Shepherd of Hermas by not sure

I finally got started in volume 2 of the AnteNicene Fathers (CCEL makes these available). Shepherd of Hermas was attributed to the early Hermas that Paul mentions and was read in many churches of east starting around the second century. The translator is pretty sure that the Hermas is actually the brother of Pius I and thinks it was written to help counter the Montanists. In other words, we're not sure. It was esteemed highly enough to be bound up in the same volume with the gospels and Paul's letters, but some were dubious and it seems to have vanished from use by the fifth century.

The translator is extremely eager to note the primacy of Grace in the parables--at least in chronological order--to defend the author against a charge of legalism. That's a hard defence to sustain.

The book is a set of visions and meetings with angels who explain the visions, over a period of what seems like several months. The theme is that one must do right, turn from wickedness and bear fruit. Wealth attaches you to the world and renders you unsuitable to be "built into the tower." Purity and more purity.

There are a few inconsistencies: he is told several times that there is no repentence possible after knowing and rejecting Jesus, and also told that the fallen-away may be able to repent unless they denied the faith.

Some things seem more than a little odd: grief grieves the Holy Spirit, and the nature of Jesus seems a little unorthodox. On the other hand, he's also told that he is going to have to suffer because his family (church) is sinful and needs disciplining, even though he himself is innocent--which is a wise observation.

His personal catalog of sins is a bit thin and jars somewhat with the claim of the angel of repentence that he has a lot to answer for.

The format of (vision+repeated questions for interpretation of the allegory)*N is a bit tiring to deal with when you read it in a couple of sittings, but since it was probably mostly read aloud in much smaller chunks the hearers might not have cared. Some of the allegories are fine and some are exceedingly uninspired.

I don't say "read it" unless you have some commitment to reading the early fathers.

On the other hand, I do say read some of it to get a feel for what the early church attitudes were like. It is about as far from Joel Osteen as you can get.