彼得的矛盾十字架

IF 0.2 0 RELIGION
David L. Eastman
{"title":"彼得的矛盾十字架","authors":"David L. Eastman","doi":"10.1080/2222582X.2021.1969976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines two ways in which the cross on which Peter hangs in various apocryphal accounts of his death is actually paradoxical. First, the earliest account, the second-century Martyrdom of the Holy Apostle Peter (the final section of the Acts of Peter), recounts that Peter returns to face his fate after meeting Christ in the famous Quo vadis? scene. However, the author presents a death that is ultimately not very Christlike at all, for the narrative effectively denies the physicality of the event. Two later authors, Pseudo-Linus and Pseudo-Abdias, reshape the story in order to correct this tension. Second, Pseudo-Linus’s accounts suggests that this first-century story can be understood properly only by looking back through the lens of fourth-century practices and imagery. The article ends by considering a final irony: although the story of Peter’s crucifixion was so critical to the Petrine tradition and Roman claims to ecclesiastical authority, alleged fragments of that cross never became part of the Petrine cult.","PeriodicalId":40708,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Christian History","volume":"11 1","pages":"61 - 78"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Peter’s Paradoxical Cross\",\"authors\":\"David L. Eastman\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/2222582X.2021.1969976\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This article examines two ways in which the cross on which Peter hangs in various apocryphal accounts of his death is actually paradoxical. First, the earliest account, the second-century Martyrdom of the Holy Apostle Peter (the final section of the Acts of Peter), recounts that Peter returns to face his fate after meeting Christ in the famous Quo vadis? scene. However, the author presents a death that is ultimately not very Christlike at all, for the narrative effectively denies the physicality of the event. Two later authors, Pseudo-Linus and Pseudo-Abdias, reshape the story in order to correct this tension. Second, Pseudo-Linus’s accounts suggests that this first-century story can be understood properly only by looking back through the lens of fourth-century practices and imagery. The article ends by considering a final irony: although the story of Peter’s crucifixion was so critical to the Petrine tradition and Roman claims to ecclesiastical authority, alleged fragments of that cross never became part of the Petrine cult.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40708,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Early Christian History\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"61 - 78\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Early Christian History\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/2222582X.2021.1969976\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"RELIGION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Early Christian History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2222582X.2021.1969976","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文探讨了两种方式,在这两种方式中,彼得在各种关于他的死亡的虚构叙述中所挂的十字架实际上是自相矛盾的。首先,最早的记述,第二世纪的《圣使徒彼得殉道记》(《彼得传》的最后一节),讲述了彼得在著名的库瓦迪斯遇到基督后返回面对自己的命运?场景然而,作者呈现的死亡最终一点也不像基督,因为叙事实际上否认了事件的物理性。后来的两位作者,伪莱纳斯和伪阿卜迪亚斯,为了纠正这种紧张关系,重新塑造了这个故事。其次,伪莱纳斯的叙述表明,只有通过四世纪的实践和意象来回顾,才能正确理解这个一世纪的故事。文章最后考虑了最后一个讽刺:尽管彼得被钉十字架的故事对皮特林传统和罗马对教会权威的主张至关重要,但据称十字架的碎片从未成为皮特林邪教的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Peter’s Paradoxical Cross
Abstract This article examines two ways in which the cross on which Peter hangs in various apocryphal accounts of his death is actually paradoxical. First, the earliest account, the second-century Martyrdom of the Holy Apostle Peter (the final section of the Acts of Peter), recounts that Peter returns to face his fate after meeting Christ in the famous Quo vadis? scene. However, the author presents a death that is ultimately not very Christlike at all, for the narrative effectively denies the physicality of the event. Two later authors, Pseudo-Linus and Pseudo-Abdias, reshape the story in order to correct this tension. Second, Pseudo-Linus’s accounts suggests that this first-century story can be understood properly only by looking back through the lens of fourth-century practices and imagery. The article ends by considering a final irony: although the story of Peter’s crucifixion was so critical to the Petrine tradition and Roman claims to ecclesiastical authority, alleged fragments of that cross never became part of the Petrine cult.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
16.70%
发文量
16
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信