Folia Theologica et Canonica 6. 28/20 (2017)
SACRA THEOLOGIA - László Perendy, The application of the term ’brother/sister’ in early Christianity
44 LÁSZLÓ PERENDY What can be the cause of the appearance of the restrictive meaning? To my mind there were several factors responsible for this phenomenon in the middle of the 3rd century, which saw several persecutions. The term Christian appears already in the Acts of the Apostles, but its usage becomes more widespread exactly as a consequence of the persecutions. The numerous Acts and Martyria appearing from the end of the 2nd century on show a great number of cases, where the act of confessing the nomen Christianum played a crucial role in the juridical procedure. So the term ‘brother’ when dealing with the world outside the Christian communities lost its value and force, and was substituted by the word ‘Christian’. As we have seen, the terms ‘brother’ and ‘sister’ gave rise to the serious accusation of promiscuity. That might have been another factor. It was not advisable to use the term in the external communication of the church. A third factor could have been that Stoic philosophy lost its appeal by the 3rd century, so the idea of universal brotherhood did not appear so attractive in the Roman society any more. In an age when the Christians were able to demonstrate that in their own communities this hope of mankind to achieve brotherhood has already substantialized, the use of the term made the Christian communities more attractive in face of the pagan world. However, as soon as Stoicism itself has lost its appeal, using the term in this sense was not useful in Christian propaganda any more. I think these three factors contributed to the more and more widespread usage of the term in a restrictive sense, meaning only a certain group inside the Christian community. This is demonstrated also by epigraphic evidence. Although the term appears on epitaphs until the 4,h century (DACL 5. 2580-2585), its use is restricted progressively: it is mostly reserved to the clergy or monks. Later on in some contexts it is used by some authors to name exclusively the clergy and monks. For example, Constantine addresses the bishops using this temi, as we can read it in Eusebius’ work, Vita Constantini (3, 24). It is used particularly among monks, nuns and in the communication between them; see e.g., Basil, Reg. hrev. 104; Palladius, Hist. Laus. 17; Jerome, In Hier. 4, praef.29 But even at the end of the fourth century the meaning of this term seems to be ambiguous: it can mean any Christian or only the members of certain Christian groups, namely the group of religious orders. To demonstrate this ambiguity, it particularly interesting to have a closer look at Egeria’s Diary of a Pilgrimage, because sometimes she feels it necessary to disambiguate that in a particular situation by this term she means only monks, and not Christians in general. Her voyage to the holy places took place probably at the end of the 4th or the beginning of the 5* century. 29 Cf. Hamman, A. - Maritano, M„ Brother/Sister, 397.
