Abstract
The question this article addresses is how the encratic, virtuous body in 2 Clement ‘speaks itself’ as a missional performance. It is in essence concerned with the discourses of corporeal virtuosity in 2 Clement. Firstly, the agon motif (2 Clem 7:1−6; 20:1−4) is discussed since it forms the basis metaphor for the understanding of ancient virtue-formation. Secondly, 2 Clement’s encratic technologies of soul and flesh as an extension and overamplification, respectively, of the body are examined (2 Clem 9:1−11). In the third instance, the proliferation of visible technologies of the body in 2 Clement are brought into perspective with special emphasis on these technologies as strategies of andromorphism, a crucial element in the understanding of virtue in antiquity (2 Clem 12:1−6). Fourthly, 2 Clement also links concepts of holiness and the pneumatic dimension of spirituality in its argumentation (2 Clem 14:1−5). This needs to be understood in the light of corporeal virtuosity. Finally, the concepts of suffering (2 Clem 19:3−4), martyrdom (2 Clem 5:1−7) and the apocalyptic anti-spectacle (2 Clem 17:1−7) are central in 2 Clement’s formulations of the missional performance and are therefore clarified. The intersection of these discourses is where the virtuous body in 2 Clement speaks itself as a missional performance. The study concludes by looking at the implications of the findings for understanding early Christian missionality.
Highlights
Read online: Scan this QR code with your smart phone or mobile device to read online
The question this article addresses is how the encratic, virtuous body in 2 Clement ‘speaks itself’ as a missional performance. It is in essence concerned with the discourses of corporeal virtuosity in 2 Clement
2 Clement links concepts of holiness and the pneumatic dimension of spirituality in its argumentation (2 Clem 14:1−5). This needs to be understood in the light of corporeal virtuosity
Summary
I shall put forward two examples to illustrate the use of the ἀγών motif in antiquity: firstly, Plato’s use of the metaphor in his Laws and Paul’s use of it in 1 Corinthians 9:24–27. The difference, and development, between Plato and Paul is that Paul is less concerned with the physical, athletic training of the body and much more concerned with moral self-control and abstinence (Pfitzner 1967:82–98).. The difference, and development, between Plato and Paul is that Paul is less concerned with the physical, athletic training of the body and much more concerned with moral self-control and abstinence (Pfitzner 1967:82–98).11 This is representative of the restructuring of encratic values mentioned above. Heaven is an empire of torture and retribution, and the optics and politics of the spectacle are inverted in this new apocalyptic reality (2 Clem 17:7): But the righteous who have done good, and have endured torture, and have hated the indulgences of the soul, when they see how those who have done amiss, and denied Jesus by word or deed, are punished with terrible torture in unquenchable fire, shall give ‘glory to their God...’15 This text, disturbingly, inverts the earthly reality. Those who have overcome, those who have ‘hated the indulgences of the soul,’ are the spectators and not the spectacle
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
