THE GOSPEL OF JOHN AND REVELATION.

Paul was not alone in his development of a Christ message which strayed away from Jesus's own emphases. Some very similar themes are to be found in the fourth Gospel, John, which is thought to have been written rather later than the Synoptic Gospels, some time around the turn of the first and second centuries CE. Perhaps it should be seen as a fruitful meditation on the tradition which the Synoptics were creating.71 John has much information about Jesus which is not to be found in Matthew, Mark and Luke. He seems genuinely to supplement their picture of Jesus's life; yet that is not John's main purpose, and his information is put to uses other than those in the Synoptics. He portrays from the outset a Jesus who, in the Gospel's great opening hymn, is already fully identified with the pre-existing Word which was with G.o.d: John's Gospel narrative is a progressive glorification of this figure, to the Cross and beyond. John's Jesus, in the course of his majestic discourses, sets himself up in great metaphoric statements prefixed by 'I am', mystically seven in number like the days of creation. He is Bread, Light, Door, Shepherd, Resurrection/Life, Way/Truth/Life, Vine. John has much information about Jesus which is not to be found in Matthew, Mark and Luke. He seems genuinely to supplement their picture of Jesus's life; yet that is not John's main purpose, and his information is put to uses other than those in the Synoptics. He portrays from the outset a Jesus who, in the Gospel's great opening hymn, is already fully identified with the pre-existing Word which was with G.o.d: John's Gospel narrative is a progressive glorification of this figure, to the Cross and beyond. John's Jesus, in the course of his majestic discourses, sets himself up in great metaphoric statements prefixed by 'I am', mystically seven in number like the days of creation. He is Bread, Light, Door, Shepherd, Resurrection/Life, Way/Truth/Life, Vine.72 He repeatedly refers to himself as the Son of G.o.d, which he does only once (and then only by implication) in the Synoptics, though they frequently put this t.i.tle into the mouth of others. He repeatedly refers to himself as the Son of G.o.d, which he does only once (and then only by implication) in the Synoptics, though they frequently put this t.i.tle into the mouth of others.73 This Johannine Christ says little about forgiving one's enemies, which is such a strong theme in the Synoptics. His p.r.o.nouncements about himself might seem arrogant, even insufferable, to those who could not accept them; they might be interpreted as a voice solemnly speaking through a man who is possessed. The Spirit of whom Paul speaks is also a constant presence in this Gospel, from the moment that John the Baptist sees it descending on Jesus in his baptism in the River Jordan. This Johannine Christ says little about forgiving one's enemies, which is such a strong theme in the Synoptics. His p.r.o.nouncements about himself might seem arrogant, even insufferable, to those who could not accept them; they might be interpreted as a voice solemnly speaking through a man who is possessed. The Spirit of whom Paul speaks is also a constant presence in this Gospel, from the moment that John the Baptist sees it descending on Jesus in his baptism in the River Jordan.74 The tradition of John's Gospel is reflected in a number of minor letters which have also taken the name of John as author, and it may be seen as evidence of another strand within the non-Jewish communities which in parallel to those chiefly influenced by Paul were spreading beyond the Jewish matrix of the Church. A strange poetic work known as Revelation now forms the last book of the New Testament, an open letter addressed to a number of named Church communities in what today is southern Turkey. It is likely to have been written in the time of the Emperor Domitian (81-96 CE) and to be the product of Christian fury at his brutal campaign to strengthen the cult of emperor worship. Like much inter-Testamental literature (see p. 68), it is an 'apocalypse' (the Greek for 'revelation'): a vision of cosmic struggles in the End Time and of a triumphant judgement of G.o.d. Its author is also called John, and may be a contemporary of the Gospel writer (from whom he is distinguished by being called 'the Divine'); his crude Greek style is very different, as are his preoccupations.

Brooding on the Roman government's maltreatment of Christians, John the Divine delighted in constructing a picture of the Roman Empire's collapse which would have been familiar to pre-Christian Jewish writers in the apocalyptic tradition. He described Rome in a frequent Jewish shorthand for tyrannical power, 'Babylon'. Significantly, John the Divine is the only New Testament writer uninhibitedly and without qualification to use the provocative t.i.tle of 'king' for Christ. There are plenty of New Testament references to the Kingdom of G.o.d, or Christ as the King of the Jews, or the King of Israel; but those are not the same at all. The early Christians were scared of what the Roman authorities might think if they started calling Christ a king; after all, Jesus was crucified because he was said to have claimed to be just that, 'King of the Jews'. So the rest of the New Testament seems almost to be avoiding the idea; modern Western Christians, who tend to talk a lot about Christ as king (see pp. 931-41), generally do not notice this. When two eighteenth-century English Evangelicals, John Cennick and Charles Wesley, wrote what has become a widely loved hymn, 'Lo, he comes with clouds descending', they drew most of its rich kingly imagery from Revelation: Yea, Amen! let all adore Thee, High on Thine eternal throne; Saviour, take the power and glory, Claim the kingdom for Thine own; O come quickly! O come quickly! O come quickly!

Everlasting G.o.d, come down!

So Revelation is the great exception: the one book of the New Testament which positively relishes the subversiveness of the Christian faith. It is not surprising that, through the ages of Christian history, again and again this book has inspired oppressed peoples to rise up and destroy their oppressors. Such emphases frequently alarmed Christians and hindered Revelation's entry into full acceptance in the biblical family; but what probably saved the book was the major aspect of its picture of Jesus Christ which did resonate with Paul's writings and with John's Gospel. Once more, Jesus is a figure of cosmic significance, the Lamb who at the end of worldly time sits upon the throne. For John's first readers, this Lamb would be resonant of the sacrifice in the Jewish Pa.s.sover, and would therefore lead them to a tangle of thoughts about the Last Supper which was their first Eucharist. Significantly, together with G.o.d the Almighty, the Lamb has replaced any need for a Temple in the city which is the New Jerusalem.75 For by the time that John the Divine was writing, the relationship of Christ-followers to the Old Jerusalem had radically changed: the future of Christianity was to move away from Jerusalem. For by the time that John the Divine was writing, the relationship of Christ-followers to the Old Jerusalem had radically changed: the future of Christianity was to move away from Jerusalem.

Paul has a good deal to say about the communities of Christ-followers, mostly from a Jewish background, who looked to the leaders of the Church based in Jerusalem after the death of Jesus and his removal from earthly life. As we have noted (see p. 98), the most important among these leaders was at first James the brother of Jesus. When the Jewish authorities executed James in 62 CE on charges of breaking the Jewish Law, his place was taken by another 'kinsman' of the Lord, Simeon. If the gathering of Christ-followers in Jerusalem had intended to become the mainstream expression of Judaism, they had failed, because they remained a minority grouping on the edge of the religious life in the city and in Palestine generally. Nevertheless, among the emerging Christ-followers they had a good deal of prestige because of their leaders' intimate connection with Jesus. Paul was constrained to admit when writing to the Corinthians that these men had experienced Resurrection appearances of the Lord before his own, in an order which he is careful to make clear - first Peter, then James.76 Indeed, Paul repeatedly urges the Churches to whom he writes around the Mediterranean to send funds to the Jerusalem Church, in the same way that Jews made a contribution to the Temple. This implies that the inst.i.tution of the Jerusalem Church was beginning to take the place of the old Temple in the esteem of Christ's followers, and it is not surprising that Paul would have to respect it. Yet he represented the growing number of communities which placed their trust in Christ as Lord far away from Jerusalem around the Mediterranean world: communities which had grown in circ.u.mstances which will probably always remain obscure, despite the brilliant flashes of light or apparent light which illuminate their origins in Paul's epistles and the Book of Acts. Indeed, Paul repeatedly urges the Churches to whom he writes around the Mediterranean to send funds to the Jerusalem Church, in the same way that Jews made a contribution to the Temple. This implies that the inst.i.tution of the Jerusalem Church was beginning to take the place of the old Temple in the esteem of Christ's followers, and it is not surprising that Paul would have to respect it. Yet he represented the growing number of communities which placed their trust in Christ as Lord far away from Jerusalem around the Mediterranean world: communities which had grown in circ.u.mstances which will probably always remain obscure, despite the brilliant flashes of light or apparent light which illuminate their origins in Paul's epistles and the Book of Acts.

The separate inspiration of much of Paul's message (a matter which, as we have seen, he himself emphasized) was bound to bring tensions with the Jerusalem leadership, and in fact there were bitter clashes hinted at even in the emollient prose of the Book of Acts. A furious pa.s.sage in Paul's letter to the Galatians reveals the real seriousness of the quarrel, as Paul accused his opponents, including Jesus's disciple Peter, one of the original Twelve, of cowardice, inconsistency and hypocrisy.77 At stake was an issue which would trouble Christ-followers for 150 years: how far should they move from the Jewish tradition if, like Paul, they preached the good news of Christ's kingdom to non-Jews? Questions of deep symbolism arose: should converts accept such features of Jewish life as circ.u.mcision, strict adherence to the Law of Moses and abstention from food defiled by a.s.sociation with pagan worship (that would include virtually all meat sold in the non-Jewish world)? Paul would allow only that Christians should not eat food which they knew had been publicly offered to idols, and otherwise not make much of a fuss about wares on sale in the market or about the dishes at a non-believer's table. At stake was an issue which would trouble Christ-followers for 150 years: how far should they move from the Jewish tradition if, like Paul, they preached the good news of Christ's kingdom to non-Jews? Questions of deep symbolism arose: should converts accept such features of Jewish life as circ.u.mcision, strict adherence to the Law of Moses and abstention from food defiled by a.s.sociation with pagan worship (that would include virtually all meat sold in the non-Jewish world)? Paul would allow only that Christians should not eat food which they knew had been publicly offered to idols, and otherwise not make much of a fuss about wares on sale in the market or about the dishes at a non-believer's table.78 One might have expected that the result of this would be the development of two branches of Christianity in fundamental disagreement with one another about their relationship with the parent Judaism: there would be a Jewish Church looking to the tradition represented by James and a Gentile Church treasuring the writings of Paul and John. In fact this is not so. There is one epistle in the New Testament which has been given James's name, and which does represent a rather different view of the Christian life and the role of the Law from that of Paul, but otherwise all Christians alive today are the heirs of the Church which Paul created. The other type of Christianity once headed by the brother of the Lord has disappeared. How did this happen? A great political crisis intervened to transform the situation.

THE JEWISH REVOLT AND THE END OF JERUSALEM.

In 66 CE a Jewish revolt broke out in Palestine which drew its inspiration from the traditions of Jewish self-a.s.sertion and rage against outside interference which looked back to the heroic era of Judas Maccabeus (see pp. 65-6). The comforts provided by Roman rule were not enough to persuade everyone in the Jewish community that they should outweigh the constant reminder from the Roman authorities that Jews were not masters of their own destinies. The rebels eventually took control in Jerusalem and ma.s.sacred the Sadducee elite, whom they regarded as collaborators with the Romans. The Jewish Christian Church, interestingly, fled from the city; it was distant enough from the world of Jewish nationalism to wish to keep out of this struggle. The result of the revolt was in the long term probably inevitable: the Romans could not afford to lose their grip on this corner of the Mediterranean and they put a huge effort into crushing the rebels. In the course of the capture of Jerusalem, whether by accident or by design, the great Temple complex went up in flames, never to be restored; its site lay as a wasteland for centuries.79 Jewish fury acc.u.mulated at this highly unusual destruction of one of the Mediterranean world's most renowned shrines and in 132-5 they rose again in revolt. Now the Romans erased the name of Jerusalem from the map and created a city, Aelia Capitolina. It took its name with deliberate offensiveness from a new temple of Jupiter, the chief G.o.d of the Roman pantheon as worshipped on the Capitoline Hill in Rome itself (the temple was built apparently on a site which encompa.s.sed the place of Jesus's crucifixion and burial, although this was probably coincidental). So Aelia Capitolina was not even intended to be a Greek city; it was a Roman colony. Jewish fury acc.u.mulated at this highly unusual destruction of one of the Mediterranean world's most renowned shrines and in 132-5 they rose again in revolt. Now the Romans erased the name of Jerusalem from the map and created a city, Aelia Capitolina. It took its name with deliberate offensiveness from a new temple of Jupiter, the chief G.o.d of the Roman pantheon as worshipped on the Capitoline Hill in Rome itself (the temple was built apparently on a site which encompa.s.sed the place of Jesus's crucifixion and burial, although this was probably coincidental). So Aelia Capitolina was not even intended to be a Greek city; it was a Roman colony.80 After the revolt of 66-70 no substantial Christian community returned to Aelia/Jerusalem until the fourth century. The Jewish-led Christ-followers regrouped in the town of Pella in the upper Jordan valley and maintained contact with other like-minded Jewish Christian communities in the Middle East. Their refusal to become a.s.sociated with the second great Jewish revolt of 132-5 cost them dear in terms of violence from their fellow Jews, who regarded them as traitors, but even when the crushing of the rebellion brought them relief, their future was one of gradual decline. No longer did they have the prestige of a centre in the sacred city of Jerusalem. The fourth-century Roman scholar Jerome came across surviving Jewish-Christian communities when he moved to live in the East, and he translated their 'Gospel according to the Hebrews' into Latin, but after that they faded from history. The Church of Paul, which had originally seemed the daughter of the Jerusalem Church, rejected the lineal heirs of the Jerusalem Church as imperfect Christians. Soon it regarded their ancient self-deprecating name of Ebionites ('the poor' in Hebrew: an echo of Jesus's blessing on the poor in the Sermon on the Mount) as the description of a heretical sect. Interestingly, the later Christian historian Eusebius claims that the Ebionites rejected the idea of the Virgin Birth of Jesus. That may well have been because, unlike Greek-speaking Christians, they knew that the notion was based on a Greek misreading of Isaiah's Hebrew prophecy (see p. 81).81 The catastrophe for Jerusalem had another important effect: it left the Jewish intelligentsia determined to make their peace with the Roman authorities, to preserve their religion and to give it a more coherent ident.i.ty. Like the Jewish Christ-followers, the surviving leaders of mainstream Judaism were forced to regroup away from the former capital and the Romans concentrated them on a former estate of the Herodian royal family at the town of Jamnia (Yavneh), near the coast.82 Here tradition says that this gathering was very influential in giving Judaism a unity of religious belief which it had not previously possessed; it hardly matters whether or not the story was really that simple, because the end result was indeed a much more clearly circ.u.mscribed ident.i.ty for Judaism. The Sadducee leadership was dead or discredited, and so it was the Pharisee group which shaped the future of this ancient monotheistic faith, producing an ever-expanding volume of commentary on the Tanakh and a body of regulations to give a sense of precise boundaries to Jews in their everyday life. That was compensation for the tragedy that they could no longer look to the Temple to provide ident.i.ty and purpose. Temple sacrifice ended for ever; what was left was the first religious tradition which could have taken the phrase which later became so important to Muslims and called itself the People of the Book. Instead of the Temple, the synagogues were now destined to carry the whole life and devotional activity of the Jewish people. Here tradition says that this gathering was very influential in giving Judaism a unity of religious belief which it had not previously possessed; it hardly matters whether or not the story was really that simple, because the end result was indeed a much more clearly circ.u.mscribed ident.i.ty for Judaism. The Sadducee leadership was dead or discredited, and so it was the Pharisee group which shaped the future of this ancient monotheistic faith, producing an ever-expanding volume of commentary on the Tanakh and a body of regulations to give a sense of precise boundaries to Jews in their everyday life. That was compensation for the tragedy that they could no longer look to the Temple to provide ident.i.ty and purpose. Temple sacrifice ended for ever; what was left was the first religious tradition which could have taken the phrase which later became so important to Muslims and called itself the People of the Book. Instead of the Temple, the synagogues were now destined to carry the whole life and devotional activity of the Jewish people.

It is interesting to see this development reflected in the Gospels. If any section of the Jewish nation had been responsible for the train of events leading up to the death of Jesus, it had been the Temple establishment of Sadducees, but the Pharisees come in for far more abuse recorded by the Gospel writers, often in the mouth of Jesus, despite the fact that Jesus seems to have resembled the Pharisees in much of his teaching and outlook. When the Gospels were compiled in the last decades of the first century, the descendants of the Pharisees, the leaders at Jamnia, were a living force, unlike the Sadducees, and many Christian communities had become strongly opposed to them. John's exalted Christ, echoing the exaltation of Christ in the writings of Paul, is emanc.i.p.ated from any concern for Jewish sensibilities about his ident.i.ty, and in John's picture of Jesus's life, 'the Jews' repeatedly and often menacingly prowl around the Jesus story as if they had no organic connection with the carpenter's son from Nazareth.83 The growing coherence in Judaism, the narrowing in variety of Jewish belief, meant that by the end of the first century CE a break between Christianity and Judaism was more and more likely: a symptom of that is John the Divine's readiness to replace the Temple with the Lamb Jesus.84 In many communities, the break probably occurred two or more decades earlier. Christ-followers had taken a decisive step away from Judaism by offering worship specifically to Jesus: there was no precedent in the tradition for this in Judaism, even though Jews had commonly recognized and celebrated the existence of supernatural beings like angels or the personified Wisdom of G.o.d. In many communities, the break probably occurred two or more decades earlier. Christ-followers had taken a decisive step away from Judaism by offering worship specifically to Jesus: there was no precedent in the tradition for this in Judaism, even though Jews had commonly recognized and celebrated the existence of supernatural beings like angels or the personified Wisdom of G.o.d.85 Moreover, at some very early stage, Christians celebrated their main worship on a different day: the day following the Jewish Sabbath. Many Christian cultures refer to it by its pagan Roman name, Sunday, but in many languages other than English it is called the Lord's Day, as it was the day on which the Lord had risen from the dead, according to the accounts in the Gospel Pa.s.sion narratives. Moreover, at some very early stage, Christians celebrated their main worship on a different day: the day following the Jewish Sabbath. Many Christian cultures refer to it by its pagan Roman name, Sunday, but in many languages other than English it is called the Lord's Day, as it was the day on which the Lord had risen from the dead, according to the accounts in the Gospel Pa.s.sion narratives.86 And central to worship for Christians was that meal in which they shared bread and wine. By the beginning of the second century at least, we find Ignatius, leader or 'bishop' in the Christian community of Antioch, calling this 'Eucharist'. And central to worship for Christians was that meal in which they shared bread and wine. By the beginning of the second century at least, we find Ignatius, leader or 'bishop' in the Christian community of Antioch, calling this 'Eucharist'.87 In everyday life, the Roman imperial authorities unwittingly encouraged the process of separation between Jews and Christians by imposing a punitive tax in place of the voluntary contributions which Jews had once paid to the Jerusalem Temple. For Roman bureaucrats, therefore, it became important to know who was and was not a Jew. Despite all the Jewish rebellions, tax-paying Jews continued to enjoy a status as an officially recognized religion (religio licita). In fact, despite the brutality with which Rome crushed various Jewish rebellions both in Palestine and beyond, it is remarkable that the Romans continued to regard Judaism with such respect and forbearance - most notably in adopting the Jewish division of the week into seven days rather than the traditional Roman eight, probably in the same century that they destroyed the Temple.88 Christians who finally broke their links with the parent culture would find no such recognition from the Roman government, although it also meant that they avoided the special tax, and they may have been anxious to avoid a.s.sociation with the 'guilt' of the Jews in the rebellion of 66-70 as well. Interestingly, such was Christians' sense of alienation from the Jewish world that they made no attempt to cling on to that privileged status. Christians who finally broke their links with the parent culture would find no such recognition from the Roman government, although it also meant that they avoided the special tax, and they may have been anxious to avoid a.s.sociation with the 'guilt' of the Jews in the rebellion of 66-70 as well. Interestingly, such was Christians' sense of alienation from the Jewish world that they made no attempt to cling on to that privileged status.89 Thanks to these developments, and to the energy of Paul's work in reaching out to the non-Jewish world, the movement which had started as a Jewish sect decisively shifted away from its Palestinian home, and all the sacred writings which form the New Testament were written in Greek. The Christ revealed in the letters of Paul, the Gospel of John and the Book of Revelation, much more than in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, was a cosmic ruler and his followers must conquer the whole world. For Paul, that meant setting his sights westwards across the Mediterranean Sea, to the capital of the empire of which he was a citizen, Rome. But very early on, other preachers of Christ looked east, to the capital of the Persian king at Ctesiphon in what is now Iraq, or even beyond, to the remote cultures with which the Mediterranean world traded, far to the east in India and maybe further. Paul had apparently met failure in his first mission to Arabia; these others did not, as we will see.

If the new religion had remained focused on the Middle East, there were obvious contenders among Roman imperial cities to replace the lost Jerusalem in its significance for the followers of Christ. There was Alexandria, capital of Egypt, home to the largest single Jewish community beyond Palestine itself, and there was also Antioch of Syria, the old Seleucid capital, still then the chief city in Rome's eastern imperial provinces. It was in fact in Antioch, according to the Book of Acts, that colonial Latin-speakers coined a word for Christ-followers (in no friendly spirit) - Christiani Christiani.90 This name 'Christian' has a double remoteness from its Jewish roots. Surprisingly in view of its origin in the Greek eastern Mediterranean and amid the Semitic culture of Syria, the word has a distinctively Latin rather than Greek form, and yet it also points to the Jewish founder not by his name, Joshua, but by that Greek translation of Messiah, This name 'Christian' has a double remoteness from its Jewish roots. Surprisingly in view of its origin in the Greek eastern Mediterranean and amid the Semitic culture of Syria, the word has a distinctively Latin rather than Greek form, and yet it also points to the Jewish founder not by his name, Joshua, but by that Greek translation of Messiah, Christos Christos. With its Latin development of a Greek word summing up a Jewish life-story, this very name 'Christian' embodies a violent century which had set Rome against Jerusalem, and the word has resonated down nearly two thousand years, during which Christianity in turn has set itself against its surviving parent, Judaism. 'Christian' embodies the two languages which became the vehicle for talking about Christianity within the Roman Empire: Latin and Greek, the respective languages of Western Catholicism and Greek Orthodoxy.

Rome owes its exceptional historic position in the Church to the Roman Empire - not merely the simple fact of the city's status as the imperial capital, resonant throughout the Mediterranean world and beyond, but the actions of first-century emperors: the sack of Jerusalem and two executions of key early Christian figures, the Apostles Peter and Paul, in Rome itself. When Jerusalem was wrecked by the Roman expeditionary force in 70 CE and the oldest and most prominent community of Christians was permanently dispersed, Peter and Paul had probably been dead for around half a decade, apparently victims of a persecution whipped up in Rome by the Emperor Nero. The Book of Acts says much about Paul's journey to Rome under arrest, and previously one of his most important letters had been written to Christians already living there. Scripture says nothing to link Peter and his death to Rome, and the suspicion does linger that the story of Peter's martyrdom there was a fiction based retrospectively on the undoubted death of Paul in the city. Nevertheless there are strong witnesses in tradition and archaeology that at least as early as the mid-second century the Christians of Rome were confidently a.s.serting that Peter was buried among their dead, in a cemetery across the Tiber beyond the western suburbs of Rome.91 The leadership of the Western Church went on to build on that memory or claimed memory over a thousand years, to create one of Christianity's most n.o.ble and dangerous visions, the Roman papacy. Their building was literal, in the ma.s.sive shape of the Basilica of St Peter above Peter's supposed grave site, a building which we will repeatedly encounter in Christian history. The city of Rome is now the centre of the largest branch of Christian faith, which styles itself the Catholic Church, but we should remember that this is an oddity: Rome was, after all, the capital of the empire which killed Christ. Without the tragedy of the destruction of Jerusalem, Rome might never have taken the unique place which it has held in the story of Western Christian faith. But no one would have realized this even two centuries after the death of Jesus Christ; and for centuries more there was as much likelihood of Christianity spreading as strongly east as west from the ruins of Jerusalem, to become the religion of Baghdad rather than of Rome. That is why the next stage of this story will take us east, rather than in the westward and northward directions so often chosen by the historians of Christianity.

4.

Boundaries Defined (50 CE-300)

SHAPING THE CHURCH.

According to legend, nearly three centuries after the Crucifixion a Roman emperor's mother called Helena headed an archaeological expedition to Jerusalem which, with a spectacular good fortune rare in modern archaeology, quickly achieved its precise goal: the rediscovery of the wooden cross on which Jesus had died (see pp. 193-4). Later archaeologists have been less easily rewarded in searches for material remains of the earliest Christians. Christianity had no specific ethnic or social base, and to begin with it was a movement too insignificant to leave artefacts or even much trace in literary sources outside those which Christians themselves created. So if we want to get a picture of who Christians were and what their lives were like, we are forced to meet them virtually exclusively through their doc.u.ments (see Plate 1). Indeed, one of the earliest known definitely Christian artefacts is a fragment of text bearing two little patches of John's Gospel; the style of its handwriting suggests a date in the second century CE, perhaps within decades of the first composition of the Gospel.1 Even then, we have to remember that the vast majority of early Christian texts have perished, and despite many new archaeological finds, there is a bias among those that survived towards texts which later forms of Christianity found acceptable. One expert on the period has recently estimated that around 85 per cent of second-century Christian texts of which existing sources make mention have gone missing, and that total itself can only represent a fraction of what there once was. Even then, we have to remember that the vast majority of early Christian texts have perished, and despite many new archaeological finds, there is a bias among those that survived towards texts which later forms of Christianity found acceptable. One expert on the period has recently estimated that around 85 per cent of second-century Christian texts of which existing sources make mention have gone missing, and that total itself can only represent a fraction of what there once was.2 The doc.u.ments which do survive conspire to hide their rooting in historic contexts; this makes them a gift to biblical literalists, who care little for history. The doc.u.ments which do survive conspire to hide their rooting in historic contexts; this makes them a gift to biblical literalists, who care little for history.

The series of letters generally agreed to come from Paul's own hand are characterized by very specific references to situations, mostly of conflict, and by references to named people, often including a little description to give us some sense of those who were important in their communities, at least in the eyes of Paul. So to the Christians in Rome, he sends greetings to a long list, including 'Epaenetus, who was the first convert in Asia for Christ . . . Mary, who has worked hard among you . . . Andronicus and Junias, my kinsmen and my fellow prisoners . . . Ampliatus, my beloved in the Lord . . .'3 The most striking feature of the correspondence is the locations of its recipients: in busy Graeco-Roman towns, commercial centres throughout the eastern half of the Mediterranean as far as Rome, and including people like Epaenetus, who had much experience of travel. By contrast, the story of Jesus told in the Gospels had been played out in a rural and largely non-Greek environment, where villages within an easy day's journey of each other could naively be described by the writers as cities and where only the denouement of the story took place in a real city, Jerusalem. Now Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, divided up the world he perceived around him into city, sea and wilderness (II Corinthians 11.26), and despite his pride in his Jewish roots, he unselfconsciously divided the people of that world into Greeks and barbarians (Romans 1.14). The most striking feature of the correspondence is the locations of its recipients: in busy Graeco-Roman towns, commercial centres throughout the eastern half of the Mediterranean as far as Rome, and including people like Epaenetus, who had much experience of travel. By contrast, the story of Jesus told in the Gospels had been played out in a rural and largely non-Greek environment, where villages within an easy day's journey of each other could naively be described by the writers as cities and where only the denouement of the story took place in a real city, Jerusalem. Now Paul, the Apostle of the Gentiles, divided up the world he perceived around him into city, sea and wilderness (II Corinthians 11.26), and despite his pride in his Jewish roots, he unselfconsciously divided the people of that world into Greeks and barbarians (Romans 1.14).

One significant and at first sight puzzling peculiarity actually emphasizes Paul's break with Jesus's first followers in Palestine. His letters have a preoccupation with personal means of support, which he links directly to one of his few quotations of the Lord Jesus. Characteristically, he takes a contrary line to the Lord. Jesus had said that 'those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel': that is, they deserve support from others.4 Paul emphasizes that he has not done this: he tells us that he has supported himself, although in what seems to be an attempt to face down criticism, he proclaims his contradiction of Jesus's practice as a privilege renounced rather than an obligation spurned. He makes no bones about saying 'keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition Paul emphasizes that he has not done this: he tells us that he has supported himself, although in what seems to be an attempt to face down criticism, he proclaims his contradiction of Jesus's practice as a privilege renounced rather than an obligation spurned. He makes no bones about saying 'keep away from any brother who is living in idleness and not in accord with the tradition that you received from us that you received from us'. So much for Jesus and his wandering Twelve. Paul was on the side of busy people who valued hard work and took a pride in the reward that they got from it: tent-makers of the world, unite.5 Christianity had become a religion for urban commercial centres, for speakers of common Greek who might see the whole Mediterranean as their home and might well have moved around it a good deal - Paul's restless journeyings are unlikely to have been unique. The communities a.s.sociated with him included such figures as Gaius, wealthy enough to be 'host to me and the whole Church', or Erastus, a man prominent as 'the city treasurer' in the great city of Corinth. Christianity had become a religion for urban commercial centres, for speakers of common Greek who might see the whole Mediterranean as their home and might well have moved around it a good deal - Paul's restless journeyings are unlikely to have been unique. The communities a.s.sociated with him included such figures as Gaius, wealthy enough to be 'host to me and the whole Church', or Erastus, a man prominent as 'the city treasurer' in the great city of Corinth.6 Although there is not much sign that Christianity had yet made inroads on 'old money' - the aristocratic elites of Mediterranean society - it was already gathering people across a wide spectrum of social status, and it is not surprising that differences of wealth and public esteem produced tensions and arguments. Although there is not much sign that Christianity had yet made inroads on 'old money' - the aristocratic elites of Mediterranean society - it was already gathering people across a wide spectrum of social status, and it is not surprising that differences of wealth and public esteem produced tensions and arguments.

Two examples involve food, but have much wider implications. The earliest specific description of Christianity's later central ritual meal, the taking of bread and wine in the Eucharist, is found in Paul's writings to the Corinthians, because this meal of unity had caused trouble there. Some had been withdrawing from the general congregation in order to eat in a separate group and Paul made it clear that it was the wealthy who were at fault. He emphasized that all must eat together.7 That tension can be laid alongside another concern already noted (see p. 106): some in the congregation at Corinth worried about banqueting with non-Christian friends who might offer them food offered to idols. Paul's proposed compromise solution allowed such Christians to maintain their private social links with the non-Christian elites of the city, while keeping public solidarity with less affluent Christians because they had avoided public contact with civic ritual. That tension can be laid alongside another concern already noted (see p. 106): some in the congregation at Corinth worried about banqueting with non-Christian friends who might offer them food offered to idols. Paul's proposed compromise solution allowed such Christians to maintain their private social links with the non-Christian elites of the city, while keeping public solidarity with less affluent Christians because they had avoided public contact with civic ritual.8 This set a significant pattern for the future: Christianity was not usually going to make a radical challenge to existing social distinctions. The reason was that Paul and his followers a.s.sumed that the world was going to come to an end soon and so there was not much point in trying to improve it by radical action. That att.i.tude has recurred among some of the apocalyptically minded in later ages, although others have drawn precisely the opposite conclusion. Nevertheless, while sharing Jesus's belief in the imminent end, Paul drew very different conclusions from that prospect: in present conditions, 'every one should remain in the state in which he was called'.9 He made notably little reference in his letters to the 'kingdom of G.o.d', that concept of a radical turn to world history which had meant so much to Jesus and had accompanied his challenge to so many existing social conventions. Paul was a citizen of the Roman Empire, here and now, emphasizing without Jesus's witty ambiguity that everyone must 'be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from G.o.d, and those that exist have been inst.i.tuted by G.o.d.' His command to obedience had a great future in Christian conversations with the powerful. He made notably little reference in his letters to the 'kingdom of G.o.d', that concept of a radical turn to world history which had meant so much to Jesus and had accompanied his challenge to so many existing social conventions. Paul was a citizen of the Roman Empire, here and now, emphasizing without Jesus's witty ambiguity that everyone must 'be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from G.o.d, and those that exist have been inst.i.tuted by G.o.d.' His command to obedience had a great future in Christian conversations with the powerful.10 Paul's solutions to the two food problems preserved a delicate balance between equality in the sight of G.o.d and inequality in the sight of humanity. So in his famous declaration to the Galatians, equality within the Church remained an equality in spiritual status, looking forward to eternal life: 'neither Jew nor Greek . . . neither slave nor free . . . neither male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ' - but not in the everyday life of the present world.11 Certainly he was aware that in the complex religious make-up of the eastern Mediterranean, there were cults which held ritual meals like the Christian Eucharist, and he was determined that Christian groups celebrating their Eucharist should not be mistaken for them. Hence his insistence that there should be no link between the 'cup of the Lord and the cup of demons', the 'table of the Lord and the table of demons'. Certainly he was aware that in the complex religious make-up of the eastern Mediterranean, there were cults which held ritual meals like the Christian Eucharist, and he was determined that Christian groups celebrating their Eucharist should not be mistaken for them. Hence his insistence that there should be no link between the 'cup of the Lord and the cup of demons', the 'table of the Lord and the table of demons'.12 The balance he struck represented a tension between a wish to keep the gatherings of Christians exclusive and a wish to keep the new religion's frontiers open in order to make more converts. This undercurrent of instability remained through the centuries during which the Church was identified with all society and has never wholly disappeared from Christian consciousness. The balance he struck represented a tension between a wish to keep the gatherings of Christians exclusive and a wish to keep the new religion's frontiers open in order to make more converts. This undercurrent of instability remained through the centuries during which the Church was identified with all society and has never wholly disappeared from Christian consciousness.

Paul's acceptance of the secular status quo had especial implications for two groups whose liberation has over the last quarter-millennium sparked conflict worldwide, but especially within Western Christianity: slaves and women. One short letter of Paul from a Roman prison to a fellow Christian called Philemon is undoubtedly genuine, since it contains no useful discussion of doctrine and can only have been preserved for its biographical information about the Apostle. It centres on the future of Onesimus, a slave to Philemon. He had recently been serving Paul in imprisonment and the letter contains a none-too-subtle hint that Paul would appreciate continuing to enjoy the benefit of Onesimus's service. There is no suggestion that he should be freed, only that now he could be 'more than a slave' to Philemon; and certainly there is no question of consulting Onesimus about his own wishes. The Epistle to Philemon is a Christian foundation doc.u.ment in the justification of slavery.13 Slavery was, after all, an indispensable inst.i.tution in ancient society. A Christian writer from a generation later than Paul, who bore the name of Jesus's disciple Peter but who is unlikely to have been the same man, wrote a miniature treatise which became one of the epistles accepted into the New Testament. It told house-slaves to compare their sufferings to the unjust sufferings of Christ, in order that they should bear injustice as Christ had done. That did not say much about the writer's expectations that Christian slave owners would be better than any others, and it followed a strong command to 'be subject to every human inst.i.tution'. 14 14 In the early second century, when the Church's leadership was beginning to be concentrated in the hands of single individuals styled bishops (see pp. 130-37), Bishop Ignatius of Antioch observed in a letter to his fellow bishop Polycarp of Smyrna that slaves should not take advantage of their membership in the Christian community, but live as better slaves, now to the glory of G.o.d - and his opinion was that it would be inappropriate to use church funds to help slaves buy their freedom. By the fourth century, Christian writers like Bishop Ambrose of Milan or Bishop Augustine of Hippo were providing even more robust defences of the idea of slavery than non-Christian philosophers had done before them - 'the lower the station in life, the more exalted the virtue', was Ambrose's rather unctuous opinion. In the early second century, when the Church's leadership was beginning to be concentrated in the hands of single individuals styled bishops (see pp. 130-37), Bishop Ignatius of Antioch observed in a letter to his fellow bishop Polycarp of Smyrna that slaves should not take advantage of their membership in the Christian community, but live as better slaves, now to the glory of G.o.d - and his opinion was that it would be inappropriate to use church funds to help slaves buy their freedom. By the fourth century, Christian writers like Bishop Ambrose of Milan or Bishop Augustine of Hippo were providing even more robust defences of the idea of slavery than non-Christian philosophers had done before them - 'the lower the station in life, the more exalted the virtue', was Ambrose's rather unctuous opinion.15 If the coming of Christianity thus made little significant difference to the position of slaves, there are plenty of signs that Christians began by giving women a newly active role and official functions in Church life, then gradually moved to a more conventional subordination to male authority.16 The Gospel narratives give a prominence to women in the Jesus movement unusual in ancient society; this culminates in the extraordinary part which they play in Matthew's, Mark's and John's accounts of the human discovery of the Resurrection. All three evangelists make women the first witnesses to the empty tomb and resurrection of Jesus; this is despite the fact that in Jewish Law women could not be considered as valid witnesses. The most prominent named woman, first in all three accounts, is Mary Magdalene ('from Magdala' in Galilee). She was a close a.s.sociate of Jesus in his public ministry and has continued to arouse a set of variously motivated fascinations among Christians throughout the ages. Some overexcited modern commentators and mediocre novelists have even elevated her (on no good ancient evidence) to the status of Jesus's wife. The Gospel narratives give a prominence to women in the Jesus movement unusual in ancient society; this culminates in the extraordinary part which they play in Matthew's, Mark's and John's accounts of the human discovery of the Resurrection. All three evangelists make women the first witnesses to the empty tomb and resurrection of Jesus; this is despite the fact that in Jewish Law women could not be considered as valid witnesses. The most prominent named woman, first in all three accounts, is Mary Magdalene ('from Magdala' in Galilee). She was a close a.s.sociate of Jesus in his public ministry and has continued to arouse a set of variously motivated fascinations among Christians throughout the ages. Some overexcited modern commentators and mediocre novelists have even elevated her (on no good ancient evidence) to the status of Jesus's wife.

The Gospels' threefold affirmation of Mary Magdalene's Resurrection experience can account for a good deal of the subsequent interest in her, but it is also apparent that she became a symbol of resistance to the way in which the authority structures of the Church began to crystallize exclusively in the hands of men. Feminist theologians have naturally found this of great interest, but it is worth noting that elsewhere the status of Mary Magdalene is repeatedly shown as being supported by some men against other men. The Gospel of Thomas, which of all such Gospel pastiches beyond the New Testament most resembles the four 'mainstream' Gospels in its content and its likely dating to the late first century, describes a confrontation between Mary Magdalene and the Apostle Peter, in which Jesus intervenes on her behalf to reproach Peter. This theme of arguments between the Magdalene and Peter occurs elsewhere. The Gospel of Mary, for instance, is a 'gnostic' work probably of the second century and represents a fairly even-tempered attempt at conversation with non-gnostic Christians. Here, Jesus's disciple Levi is presented as exclaiming to Peter, 'if the Saviour made her worthy, who are you then to reject her? Certainly the Saviour knows her very well. That is why he loved her more than us.'17 Paul is apparently inconsistent about the status of women. In his seven authentic letters, various women are named as office holders: amid the large number of people whom he lists as sending greetings to the Romans are Phoebe the deacon (administrative officer or a.s.sistant) in the Church of Cenchreae (a port near Corinth), Prisca, a 'fellow worker' and Tryphaena and Tryphosa, 'workers in the Lord' - descriptions also applied to men in the same pa.s.sage. Most strikingly, there is Junia, a female 'apostle', so described alongside another 'apostle' with a male name - this was considered such an appalling anomaly by many later readers of Romans that Junia's name was frequently changed to a male form in the recopying of ma.n.u.scripts, or simply regarded without any justification as a man's name. Early biblical commentators, given a strong lead by the great fourth-century preaching Bishop of Constantinople John Chrysostom, were honourably prepared to acknowledge the surprising femininity of Junia, but then there was a sudden turn in the writings of Giles of Rome in the thirteenth century, which was only rectified during the twentieth century. Likewise, historians have tended to view Phoebe's status as that of a 'deaconess'; yet this is probably reading back from the third and fourth centuries, when female deacons were restricted to roles necessarily reserved for women, like looking after scantily clad female candidates in services of baptism. First- and second-century Christians may not have made such a distinction between male and female deacons or the part that either played in the life of the Church.18 While Paul thus provides evidence about the roles that women were playing in positions of authority in Christian communities, his list of witnesses to Resurrection appearances significantly contrasts with that of three Gospels, by not including any women at all. He also insists in his first letter to the Corinthians on a hierarchical scheme in which G.o.d is the head of Christ, Christ the head of men and a husband the head of his wife: quite a contrast to his proclamation of Christian equality for all. That leads to a pa.s.sage notable for its confusion of argument, in which he tells women to cover their heads when prophesying, yet elsewhere when addressing the same community in Corinth, he forbids women to speak in worship at all.19 This was not a stable position and a second generation was bound to move to clarify it. Paul's admirers evidently decided to place increasing emphasis on his hierarchical view of Christian relationships and on his awareness of the scrutiny of Christian communities by non-Christians. This was not a stable position and a second generation was bound to move to clarify it. Paul's admirers evidently decided to place increasing emphasis on his hierarchical view of Christian relationships and on his awareness of the scrutiny of Christian communities by non-Christians.

Perhaps this was not surprising as hopes of Christ's imminent return began to fade in the later first century and Christians began to realize that they must create structures which might have to last for a generation or more amid a world of non-believers. The change is visible in a series of further epistles which, although they a.s.sume the name of Paul, display a distinctive vocabulary and a mechanically intensive reuse of phrases from his writings. They should be thought of as commentaries on or tributes to his impact and teaching. Two which are now given addresses to Churches in Colossae and Ephesus are very closely related: Ephesians contains a patchwork of words and phrases from Colossians and from authentic letters of Paul, to the extent that it seems to be a devout attempt to provide a digest of Paul's message.20 Three other epistles, supposedly addressed to Paul's close a.s.sociates Timothy and t.i.tus, seem to be circular letters to Church communities in Paul's tradition, hence their common collective designation as the 'Pastoral Epistles'. Three other epistles, supposedly addressed to Paul's close a.s.sociates Timothy and t.i.tus, seem to be circular letters to Church communities in Paul's tradition, hence their common collective designation as the 'Pastoral Epistles'.

What is striking in this literature is the way in which the idea that the end is at hand, so prominent in Paul's letters, has faded from view. The author of Ephesians is prepared to talk about 'the coming ages', which seems to mean a long time on this earth.21 Nowhere is this shift more perceptible than in one feature of these doc.u.ments, also to be found in the first of the two epistles attributed to Peter, which also takes many cues from Ephesians: sets of rules for conducting a human household, which in the sixteenth century Martin Luther styled Nowhere is this shift more perceptible than in one feature of these doc.u.ments, also to be found in the first of the two epistles attributed to Peter, which also takes many cues from Ephesians: sets of rules for conducting a human household, which in the sixteenth century Martin Luther styled Haustafeln Haustafeln, 'tables of household duties'. What is particularly remarkable about the Haustafeln Haustafeln is that they include commands to children 'that they may live long in the land': the Church must now consider the next generation and its earthly future. is that they include commands to children 'that they may live long in the land': the Church must now consider the next generation and its earthly future.22 Indeed, the writer to Timothy tells women that their salvation comes from having children (not a text to find favour with countless generations of women in the monastic life in later centuries). Indeed, the writer to Timothy tells women that their salvation comes from having children (not a text to find favour with countless generations of women in the monastic life in later centuries).23 These lists repeat the commonplace h.e.l.lenistic wisdom of their day, but they give it a gloss from Paul's argument that the relationship of husband to wife is like Christ's relationship to his Church: '[T]he husband is head of the wife as Christ is head of the Church, his body, and is himself its Saviour.' These lists repeat the commonplace h.e.l.lenistic wisdom of their day, but they give it a gloss from Paul's argument that the relationship of husband to wife is like Christ's relationship to his Church: '[T]he husband is head of the wife as Christ is head of the Church, his body, and is himself its Saviour.'24 Now the various gradations of status and authority to be found in the world are to shape the way in which Christians conceive their faith. And there is an extra consideration, connected to the Pastoral Epistles' insistence that Church leaders must be beyond reproach outside the community as well as inside it. Now the various gradations of status and authority to be found in the world are to shape the way in which Christians conceive their faith. And there is an extra consideration, connected to the Pastoral Epistles' insistence that Church leaders must be beyond reproach outside the community as well as inside it.25 The Church is worried about its public image and concerned to show that it is not a subversive organization threatening the well-being of society, 'that the word of G.o.d may not be discredited'. The Church is worried about its public image and concerned to show that it is not a subversive organization threatening the well-being of society, 'that the word of G.o.d may not be discredited'.26 As we have seen (see pp. 103-5), the only dissident voice against this frank quest for respectability is to be found in that very unusual entrant into the Christian New Testament, the Book of Revelation. As we have seen (see pp. 103-5), the only dissident voice against this frank quest for respectability is to be found in that very unusual entrant into the Christian New Testament, the Book of Revelation.

In just two respects are the first Christians recorded as having been consciously different from their neighbours. First, they were much more rigorous about matters of s.e.x than the prevailing att.i.tudes in the Roman Empire; they did not forget their founder's fierce disapproval of divorce. Although with Paul's encouragement Christians did move to make some exceptions to Jesus's absolute ban (see pp. 90-91), their concerns to restrict such exceptions are in sharp contrast to the relative ease with which either party in a non-Christian Roman marriage could declare the relationship to be at an end. Likewise, abortion and the abandonment of unwanted children were accepted as regrettable necessities in Roman society, but, like the Jews before them, Christians were insistent that these practices were completely unacceptable. Even those Christian writers who were constructing arguments to show how much Christians fitted into normal society made no effort to hide this deliberate difference. 27 27 Paul's contribution was once more ambiguous. A celibate himself, he was of the opinion that marriage was something of a concession to human frailty, to save from fornication those who could not be continent, so it was better to marry than to burn with l.u.s.t. Many Christian commentators, mostly fellow celibates, later warmed to this joyless theme. Yet in the same pa.s.sage Paul said something more positive: that both husband and wife have mutually conceded each other power over each other's bodies. This gives a positive motive for Christian counter-cultural opposition to divorce, but it is also striking in its affirmation of mutuality in marriage. That message has struggled to be heard through most of Christian history. Paul's contribution was once more ambiguous. A celibate himself, he was of the opinion that marriage was something of a concession to human frailty, to save from fornication those who could not be continent, so it was better to marry than to burn with l.u.s.t. Many Christian commentators, mostly fellow celibates, later warmed to this joyless theme. Yet in the same pa.s.sage Paul said something more positive: that both husband and wife have mutually conceded each other power over each other's bodies. This gives a positive motive for Christian counter-cultural opposition to divorce, but it is also striking in its affirmation of mutuality in marriage. That message has struggled to be heard through most of Christian history.28 The other challenge to the norms of imperial society might seem to contradict even more strongly everything that we have said about Christian acceptance of the existing social order. In the Book of Acts there is an apparently circ.u.mstantial account of the Jerusalem congregation selling all the private property that its members owned in order to create a common fund for the community.29 However, this is unlikely to have happened. The story is probably a creation of the writer's, designed to ill.u.s.trate the theological point that this community was the New Israel; in the old Israel, there had supposedly been a system of 'Jubilee', a year in which all land should go back to the family to which it had originally belonged and during which all slaves should be released. However, this is unlikely to have happened. The story is probably a creation of the writer's, designed to ill.u.s.trate the theological point that this community was the New Israel; in the old Israel, there had supposedly been a system of 'Jubilee', a year in which all land should go back to the family to which it had originally belonged and during which all slaves should be released.30 Probably even that original idea had never been implemented, simply remaining a pious hope, but the writer of Acts did not know that and he was making the Jerusalem Church re-enact the Jubilee of G.o.d's chosen people. Even if one decides to believe that the attempt was actually made (and it is just possible that it was), the story is frank in its admission that the scheme did not work, and two people who cheated the system were struck dead for their disobedience. Christian communism thereafter lapsed for nearly three centuries until the new counter-cultural impulse of monasticism appeared, in very different circ.u.mstances. Probably even that original idea had never been implemented, simply remaining a pious hope, but the writer of Acts did not know that and he was making the Jerusalem Church re-enact the Jubilee of G.o.d's chosen people. Even if one decides to believe that the attempt was actually made (and it is just possible that it was), the story is frank in its admission that the scheme did not work, and two people who cheated the system were struck dead for their disobedience. Christian communism thereafter lapsed for nearly three centuries until the new counter-cultural impulse of monasticism appeared, in very different circ.u.mstances.

One has always to remember that throughout the New Testament we are hearing one side of an argument. When the writer to Timothy insists with irritating fussiness that 'I permit no woman to teach or to have authority over men; she is to keep silent', we can be sure that there were women doing precisely the opposite, who were probably not slow in a.s.serting their own point of view.31 But their voices are lost, or concealed in texts modified much later. Up to the end of the first century, it is virtually impossible to get any perspective on the first Christian Churches other than that of writings contained in the New Testament, however much we would like to have a clearer picture of why and how conversions took place. There is a silence of about six crucial decades, during which so many different spirals of development would have been taking place away from the teachings of the Messiah, who had apparently left no written record. A handful of Christian writings can be dated to around the time of the latest writings now contained in the Christian New Testament, at the beginning of the second century, and these give us glimpses of communities whose priorities were not those of the Churches which had known Paul. For instance, one very early book about church life and organization called the But their voices are lost, or concealed in texts modified much later. Up to the end of the first century, it is virtually impossible to get any perspective on the first Christian Churches other than that of writings contained in the New Testament, however much we would like to have a clearer picture of why and how conversions took place. There is a silence of about six crucial decades, during which so many different spirals of development would have been taking place away from the teachings of the Messiah, who had apparently left no written record. A handful of Christian writings can be dated to around the time of the latest writings now contained in the Christian New Testament, at the beginning of the second century, and these give us glimpses of communities whose priorities were not those of the Churches which had known Paul. For instance, one very early book about church life and organization called the Didache Didache ('Teaching') tells us a good deal about the worship used in the community whose life the writer was seeking to regulate, perhaps some time at the turn of the first and second centuries. It is much closer both to earlier Jewish prayers and to forms to be found in later Jewish liturgy than is perceptible in other early Christian liturgies. ('Teaching') tells us a good deal about the worship used in the community whose life the writer was seeking to regulate, perhaps some time at the turn of the first and second centuries. It is much closer both to earlier Jewish prayers and to forms to be found in later Jewish liturgy than is perceptible in other early Christian liturgies.32 And for all Paul's hatred of idleness, he would have been infuriated by the And for all Paul's hatred of idleness, he would have been infuriated by the Didache Didache's a.s.sertion that it is necessary for us to work to ransom our sins.33 Even in the co