Conflict at Rome: Social Order and Hierarchy in Early Christianity (review)

It is common to relate the development of the Western episcopate to Clement of Rome and the social environment of the early church. The novelty of Jeffers's study is the connection it makes between Clement, Rome's aristocracy, and the hierarchy of the Roman church. Jeffers' thesis is that the Roman monoepiscopacy evolved from the strict hierarchal structure Clement's church had adopted from Rome's elite class.

In the first two centuries Roman churches both imitated and opposed the society in their ideology and structure. The minority which adopted the aristocracy's hierarchy did so out of a beneficial relationship with that segment of society. The majority which opposed both the society and those integrative Christians were of low status. This disharmony amid the churches caused the elitist, hierarchical minority to reformulate tradition into a stricter authority structure. By the late second century this reformulation developed into the monoepiscopacy which dominated the Roman Church.

Jeffers builds a case for such a development through archaeological, literary, and sociological theory analysis. The data analyzed are pertinent to illuminating the social status, values, and interrelationships of Clement of Rome, Hermas, and their congregations. Archaeologically, Jeffers seeks to construct a plausible background for Clement's association with Roman aristocracy. He attempts to fortify the theory identifying Clement as a freedman of Flavius Clemens under the patronage of Clemens' wife, Flavia Domitilla, a Christian or sympathizer. His argument connects the warehouse beneath the San Clemente complex with the house church of Clement on first-century Flavian property. This property, the site of Domitilla's catacomb, is said to have a history of burial plots granted by Domitilla to her dependents. Some of these dependents were probably Christians whose second-century descendants expanded the use of the cemetery.

1 Clement and the Shepherd of Hermas comprise the literature Jeffers examines for evidence of social status and relations among Roman congregations. This examination reveals a polarization of the churches represented in the two documents. 1 Clement shows a small group ideologically aligned with the Roman elite through the Flavian household. They are comfortable with the world. They recognize the absolute power of their leaders because they follow the order of Paterfamilias. They distinguish sharply between clergy and laity. They value order and unity among individuals and other churches. The Shepherd of Hermas, on the other hand, exemplifies that group which because of lower social and economic status defines itself against the world, rejects those churches aligned with it (i.e., Clement's) and elevates the poor's spirituality.

Jeffers employs contemporary sociological theories as models for illuminating the authority types (Max Weber) and group types (Bryan Wilson) with which these two churches may be associated. 1 Clement is classified as reflective of a traditional authority structure which argues its system from Christian, Jewish, and pagan sources. Although having some characteristics of a sect, Clement's church structure had evolved beyond this to incorporating the society's elitist ideology. Hermas, however, was charismatic in authority, and in opposition to worldly churches. Hermas' church acted more like a sect by separating itself from society and functioned without a clerical hierarchy. The more permanent nature of Clement's structure ultimately prevailed against the ecclesiological disunity in Rome.

Jeffers has appropriately emphasized the notion of a developed structure and order in the congregation of 1 Clement. He helpfully demonstrates that aspects of this structure and order are common to the Roman empire's aristocracy. Clement's concepts of household, army, and sensitivity to Roman civil authority reveal organizational similarity with Roman elitist society. Nevertheless, structural characteristics of Clement's church may also find antecedents elsewhere. General sympathy with the Greek city-state, Qumran, the synagogue, and Judeo-Christian precedents all deserve further consideration.

Jeffers also properly captures the element in 1 Clement regarding subordination to recognized authority. There is a strong vertical relationship of order between leaders and congregation. However, he might have balanced this aspect by elucidating further the...