Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

corpus-paul - Re: Ignatius and all that! (Part Two)

corpus-paul AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Corpus-Paul

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "David C. Hindley" <dhindley AT compuserve.com>
  • To: "Corpus-paul" <corpus-paul AT franklin.oit.unc.edu>
  • Subject: Re: Ignatius and all that! (Part Two)
  • Date: Mon, 20 Aug 2001 03:35:05 -0400


Mike ,

At first I was not sure that your response to my evaluation of your
JHS article really answered by objections, but I see them in part two.

I think that one weakness to your response is in assuming that the
clergy of the Roman Christian church made systematic efforts to
achieve "1) the liquidation of their opponents records [meaning the
multitude of competing gospels and other literature already in
existence] and 2) the fabrication of alternatives where they sensed a
meaningful lacuna [by creating the Ignatian corpus, and presumably
also the Pauline corpus]."

With regard to the wholesale destruction of opposing records I can
only think of Robert Eisler, _The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist_
(Methuen, 1933), who offered the campaign of the Roman Catholic Church
to censure the Jewish Talmud as an analogy to how Josephus' initial
Aramaic work _On the Capture of Jerusalem_ could be almost completely
suppressed (surviving only as fragments contained in the Slavonic
version of his _War_, and a description of Jesus it supposedly
contained finding its way into his Greek _Antiquities_ as an
interpolation). Even so, the Talmud did survive (although he does make
some interesting points about the possible tampering of the text of
Josephus' works).

I think you suggest in your response to me that the clerics of the
Roman church were able to destroy the records of their opponents
because the opponents themselves had already disappeared. From your
article I would take this disappearance to be the result of strong-arm
tactics effected by enforcers posing in the guise of charitable
workers. Unfortunately, this was one of my objections was not
addressed by your reply. Again, what *specific* sources can you point
to that substantiate the kind of "strong-arm" tactics you described in
the article?

You also lament that a "history of this tactic [of establishing a
contending, parallel hierarchy and the independent attestation of any
sort of underlying universal psycho-organizational patterns] does not
exist" but is this not an incredible weakness in your reasoning? There
undoubtedly *are* accounts of similar tactics (e.g., the case of the
anti-popes of the middle ages comes immediately to mind, not to
mention the competing governing bodies operating in Russia in 1917 or
Jerusalem in the war of 66-70) and I'd also find it hard to believe
that psychological or sociological literature does not treat the
psychology of resistance movements (J. D. Crossan and Gerd Theissen
managed to find plenty). This is an area where you will really need to
do more research.

With regard to the fabrication of literature as a form of propaganda,
Joseph Wheless, _Forgery in Christianity_, (Alfred A. Knopf, 1930)
comes to mind, although I think Wheless overstated his case. However,
even G. A. Wells, _The Jesus of the Early Christians_ (Pemberton,
1971), does not question the genuineness of the letters of Paul
(although accepts that they were at least somewhat redacted, even the
pastorals) nor even the Ignatian letters and that of Polycarp.
Personally, I think you need to concentrate on the dynamics of that
transition from an eschatologically or apocalyptically oriented
messianic movement to a covert underground insurgency, if you want to
successfully explain how Ignatius or Paul could have been chosen as
propaganda vehicles.

Respectfully,

Dave Hindley
Cleveland, Ohio, USA






Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page