Paideia Kyriou: Biblical and Patristic Models for an Integrated Christian

Curriculum

In his book, The Lost Tools of Learning, Douglas Wilson

surmised that the fundamental reason for the struggle and

frustration of public schools in America is that education

has been isolated from its religious context. Wilson wrote,

“Education is a completely religious endeavor. It is

impossible to impart knowledge to students without building

on religious presuppositions… This is because all the

fundamental questions of education require religious

answers. Learning to read and write is simply the process of

acquiring tools to enable us to ask and answer such

questions” (1991, p. 59). Entailed within this assessment is

the consequence of the loss of a coherent center by which

all subject material can be integrated and interpreted. The

world is therefore presented in terms of particulars

fragmented from other particulars, resulting in an ecology

characterized by alienation, an alienation that inevitably

works its way into the student’s sense of identity. The

solution offered by Wilson, echoing Dorothy Sayers, is a

return to the integration of all subjects through “the queen

of the sciences, theology” (p. 63). It is in the

inexhaustible knowledge of God from which all things emerge

and in which all things cohere.1

There have been a number of studies that have

corroborated the importance of an integrated or

interdisciplinary curriculum, most notably Mortimer Adler’s

1982 educational manifesto, Paideia Proposal.2 While Wilson’s

observation on the religious nature of education has not

gone entirely unheeded,3 theology as the source of

1 Wilson’s concern over the religious nature of education is hardly novel. Archbishop Temple, a former headmaster, remarked: “An education which is not religious is atheistic … If you give to children an accountof the world from which God is left out, you are teaching them to understand the world without reference to God” (quoted in Doble, 2000, p. 192). Such sentiments were corroborated by one of the most influential Catholic thinkers of the 19th century, John Henry Newman, who wrote: “Christianity, and nothing short of it, must be made the element and principle of all education. Where it has been laid as the fist stone, and acknowledged as the governing spirit, it will take up into itself, assimilate, and give a character to literature and science”(quoted in Doble, 2000, p. 192). Both men witnessed the loss of theology’s plausibility in the secularization of the modern world and the consequential abdication of its role as the “queen of the sciences.”2 For a survey of the studies over the last two decades with bibliography, see the development by the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory based on the work sponsored by the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, at: http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/8/c016.html. 3 For example, The Religious and Public Education Resource Center at California State University, Chico, promotes the study of comparative

2

integration has been addressed primarily by sectarian

communities and remains a work in progress. A fruitful path

toward this work has been a number of historical surveys of

theology and education, particularly exemplified in the work

of Arthur F. Holmes (1991; 2001) and George R. Knight

(1998a; 1998b), and the role of worldview in education and

the development of a “Christian mind” in the work of Harry

Blamires (1963). This essay is an attempt to contribute to

these historical and worldview surveys by demonstrating how

current research in biblical and patristic studies offers

models for the integration of curricula, providing

interdisciplinary precision for a more effective education

in the cultivation of what C.S. Lewis envisioned as nothing

less than true humanity (1972 [1944]).

Christ and Caesar

A rather immediate point of integration is the

historical relationship between scripture and the Graeco-

Roman world. Such integration is the hallmark of a

religion as indispensable to understanding the advancement of civilization. See http://www.csuchico.edu/rs/rperc/.

3

collection of essays published under the title, Paul and

Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Edited by Richard

A. Horsley, the essays are situated within a strand of

scholarship that has built upon the work of D. Georgi with a

particular eye toward the supposed verbal and conceptual

parallels between Paul’s eschatological presentation of

Christ and the Roman Imperial language that surrounded the

unparalleled figure of Caesar.4 Such analysis on the

relationship of the NT to Roman imperial eschatology

suggests that the universal nature of Jesus’ kingship

pronounced by Paul represented a deliberate ‘counter-

imperial’ theology to the pseudo-gospel of Caesar.

Interpreting Paul’s pronouncement of Jesus as sōter and

kyrios as a direct challenge to the imperial propaganda of

Paul’s day, one of Horsley’s own essays explores the

significance of Paul’s use of the term ekklesia (i.e.

“church”) which, in accordance with its primary meaning in

the Greek speaking eastern Roman Empire, denoted his

communities as “citizen assemblies” of the Greek polis (1997,

4 Cf. the studies by Georgi 1991; Brown 2001; Harrison 1999; Wright 1994; 1998; etc.

4

p. 208). Horsley thus maintains that “Paul evidently

understood the ekklesia of a Thessalonica or Corinth not as a

‘cultic community,’ but as the political assembly of people

‘in Christ’ in pointed juxtaposition and ‘competition’ with

the official city assembly (e.g. 1 Thess. 1:1; 1 Cor. 11:18;

cf. all the ‘assemblies’ of a given Roman province, 1 Cor.

16:1; 16:19; 2 Cor. 8:1; Gal. 1:2; 1 Thess. 2:14)” (p. 209).

That Paul intentionally referenced his communities with such

politically charged terminology is corroborated by Larry

Hurtado’s observation that of the variegated nomenclature

for religious gatherings available to Paul – thiasos (worship

of a particular deity), eranos (religious feast), koinon

(fellowship), or synados (group following a particular

teaching) – ekklesia, however, was not one of them (1999, p.

54). While the roots of the term “ekklesia of God” are rooted

in the Septuagint’s translation of qahal for the formal

assemblies of ancient Israel, Paul’s appropriation of the

term for his communities as the legitimate heirs of the

Jewish commonwealth is interpreted by Horsley and others to

5

represent alternative societies to the Roman imperial order

(1997, p. 209).

The political significance of the early church provides

a bridge between biblical studies and classical literature.

A major difference between the Caesarean and the Augustan

age at least partially accounts for the Julio-Claudian

permeation of imperial propaganda. The men who represented

the new age were neither scholars like Varro nor

philosophers like Cicero: they were poets – Horace, Virgil,

Propertius, Ovid, Manilius, who communicated the ideal of

Rome to the spiritual imagination of the senate and

citizenry alike (Momigliano, 1984, p. 210-11). With Virgil’s

Aeneid overlapping his Fourth Eclogue, Augustus emerged as the

second founder of the eternal city, the father of his

country, the law-giver who “reinforced the trembling hopes

of the lovers of peace with the magic splendor of ancient

ritual and the benign compulsion of a world-wide security”

(Granger, 1897, p. 285). Indeed, as the sixth book of The

Aeneid suggests, if Rome were not patterned after paradise

then maybe the gods would want to do a bit of remodeling

6

after Rome. Horace’s pen echoed the imperial praises of

Virgil: “We believe that Jove is king in heaven because we

hear his thunders peal; Augustus shall be deemed a god on

earth (praesens divus) for adding to our empire the Britons and

dread Parthians” (1988, 3.5:1-4, p. 194-95). Thus, Horace

could celebrate: “Neither civil strife nor death by violence

will I fear, while Caesar holds the earth” (3.14:14-16, p.

226-27).

Moreover, the counter-imperial significance of the NT

can be further illuminated by the introduction of extant

epigraphy in a Western Civilization I or social studies

class. Such a historical survey would introduce the student

to how the pen of the emperor’s poet was but the blueprint

for a surge of images and inscriptions that permeated the

Empire with billboard-like ubiquity. In Ankara (central-

western Turkey), an inscription of the Prologue to the Res

Gestae publicly pronounces: “[A copy of] The acts of the

Deified Augustus by which he placed the whole world (orbem

terrarium) under the sovereignty of the Roman people”

(Paterculus, 1924, p. 344-45). In Halicarnassus in Caria

7

(south-western Aegean Turkey), an inscription reads: “Since

the eternal and immortal nature of everything has bestowed

upon mankind the greatest good with extraordinary

benefactions by bringing Caesar Augustus in our blessed time

the father of his own country, divine Rome, and ancestral

Zeus, saviour of the common race of men, whose providence

has not only fulfilled but actually exceeded the prayers of

all. For land and sea are at peace and the cities flourish

with good order, concord and prosperity” (Braund, 1985, p.

40). At Narbo (in southern France), the imperial cult was

honored with the following: “The colonists and inhabitants

of Colonia Julia Paterna of Narbo Martius ... have bound

themselves to the worship of his [Augustus’] divinity in

perpetuity. The plebs of Narbo erected an altar at Narbo in

the forum, at which each year on 23rd September, on which

day the felicity of the generation (saeculum) brought him

forth to guide the world [sacrifices should be offered]”

(Braund, 1985, p. 61). Perhaps most significant for the

language of the NT is the inscription from Priene (9 BC)

which acknowledges the blessings brought by Augustus:

8

Since the Providence [Pronoia] which has ordered all things and is deeply interested in our life has set in most perfect order by giving to us Augustus, whom she filled with virtue [divine power] that he might benefitmankind, sending him as a Savior [Soter], both for us and for our descendants, that he might end war and arrange all things, and since he, Caesar, by his appearance [phaneis] [excelled even our anticipations], surpassing all previous benefactors [euergetai], and noteven leaving to posterity any hope of surpassing what he had done, and since the birthday of the god Augustuswas the beginning for the world of the good tidings [euagelion] that came by reason of him … (Ferguson, 2003, p. 46)

In contrast to such an eschatological counterfeit, the

lordship of the resurrected Christ entailed in Paul’s gospel

stretches over the entire cosmos and all that is in it, both

in heaven and on earth (Rom 1:1-7; cf. Eph 1:20-21). And

because God the Father has subordinated all things to his

Christ, including earthly kingdoms and civilizations (1 Cor

15:21f; cf. Eph 1:21-22), divine beneficence is mediated

through his messianic throne (Eph 1:3-14). The very

existence of the church for Paul is an affront to Caesar,

since it is within this Spirit circumscribed community that

allegiance is given to another lord, to “another king” (Acts

17:7). Here we have a horizontal integration between Bible,

9

history, and literature classes reciprocating and thus

reinforcing one another and providing a point of subject

integration that invites further participation. For example,

it has been observed that the counter-imperial thesis opens

up possibilities for exploring Pauline theology in the

Government and Civic Education classroom (Wright, 1998,

n.p.). Students can then be encouraged to understand how

Paul’s message applies to proclaiming Christ’s lordship over

against imperial tendencies in our time.

The Emergence of a Christian Paideia

It is highly significant that students of classical

education are periodically introduced over the course of

their studies to the sacred texts of the Graeco-Roman world,

such as Homer and Hesiod. Of importance to subject

integration is understanding the role of these sacred texts

as the foundation for a distinct education model termed

paideia. According to Werner Jaeger, paideia had been for

centuries “the unifying cultural ideology of the Roman

Empire and the civilization for which it stood” (1965, p.

10

71-2). At the heart of paideia was a formative process termed

morphosis, the formation of a particular kind of human

personality (Jaeger, 1965, 86-7). The object of this

formative process was the literary texts by which the

student was shaped (Jaeger, 1965, 91). The emulative

instrument through which such shape took place was mimēsis

(imitatio) which, beginning with the Sophists, became an

established educational technique where both text and

imitation provided the means by which the heroism of the

past could be embodied in the present (Conte and Most, 2003,

p. 749).

Against the backdrop of the church as an alternative

society, what is of further interest is how paideia related

to the ancient polis. The classical idea of paideia as an

educational ideal or integrated model did not exist in a

social vacuum. Since paideia was more a process of slow

vegetable-like growth, it required a climate and nutrients

by which it might be nurtured and cultivated, which, as

Plato taught, the social atmosphere of the polis was more

than able to provide (Kelsey, 1992, n.p.). The interaction

11

between paideia and polis developed into a synonymous

identification of paideia and culture. It was the polis that

gradually defined the difference between “barbarian” and

Greek as the polis embodied the standard of “education and

culture” on (Georgi 1991, 34; cf. Hale, 1970, 81-2). Thus,

Paul’s conception of the ekklesia as the new eschatological

polis would provide a natural foundry for a distinct

Christian paideia.

The exhortation to a distinctively Christian paideia is

evident in the earliest epistolary witnesses to

Christianity, particularly Ephesians (6:4), Hebrews (12:5),

and II Timothy (3:14-16). However, the conjunction of polis,

sacred text, mimesis, and morphosis weaved together by Paul

into a network of formally related terms is entailed

throughout his epistolary corpus. For example, Paul’s

distinctly textual argument for the Galatians’ new identity

in Christ by virtue of their relationship to the new polis –

“Jerusalem above” – involves the maternal motif of his

“laboring” over them until Christ is “formed” (morphoō) in

them (Gal 4:19), a formation that has already taken place in

12

the life of Paul (1:16; 2:20). Thus Paul exhorts his

Galatian “children” (teknon 4:19) who embody the Spirit

(3:1-5) to be imitators of him (4:12 ginesthe ōs egō; cf. 1 Cor

4:16; 11:1) as he himself imitates Christ (cf. 3:1 with

6:17; cf 2 Cor 4:10), not by keeping the “works of the law”

but rather by exemplifying the cross of Christ in his life

(putting to death sinful inclinations) together with his

resurrection and law-keeping life within him, enabling God’s

servants to endure suffering with joy as lived-out

testimonies of God’s grace exemplified on the cross. As such

the Galatians were to formulate a distinctly Christian

identity through mimesis. A distinctive characteristic of

Christian mimesis, observed by Judith M. Lieu, is the

dilemma of the NT authors writing to an audience that feel

themselves sharing a Christian identity but who do not yet

grasp what that identity entails (2004, p. 157). Reminiscent

of this dilemma is the indicative-imperative relationship

summarized in the exhortative, “become as you are.” As they

are “in Christ,” they are to live in terms of who they have

become (cf. Rom 6) and, which is to say the same thing, in

13

terms of who Christ is (Phil 2:5). Thus their practice

serves to generate an identity that embodies the virtues of

Jesus Christ (Lieu, 2004, p. 158). In the case of Galatians,

this identity-generating practice is imitatively based upon

both the personal Christ-like example of Paul and the

textual paidagōgos function of the law which leads them to a

new polis, the freedom of “the Jerusalem above” (3:24-5;

4:26), and a new identity (4:28) that they are called to

embody (5:1). Paul’s paternal metaphor in Galatians

conceptually mirrors Paul’s argument in 1 Corinthians 4,

when, in the context of rebuking their “over-realized

eschatology,” he writes in verse 15: “For if you were to

have countless tutors (paidagōgous) in Christ, yet you would

not have many fathers; for in Christ Jesus I became your

father (gennaō, lit. “given birth”) through the gospel.” He

thus exhorts in verse 16: “be imitators of me” (mimētai mou

ginesthe).

The Primacy of Narrative

14

The emergence of a distinctly Christian paideia entails

a profound significance for course integration. For example,

the mimetic nature of early Christianity serves as a common

factor for all classes that integrate personal narratives

and stories in their curriculum. Along side of learning

proverbs and morals, doctrines and catechisms, narrative

communicates life lessons in ways only a story can. Only a

story is able to show how what appears to be courage is

actually foolish recklessness or how what appears to be

infidelity is in actuality an expression of commitment

(Guroian, 1998, p. 19). As such, the story nurtures what has

been called the “moral imagination,” the center for

cognitive and affective integration that classical thought

understood as the means of moral formation. It is not a

coincidence that the Greek word for “character” (charaktēr)

means “impression.” This character-impression is formed by

the subjective embodiment by the student of the virtues and

wisdom entailed in the story which is itself a mimēsis of

the sacred texts that form the foundation of paideia. Thus,

all narratives read in the Christian classrooms should be

15

read in terms of the student thinking through how they shed

light on, imitate, or are critiqued by the scriptures, thus

stimulating his or her moral imagination as the means of

Christian character formation.5

Exegesis and the Formation of Culture

But the student’s familiarity with stories that form

Christ-likeness can provide a further model for

interdisciplinary subject material, one that historically

differentiated itself from its social milieu. This model is

shaped by how biblical exegesis historically led to the

formation of a distinct Christian culture in the midst of

the Jewish and Graeco-Roman worlds. In her 1997 publication

Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Culture, patristic scholar

Frances M. Young provides a breathtaking account of how a

distinctly Christian paideia emerged by means of an

alternative literary culture to that fostered by classical

paideia (p. 51). Young traces the process, following a

precedent already established in the synagogue, whereby

5 An excellent introduction to the use of narrative in the formation of the moral imagination is Guroian 1998.

16

Christian apologists deliberately attempted to subordinate

the sacred writings of the Greeks (e.g. Homer, Hesiod) to

the philosophical, chronological, and theological primacy of

the (developing) Christian canon (p. 68). The selective

survey of early Christian apologists, like Justin, Tatian,

and Theophilus, demonstrates that such efforts were not

interested in getting rid of Hesiod and Plato as much as

they were interested in reading these texts in light of a

canonically circumscribed theological foundation different

from that which characterized Hellenistic culture (p. 53).

Young observes that the patristic aim of such subordination

was the provision of “a body of approved literature to be

used for Christian paideia” (p. 68).

Young draws out the significance of mimēsis for the

early Church by pointing to the Christian narratives that

were mimetic of Scripture and intended to inspire mimēsis

(240). Liturgical and literary mimēsis, the latter

represented by The Acts of Paul and The Martyrdom of Polycarp,

generated new panegyrics, new Christian narratives which

were in turn incorporated back into liturgy and life, thus

17

formulating a recursive framework for the emergence of a

distinctly Christian cultural identity. Young writes: “Just

as paideia in the schools was based on exegesis of texts and

their appropriation by critical mimēsis of style or ethics,

so Christian paideia took place through reading texts and

discerning their appropriate application…The corresponding

analogy between Church and school became more apposite …”

(p. 241). A survey of the homilies and catechetical lectures

in the early Christian period highlights the particularly

pedagogical interest of the body of writings, especially in

terms of how literature functioned in the process “of

educating people into a particular culture … with a body of

literature rather different from the elite texts of the

classical tradition” (p. 243). Young concludes that “there

are, then, many reasons for supposing that the early Church

was more like a school than a religion in the social world

of antiquity” (p. 244).

Such mimetic exegesis of scripture is indicative of a

larger entailment within sacred texts, an entailment

observed by the ecological anthropologist Roy Rappaport.

18

According to Rappaport, there are entailed within divine

discourse cosmological axioms which constitute “assumptions

concerning the fundamental structure of the universe or, to

put it differently,…refer to the paradigmatic relationships

in accordance with which the cosmos is constructed” (1999,

264). As a necessary entailment of sacred discourse,

cosmological axioms serve to interpret ecology in relation

to divine referents. This is perhaps most explicitly

demonstrated in the theology of the American Puritan

theologian Jonathan Edwards, who exemplifies a stunningly

detailed understanding of creation as an arena of divine

glory (see his Typological Writings). The patristics were no

exception to this. Note Ephrem’s scriptural interpretation

of ecology:

A bird grows up in three stagesFrom womb to egg, then to the nest where it sings;And once it is fully grown it flies in the air,Opening its wings in the symbol of the Cross.But if the bird gathers its wings,Thus denying the extended symbol of the Cross,Then the air too will deny the bird: The air will not carry the birdUnless its wings confess the Cross (quoted in Young,

1997, p. 148).6

6 An exceptional book on the nature of biblical imagery is Jordan 2000.

19

Theophilus deliberately cast the Genesis cosmogony account

in light of Hesiod’s Theogony, demonstrating the reliability

and consistency of the former at the expense of the latter

(Young, 1997, p. 54-56). Aristides presented Christians as a

new race amidst the Greeks, barbarians, and Jews (Dulles,

1999, p. 31-2). Justin Martyr was anxious to demonstrate how

Christ’s fulfillment of prophecy contained in the Jewish

scriptures enshrined within those scriptures a philosophical

veracity of which Plato and the other philosophical schools

were but foreshadows (Young, 1997, p. 67). Clement of

Alexandria challenged the Pythagorean concept of the music

of the spheres by presenting Christ as “the minstrel who

imparts harmony to the universe and makes music to God”

(Dulles, 1999, p. 39-40). Cosmology, race, philosophy,

history, and music are but examples of how early Christian

paideia functioned to integrate the totality of life around

the lordship of Christ in the midst of the Graeco-Roman

world. Even the gym class can be understood in distinctly

Christian terms. The recent study by James R. Harrison

20

compares and contrasts the ideals of Paul with those of the

ancient gymnasium, the most popular educational institution

in antiquity (2005). Harrison argues that the ubiquity of

gymnasia accounts for Paul’s “basic familiarity with the

athletic ideal of the Greeks (1 Cor 9.24-27; cf. 1 Tim 4:7-

8) and the honours it bestowed (9.25; cf 2 Tim 2.5), as was

the case with many other first-century Jews” (2005, p. 6).

The Christian athletic program can contribute to the

formation of Christian identity by interpreting athletic

participation as mimetic representations of biblical ideals,

such as the development of spiritual discipline,

perseverance, and character, projecting upon an athletic

competition the metaphor for a student’s life in Christ.

Observations

Our models for an integrative curriculum provided by

the survey of current research in biblical and patristic

scholarship yield the following set of observations:

First, the primacy of biblical text and mimēsis that

led to the formation of a distinct Christian culture in the

21

Graeco-Roman world corroborates what Temple, Newman,

Blamires, Van Til, et al, have argued, namely, that

institutions and pursuits of education are situated within a

social story, a meta-narrative, in relation to which the

totality of human experience is understood, however

incoherent that relation may be (as per the contemporary

post-modern phenomenon). Therefore, Christian education, if

it is going to be distinctly Christian, must understand

itself in relation to the divine narrative that climaxes in

the messianic ministry and reign of Christ. The importance

of such situatedness is the filtering function entailed

within such an interpretive paradigm, one that causes its

adherent to morally and intellectually cling to the

plausible and dismiss the implausible. Thus, Paul’s

messianic narrative did not merely subvert the reigning

imperial paradigm or the sacred texts of his particular age.

The Christian story was the reality of which the classical

world and Caesar’s Empire was the parody (Wright, 1998,

n.p.). From this posture, Paul and his churches could

embrace the good and reject the evil of their age by the

22

arbitration of the biblical narrative embodied through the

process of mimēsis. The Christian narrative, as the

realization of the hope and dreams so often expressed in a

variety of competing but inexorably grave-bound ideologies,

enables the people of God to affirm the good and shun the

evil, to collaborate and critique. It is essential, then,

that the biblical narrative remains foundational to the

endeavours of Christian education, for if presuppositional

narratives entail a filtering function by which the claims

of competing non-Christian ideologies are rendered

implausible, then the foundational occupation of a competing

ideology will only serve to render distinct elements within

the Christian narrative proportionately implausible.

Second, the implications of our study are such that the

Christological centre of Christian education would manifest

in both classroom and character alike. In the classroom,

Paul’s message of messianic kingship deliberately subverting

the imperial propaganda of his day demolishes the

Enlightenment separation of politics from religion, the

23

civil from the ceremonial. Pauline thought is just as

relevant in Government and Social Studies classes as in

Bible classes. The cosmological axioms entailed in sacred

discourse engender fundamental structures of the universe so

that every square inch of cosmos and culture symbolically

reflects the reign of Christ. In terms of character, the

heart of such Christological integration is a daily mimetic

reinforcement of the characteristic virtue of the Christian:

self-giving love. Students and teachers should together

strive to live out the cross in their daily lives by

considering the needs of others as more important than their

own. The prayerful, spiritual, and moral fostering of this

orientation collectively would go a long way to promoting a

constant presence of the cross and crown in every area of

life.

Third, and perhaps most profoundly, the imitation of

Christ by the student as it is modeled by the teacher means

that both teacher and student reciprocally grow together in

Christ-likeness. The beauty of Christian education is that

it provides a foundry for progressive Christ-formation in

24

both teacher and pupil. Christian education is not just for

the student. In seeking to form Christ in our students,

Christ is in turn formed in us. We together begin to realize

our own integration of mind and heart, resulting in what is

expressed in John Ruskin’s description of “moral taste”:

The entire object of true education is to make people not merely do the right things, but enjoy the right things — not merely industrious, but to love industry —not merely learned, but to love knowledge — not merely pure, but to love purity — not merely just, but to hunger and thirst after justice (1905, 435-36).

Conclusion

This essay was an attempt to demonstrate how current

research in biblical and patristic studies can contribute

models for the integration of curricula and provide a more

effective Christian education. The counter-imperial thesis

for Paul’s theology broke down walls between Bible,

Literature, History, and Government classes. The emergence

of a distinctly Christian paideia modeled the importance of

mimēsis for the formation of Christian character and identity

based on text and narrative. And the patristic formation of

25

Christian culture from biblical exegesis and the

cosmological axioms entailed in sacred discourse modeled a

comprehensive cosmic and cultural application of the

lordship of Christ which shaped a distinct Christian culture

in the midst of the Graeco-Roman world. For the early

church, a new cultural world was formed out of their

confidence in the inexhaustible knowledge of God as that

from which all things emerge and in which all things cohere.

Perhaps these recent studies of scripture and exegesis will

provide resources for Christian students today to learn to

think coherently within – and thus provide healing to – an

exhausted and fractured world.

26

Bibliography

Blamires, Harry. 1963. The Christian Mind. New York: The SeaburyPress.

Braund, David C. 1985. Augustus to Nero: A Sourebook on Roman History31 BC – AD 68. Totowa, NJ: Barnes and Noble Books, 1985.

Brown, Michael Joseph. 2001. “Paul’s Use of DOULOS XRISTOU IHSOU in Romans 1:1.” JBL 120/4, p. 723-737.

Conte, Gian Biagio and Glenn W. Most. 2003. “imitatio.” In The Oxford Classical Dictionary. 3rd Edition. Edited by Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth, 749. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Doble, Peter. 2000. “Education.” In The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought. Edited by Adrian Hastings, Alistair Mason, Hugh Pyper, 362-4. Oxford: Oxford University Press,191-93.

Dulles, Avery Cardinal. 1999. A History of Apologetics. San Francisco: Ignatius Press.

Ferguson, Everett. 2003. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. 3rd edn. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Georgi, Dieter. 1991. Theocracy in Paul’s Praxis and Theology. Philadelphia: Fortress Press.

Granger, Frank. 1897. “The Moral Life of the Early Romans.” International Journal of Ethics Vol. 7, No. 3, pp. 281-301.

Guroian, Vigen. 1998. Tending the Heart of Virtue: How Classic Stories Awaken a Child’s Moral Imagination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hale, William Harlan. 1970. Ancient Greece. New York: American Heritage Press.

27

Harrison, James R. 1999. “Paul, Eschatology and the AugustanAge of Grace.” Tyndale Bulletin 50.1, p. 79-91.

_______. 2005. “Paul and the Gymnasiarchs: Two Approaches toPastoral Formation in Antiquity.” http://www.pitts.emory.edu/hmpec/docs/Harrison-Gymnasiarchs-SBL05.pdf.

Horace. 1988. Horace: The Odes and Epodes. Trans. by C. E. Bennett, LCL 33. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Holmes, Arthur F. 1991. Shaping Character: Moral Education in the Christian College. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

_______. 2001. Building the Christian Academy. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Horsley, Richard A., ed. 1997. Paul and Empire: Religion and Power in Roman Imperial Society. Harrisburg: Trinity Press International.

Jaeger, Werner. 1965. Early Christianity and Greek Paideia. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Jordan, James. 2000. Through New Eyes: Developing a Biblical View of the World. Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers.

Kelsey, David. 1992. “To Understand God Truly.” http://www.religion-online.org/showchapter.asp?title=379&C=56.

Knight, George R. 1998a. Issues and Alternatives In Educational Philosophy. 3rd ed. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

_______. 1998b. Philosophy and Education: An Introduction in Christian Perspective. 3rd ed. Berrien Springs, MI: Andrews University Press.

28

Lake, Kathy. 1994. “Integrated Curriculum.” http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/8/c016.html.

Lewis, C.S. (1972 [1944]). The Abolition of Man, or Reflections on Education with Special Reference to the Teaching of English in the Upper Forms of Schools. New York: Touchstone.

Lieu, Judith M. 2004. Christian Identity in the Jewish and Graeco-Roman World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Momigliano, Arnaldo. 1984. “The Theological Efforts of RomanUpper Classes in the First Century B.C.” Classical Philology Vol. 79, No. 3, pp. 199-211.

Paterculus. 1924. Velleius Paterculus: Compendium of Roman History & Res Gestae Divi Augusti. Trans. By Frederick William Shipley, (LCL 152. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1924),pp. 344-45 (for Preamble).

Rappaport, Roy. Ritual and Religion in the Making of Humanity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Ruskin, John. 1905. The Works of John Ruskin. Ed. by E.T. Cook and Alexander Wedderburn. New York: Longmans, Green, and Co.

Wise, John E. 1961. “Jesuit School Beginnings” History of Education Quarterly Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 28-31.

Wright, N.T. 1994. “Gospel and Theology in Galatians,” in Gospel in Paul: Studies on Corinthians, Galatians and Romans for Richard N. Longenecker, eds. L. Ann Jervis and Peter Richardson, pp. 222–239, Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement Series 108. Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press.

______. 1998. “Paul’s Gospel and Caesar’s Empire.” http://www.ctinquiry.org/publications/wright.htm.

29

Young, Frances M. 1997. Biblical Exegesis and the Formation of Christian Culture. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers.

30