Brent—How Irenaeus Has Misled the Archaeologists 43group whose διαδοχή was from Greek philosophy that he was taking “refuge in the
school [σχολῇ] of Callistus” and not in the Catholic Church.^44 In this respect, the model
of the διαδοχή of a philosophical school well fitted Irenaeus’s purpose in drawing a
boundary between heresy and orthodoxy.
But in another respect, the candidate for the title of διάδοχος over the διαδοχὴ τῶν
ἀποστόλων proved for Irenaeus more elusive. He knew Justin Martyr’s work against
Marcion, and Justin’s interpretation of his own role as Christian teacher as one of a
συνεστώς of a philosophical school.^45 But Irenaeus could not place Justin’s name on
his episcopal succession list because, I maintain, had he done so, he would have been
acknowledging only one group among many in the loose confederation of house
churches. He needed another figure whose office was more than simply that of a pre-
siding presbyter-bishop of one of the congregations forming the Church of Rome in
the course of the first and second centuries. There was one such office holder, a mem-
ber of the Roman presbyterate to whom was given by them an “entrusted ministry
[ἐκείνῳ... ἐπιτέτραπται]” of writing to “the cities outside.”
This example of Clement did not at first sight serve too well Irenaeus’s purpose
since clearly this figure was not described as ὁ προεστών like Justin over his own
congregation. Furthermore, though Clement had written his copy of Hermas’s vision
to external churches, having received one of his two “little books,” βιβλαρίδια, it was
Hermas who was now to read his vision, with the charismatic authority of a prophet
clearly acknowledged at this time, in the company of the presiding presbyters of the
Roman church [μετὰ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων τῶν προσταμένων τῆς ἐκκλησίας].^46 But was
Clement among those presbyters? No doubt we should conclude, in the light of what
we shall shortly see was Soter’s title, that the secretarial figure was a presbyter-bishop
over one congregation but, having written the enclosing letter for the βιβλαρίδιον,
he simply joined the ranks of the πρεσβύτεροι προσταμένοι, the “presiding elders/
presbyters.” For Irenaeus this was awkward but he needed a list of names to make
his application of the scholastic model credible and this was all that he had: it was
better than nothing.
There were names on correspondence, cited by Eusebius, like that of Soter to whom
Dionysius of Corinth addressed a letter. There he praised “your blessed bishop Soter,”
for the financial relief provided for those suffering persecution in the mines, and in so
providing they had “preserved the long standing custom of the Romans.” Indeed, the
name of the presbyteral secretary whose letter accompanied such financial relief may
have prefigured more outside Rome and been awarded greater importance than within
Rome itself, and for this reason seemed more plausible to Irenaeus in constructing his
succession list.
Soter in writing such a letter whose bearers also carried the material assistance
is called “the blessed episcopos” (ὁ μακάριος ἐπίσκοπος).^47 But I would suggest that it
is better to read these words in the sense in which they would be understood in the
context of Clement’s letter and the vision of Hermas rather than in that of Eusebius:
the “blessed bishop” was one bishop among many but whose name was particularly
gladdening given the resources accompanying the letter that he wrote on behalf of the
whole community. Undoubtedly, as Lampe argued, the foreign secretary of the Roman