REL E 642 Military Ministry 2Lesson 1-Read Chapters 1,3,4,5-Edwards, History of Preaching

Lesson Plan: Week 1 TH—Review Edward History of Preaching Chapter 1, 3, 4, 5

Task: The History of Preaching Chapters 1, 3, 4, 5

Condition: Classroom environment

Standard: Students will understand the basic historical events that influenced the development of preaching.

Overview: This section will look at the antecedents to preaching through individuals such as Origen, The Cappadocian Fathers, Chrysostom, and other. It will focus on the events that surrounded these individuals and how they developed and influenced the art of preaching. It will also examine the context (religiously/historically) surrounding these men (preachers).

Author: Vance P. Theodore

Audience: LDS Chaplain Candidates

Time: 1 hours

Method: (see lecture notes w/slides)

This lesson is designed to encourage group participation and interaction. The instructor should use their teaching skills to draw on the experiences of the group by using effective questioning techniques. The instructor should show each slide and generate discussion based on the notes listed on the slide and the narrative content of the lesson plan. The discussion time depends on the instructor and student interest.

Materials

Projector, Power Point SlidesOverview of Instruction

Slide 2: Show the cities where communities of Christianity thrived.

Slides. 3: The Relationship of the Roman Empire w/ Christianity: Ancient Roman Religion

Before we can understand the individuals who influenced and developed preaching, we need to understand the relationship of the Roman Empire w/Christanity

The Roman Empire’s relationship with the early church was precarious at best, with this new Christian faith came a professed allegiance to Jesus Christ. This allegiance to Christ was to have a

2

significant effect on the early Christian church especially concerning its stance against bearing allegiance to the Roman Emperor and it bouts with persecution and martyrdom.1

However, before digesting the concept of early Christianity and persecution an understanding of ancient Rome’s religion is important to understand, specifically how religion was practiced in the Roman Empire.

In comprehending Roman religion, religion in Rome was not understood in a monotheistic manner. For the Rome, religion was not a matter of belief, but one of practice, procedures or a series of formulas to request divine assistance. Romans lived their lives in fear of local hazards (storms) or as the result of local customs or folklore. Religion was not a question of one’s beliefs but rather how the gods would help them, assist them against the occult powers or prevent possible hazards such as draught, famine, or other calamities.2

Normally, religion was separated in two fields when referring to the gods: public and private -private, in the home, where the household gods looked after the family, the fields, and even various tools which had their own demons, and public; where the state had its series of gods. Turcan explained it as “every instant of the domestic day was governed by a ritual…”, that is, the gods were involved in the daily activities of the Roman citizen. (Turcan 2000, 15)

The Roman’s religious beliefs were from the cradle to the grave. Life was highly ritualistic. There were gods for birth, gods for nourishment of children, and gods for the various developmental ages of the individual from birth to death.3

On a broader scale, there were the public gods like Jupiter and Mars. This was the more formal aspect of religious rites. Temples were built in which priests paid homage through rituals on behalf of the Roman Empire. For example in order to be victorious in war new temples would be built to honor the gods. Rome in its conquest of other territories would assimilate their gods into their ritualistic rites. The generals would invoke the name of a god who would help them in battle.4 Rome’s conquest of territories and cultures only reinforced the idea that the gods were assisting them.

Therefore the object of worship was to gain the favor of the gods. The Roman citizen believed that by gaining such favor through rituals, sacrifices, and rites that this would lead to prosperity for family, friends, and the state. Emperors understood the political important of being aligned with the gods. For example Caesar took the name of Chief priest in 46 BC, and Augustus (12 BC) used the appearance of Haley’s comet to announce that he was a son of a god.5

1 Justo L. Gonzales, Church History: An Essential Guide (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996), 27.

2 Robert Turcan, The Gods of Ancient Rome (New York: Routledge, 2000), 2.3

Turcan, 18.4

Turcan, 106.5

For a discussion see PBS, “The Roman Empire in the 1st Century,” PBS Library. http://www.pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/religion.html. (accessed July 29, 2011).

3

Religion was consequently a very important aspect in daily lives of the Roman citizen. And though the Roman Empire would assimilate gods from other religions into their frame of religious reference, the early Christians did not bow down to their gods. The monotheistic God of the Christians was not assimilated into the gods of the Romans due to the concept of allegiance which the Christian’s would not profess.

This monotheistic belief was to lead to conflicts with the state in which the early Christians would determine what the social, cultural and political relationship of this new religion would have with the Empire.6 These conflicts would produce martyrs and apologists which would explain and give credence (heroes) to the Christian faith and ultimately bring hope and the message of eternal life to the Empire. (Gonzalez 1996; Noll 2000)

Show class 10 minute video clip describing ancient religion of the Roman Empire. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upfggzy00JE7

Slide 3. The Relationship of the Roman Empire w/ Christianity: Persecution and Martyrdom

Christianity spread rapidly in the Roman Empire, and its influence was not without problems. The Emperor Nero (54-64 AD) first began to persecute the Christians followed by Domitian in 81-96 AD.8 During Nero’s time Rome was put to fire, some say it was to divert suspicion from him-self. He accused the Christians of the deed and had many put to death in the coliseum.

What caused these persecutions? Why were Christians not tolerated? What grounds did the Roman Empire have which permitted them to attack a small religious sect? Perhaps, it was to use them as scapegoats for political reasons. Some sources say it had to do with the pagan charges against Christians as cannibals, that is, partaking of the blood and body of Christ in their sacraments performed in secret meetings. Many pagans were angered at the Christians because they refused to make sacrifices to their gods. They were charged with not being loyal to Rome.9 They also declined to acknowledge the emperor as the divine son of god. Many early Christians were put to death if they failed to swear allegiance to the emperor. Christians were asked to deny their faith or face death. These acts and other charges that were laid against the early Christians had much to do with Christian persecutions and for the martyrdoms that took place in the early church.10

6 Gonzalez, 12.7

YouTube, “Ancient Roman Religion,” YouTube Web site, video file, 10:00, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upfggzy00JE (accessed July 29, 2011).8

Gonzalez, 26.9

This was a common accusation made against the early Christians, i.e., atheism. Christians refused to offer sacrifices or to pay tribute to pagan idols or state statues. They tended to stay away from pagan festivals, and temple rites and sacrifices. They were accused of being atheists because they did not honor the Roman gods or respect the state religion.10

For a discussion of the early Christian martyrs see John Foxe, Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, ed. William Byron Forbush (Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004), 1-42.

4

With this in mind, second century church leaders like Polycarp and St. Justin Martyr (deacon) were put to death for their beliefs. Polycarp, the bishop of Smyrna (163) was urged by the Roman officials to “Swear, and I will release thee-Reproach Christ”. Polycarp answered with “Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He never once wronged me: how then shall I blaspheme my King, Who hath saved me?” 11 He refused and was burnt at the stake.

St. Justin Martyr (103-165), philosopher and scholar, also fell to martyrdom. An early Christian writer, converted to Christianity; he used his knowledge as a scholar and philosopher to defend the faith from false accusations. When Christians were accused of being atheists, he responded with:

Thus are we even called atheists. We do proclaim ourselves atheists regards those whom you call gods, but not with respect to the Most True God, who is alien to all evil and is the Father of justice, temperance, and the other virtues. We revere and worship Him and the Son who came forth from Him and taught us these things, and also the legion of good angles that attend Him and reflect His virtues, and the Prophetic Spirit, and we pay homage to them in reason and truth, and pass His doctrine on intact to everyone who wishes to learn it.12

Justin also took offense of the pagan worship of gods he stated:

We do not worship with many sacrifices and floral offerings the things men have made, set in temples, and called gods. We know that they are inanimate and lifeless and have not the form of God (for we do not think that God has that form which some say the reproduce in order to give honor to Him)-but have the names and shapes of those evil demons who have appeared {to men}. Why should we tell you, who already know, into what different shapes the workmen fashion their material, by carving, cutting, molding, and hammering? From vessels destined for vile purpose, by merely changing their shape and by skillfully giving them a new form, they often make what they call gods. Thus, His name is applied to corruptible things that need constant care. This, we think is not only stupid but also disrespectful to God, who is of ineffable glory and form.13

His conversion to Christianity is to be admired in his own words, he stated that he had admired the heroism and steadfastness of the Christians that were put to death, and he writes “when I heard the Christians misrepresented and watched them stand fearless in the face of death, I realized that they could not possibly live in sinful pleasure.”14

11

Fox, 14.12

Saint Justin Martyr, First Apology, ed. Thomas B. Falls (Washington, D. C.: Catholic University Press, 1965), 38-39.

13

Saint Justin Martyr, 41.14

St Justin Martyr, 12.

5

Persecutions and martyrdoms were to plague the ancient church well into the 4th century, however; with a new Roman emperor in Constantine the beginnings of a Christian Empire were soon to be established. Also, it is important to be aware that although there are not many early Christian writings from the ancient church to verify rites and ordinances, the early church did celebrate the resurrection of Christ, established rites of communion/baptism, and worshipped together on the Sabbath.15

The early Christians spread their faith slowly throughout the Mediterranean. Its influence will soon have an impact on the Roman Empire. Its commission to make disciples of all nations will slowly come to fruition.16

Slides Quickly Go Through Slides. Probably no other controversy in the early Christian church concerning the nature of God was more problematic than in developing doctrine concerning the Trinity. The early church fathers defined God according to their understanding, and their definition of the Godhead was to provide considerable fuel for debate for almost 150 years.17

This debate was to have a divisive and historical consequences for the early church which produced four councils developed to explain and to define the doctrine of the Trinity. Consequently, the four councils: The First Council of Nicaea (AD 325 ), The Council of Constantinople (AD 381), The Council of Ephesus (AD 431), and finally The Council of Chalcedon (AD 451) spelled out the parameters from which the Trinity would be understood and defined for Christianity.18

During the 1st and beginnings of the second century there appeared to be a gap in the literature concerning the early Christian church, that is, there was a paucity of early church writings. Though by the year 200, New Testament as a canon was used as authoritative scripture.19 As Christianity began to develop at the end of the second and at the beginning of the third century some believed that the hellenization of the Christian church was beginning to become problematic. Hellenization means being influenced by the Greek culture.

Early church fathers like Origen, Clement of Alexandria, and Augustine, trained in neo-platonism, focused on the use of neo-platonic techniques to develop and interpret Christian doctrine.20 Clement argued that “Perchance, too, philosophy was given to the Greeks directly 15 Gonzalez, 30-32.16 Noll, 11-12.

17 Mark A. Noll, Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000), 48.

18 Noll, 81.19

Noll, 36.20

6

and primarily, till the Lord should call the Greeks. For this was a schoolmaster to bring “the Hellenic mind,” as the law, the Hebrews, ‘to Christ.’”21 This suggested that philosophy and reason were tools to interpret the scriptures; however, they professed that it did not supersede the word, that is, revelation.

We can see how the early church fathers trained in neo-platonism like Origen, Clement, and Athanasius used philosophy as a methodology providing a framework from which to understand and explain scripture. However, other early fathers like Tertullian did not believe in using the stoic’s techniques when talking about the nature of God. Though to be fair to neo-platonism, Tertullian when he attacks the heretics like Marcion and the Gnostic barrows from Seneca when talking about the existence of God.22 However, he disagreed with Clement and argued that revelation was an important concept in and of itself not to be interpreted by a neo-platonic framework. He stated:

What indeed has Athens to do with Jerusalem? What concord is here between the Academy and the Church? What between heretics and Christians? Our instruction comes form the “porch of Solomon, who … taught that the Lord should be sought in simplicity of heart. Away with all attempts to produce a mottled Christianity of Stoic, Platonic, and dialectic composition! We want no curious disputation after possessing Christ Jesus, no inquisition after enjoying the gospel! With our faith, we desire no further belief. For this is our palmary faith, that there is nothing which we ought to believe besides.”23

During this time period, it appears that there were not clearly defined doctrines. The early church fathers seemed to be struggling with developing doctrine that provided a standard from which the church could be defined. In this environment, rich with discussion and dissention, arose the concept and argument concerning the nature of the Godhead or the Trinity.24

Embroiled in this controversy were two individuals Arius (ca. 260-336) and Athanasius of Alexander (ca. 300-373). Arius was a presbyter of the church in Alexandria. His controversy with the Bishop of Alexandria (Alexander) stemmed from his belief that Jesus was subordinate to the Father, indivisible, and also subordinate in his essence. He was condemned for his beliefs concerning the Son God, and dis-fellowshipped from the church. During the council of Nicaea to

Noel B. Reynolds, “What Went Wrong for Early Christians,” in Early Christianity in Disarray, ed. Noel B. Reynolds (Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 2005), 11.21

Clement, Miscellanies, in The Ante-Nicene Fathers (ANF), ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson (1885; reprint, Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 2:305.22

Roy Kearsley, Tertullian’s Theology of Divine Power (Edinburgh, Scotland: Rutherford House, 1998), 10.23

Tertullian, Prescription Against Heretics, (ANF 3:246).24

Noll, 48.

7

settle the Arian conflict, he was excommunicated and exiled, but later recalled from exile in 335. Before he was able to reconcile himself with the church he died in 336.25

Unfortunately, there are not many original writings from Arius. Most of what is known concerning the debate is taken from his distracters. Much of what he believed can only be found in a few of his original sources, i.e., the poem Thalia, two letters, and what Athanasius and his distracters wrote about him.26 However, to understand Arius and the controversy that led to the first council of Nicaea an understanding of Alexander, the Bishop of Alexandria is critical in placing the issue of the unity of the Trinity in context.

Alexander became the patriarch of Alexandria in 312 AD after the death of Achillas. During his time as the patriarch, he dealt with three main issues during his episcopate. The first dealt with the timing of Easter which was settled at the Council of Nicaea in 325. The second concerned a conflict with the Bishop of Melitius who had formed an alliance with Arius due to his confirming Bishops without the permission of Alexander which was also settled at the first Council. A compromise was made and Bishop Melitius was again in full fellowship. The last controversy and probably the greatest concerned the heretical movement started by Arius. This caused Alexander great consternation in that Arius had been placed by the previous Bishop (Achillas) as a presbyter in one of the most prestigious churches in Alexandria at Bucalis. This church was in the most populated part of the city which exercised a great deal of influence with the local Christians. As rival for the episcopate after the death of Achillas, the two were not friendly one with the other. In a sermon given by Alexander concerning the unity of the Trinity, Arius accused Alexander of SABELIANISM. Arius argued that since the Son was created by the Father he could not be co-eternal with the Father. This begins the controversy. Alexander to thwart this deviation from doctrine calls a synod in 320 AD. The purpose of the synod was to condemn Arius’s doctrine. In attendance were forty four deacons and thirty six presbyters. Amongst this group was a young deacon by the name of Athanasius who along with those present at the synod signed a formal document condemning Arius. However, this did not stop the spread of Arianism which caused Alexander to call a Council in 321 AD of the diocese in Alexandria in which 100 members attended. Arius again defended his stance concerning the nature of the Trinity that so horrified the Bishops that he was forced to flee to Palestine where he gained the favor of many, especially Eusebius, Bishop of Nicomedia.27

An understanding of the relationship of Alexander and Arius suggests that the two of them were political rivals. They did not care for each other, and they used their office to seek political favor and support from the emperor. This religious and political maneuvering in the

25 Encyclopedia of Christian Theology, s.v. “Arianism.”26

Stuart G. Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1991), 122.

27 The Coptic Encyclopedia, s.v. “Alexander I”.

8

early church was to set a pattern for church politics which appears to have continued throughout the centuries.

Nonetheless, the primary concern about Arius’s beliefs was that he professed that the Son was begotten from the Father. That is, he had a beginning. He could not have existed before the time of creation. This was in direct opposition to the concept without beginning our unbegun.28 His distracters argued that this could mean that the Father could have existed, at one time, without the Son. They point to the Thalia (poem written by Arius) for support of their argument: His existence from when and from whom and from then — are all from God. For it is impossible for him to fathom the Father, who is by himself. For the Son himself does not even know his own essence (ousia),For being Son, his existence is most certainly at the will of the Father.29 These were heretical statements. He also argued that the “Son was not similar to the Father in substance.” This was the final straw which caused Arius to flee for his life.30

Arius continued to assert that the “Son was begotten apart form time by the Father.”31 The following taken from a letter to Alexander (325) fixes this as one of the first heresies attacked at the council of Nicaea, We acknowledge One God, alone unbegotten, alone everlasting, alone without beginning, alone true, alone having immortality, alone wise, alone good, alone sovereign, judge, governor, and provider of all, unalterable and unchangeable, just and good, God of the Law and the Prophets and the New Testament; who begat an only-begotten Son before time and the ages, through whom he made both the ages [Heb 1:2] and all that was made.32

To understand the social and historical impact of these doctrines, perhaps, the doctrines of the nature of God were influenced by the context in which they lived. Hall argued that their ideas, during their time period, were brought about by the debates of the great philosophers. Concepts like the beginning of the world, the existence of God before a created universe, and intelligence apart from an embodied form were discussed, i.e., being debated with proponents for and against.33

In this environment, the distracters against Arius were many. Athanasius of Alexander, prime opponent of Arianism, and defender of the faith, led the fight against the Arians at the Council of Nicaea (AD 325). He was the Bishop of Alexander (328 – 373), and was disposed of and readmitted as Bishop several times over the course of his career. This primarily pertained to

28 Hall, 124.29

Wisconsin Lutheran College, “Arius – Thalia,” Fourth Century Christianity, http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/arius-thalia-intro (accessed August 03, 2011).30

The Coptic Encyclopedia, s.v. “Alexander I.”31

Hall, 124.32

Wisconsin Lutheran College, “Confession of Faith from Arius to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria,” Fourth Century Christianity, http://www.fourthcentury.com/urkunde-6/ (accessed 03 August, 2011).33

Hall, 124.

9

the Arian controversy which he fought until the end of his life. His exiles had to do with the change of the political/religious situation with the sons of the emperor Constantine (Constantine II, Constants in, Constantius II) and their stance towards the Arians or the Nicenes. Athanasius believed that the Father and the Son were separate personages coexisting in the same being.34

Though Athanasius was to be the primary defender of the Nicenes, the conflict concerning the nature of God had its beginnings and had been debated long before Athanasius. The primary question being was how to define Jesus’ status as the Son of God, i.e., his divine nature. This question and continuing discussion in the early years produced three camps of thought:: (1) monarchian modalism, (2) adoptionism, and (3) Sabellianism.35

(a) Monarchian modalists, a doctrine that was developed in the early 3rd century, believed in the preeminence of the Father, that is fidelity to the God of Judaism.

(b) Adoptionist proposed that the Son, a man, was adopted by God and imbued with divine presence distinct from the Father.

(c) The Sabellians taught that God had appeared in different forms, e.g., Father, Son, and Spirit. They had different modes. This doctrine held the supremacy of the one God; however, he appeared in different modes (personas).36

With an understanding of the historical and religious context, the East and the West church were polarizing as to support for Trinitarian doctrine, i.e., the East church supported Arianism, and the West church opposed it. These differences in doctrine concerning the nature of God and the resultant controversies that divided the church led Constantine (emperor of Rome) to encourage a settlement of the issue and to try to reestablish unity in the church. In June of 325, the ecumenical council met (Nicaea) and Arianism was condemned.37

With Christianity a recognized religion and one accepted in the Roman Empire, Constantine wanted to establish peace in the church and stop inter church quarreling. His support for Christianity at Milvian Bridge was cemented when he as stated by Eusebius of Caesarea (church historian):

Saw with his own eyes the trophy of a cross of light in the heavens, above the sun, and an inscription, CONQUER BY THIS attached to it. At this sight he himself was struck with amazement, and his whole army also, which followed him on an expedition, and witnessed the miracle.

34 Encyclopedia of Christian Theology, s.v. “Athanasius.”35

Noll, 48.

36 Encyclopedia of Christian Theology, s.v. “Modalism.”37

J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (London: Adam & Charles Black, 1960), 231.

10

He said, moreover, that he doubted within himself what the import of this portent could be. And while he continued to ponder and reason on its meaning, night overtook him; then in his sleep the Christ of God appeared to him with the sign which he had seen in the heavens, and commanded him to make a likeness of that sign which he had seen in th4e heaven, and to sue it as a safeguard in all engagements with his enemies.38

One could say as opined by Eusebius that this was the beginning of the conversion of Constantine to Christianity, and was significant in producing the edict of Milan which was a turning point concerning relations between the Church and the empire. Eusebius continues in his historical narrative (AD 313) and writes about Constantine and the emperor Licinuius:

When we, Constantine Augustus and Licinuius Augustus, had happily met at Milan, and were conferring about all things which concern the advantage and security of the state, we thought that amongst other things which seemed likely to profit men generally, the reverence paid to the Divinity merited our first and chief attention. Our purpose is to grant both to the Christians and to all others full authority to follow whatever worship each man has desired; whereby whatsoever Divinity dwells in heaven may be benevolent and propitious to us, and to all who are placed under our authority.39

With the Edict of Milan established in 313 AD, this set the stage for toleration of religion and the right to exercise religion according to the dictates of ones conscience. As a recognized religion, and with a supporter in Constantine, he sets the precedent in which sovereign rulers will influence and work closely with the church in forming a church state relationship which lasts for centuries.

With this established, and with persecution amongst Christian’s almost extinct, the growing church begins to deal with issues of doctrine as already established in this paper. The following four councils were to establish precedents in dealing with issues of policies, doctrines, and standards whereby the church would be governed. Councils or synod in the early church were established to combat heresy and to establish doctrine. They were usually attended by the Bishop who represented the church and was seen as successor of the apostles and therefore held the keys to make decisions. Councils were called by rulers to adjudicate differences in doctrine40

The First Council of Nicaea (AD 325). As already stated the Council of Nicaea was called to resolve the doctrinal issues of the church. Arius, who was a popular Bishop, argued that Jesus was of a different essence than the Father, and that he was subordinate to the Father. He stated that “the Father was God and the Son a creature of the Father, a secondary God, a mediary being between God and the world, yet a being created before the world and before time…(he goes on to say that the Son) had a beginning of existence; and from this it is evident,

38 J. Stevenson, ed., The New Eusebius: Documents Illustrative of the History of the Church to A.D. 337 (London: SPCK, 1957), 299-300.

39 Stevenson, 300.

40 Howard A. Slaate, The Seven Ecumenical Councils (Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1980), 1-3.

11

that there was a time when the son was not. It therefore necessarily follows, that he had his subsistence form nothing.”41 This caused dissention in the church. The Son was not subordinate to the Father. They could not be of different essence or a different substance. At the council there were three groups: (1) the Catholics – universal church, (2) the Arians, and (3) the Eusebians, or semi-Arians, they believed the Son was of like substance with the Father.42

The council dismisses the views of the Arians and decides that the Father and the Son are of one essence, and that the Son came down from heaven (incarnate) to redeem mankind. The Nicene Creed is developed and Eusebius of Caesarea submits the text for the creed. However, it is rejected. The reason being is because it did not include the statement about consubstantiality of the Son with the Father, i.e., “the Son is not only similar but inseparable from the Father, that He is not only like the Father, but of the same substance”. This is where the orthodox Arians parted. Consequently the creed is modified and stands as follows:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, Begotten of the Father, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father; by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down and was incarnate and was made man; he suffered, and the third day he rose again, ascended into heaven; from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. And we believe the Holy Ghost.

And for them that say, concerning the Son of God, there was a time when He was not, and He was not before He was produced, and He was produced from thins that are not, and, He is of another substance or essence, or created, or subject to conversion or mutation, the Catholic and Apostolic Church faith, let them be anathema. 43

Anathema means a person cursed or assigned to damnation or destruction.44

The creed was accepted by all the Bishops present minus two Bishops and Arius. For their denouncement of the creed they were exiled to Illyria.

Before proceeding or continuing with a discourse about the last three Councils (Constantinople, Ephesus, Chalcedon) an understanding of the words homoousion, homoiousion, and hypostates will help to understand these words in a historical context, and also how they relate to the Godhead.

Homoosion became a common word in Christianity when it was used in the Nicaea Creed in 325. It refers to the Son of God to explain His relationship to the Father. It means “one substance with,” or “consubstantial.” or “one in being with.” Nevertheless, the meaning of 41 Slaate, 9.42

Slaate, 11. 43 The Coptic Encyclopedia, s.v. “Alexander I.”44

Dictionary.com, http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anathema, accessed 09 August 2011.

12

homoousion became part of the Nicaea Creed has over the centuries caused considerable debate. Athanasius, in later years, latches on to the word and uses it as a motto against Arianism. Before the Council of Constantinople, it is stressed again by the Cappadocians and becomes part of the Creed of Constantinople to describe “identity of Being without contradicting distinction of persons.”

Like homoosion, homoiousion has its own history as it relations to the creeds. It means “of like substance” and emerged around 355 as an alternate word proposed by the likes of Basil of Ancrya, Melitius of Antioch, and Cyril of Jerusalem. These prominent church leaders were assured by Athanasius that the homoosions were not Saballenian (modalists). When they understood that the homoosions were not modalists, they became more acceptable to the homoiousions.45 The term though does not matter one iota came from this controversy.

Hyposthstasis was used to mean “persons” in the sense that God is not three substances but three persons. This word has a long and storied history concerning the councils. Before the councils it was understood as “substance”. It was hardly used by Athanasius until after 361. The Cappadocian fathers used the word indiscriminately to mean individual identity or substance. In the Nicaea creed it confused people by referring to the Son as ousia (essence) or hypostasis different from the Father. This caused much debate. Easter church leaders referred to the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as three hypostases. This added to the confusion between different groups who accused one another of being Sabellians or modalists. Finally both Eastern and Western bishops agreed to refer to God as three hypostases as long as He was not three substances (Arian), but three “persons.” Later, the Cappadocians coined a phrase to help them understand the concept “God is as Three, and ousia what He is as One.” The Nestorians used the word to say the Jesus Christ had two hypostases, the human and divine.46

The words homoosion and hypostatis still cause much confusion in understanding the Godhead.

The Council of Constantinople (AD 381). Even-though, the first Council of Nicaea created the Nicene Creed to resolve doctrinal issues in the church, the church was still not united. Therefore, The First Council Constantinople was called by Theodosius I to resolve any disagreements caused by the Council of Nicaea of 325. It was primarily made up of 150 bishops, no diocese of the West was represented, nor the See of Rome. Though Athanasius was dead his influenced was felt and the doctrine that there is one ousia in the Godhead and three hypostases was cemented. Therefore, the purpose of the council was to unite the church and the empire and to clarify some of the doctrinal disagreements caused by the Nicene Creed. Again, East and West had different interpretations, created by the political machinations of the emperor, Theodosius I. The council again condemned Arianism, developed territorial jurisdiction, i.e., bishops not to interfere with the affairs of other diocese other than their own, and gave the see of

45

The Coptic Encyclopedia, s.v. “Homoiousion/Homoousion.”

46 The Coptic Encyclopedia, v.s. “Hypostatis”.

13

Constantinople honorary superiority after Rome. This was to lead to divisions between Alexandria and the other patriarchates, primarily Rome, and Constantinople.47

It also expanded on points of the Nicene Creed. The creed is as follows:

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of heaven and earth and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten son of God, begotten of his Father, by whom all things were made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who for us came and for our salvation came down form heaven and was incarnate by the Holy Ghost and the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the Right Hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the quick and the dead. Whose kingdom shall have not end.

And (we believe) in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver-of-Life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spake by the prophets. And [we believe} in one, holy, (II) Catholic and Apostolic Church. We acknowledge one Baptism for the remission of sins, {and} we look for the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.48

As suggested by Noll, the councils primary points were as follows:

1. “ Christ was very God of Very God2. Christ was one substance with the Father.3. Christ begotten not made4. Christ became human for us men, and for our salvation.”49I

It is interesting to note that the 2nd Creed omits the anathema at the end. The importance difference between the two creeds besides the input concerning how the Jesus came to be is concerning how the Holy Ghost proceeded from the Father.50

The above content (shown in slides 2-23) was written to give you a brief overview of the first four centuries, though not in sequence. They will help you to put the following slides concerning preaching in context.

47 The Coptic Encyclopedia, v.s. “Constantinople, First Council Of ”.

48 Constantinople Creed, in The Nicene and Post Fathers (NPNF), ed. Phillip Schaff and Henry Wace, (1885; reprint, Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1994), 14:163.

49 Noll, 57-58.50 Slaate, 18.

14

Overview History of Preaching

Slides 23 thru 51 (see slide presentation w/notes)

Edwards in his book History of Preaching gives a succinct definition of a “sermon”, he say:

A speech delivered in a Christian assembly for worship by an authorized person that applies some point of doctrine, usually drawn from a biblical passage, to the lives of the members of the congregation with the purpose of moving them by the use of narrative analogy and other rhetorical devices to accept that application and to act on the basis of it.51

What is Edwards saying? What is a narrative analogy and how does rhetoric influence the act of preaching.?

Slide 25 Discuss elementary and secondary education. How were the early Romans and Christian taught, i.e., the patristic fathers?

Discuss slide 26 from the content provided on page 28 History of Preaching

The aspect of this education that was to be so determinative for preaching was the way the literature was taught by the schoolmaster, or grammarian (grammatikov"). First, students were given a plot summary of the passage they were to study, an ancient Greek equivalent of Cliffs Notes. Next, since the copies the students had of the work being studied were handwritten, there was a certain amount of variation between them, and the instructor had to lead the students laboriously through the text to be sure they were all reading the same words. After that, other difficulties imposed by the manuscripts had to be dealt with. Since writing at the time did not separate words and did not make use of punctuation, students were required, after thorough preparation, to read the passage aloud expressively to show that they could make up for these deficits. Then, after the students had gone over the text so closely several times, they took the next step by memorizing it. With such preliminary work out of the way, students undertook the real task—the explanation of the text—which was called exegesis (exhvghsi"), the word Christians have taken over to mean “biblical interpretation.” Explanation involved, first of all, defining words in the text; no small task since Homer’s vocabulary was archaic by then. Next, the inflected forms of the words had to be noted and the grammatical structures indicated by those forms. Students studied etymologies as guides to meaning, and pointed out figures of speech. Then the persons (divine as well as human), places, times, and events mentioned in the text had to be identified, a process that was called “historical” study.

All of this analysis, however, was not considered to be an end in itself, nor was its purpose merely aesthetic. The program was designed to initiate the young into their culture and its values. Its end, therefore, was moral education. Teachers completed their presentation of a reading by pointing to the ethical example it held up. Over time, however, readers recognized that Homer, whose writings were valued as scripture to the

51

O.C. Edwards Jr., The History of Preaching (Nashville: Abington Press ), 3-4.

15

Greeks, often depicted the immortal gods as engaged in unedifying activities. This meant that pointing out the moral was not always a straightforward task. It was often supposed that the poet was speaking symbolically and calling for an allegorical interpretation. This program of secondary education was, therefore, socialization into the life of acommunity. And the method by which the grammarian taught had great influence on the way the homily developed.52

Stress the importance of education, and how the early patristic fathers were influenced by their educational environment. This impacted on their preaching and how they examined the text.

Slide 27 Review w/ Class

Slide 28

Explain why he preached for only three years. This could have to do with his belief in pre-existence souls and in the ultimate salvation of everyone, also his criticism of clergy in Caesarea. Theoctistus may have relieved him of his pulpit duties.

We know that Origen preached every Sunday and Friday Eurcharist. On Sundays there were readings from the Hebrew Bible and from one of the Gospels, with a homily on each; During the week day services there was a reading from the Old testament and preached on which concluded with a prayer. All services took place in the church.

He taught with the text open which had parallel colums with Greek and Hebrew translations of the scripture. He had a set of symbols which told him at a glance which words for one text were present in another. He could correct the text to match the original text which was Hebrew.

He also quoted freely from the bible, i.e., he had memorized the old and new testament.53

Slide 29 Review and Discuss w/ Class

Edification through interpretation, this came about allegorically because the allegorical meaning was the true meaning—the meaning of the Holy Spirit present—grammarian-application moral and spiritual.

Interpretation (Allegory) Old Testament: Most of the New Testament bases its theology on interpreting passages in the Hebrew Bible as predictions of redemption in Christ.

Allegorical interpretation: is an interpretive method which assumes that the Bible has various levels of meaning and tends to focus on the spiritual sense. It is sometimes referred to as the Quadriga, a reference to the Roman Quadriga, a chariot drawn by four horses.

52 Edwards, Jr., 28.

53 Edwards, Jr., 39-40.

16

The literal: historical backwards to the past, the anagogic forwards to the future, the tropological interpretation can be found later in the new testament.

Literal teaches deeds, what you believe Allegory, Moral how you act, where you are going.

In the Middle Ages, typology was the dominant Christian Allegorical interpretation, i.e., events described in the Old and New Testament, occurred in order to pre-figure events in the life of Christ in the New.

Slide 30

Origen spoke Greek. His sermons were recorded by a stenographer. He did not write them before hand.

He sets the shape of preaching for centuries to come.

Slide 31

Christianity becomes respectable.

Explain the Roman Empire (Hadrian 117 to Constantine 312-337. The borders on the west where the romans built a wall by Scotland, on the North into the Rhine and Danube, and the South –the Mediterranean coast of Africa , Palestine and Syria to the East.54

Slide 32 (Insert from Wikipedia click on words to refresh memory concerning concepts)

The three scholars set out to demonstrate that Christians could hold their own in conversations with learned Greek-speaking intellectuals and that Christian faith, while it was against many of the ideas of Plato and Aristotle (and other Greek philosophers), was an almost scientific and distinctive movement with the healing of the soul of man and his union with God at its center—one best represented by monasticism. They made major contributions to the definition of the Trinity finalized at the First Council of Constantinople in 381 and the final version of the Nicene Creed, finalised there.

They made key contributions to the doctrine of the Trinity and to the responses to Arianism and Apollinarianism.[2]

Subsequent to the First Council of Nicea , Arianism did not simply disappear. The Council of Nicea had asserted that the Son was of the same substance (homoousios) as the Father. The semi-Arians taught that the Son is of like substance with the Father (homoiousios) as against the outright Arians who taught that the Son was not like the Father, but had been created, and was therefore not God. So the Son was held to be like the Father but not of the same essence as the Father.

54 Edwards, Jr., 50-51.

17

The Cappadocians worked to bring these semi-Arians back to the orthodox cause. In their writings they made extensive use of the (now orthodox) formula "one substance (ousia) in three persons (hypostaseis)".[3] The relationship is understandable, argued Basil of Caesarea, in a parallel drawn from Platonism: any three human beings are each individual persons and all share a common universal, their humanity. The formulation explicitly acknowledged a distinction between the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, (a distinction that Nicea had been accused of blurring), but at the same time insisting on their essential unity.

Slides 33-34 Review pages 49-67 (O.C. Edwards, Jr.)

Slide 35

Please watch this video (25 minutes about Saint John Chrysostom) Great video concerning the accomplishment of John Chrysostom as explained by Greek Orthodox Priests.55

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODesJ1qWQhs

Slides 35-42 Review with class Content about John Chrysostom. Content for slides found on pages 72-86.56

Slide 41 Review Content and Discuss Theodore of Mopsuestia, Cyril of Jerusalem, and Ambrose of Milan.

Slide 42 Augustin

Please watch this video (9 minutes about Saint the life of ) Great video concerning the accomplishment of St. Augustine as explained by Dr. Marcellino D’Ambrosio.57

Slides 42 to 50 from Edwards 100-121, and Discuss with Class.58

55 YouTube, “John Chrysostom.” YouTube player video file. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODesJ1qWQhs

56 Edwards, Jr., 72-86.57

YouTube, “Early Church Fathers: St. Augustine’s Conversion.” YouTube player video file. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr8kh7OQ4_U

58 Edwards, Jr., 100-121.

18

Bibliography

Articles of Faith. History of the Church (LDS). Vol. 4, 535-541.

Bickmore, Barry and Bentley Adam. “Christian Councils.” in Early Christianity in Disarray.edited by Noel B. Reynolds. Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 2005.

Brandon, S.G.F. The Fall of Jerusalem and the Christian Church. London: S.P.C.K., 1951.

Chaplain Led Programs: Authorized Support. Title 10 U.S. Code, Pts. 1789. 2007.

Clement. “Miscellanies.” in The Ante-Nicene Fathers (ANF), edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Vol. 2.1885; reprint, Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1994.

Constantinople Creed. in The Nicene and Post Fathers (NPNF), edited by Phillip Schaff and Henry Wace. Vol. 14 1885; reprint, Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1994).

Edwards, O.C. Jr. The History of Preaching. Nashville: Abington Press, 2004.

Fox, John. Foxe’s Book of Martyrs. Edited by William Byron Forbush. Peabody, Massachusetts: Hendrickson Publishers, 2004.

Gonzalez, Justo L. Church History: An Essential Guide. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1996.

Hall, Stuart G. Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1991.

Kearsley, Roy. Tertullian’s Theology of Divine Power. Edinburgh, Scotland: Rutherford House, 1998.

Kelly, J. N. D. Early Christian Doctrines. London: Adam & Charles Black, 1960.

Krathwohl, David R. “Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview.” Theory into Practice 41, no. 4 (2002): 212-218.

Martyr, Saint Justin. First Apology. Edited by Thomas B. Falls. Washington, D. C.: Catholic University Press, 1965.

Nibley, Hugh. Apostles and Bishops in Early Christianity. Edited by John F. Hall and John W. Welch. Salt Lake City: Deseret Book Company, 2005.

Noll, Mark A. Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2000.

Paul’s Journeys. Accessed 19 July 2011. http://lds.org/scriptures/bible-maps/map-13?lang=eng .

19

PBS, “The Roman Empire in the 1st Century.” PBS Library. Accessed July 29, 2011. http://www.pbs.org/empires/romans/empire/religion.html.

Reynolds, N. B. “What Went Wrong for Early Christians.” in Early Christianity in Disarray, edited by Noel B. Reynolds, 1-26 Provo, UT: Brigham Young University Press, 2005.

Slaate, Howard A. The Seven Ecumenical Councils. Lanham, Maryland: University Press of America, 1980.

Stevenson, J. ed. The New Eusebius: Documents Illustrative of the History of the Church to A.D. 33. London: SPCK, 1957.

Tertullian. “Prescription Against Heretics” in The Ante-Nicene Fathers (ANF), edited by Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Vol. 3. 1885; reprint, Peabody MA: Hendrickson, 1994.

The Bible Knowledge Accelerator “The Harmony of the Life of Jesus.” Accessioned July 18, 2011. http://www.bible-history.com/jesus/jesusThe_Synagogue.htm.

The Standard Works of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Bible Dictionary. Britain: Cambridge University Press, 1994.

Turcan, Robert. The Gods of Ancient Rome. New York: Routledge, 2000.

Wisconsin Lutheran College. “Arius – Thalia,” Fourth Century Christianity. Accessed August 03, 2011. http://www.fourthcentury.com/index.php/arius-thalia-intro .

Wisconsin Lutheran College. “Confession of Faith from Arius to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria.” Fourth Century Christianity. Accessed August 3, 2011. http://www.fourthcentury.com/urkunde-6/ .

YouTube, “Ancient Roman Religion.” YouTube Web site. YouTube player video file. Accessed July 29, 2011. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upfggzy00JE.

YouTube, “Early Church Fathers: St. Augustine’s Conversion.” YouTube player video file. Accessed January 9, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vr8kh7OQ4_U

YouTube, “John Chrysostom.” YouTube player video file. Accessed January 9, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODesJ1qWQhs.