the noun, "slns, ft

more toroef'ully presented the testimony or Christ . Sin is not

emphasized so much as the action of bear1~g our sins . Hore-

over, this assoc,hUon wlth Christ vas reemphasized by

changing ~'hls body" to his flown'I body In. Polyoarp . Polycerp

plaoed this .betore the direct quote , and thus contributed

more emphesls t o that passage 'by his rearranged emphasis

on Christ's actions .

Polycerp agsln reversed the procedure by lif tlng a key

word, tlexample," from 1 Peter 2.21. In th1s instance, Poly-

carp used the word af'ter the verbat1m quote, whereas 1n

1 Peter the word 1s before.

Polycarp 8 .1,2 - \ (cont1nued) T'H';T~V V1"

(" ..... \ t n~jV'T~1/ ;::: --(" \

VZ(2)61''fd1/«t2V

t!;Q~KC.

1 Peter 2.21 )/ ~ \ Pllo(

25

plsced lt 1n 8 more empha tic position ,11 8S a summary and

key ide8 f or the whole section ln hls letter .

The whole cOID.par1 son i s seen:

Polycerp 8 . 1 , 2

who bere L- textua1 error-i our sins l n h1s own body on the tree , who dld no sln , nei~her wes gu1le found 1n his m.outh, but t or our sakes, that we mlght live in him, he en-dur ed all things •••• and 1t we sutfer for h1s name ' s sake , let us glorify hi m. Por t his 1s the example which he geve us in himself •••

1 Peter 2 . 21

(Christ) also has suf.fere for you , l eaving you an exemp1e ••• (22) "Who did no sln , neither was deceit found in his mou t h. " ••• ( 2~) who himself bore our s i ns ln his body upon the tree , t hat we , having di ed to sin , might l ive i ro jus tice; •••

Po1ycarp arranged the ideas from. 1 Pet er 2. 21 1n a more

clearly logical or der , for 8 ' tlore foreefu11y express.ive

t eaching on t he meani ng of Christ ' s suffering for us . While

the language varies , the l deas snd t he appar ent i ntent of

1 Peter are ma intained .

In anot her quote from 1 Peter. siml1er effects can be

noted . In Po1ycar p , lines 2Q- 21 , t he order is the same as

1 Peter 1.8 , except for conci se editIng.

Polycar p 1 . 3 1 Peter 1 . ,) (\ > ) j"

€{.s 121( PH< I (7&1I/[£S t'\ I I tI~ (JV eVI( I V 'lrS

10Sea .Appendlx J) f or charts of 1 Cori nthians r eferences . Dr t his pOint al so see 1 Cor . 6 . 9- 10.

11See 1 Cor . 13 .13; 8 .10 f or similar e.xamp1es of thi s . Ref erences t o 1 Corinthians are n9t incl uded in t his eha.pt er 1t self beoause their In01u.810n would servo only t o repeat the observations maBe ln 1 Peter in spi t e of t he diff erent oont ext s and contents .• 'Footnote r eference to specific 1 Cor-int hians references 1n t he Append.1x wi ll support this .

..... -" *'7 4 0< 7f"T~vCn; J \ ) -" KK( ek I"€KJo< n T'J' .

~ e'1# dcdaffo(~e J

Trnns1ate4 F

in whom , t hough you di d not see tUm, you believed in unBpeaksble and gl orified j oy.

26 ) ...... >

C«"(lle(ltc, L'I.~

h)"" 1 C -K oi4T( UK/ '1,4 WKTtCs t 7 \ 71 (e=T.cet:>VlFA" fie;

J)I Ot')) I ~£ ~£ ro( 4:1 J I ( \ aV

27

used as 8 sIgn of one's preparat.lon to serve God who raised

up Chriata 8 lQuch more direct approach than 1 Peter , yet the

sense is similar . This passage also illustrates Polycarp 's

concise edlting, but the characteristic is not 8bsolutely

eVident throughout the epistle. Polycarp 5.3, line 971

Polycerp 5.3

_ - ~ c. '¥ Ke~,

Polycllrp marked, this contrast himself'

'or neither am I , nor 1s any other like me , able t o foll ow t he wisdom of t he blessed and glorious Veul , who when be vas among you in t he presence of the men of t ha t tim,e taught accura t ely and steadf astly t he word of truth, and also when he "as absent wrote letters to you, t'rolDr,the study ot Which you will be able to build your-selves up into the faith given you; ••• 12

The Oxfor d Committee ,noted the textual contrast: r

~o • iil. 2 ~_,.g,;":,,&,,~.;;;.aIL.III:l~~..a::,.,,":,a;,,,,"

sws t he t Polycarp bad written lett ers to the Philippians (or possibly, a letter: see Light foot. Phl1ippJ,ans,p. 138) . It is bigbly prob-able that he knew the extent letter; but t he aMount of evidence of his use of it is not large, tbough it must be added t hat the general acquaintance with it is stronger than CBn be fairly estimated rom the isola t ed examination or Single

passages.13

28

Analysis of 'bo •• ~p8.sage. which are generally regar ded 8 S

Polycarp's use of P,eul' s Ph1lippiens reveals similarities -

some probable references and some only tenuous.

A comparative reading of Paul ' s Philippians offers .many .

stylisticand pbrese similarities with Pol yoar p. Pol;' 9 . 2

epP8ars to be a ref lection of Phil . 2 .16. He vas nonchal a,nt

referring to Paul ' s letter expli citly, but 1ncluded, Paul

among tho •• who ureo not .1n vain" (158), a concise allusion

12Pol . 3.2, lines 50-57.

l30xford Committee. p . 9lt. Torrance uses this admission ·of very tenuous connection, to support his conclusions against the Pau11ne sense Df lome of PDlycarp'. terms. rla ther, at mo,st, Pol . 3.2 sbows personal ditferences and can hardly be applied exegetically. Torrance , Grace , p. 94 f ootnote.

29

to Paul's self- description, "because not in vain have I run

••• " (Phil. 2. 16) .

Polycarp 9 . 2 Philippians 2 .16 f/ l' ..... OTt o {/r()1 lloreZLs r/ > } OTt aet< ,£( 'f

J ) \

tJVI'< '£/ .5 r EYt:JV' U ri

.£ 0'/ 1 D(' AA' d // r -- 7 In Pb11. 1.27 - an exhortetion to others by Paul - is

assimilated apparently by Polyce.rp ;\' ) ." 62 tf~V 7112 ITC~e-Uj&t£' K > z- / > ...."

0/ I:; I~S . otU T (;": • .1 • .,

Of' interest are the di f f erent

Phil ippians 1.27 / ,) ~ ",. ..,

;P

30

related to Peul' s ovn s ufferings. Polycerp used the same f orm

ot .greeting twice (llnes 9, 15) but a8 references to the

communlty's falth in Jesus Christ. Paul ' s notion of the

commun1ty being saved through Paul's sufferings in Chrlst

is indirectly rejected. Tbe example of Christ predominates

in Polycerp .

Polycerp 1 .1 (' ...... . ./

1li2JI£ J/alLvzl/_ J/~~Y 7T -- r -- ~ - - , / "} )

-kt:: lAx' Af~ £ v' r --------r / " .. -1

~

\ r J~ "" Ta dfd{V< t'I

SInce association by reference to speoific oanonical

Synoptio texts 1s thus eliminated insofar as comparative

32

nalY8is of specU'io texts is conoerned , the approach must be

similar to tha t of approaching Philippians, an analys1s of

how Polyocr p used thetredi tion in oont,ext , with 8 oompar1-

son of canonioal usages • .Four passages wil l be Viewed .

Polyoarp 5. 2 yith .Mark 9 .35 and Hat they 20. 2814

Mark 9.34-35 J.I' -': 1

£j r l S _t2c AL'I

'/

7T -«'-"'- r ~

I

33

Po1yc,.rp 2.3 with Mstthey 7 .1: 5 . 3,10 flOd Luke 6 .35,20 15

Polycarp 2. 3

#

. T~ ?' ;du/ 444.€( t# ,ug~3 ; .. ;' . f) -'" CT£To?/ k~Z-f«&f'1!2 ,dq {,., "I

or. ( -V- . K«( \ ¥«.t c '.fi2!

/ :0'01 4.1 7[7~ Ue#?'lj45"( 7c,.. .4LCrJ~ &~If1"£ rtXt

/--~ r

(" -/¢Vl, . atthew 5. 3

) 0

are signIficant because of their form and teachings: in

the first, the use of antIthetical phrases encapsUled

3»+

proverbs for ethical counsel; 1n the

the Mount was the source .

cond, the Sermon on

11he use of ant1 thesis seems to b Polycarp favorite . To

o back to the epistles, in 1 Peter 3.9, Polycarp (1,Q 2. 2,

line 38) extended the ant1thetioal phrases beyond the two

phrases in1 Peter .16 Polycarp used antithesis to teach, 8S

well as, to warnf in lines 36-37 , n ••• l ov1ng the things he

loved , " and in 42 , "Judge not lest you be judged . n Several

points are important I (1) the uses of antithesis are t .race-

ble to traditional sources . That may indicate that Polycarp

wss not only attracted by the t orm, but also that he con-

·idered such teachinKs to be indicative of the deeper

ntithesis which Christian teaching 111um1notes - that

botween good and evil . The credal statement (lines 127-33)

1s also antithetical . (2) The Synopt1c tradition and th

reference to Matthew and Luke: the reference in each case has

the antithetical phrases, which are grtet the Sermon on the

Mount quote, placed befpre tbe same quote in Polycerp . That

1s not of auch £reat importance in itself because various

historical sourCGS may provide Polycarp with this pattern,

but what is sinnificant is that the antithetical statement <

16ltThis is certainly 8 quotation trom 1 Peter , but the possib11ity cannot be excluded that both Polycarp and 1 Peter ere quoting a proverb in the part common to them. l'olycarp ' s

e t hod of continuinl the quotation by additions of his own is worth notice . 1t Oxford Committee, p. 88 .

35'

re betore the quote conoerning "r1ghteousness" Bnd the

Kingdom of God 1n Polycarp . In short, the Kingdom of God is

Achieved through series of admonitions aod teaohings (the

introduction to this seotion in l1n69 33 ft . agrees) .

Colleotively, theBe 'items ' constitute lIr lghteousness u for

which ve may suffor and aohieve the Kingdom.

Christ's sufferings ere nonetheless exemplary; salvation

is a choioe between pol ari ties and not interpersonal identity

With the sevior . Regardless of other historiesl sources for

this pattern, it is signifioant that tthew Bnd Luke differ

f r om Polycarp . Po1yoarp ' s ' priorities ' indicate a different

view of faith between the lost of the Bposto11c t athers and

two of the Evangelista .

PolyqBrp p.l .? with Ma tthew 6 .12 end Luke 11,4 17 Polycarp 6.1,2

\ ,/ /In Tq( l4

36

The same thinking w1th regard to the Synoptic sources may

be applied to lines 113-117, an apparent reference to the

teaching in the Lord's preyer. The context in Poly-carp 181

Not quiokly believing evil of any, not hasty in judgement, knowing that we all owe the debt of sin . It then we pray the Lord to forgive us, we also ought to f orgive •• •

"The words d£~" &e< -rov ~rieo evidently introQuc reference t o the Lord's Prayer," the Oxford Committe

states (se.e footnote 17) . The notion of the "debt of sin"

nd the phrases about forgiveness support the point. The

"debt O~ sin" concept closes the teaching regarding the .

presbyters .1S 'the concept places the1r authority and jud£ce-

ment in the universal oontext of the community in sufferln

for sln .

The forgiveness prayed for opens section III in the

plstle, the flnal teaching to the whole community on Christ

Jesus , the pledge of our righteousness (line 11+2) . While the

lines quoted appear ss a unit of thought, the total context

in Polycarp denies th1s .19 The point is that once sga1n

17uThe words oI~ec9e$' T~iJ ~~'" evidently introduce reference to tho Lord's Prsyer:But no quotation from the

Lord ' s Prayer can be used a8 evidence for acquaintance with our Gospels, 9S there are clear Signs of Its ellrly ecclesias-tical use as current elsewhere (see e . g. D1d~cbe • •• ) . Poss-ibly, the cont ext here, emphas1zing a large charity- 1n .1udge-

nt, pOints to the context of the Sermon on tbe Hount as colouring Polycorp's thoughts (see Matt . 6 .11+, 7.1-5). But even 1f Polycarp were Inclined to treat the Lord's Prayer belong1ng to the Sermon on the Mount, this would not neces:t-rily imply e knowledge ot our Matthew. 1I Oxford Comm . , p. 102.

18See nThe Audience" in cbapter one, this paper .

19The plural first person is 9 transition to the teacbin

37

Polycarp utilized the Synoptic tradition for en antithesisl

forgive because you are f orgiven , and because you are to

stand before tbe eyes of' God end Christ (11'7) . This is not

the oontext in Luke, which is the context of the KIngdom of

God (11 . 2), not t he oontext i o Ma tthew 6.10, also the oon-

text of the eomingo;f · the Kingdom .

Polycal'p, regardless of his precIse source, was in oo~:.trest

with the canonical presentation ot this teaching. The differ-

ences are not, in 1 Peter for example, simply of word

emphssis in arrengement, or, a ::. In PhIlIppIans, a change of

emphasis inward the community's tradItion . Comparison with

the Synoptic traditIon demonstr.tes 8 different theology

concerning Christls contemporary redemptive actions in

t"istor y.

Polycprp 2 . 2 )lith Matthew 6 . 13, 2.6 . 41 and. ~1ark 14. 38 20

Polycarp 7.2 Matthew 6 . 13 (Luke 11 .4) r/J. '" ) / ~U'ql (/ ,,( / mu - \ \ ) / Kt(I un ' (lYe"£' v Kf7S ; I

tor all of us, beginnIng in line 11;. The use of "Lord" in "we pray the Lord to forgive us" i8 the beginning, as well , of the finBI teachings employed with that term , ot which there are six refe7ences in sectIon Ill . Furtbermore , . in con-text , this teachIng on forgiveness opens the section s pres-entation on Christ 8S Judge before whom we must give our account (Mkf.~S' ) the commencement of the teachings con-cerning the ~word . A These teachings prepar e us for the oreed whloh follows . Our "words" (a ocount) are judged by the "word" (the erodel expression), which presents the resurrection Bnd the judgement (132), the ultimate eat of reconciliation . We forgive because God forgives .

\ 1" c 20"'rhe quotat1on introduced by K.( ~ E INe y d j/4.~ht2S

grees verba$1m with Ma tthew Bnd "Merk , and appears tnevery Imilar context to that in the. Gospels . But t his quotation

might well be due to oral tradl t10n; or it might be fr·om document akin to our Gospels , though not necessarily those Gospels themselves . " Oxford CommIttee, p. 103 .

\ U L'Vdl 7()k' To( IIT£-,

..... /) , \ 7T If) T/' ;-nv (7',£'0"'" .M VI . ~ ------,----~.

) ~ (,. C"q-£'(/€)IK~(/ l:}M'e

39

the Matthew and Mark 11ne, JlWatoh and pray. " In Ma tthew and

rk, the referenoe to temptot1on 1s from the trad1tion of

the Lord's preyer. In this oase, Polyoarp 1s s1mply present-

ing an older, unoollated tradit1on.

The whole section (11nes 137-40) follows the credal state-

ment (127- 33) . The whole seotion centers upon Polyoarp's

communal exhortation to return to the word "whioh was

livered to us in the beginning" (136, .

The Merkan and t1atthean presentation 1s in the context of

the passion and death of Jesus Christ . It is Christ whO

personally states t he words referenoed here - be is quoted .

In oontrast, Polycarp expressed these ideas 1n the context of

return to the original teaohing about Chr1st. that he came

i~ the f lesh; that his testimony is the cross; that there 1s

resurreotion end j udgement (the credQl propositions). These

teaChings, coll ectively, are the word as it s given to us

1n the beginning . Further, these teachings are in reference

to Polycerp's presentation of the Lord, presentation for

the most part dependent upon his teaching about Jesus Christ .

The context ot the Lord steting that "the spirit is willing,

but the f lesh is weak" is signIficant because the Lord will

not mean anything unless Christ oame in the f lesh: this was

Polycarp ' s concern. This evident conoern is in oontras t to

the gospel of IdentIty with and in Christ which 1s presented

in Matthew and Mark. For the ngel1sts present Christ ' s

words in the context of his invitation t o his passion - the t

choice would be to accept or reject that invitation to

40

identify with him . Polycarp used these woros 1n ~he context

of adhering to 9 body of teachings, end not of identity with

the passion of ChrIst, tor his p88s1on was an example for

Polycarp .

Summary

Regardless of the verification of actual reference to the

Synopt1c sources listed, the velue of tbe comparison is 1n

t he contrast of two d1fferent expressions ot apparently

sim.iler or identical sources . 'tbe conclusions at each. level

- style, emphasis, and design - revealed ev1dence whicb

complements the conclusions regard1ng the theology analysed

in the f1rst chapter.

This correlation becomes more clear by collecting the

Synopt1c tradition wbich we have compared into a ' corpus'

of teachinRs , rather than isolated referenceD.

Polycarp expressed this tradition 8S 8 body of teachingD,

s a collection of exemplary characteristics for human con-

duct . It is important to note what hes not been expressed:

the sources for the SynoptiC tradition include not only the

words end t.eacbint(s of Christ end the early community of

fa1th , but that tradition was primarily concerned with the

presentation of 8 person, his aotions, the plnce and time and

people ot his l1fe. While the form of an epistle mey not

necessarily emphasize those values, analysis of the Synoptic

tradition within that epistle should reveal a concern tor

those v.lues, if those values are the author's . The point is

that t he Synoptic trodition ' s teachings are presented in

41

Polycarp's PhIlippians apart from such 8 context. We have

lready noted how the Lord Jesus Christ wes presentea as an

example, and 88 uJesus Christ'l, remotely associated with the

teachings of the Lord presented within the contemporary

oommunity. The context of these Synop,10 sources in the

epistle has already shown the distanoe of tbese souroes

from the presentation of Jesus Christ.

The analysis ot the references in 1 Peter , and Paul 's

Philippians, revealed a similar concern by Polycarp to

emphasIze the moralistic and exemplary vIewpoint, and to

present his faith with didactic force .

CHAPTER Tn

ME'l'HOD, UND~RSTANDING t AND CRITICIS1'4

his chapter presents three problems. Polycerp ' s

consciously employed methods for his epistle's theology;

PolYQsrp's unders tandlngof tbeol ogy revealed through his

ethod and text; understanding f'olyoarp's understanding

f theology.

The oonolusions of the t hesis oomprise the l est sectlon,

theologicsl or1ticism.

Methodljf

he oonoept, "methods," i mplies those techniques, struot-

ures , and f orms, consciously employed t o organize, to inter-

relate, Poly-car p's theolo

communi ty' s traditiol8l source~.

, nd his use of the

nalysis disclosed the overall three-part form (see Append-

ix A) of the epistle .

The analys1s of the terms la context showed that t he

first nine chapters are divided almost equall y i nto three

sections (illustrated in detail by the (jutl1ne 1n Appendix

•

The first section presents t he fact of revelation ahd its

ennings; t he second, section presents the ways in wh410 b Go

comes to us; the third section presents the confrontation

42

between God and man 8S he Is . From another view,

conclusion resulted f'rom the analysIs of the

43

s1milar

terms 1n

themselves . The terms were arranged 1n three categories

(chapter one) which correspond to those of' tho Outline. Both

form and content, therefore, corroborate that suoh an

arrangement of hIs thought was an essentin1 feature of

Polycerp ' s theological metbod .

Methods from Textual Analys1s

Tbe analysis of the epistle's contents 1n chapter one and

the comparatIve analysis of Polycarp's text and referenced

sources revealed the following methods.

1 . Pastornl or communal appl1cation of divine teaching

through direct address, and through use of the first person

plural and exhortat1on ,

2. Parellels of events in his exper1ence wIth ChrIst ' s

11te and suffering .

3. Use of theologicslly meaningful t erms common to all

Chr1st ians (1 •. e~, later employed in Scripture) as connection

w1th his thought (e . g. , "rlghteouaness , lt nfaith") .

4~ A mu1t1ple- top1c theology cent ered upon one subject

(r1ght ·eousness) . Polycsrp's letter consists of approximately

fifteen sub-theoloRies (see second seotlon, chapter one

about Christ , God , resurrection, etc . These theologies

support the tbeology of righteousness .

5. Use o·f mul t1ple senses of the seme term , ss indicated .- '\'_ 1

by their respective contexts , e . g. 7l11l'TI'GI"P t & IO'W , • t indioates poliyoarp s swar. ness of the distinction between the

44

Christian perspectIve of lIfe and. the Hellantstic .

6 . Development o£ B term's meanIng by association ("faithll

and Ur lgbteousness", lIne 159) or by collectIve defln1tion

("love goes before faIth snd hope lf ) .

ethods from Use of Tradition

The (,xtord CommIttee oould. not tind Polycarp ' s ' method '

tor employment of traditional sources . The CommIttee's

approach presQlD.ed that Polycarp had a demonstrable method

tor the quotatIon ot, or allusion to, the community's source .. .

IUs method was based upon an unconscious approach to these

sources. His method was predicated 1n part by the type of ource , but was essentially dict ated by his own presumptions

bout the Chr1stian message . In this latter sense, Polycarp

h~d a ' method' for usIng his sources , but this method was

not consciously employed . These apparently unconscious

prInciples or presumptions become visible in the analysis of

how Polycerp used traditIon. Tbese prinCiples arel

1. Non- Pauline letters wer played with mInor s,y11stlc

changes tor emphasis for clarity and forcw .

2. Pauline writings were presented as exemplary. Poly-carp

put Paul ' s personal testament into communal torm 8S a

normative tradItion tor ChristIan thought and conduct . lie

stated that he could not understand Paul completely. liis u , therefore , must be based on Paul ' s reputation, 8S much as, Dn

the quotable characteristIcs of Paul's teachings .

3. The Gospel tradition was the t hen- developing testament •

to the community ' s fa1th, and. the presentation of the

4, traditionsl Witness to the person of Christ . Polycarp used

these sources didactIcally - to derive epigrammatIc phrases

tor pastoral teaching.

Polycarp's use of' the Gospel sources crossed over from

consclous method to unconscious principles or presumptIons,

as well . The core of the community ' s tradition was the

gospel . The fact that Polycarp employed that core of teach-

ing in an uncritical manner raises the probilM of' Polycarp' s

understanding of theology.

Polvearp's Undetstandln.g of 1heologv

Obviously, Polycarp did not explioitly state his understand-

ing ot theology. Theology, as a defined discipline, was not

known 88 such during Polycarp's lifetime. Examining tb

problem 1.s a valid enterprise, however, because Polycarp

cknowledged .faith and steted his understanding of what fa1th

was . Bis understanding of theology was expressed through his

writings probably without hisconsiderntion of' the Intellect-

usl process, but his consideration was expr ed simply with

the subject of the text . ~e t hougbt about God .

olycarp ' s methods for using traditional sources were

illuminated by snalys1s ot the context f or the quote or

llusion in his let t er snd of the context ot the referenoed

source . This analysis revealed that two groups of key conoept

may be cato, orized: the key words of Polyoarp's text (chapter

one examined th , nd th.e key concepts of Scripture . hey key words are the baSis for his th.eology . Interspersed

w1th1n that t heology were Soriptural concepts which form a

46

besic communltyteachlng to express the realities of fa1th.

;1' contrasting Polycarp t S teaching wi ttl the oommuni ty'

teaching, the underlying reletions between tbese two express-

ions wl11 d.lsclose the presumpt1ons , and crit1csl theoloa1cal

rlnclples, beneath Polycorp's expression.

Section 11 has the rollowing key words: God , Lord, Jesu

Christ , resurrection, death, love and ju ent. The Scrip-

tursl concepts in the section erea I rejoice in the Lord

rostly tbat, while you cannot see, you believe in the

gloriti joy, believing that he was .ra18ed from tho dead add

iven glory, tbat all things in heoven and earth are subject

to him . KenderiJl3 not evil for ev1l; judge not lest you b

judged. Blessed are they who are persecuted for righteousness'

sake, tor theirs 1s the Kinadom of God . 2

Two terms 1n the first section introduce how revelation

is presented . tlJesus Chr1st"ls fIrst entltladour savior (7J;

the "Loro tl will come 8S the Judge of the 11ving and the

aao (32) . Those two conoepts place tho teach1ng on tbe Lord

Jesus Christ ano hIs resurrection in the perspective of the

aving judgomentof the Lord. The only two references to

the "vill of Godu (23, 35) are 1n th1. section, the teaohin

lThe term, seotlon, refers to the sect10ns of the Cutlin ot the epistle 1n Appendix A.

2Tbese Scriptural concepts were gathered accordlng to th quotat1ons or allusions stated in Appendix ~ The reterenced statements were gathered by section (Appendix A) An expressed here 1n pa.ragraph form .

47

on grace 1s in this section, 88 well . Tbe resurrection is

presented in the oontext of 8 demonstrat1on that the Lord

18 judge . Tbe Soriptural concept electod from his sources

support thAt perspective . Tbe revelation was our being

"justified with" (righteousness) the Lord.

These concepts center upon the revelation of God in

h1story, and the teachings from the life and words of Christ .

The first section emphasizes the fact of revelation.

Section II has the folluving key words. God, righteousnes"

love, servant, to walk; and the Lord, Christ, truth, f alth,

to see, evil, commandment (listed from the most frequent to

the less frequent) . A greater number of terms were used wlth

equal frequency thaD 1n the first section. The terms are not

,ealing with revelat1on, nor is once term used 80 much more

frequently to indicete an emphasis ( righteousness 1s the

stated subject, but it is used 88 otton as "love," "servant,"

Uto welk," in this section) .

The Scriptural teachings 1n th eotion area Love preceed

f aith , and hope follows . God knows the secret things of tb

heort . FOllow the truth of the Lord, and be worthy citizens

of his community. Lust wars against the Spirit . Evil-doers

will not possess the Kingdom of God .

The meaninft of the verb, "to walk," and 1 ts association

wi th love end "truth," is 1.dent1 ty w1 t ll the Lord. The truth

of the Lord is a key phrase here . The Lord 1s 8 servant, and

so must the Christian be to Ifwalk in the commandment of th

Lord . "

48

The distinotion between vision and faith is offeredl evil

1s d1st1ng\.1ished f rom good . The presbyters live the conseQ.u-

enoes or this distinotion,: for they are to provide all that

is good, 81'1d the oommunity is to be subject to them 8S to

God. Their lives were to be the standard of the truth, of

liv1ng in righteousness .

In seotion II, various groups in the community were address-

ed. !rhe presbyters were noted above, but other groups of

the audience were 8ddress~d to involve them in the meaning

of n~igbteousness.lt Thus by assoOiation with , the term,

righteousnesf;l 'Was to take on meaning t or those adc1ressed.

In 8 variety of traditional words (the traditional ident-

ity between key words and the Soriptural oonoepts), Polyoarp

xpressed the meaning of tho truth of the Lord in his

ffort to further define righteousness, not just os a divine

gift offered 1n saving judgement, but 8S 8 vay o~ liVing with

the Lord .1n love and in set>vice. These phrases and words

center upon the Q.uestion, and tbe problem. of bumen la@guage,

of making the Word verbal.

The tbird section h.8 S the follow1ng key terms I the Lord;

the word (with 1ts var1ation , oonfession), to endure and

endurance and to suftel"; God, righteousness, Christ; resurrec-

tion, des1re, s1n . This seotion oonta1ns also the greatest

variety of Christolog1oal terms, flesh, testimonyo! the

oross, body, to im1tate (Christ) and the examplv .

The Sor1ptural ooncepts in the seotion are : Beoause of •

sin, we pray to God. "Forgive us our debts, as we forg1ve our

49

debtors ." Watch and prey, for the spirit 1s willing, but

the flesh is weak. Christ died for our sins, thougb he had

no sin . This is our example. We have not run in vain.

The dIvision of sin within humanIty is the emphasis from

the Scriptural concepts. Polycerp's credal statement

mphaslzed a d1fferent, but related, d1vision based upon

tho confession of our belief in ChrIst: Christ was contraste

wIth anti-christ, the devil snd satan, tor various deniels

ot Christ ' s 1noarnation, the testimony ot the cross, or

resurrection and judgement.

rmony within the community was stressed by s return to

the word (136) . Life accordIng to the word confronts sutter-

ing , tor the word lived is to see Christ as our hope and the

p,ledge ot oU.r rIghteousness. 11'01' t hat lite, we will sutter .

The d1vision within humanity oonfronts the word and must

endure the persecution of desIres .

The lnitial contrast between ChrIst and satan, between

those believing and those who retuse fai th, is resolved in

the example of the saints WO "endured 'before our very eyes"

and who ere with the Lord . Like them, the communltY'scentral

action was to profess that example and to form themselves in

imitation of 1t . The principle operatIng in the epistle's

thIrd section 1s that theology must confront the community

with the presence of God and the new Qr1entation 1n lit

thstpresence demands. Theology 18 prophet1c and J:1turgical,

and allied to the oracular ministry. It 1s not inoidental • that Polycerp is a presbyter: that experIence and hi

,0 responsibility l~or the community effeoted his theology.

Sufficient evidanee ensta to demonstrate that the last

of the apostolic tathers composed a letter and 1ts format,

chose a centrel vooabulary, ana selected his trad1tional

referenoes . These actions presume en understand1ng of wbat

was belng composed . Polycerp's understand1ng of his fa1tb-

express10n 1n this letter expressed an evident concern to

reveal that God bas come into history, to make sensible to

his audience 1n humen language the signs of the incarnation"

and to show what these revealed events meant .

Understanding polyearp ' 3 Understanding

The 't heologian reminds the histor1an that theology from

the past came from 8 person who accepted faith . In t llltn, the

his t orian reminds the theologian t bat the acceptance of

faith implies the human understand1ng ot that event , and

tha t t he ' God' of the bel1ever 1s never absolutely God 8S

God 1s . The f a1th- expression of another age expressed to

some degree a 'God ' who 1s now 'deed .' the person who wrot

thefai th- express1on, or theology , worshipped 8 ' God '

different then our contempora.ry ' God .'

In his time, Polyoarp presented God 88 Polycarp saw God.

~hat dld Polyc~rp see in faith?

evelation

sa,\( that the God ot the Old Testament (line 124) reveal-

d to the prophets and the Apostles th.at the full mean1ng of

l1te had come through our Lord Jesus Christ . Life ' s meanin

was shown throuttb his lite, teachings, suff erings , deeth,

51 resurrection, Dnd glory. Polycarp admitted revelation. n

presented revelation through. Jesus Christ an example for

u.s to live by. Since Polycerp emphasized Christ as an example,

ad the resurrection as a promise , did Polycarp believe that

Jesus Christ was divine, and totally identified with ~ro,i ?

What was the 1ncarnotion for Polycnrp? Did the 80n1'8d10811y

transform humDnk1nd, orwos 1:10 only a figurehead savior, an

example of how God would aid the saints?

These quostions not only reveal ~olycDrp 's uncritical theo-

logical understanding but elso imply the deeper question:

what WAS revelati on for Polycarp?

he chronic meaSure of Polycarp's view of revelation is

the past . Revelation , 8S a source of re11gion, wa

~nd complete.

priori

Pastorally, the traditional sources of the community gave

osning and encouragement to the 11te of the faithful . Po1y-

carp's evident concern for his cburches ' taith during a

time of persecution rostered his presentation or the trAd1tioo-

1 teaching. be demonstrated no awareness ot revelation

8 an on- going pr ocess , and therefore an object ot critical

eV81uatlon in terms 01' t hen- contemporary experience . In

contrast, Paul did critically judge ihe understanding 01'

Christian t eachings and faith through his own experienoe .

Euman Len~u8~e

1storica1 studies must approach the problem of the valu

of Polycapp ' s teachings to his audience . Theology, however , t

and 1n particular , theological criticism, must evaluate his

;2 woy or using human language, of employing theological terms.

Polycarp's human expression attempted to make meaningful

an example only through the vision of a promise . Accordingly,

he used the central humAn terms of "love," "truth, It "command-

ent," "word , n to express the presence of 8 model Christ in

the oommuni ty. The W8Y in which Polycerp form.ed tho communit y

round this confession of the faith was through the divine

judgement of the Lord. By judging history by the deeds of the

fai thful , for their actions distinguish the vision of faith

rom that of the vorld, the community 'Wss "justified with"

the Lord of history, the judge of the living and the dead .

The problem of human express10n involves the meaning of

the terms as Polycarp 's theology used them. The analysis of

qhapter one has already shown that POlycer p ts teaching on

"love , " "service, " "word," and "truth tl contrlbute6 to hi

teaching of judgement .

The analysis of the word, "faIth," demonstrated that his

understanding of that word , his vision of the Lord, 1ncluded

def1nite relation of suffering and death 1n Christ to the

believer, but not of Christ's resurrection to the believer .

The term ' s association with the other key words mentioned

in this sect10n ot the epIstle indicates his emphasis upon

the presence of the Lord in the community through his

commandments and not through any personal, divine savln« act .

The problem ot l anguage reflects the problem ot Polyca r p 's

faith , and the understanding he ha. of tho meaning of that

ift .

;3

God Among as Polycarp's r elation to the community affected the intent

of the letter (11nes 1-;). Theoraculsr ministry provided

the norms tor Christiqn lIfe . At the polnt wbere the mlnister

should have presented the testament to the risen Christ,

11vlnR among us , Polycarp presented the creed (11nes 161-6;)

composed of antithetical formulas . The unspeakable joy of

t'tllth withered into the dry adherence to faith ' s words as

teachings end not the Word of God who is Christ .

At the epIstle's close, Polycarp protested that the race

is not 1n vain. The quest10n remains: where is God? what

was faith? Adherence to the past , and its i mplied wonders?

What was revealed in Polycur, in his Christian traditlon?

~bet was salvation for Polycerp? Wh~;vas the race not 1n

valn?

9lycarp does not answer these soterlological quest1ons .

IUs subj ect , "righteousness , tl implies confrontation wi tb

soteriolo£ical issue , but Po1ycarp did not contend witb it .

Theplogioal Critioism

Polyoarp's faith was traditlonal . All the notes concerning

the intearetion of tradition 1nto his text, of tbe lack of

explicitly verifiable referenoes 1n spite of certainty tbat

sources were referenced, support that judgement . Polycerp

urged e return to the word as it was given in the beglnning .

Ite d1d not understand Paul , but apparently did understand his

trad1tion , at least" in his own opinion. He referenced h1s

teachlngs with the teachings of the Lord; e . g., "Judge not

74

lest you be judged . II

The presentation of revealed truth ends (lines 37-47) in

8 oollecrtion of sayings , ul tlmately conoludln~ w1 th sn intro-

duction to his teaching on righteousness in section two by

orcing the term from tbe Sermon on the Mount tradition on

the audience . These apparent strains in Polycarp's teaching

ive evidence that, while be was perhaps fighting the

heresies of J.ta rcion and Docetlsm (the credal statement), he

was perplexed by Paul end tbe then-contemporary tbeological

evelopment . The portrait of these bypotheses is that

Polycarp was reactionary, harking to the sources 88 if

only 8 particular language or expressIon - oral or wr1tten -

s the word of the Lord.3

This portrait, with the evidence from his use of Scripture ,

ad with the teaching of the vbole epistle , indicates that

olycarp ' s theol ogy leeks the most fundamental theologieal

principle, the differentiation of tradition from the

oontempo~ary fa1th- experience and its oonsequent buman

understanding. Polycarp did not critically view his sources,

for they were the fQlth to him. Apparently Polycarp did not

3 t , ••• it may be that a mind such as that of Polycarp, essen-tially receptive by nature and lecking 1n orIginality, was nct one to grasp best the princIples of the new fa ith . In th1 respect Poly-oarp resembles his contemporarles ,,1n a failure to apprehend the revolutionary and distinctive character of the Gospel . Nevertheless , he is to a 18rge extent saved by bis lack of originality and real modesty which lead him to rely to an astounding extent on citations fr~Q the New Testa-ment Bnd no doubt elso on many oral words which ~e hed p1cked up as tlan associate .of the Apostles" C Euseb1us_l. Torrance, Graoe, p . 91 .

55

think about how be thought or faith itself. He totally

assimilated the co~munity's trad1t10nal understanding of the

g1f t wi th.out reflection on the meaning of the communl ty' s

traditional language and its relation to h1s own conaeptual-

1zationof the feith-experience in his lite. The ph11osophical

judgement WBS not made tbat the humen mind can certainly

know truth.

Tbese points bring into questlon tbe whole of Polycarp's

theological experienoe to ask if lt wes theologicsl

experienc t all . Is the best that we can say , in terms of

our understanding, for Polycarp is thet he WB.S 9 deposit of

the written record of the faith of t he apostol ic community?

historic limitations of what was known about the fa1th

t that time must be admitted . Indirectly, Po1ycarp admitted

that something at least "other n was known 1n the statements

of Paul. Whet her P01ycarp did not understand Paul , or

disagree{! with him , 18 not clearly determinable . No Sign ,

however , was included 1n Polycarp ' s letter that WOuld indio8t

his or1tical evaluation of contemporary theological thou8ht.

In hindSight and in historical evaluation, P01ycerp's letter

may be seen as a stage in the whole community ' s understandin

of itself at that time; that Paul was the cutting edge of

chenge. Po,lyoarp seems to have stood at the nether side ot

the Christian trad1tion ' s confrontation (1 . e ., Paul) with

the humon mind ' s capability to see itself' and its operations

s an object , rather than an unrecognized presumption within

tradi tion. The very principles discerned within Po1ycarp ' s

,6 structure judge the inadequacies of his th~ology.

The value of his testimony must also be seen by tb

$can4al of the believer to the world. HistoricallY,'" Polycarp

was a renowned witness to the fa1th. The testimony of his

martyrdom Dnd the w1 tness of Eusebius marked him 8S one of

the great Christians of his time . Poly-carp took the world'

judgement ot those who endured end used it to mark th

scandal of be11ef: "They ran not 1n valn, but in faith and

riJthteousness . " Much of his own faith-experience must have

been in the witness others made in his sIght: the saints 1n

Philippi, and Paul, the Apos tles and martyrs. Polycarp

accepted fa1th end martyrdom end this t act is the first

principle of our understanding of Polycarp ' s God .

'1th fa1th trom and 1n the community, Polycarp recognized

revealed truth, expressed the faitb in humen 'language, and

presented the faith he exporienced under persecution to

form the church at Philipp1.

Theoloi1cel criticism reveals thet his underst8ndin~ did

not see ell that hed been revealed to him - that his faith

was a light from the past, and 8 Word spoken by which men

were judged. That was Polycarp's living faith. His theology

woa not 8 measure of his boliness, but the measure ot

uncritical understanding of understanding faith .

the

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abbott- SmIth , G. A Manual Greek LexlC~ of the NtH Test@-m!n1. Ed1nburgh: T&T Clark, 19 o.

Barnard, L.W. "The problem of St . Polycarp's Epistle to the Ph1lippians, t.t in The Church Quarterly l~eviell, ,vol. 163 (1962), 421- 30.

The most open attack upon harrison ' s thesis of two epistles. Worth reading to illustrate Harrison ' otten tenuous relation of exegesis to history.

uer,

Cross ,

Cros

Dodd ,

Glimm,

Walter. A Greek- Egg11Sh Lexison of the New Testament and 9th,IX' Early brist~an Li terature . Trans . by Wm. Arndt , F.W. Gingrich . th ad. ChIoSROI Onlv . of ChIcago Press , 1952.

F . L. The Esrly CbrIsU.@n F8~hers . "PolycQ'rp , It 19-21 . London. Duckworth , 1960.

An average 1ntroductory presentat10n about Polycarp.

C.H. ItA Ilew Gospel u 1n tiey Testament Studies, 12- 51 . Retrintedfrom the BUll'~ of the Jobn HY1AndS Li rary, vol . 20, no . 1 . anchester , 1953 .

- rrison (p. 351) recommends tbis work tor the method of analysis revealed in Dodd ' s study.

~.~., and J . Merique , G. e . Walsh , S.J ., translators . The ApostpliC; fathers ("The Fathers of the Church" series) N. Yt a Cima Publishing Co ." 1947.

Introduction and English text with Scripture references . Lake and Lightfoot texts far superior .

57

alouce ot Polycarp to the 1n "up "1f""+Y" ~Mg. YR •• ' "."' • • 2"' The 'f'.l . . -

rrison'

Goodsneed , Edgar 1. Tbe Apostolic Fether§ _ "The Letter of Poly-carp to the Philippiens ," 237-44. London: Independent Press , 195'0_

Goodspe

Introduction with English te~t . Opposes Harrison ' s thesis. Scripture references .

Berr1son, Percy Neale. Pplycarp ' s Two Iplstles to the Pbi11pp18ns . Cambridge, 1936.

The key liIOrk on the historical value of tbis plstle. The book contains reference tools to

other sources, including the N. T., whicb are of value in studying the Apos toliC Fathers .

Kelly, London:

Kittel,

Kleist, 1~mes A. , 8.1 .

oster,

Lake ,

Christian Writ 19 .... 8.

'avors lls rrison' s theory by presenting oh. 13 betore ah . 1 . Textual not es of value .

5'8

Lawson,

59

John A. A Theolog1ge1 and Hiftpr;J.cAl Introdugt1on to thl Appstolic Fethers . N •• ; Macmillan, 1961 .

A readable introduction to Polycarp, though often relating ~$pur1ous scholarly anecdotes of little value . Contains a commentary on tbe epistle With Scripture references , and some general text-ual and historlcal notes .

Lightfoot~ Joseph B. Apostplic Father • • Londona MaCmillan, 1098.

Migne ,

Lawson calls this the llstandard edition" of Polycerp. It has a compendium text indicatIng the influence of the various manuscriptsl references to Scripture, end a translation . Lake' s text has the singuler advantage of having the EnglIsh translation lined up with the Greek, that is its only value over Lightfoot .

J .P. , ed . Pafr01Q~18e c~rSH8 Completuft9¢ ,Latinorum •• • Greecorum. 01 . ,100 - 2 • PariS , 1 , •

Lattn end Greek texts with varying manusoripts nd "Monltums . "

IY Testament Students ' WPfkb¥OkC Greek , Latin , English . Collegeville, Minn . I he Liturg1cal Press, 1963 .

A Committee of the Oxford SOCiety of Uistorical Theology. 'rhe New TestAment in the, ApostoHlg Fatbers . (,xford , 1905.

Absolutely essential to this study, and a v8lu-ble work to illustrate exeget1cal method.

Quasten , Johannes . PPt§ologV. Vol . 1 , 76-82 . Westminster, d • • Newman 19 o.

An exoellent introduot1on to Polycarp .

Quell , Gottfried, and Ethelbert Stauffer . ~. Vol ,. 1 in "Bible Key Words" series by Gerhard Kittel . Trans . J . l~ . Coates . Londons Adam 8: Charles Black, 1949.

Quell ,

Torr

Gottfried, and Gottlob Schrenk. Righteousness . Vol . ~ in "Bible Key Words" serles by Gerhard Kittel. Lon-don. Adam &:Charles Black, 19,1 .

Both Quell books are oriented more for Peuline studies rather than the ApostoliC Fa thers . Some ma t erial on the Fa thers is presented .

60

~

APPENDIX

OtfrLINE AND SUM.'lARY 0F pc, LYCARP , S EPISTLE TO TilE Pl iILIPPIANS

This outline 1s divided according to the line numbers of the vreek text 1n the Loke edition . 1 summerized the sect-10ns· contents . The text summaries ere the writer ' s main ideas translated . These summaries were composed from the main concepts of each section. The division between one sectton and another is according to my analysis of the text : soo Append1x B.

Virst Sect1on: The Church at Ph111ppi imitates the Lord Jesus Christ, our faith. The c~ntr81 tdea 1s that the Lord Jesus Christ shares the procise of resurrection through grace willed by God , not earned by our works .

1 - 8 Polycorp and the presbyters to the church of God at Philippi.

9 - l~ Imitators in love and truth of the Lord Jesus Christ gave aid to the Buffering in cbeins, tho! trul~ chosen by God end Christ to be solnts .

15 - 2~ OUII' foith in the Lord Jesus ChrIst , who dleo for our sins and vas raised by God from the dead, introduces us io.to the joy of the saving grs(le willed by God and not earned by our works .

25 - 37 Serve Ood 1n fear Bnd truth , believing in the LorO Jesus Christ , who was raised from the deed and into glory, whom all breath serves , who comes as jud of the living ond the deed , and whose blood Go will demand of those who d1sobey , ond thus shere in the prom1se of the resurrection by walking 1n the Commandments and loving the things which he loves.

38 - 1+7 Befroin from unrighteousness, anrj render no t evil for evil , for the Lord taught , ItJudge not lest you be Judged,fI ond "Blessed are the poor and those who suffer tor righ teousness, for theirs is the KIngdom ot Ood . "

61

62

Second Sectionl Righteousness is the command to love 8S our common faith teaches. The central idea 1s that the commend of righteousness is love for God and man , and th1s goes before faith.

'+8 - 57 Brethren, I write to you ot righteousness, snd of PllUl \ilho taught the word of truth, whose wrl t 1ngs Will bu11d up fa 1 th am'cng you .

58 - 63 This faith 1s the mother of us all when bope follows end love goes before - for God and Christ and neigh-bor. .Ii'or he who fulfills the command. of righteous-ness bBS love snd is far from sin.

Wives and Widows take up the al"lftor of righteousness.

6l.t. - 68 Knowing the root of all evils, let us take th armor of righteousness, and walk in the commandment of the Lord.

69 - 73 Wives are to remain in the fa1th, and in love and purity, truly loving their husbands, and l oving all others; educatlng thelr children t o fear God .

7'+ - 81 Wiidows s.re to be discreet 1n the fsith of the Lord, refraining from eVil. For they are the altar of God, from whom no reasonings escape notice .

eons, younger men , and vi:rg1ns must be blameless before '8 righteousness 8a worthy citizens of his commun1ty. sbyters must provide all that 1s good before God and man.

82 - 8'+

8'+ - 90

90 - 9'+

94 - lOl.t.

Knowing that God is not mocked, walk in his command-ment and glory.

Similarly, deacoDs must be blameless before Go'" righteousness, as becomes serv8nts of God and Christ , who walk 1n the t ruth of the Lord, the servant ot all .

This is the promise ot wbat 1s to come, just as the promise of the resurrection; ana the promise of our reign with him, if we are worthy citizens of his oommunity.

Similarly, the youager ment blameless and pure, must refrain from evil, and see the good of bein cut off from the lusts of the world . For lusts val' against the Sp1r1t ,and the Kingdom of God. For they must \:'e subject to the presbyters and the deacons as t o God aDO. to Christ .

10'+ - 10, Virg1ns must walk wi th a blameless snd pur conscience.

APPENDIX B

CltAnTS ,i4"'OR lillY VAJ!IDS

~otes

the following charts of the key words for Polycarp ' s epistle provide the Greek word end the references for tbe key words in the first nine chepter.s . These k.ey words served 8S 8 basis to the f1rst chapter of the thesis .

ehepter one of the thes1s w111 serve to relate the key vords listed and to arrange tbem 1n the structure of Poly-carp ' s theology.

t the process Dge 11i provides further informat1on of selecting the key words . For the ssk it may be noted that not all the mor Greek words are referenced; e . g. , 4tf.."f/4(Il

6, Key

Parenthesis lnd1cllte thet {; reference occurs more tha n noe 1n 9 given ch9pter one verse; c . g. (2) .

The English headings indicate 8 basic 1dea w1ch has several Greek words to express 1t in the epistle .

wonD

&co.£

,.-1{(/4ItJ>5

I

1t/q-0t,s. ~tZ7Q S-II - t -see also ';;qPS f1~trms . -'~~~~7DS F~ Y;ib4a S

~krX' / t2(zP tfn£

~6?-4~ see 81150\4 Bw.s "li((er - root wor

..1 -

~~ ) ....

a

"OhD

;

2 timesa 7.1,2.

terms: 2.1 7.1 8.1.

~~k

.' f .,;

,.

-' -- -,--- - - --- -.---- ,. "1 - THE APOSTOLIC FATHERS - , ~ ' ... -

" - i- 'Eph.2,U.9 aV€KMA7)Tr:> Kal O€OO~a(]p.EV?l' El

3~

Lye>

~~r

r - E7Tl Uj.L0UUIV ElUEII. Ell', €tOCiTE,>, .oTt ,xapln EUTE' I ,(JEUWU j.LlVal; aiue lr €P'lWV, aAM 8EA~J.LaTt· BEau . ; :' OllVI7]uau XplUT.oU. '

i '. II

('";'--1- A" l-' " ',/..' ,~'" , ~ 0.£0 ava."wuaj.LEvaL Ta

"

.. -~ ..

-, "._- '"

l.' ·

.'

5.e[,

.s-S' .

-Gal .~, 20

~tp

- -inc hrV':'lVLll.,; l'hlnCIt,:, --- I '"

. .~ .. . : .. .

! -III

, ' ,

CD. Taum, dOEArpO[,Ol"C EflaUT{'O