More than once the doctrine of the Spirit (Pneumatology) has been called the Cinderella of Theology. If this was so in the past, and is perhaps still, it now requires our full attention. At the risk of viewing the situation through ‘continental’ eyes, but hoping you will recognize this, I would say that the nineteenth century, impressed by the advance of science, confronted theology in the first place with problems raised by natural science. Its first question concerned the nature of God, especially in connection with creation. Scientific historical inquiry paid attention to the Bible, and in the New Testament focussed its interest upon the question of the historical Jesus. This work culminated and came to a temporary halt in Albert Schweitzer's, The Quest of the Historical Jesus. A revival of Systematic Theology and Dogmatics followed, and in the opinion of the dogmatists the connecting lines between theology viewed from a cosmic standpoint and the Gospel were too long. The same thing was seen happening in the historical study of religions which came to cover an ever-widening field. On flle other hand, however, they could not be satisfied with a ‘life of Jesus,’ so that Christology began to occupy a central place which it has held during the last few decades. And, if Pneumatology received any attention at all, its allotted place was small.

Not long ago, an English New Testament teacher was pressed by a Russian theologian for a straight answer to the question, “Do you teach your students to interpret the New Testament according to the Fathers?” The answer could hardly be Yes. In most Western Universities it would be rare to find references to patristic exegesis in lectures on the Old or New Testaments. So a chasm was disclosed between academic theology as it is understood in the Eastern Orthodox world and its counterpart in the West. It is as big a chasm as any that gapes, doctrinally or ecclesiastically, between the Western Christian denominations and the various branches of the Eastern Church. For the Orthodox, patristic exegesis affords a sure safeguard of right Christian belief, so that the task of the academic theologian is to teach that exegesis. He is not so readily concerned about the primary meaning of the text of Scripture; that is to say, about the meaning it had in the minds of the writers, and that they looked for it to have for their immediate readers. Dr. Zankov, speaking for the Greek Orthodox Church, says, “The Holy Scriptures serve us as a source. The liturgical books, and writings of the Church Fathers, are, so to speak, the rule and line of ecclesiastical consciousness. In both of these the heart and spirit of Orthodoxy are reflected.” This Orthodox concept of Scripture has roots that run back to the first days of Greek Christianity.

All historical studies suffer from the unconscious transformation of generally accepted hypotheses into ‘universally known facts.’ This transformation is particularly frequent in NT criticism, where the small amount of directly relevant material necessitates constant resort to hypotheses. Therefore particular credit is due to Munck for writing a book which challanges many of the accepted hypotheses about Paul.

We are in possession of a Number of documents (inscriptions and papyri) relating to the lease of priesthoods in Greece and Egypt, dating from the fifth century B.C. to late Roman times. That curious practice, similar in some respect to the holding of Church benefices in the Middle Ages, has been studied by different scholars, but without agreement on many substantial points. Before the second World War K. Wilhelmson and M. Segre dedicated very important studies to the problem, advancing considerably the interpretation of the sources. In my Lois Sacrées of Asia Minor I collected many specimens of these documents and tried my best to promote their understanding. But nobody has sought to link the sale of cults in Greece with the same practice, as it is well attested through the papyri, in Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt. Meanwhile the inscriptions and the papyri, put together, not only fill the lacunas existing in both fields of documentation, but contribute to elucidate the legal side of the practice itself. With the recent publication of the study of M. Talamanca on auction in the classical world, the task has now become easier. Unfortunately the author does not utilize the abundant epigraphical material on our subject. I should like to endeavor to supply in part this need.

By the time the Fathers of the Church began to offer negation as a solution of the problem of divine attributes, the theory of negative attributes had already been dealt with by Philo, Albinus, and Plotinus. All three of them, starting with the assumption that God is ineffable, found that one way of describing God was by means of negative attributes. In their treatment of this type of attributes, however, there is a difference between Philo on the one hand and Albinus and Plotinus on the other.