In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

F I V E Early Christian Apologists Anyone a t al l curiou s abou t ho w believer s i n a n invisibl e go d reac t t o the visible image s o f god s whe n the y ar e confronted wit h the m wil l b e fascinated b y the first attempts of Christianit y t o come to terms, within a conceptual framework , wit h th e surrounding culture. If considered a s mere theory , th e literar y record s o f thes e attempts—normall y under taken t o defen d th e ne w religio n i n specifi c historica l conditions—wil l not b e counte d amon g th e mos t importan t o f th e document s discusse d in thi s book . The reasonin g i s no t alway s a s stric t a s a critica l reade r might wish it to be, and the practical needs and historical constraints are often intractable , forcin g th e writers t o adop t compromise s that , whe n measured b y intellectua l yardstick s only , ma y no t b e satisfactory . Bu t these early attempts have the rare merit of letting us witness directly, as it were, how the great question of the god's image was broached. History itself compelled the m to face the problem. Here they were, rejecting the material image s o f a god the y believe d t o b e invisible, an d surrounde d 95 96 The Icon in Early Christian Thought by th e man y image s o f differen t gods . Ou r concern , a s I have alread y said, is less with ho w i n practice they reacte d t o these images . Moder n scholarly literatur e ha s deal t extensivel y wit h simila r questions , an d I have n o ne w contributio n t o offer . Wha t I should lik e t o as k is , wha t were the reason s that the early Christian s gave fo r the theoretical posi tions they adopted? The historian nee d no t b e told tha t ancient Christianit y i n countles s ways absorbe d th e culture , th e taste , an d th e though t o f it s time . Th e new religio n continued , sometime s only thinl y veiled , th e grea t paga n cultures it inherited. Modern scholarship has taught us, with great intensity an d muc h success , t o se e thi s continuity , an d thereb y ha s muc h enriched ou r vie w an d understandin g o f th e time . Ove r an d abov e th e study o f continuities , however , w e shoul d no t forge t th e realit y an d significance o f change . A t th e ris k o f statin g th e obvious , I think w e should b e awar e of , an d accor d prope r proportion s to , th e ne w ideas , and the ensuing conflicts. These conflicts—one sometime s feels the need to remin d onself o f thi s simple fact—were rea l struggles, in intellectual respects as well a s in many others . Everybod y know s tha t this struggl e can be observed in innumerable facets; one of them is the attitude to the images o f God . I n th e followin g page s I inten d t o outlin e th e first encounter between Christian thinkers, who rejected images of God, with the abundance of such images and the ideologies defending them. The perio d betwee n roughl y a.d . 14 0 an d 18 0 sa w th e compositio n of the treatises recording the earliest Christian attempts to come to terms with the cultures surrounding the new religion. These are the writings of the so-calle d earl y Gree k apologists. 1 Readin g thes e earl y statements , one canno t hel p noting , sometime s wit h surprise , ho w grea t a signifi cance i s granted to the problem of images . Images, the modern studen t may feel , coul d no t hav e bee n a n...

Share