This thesis extends recent scholarly interest in the practical processes of Late Antique Roman law and on the integration of the episcopate into Roman power structures in the fourth century, the first century of imperial patronage of Christian communities. It confirms the "minimalist" model of Roman governance and provides a non-medieval example of the persecution of minorities as a contingent effect of competing claims to authority. This thesis argues that fourth-century elite Roman men disputing episcopal status via the Roman courts led to a transformation of episcopal polity, and that this development has been obscured by a subsequent paradigm shift in the norms concerning episcopal use of Roman law towards the end of that century. This paradigm shift identified by this thesis has three important aspects:1. With the change in imperial dynasty from the Valentinians to Theodosians, imperial favour moved from non-Nicene to Nicene bishops. Disparity of access to imperial favour during the fourth century required Nicene-identified bishops to invent tools to succeed in spite of their poor position. After the Theodosian-Nicene takeover, the Nicene-identified bishops retained these tools while also inheriting the legal framework that the non-Nicene bishops had crafted during their mid-century period of patronage.2. The power structures through which imperial favour was granted also changed. The typical fourth-century use of Roman law to resolve inter-episcopal disputes was different from that which would become established as a more enduring precedent in the Theodosian era. 3. The episcopal rhetoric used in claiming imperial favour changed from a focus on affirming one's own privilege to a focus on the proscription of others. The terminology of orthodox versus heretical is significant but must be understood as relational: even once heretics were proscribed by law, orthodoxy remained a status granted by the emperor. The methodology of this thesis argues for the importance of interpreting the relevant fourth-century sources in the context of their own time and norms, rather than in the light of the significantly different fifth-century practice as previous scholarship has done. This thesis first discusses two case studies before the paradigm shift: in Chapter One, Athanasius of Alexandria, as an example typical of the fourth century, and in Chapter Two, Priscillian of Avila, as an example at the cusp of the transition in the 380s who still demonstrates conformance with earlier practice. The thesis then describes the transition to the Theodosian-Nicene mode with an extended focus on Ambrose of Milan. Chapter Three shows Ambrose, contemporary with Priscillian, refusing to engage with existing episcopal legal practices and inventing a new strategy to survive the threat of Roman law. Chapter Four shows how Ambrose further refined this strategy in other conflicts and in doing so created a new place for bishops within the power structures of the Roman Empire.

Thesis advisor: Pheme Perkins / This study demonstrates how the Comma Johanneum (1 John 5:7b-8a), a Latin addition and “spurious” text of the New Testament, could proffer valuable meaning-making and intricate sociocultural realia to Christian history, although it has been long neglected in Johannine scholarship. Its first aim is to reconstruct the transmission and reception history of the CJ, starting with the Spanish Latin MSS (the direct evidence) and returning to patristic citations (the indirect evidence). Its second aim is to explore the theological and ecclesiological interpretations of 1 John 5:6-8 from the second through fourth centuries, in which the CJ could have been created. Chapter 1 reviews the history of scholarship on the CJ and the interpretations of 1 John 5 in contemporary Johannine scholarship. Chapter 2 discusses the methodological shift in contemporary text-critical scholarship that enabled the new perspective to appreciate the variant readings. Against the historical background, data, and evidence presented in Chapter 3, in Chapter 4, we reconstruct the transmission history of the CJ text from the seventh through the thirteenth centuries, mainly in the Spanish Latin Bible tradition. The Spanish Vulgate Bible is a mixture of the Old Latin biblical text, particularly in the Catholic Epistles, which also retain variant readings, including the CJ text. The earliest evidence—VL 64 and VL 67—exhibit the transition from North Africa to Visigothic Spain, preserving the seventh-century “Isidorian Renaissance.” The Spanish Latin Bible traditions—Codex Cavensis, Codex Toletanus, and Complutensis primus—all preserve the CJ text while formulating independent recensions. Outside Spain, Théodulf of Orleans, a Visigothic Spaniard, brought a Spanish Vulgate tradition to Charlemagne’s court; thus, Théodulf’s Mesmes Bible (ΘM) preserves the CJ in the textline, with a variant replacing uerbum with filius. Meanwhile, in Switzerland, St. Gall MSS—Cod. Sang 907 (Winithar) and Cod. Sang 83 (Hartmut)—also retain the CJ, along with some Spanish-type paratextual components. In ninth-century Spain and beyond, the Lesionensis group MSS (VL 91, 94, and 95) attest to another endpoint of the CJ’s journey. In addition, VL 95 affirms the date of the inversion of in terra and in caelo to the twelfth or thirteenth century (together with the second hand of VL 54). The CJ text, therefore, survived in the soil of Spanish cultural orbit, where the Vulgate text (mixed with the Old Latin readings) was received and survived. Simultaneously, the study reveals high levels of textual circulation and interregional cultural communication in North Africa, Spain, Gaul, and beyond. In Chapter 5, we examine the indirect evidence, focusing on Priscillian of Avila. While we rehabilitate Priscillian’s citation of the CJ, the earliest and most extended surviving indirect witness, as one recension in Spain, our examination of the indirect evidence also shows that there are at least three receptions of the CJ—(1) the terrestrial witness (in terra), a simple addition to the three witnesses in v.7a; (2) the celestial witness (in caelo), a further addition in v.8a, pointing to the trinitarian “heavenly witnesses,” and (3) a combination, which is the CJ properly so-called and eventually attested in the Vulgate. Finally, in Chapter 6, we explore the patristic interpretations of 1 John 5:6-8 (and John 19:34), which are laden with sacramental and ecclesiological connotations. In the second and third centuries, Tertullian, Cyprian, and Ps.-Cyprian expounded the baptismal interpretation with 1 John 5:6-8, and in the fourth century, Ambrose and Augustine crystalized trinitarian interpretations. Ambrose emphasized the divinity of the Spirit as the heavenly efficacy of the baptismal sacrament, which differentiated the invisible and visible realia of the sacraments. Augustine further developed his trinitarian interpretation of 1 John 5:6-8, grounded in incarnational theology of the Johannine turn; “the three” (tres) thus became the “signs” (signa) of the divine mystery of the Trinity. The CJ text could be another attempt to elucidate the crux interpretationis of 1 John 5:6-8. Exploring the patristic interpretations of these passages revealed the significance of the “lived life” of early Christian communities, which contemporary scholarship has somewhat devalued. This study thus reveals a forgotten sociocultural and religious history along with a journey of the CJ text. / Thesis (PhD) — Boston College, 2024. / Submitted to: Boston College. Graduate School of Arts and Sciences. / Discipline: Theology.