ERA 1 << Early Church (1): Persecutions (AD 30–300) >> SESSION 2
Reference: Gonzalez, volume 1, chapters 7-9
† 3.1.1 Rumours & misunderstanding of Christian faith
·
Background: Apology (Greek apologia) means a defense. Apologists were the scholars who defended
Christianity from enemies outside the church. Throughout 2nd-c, many
rumours have arisen about Christianity. Christians were under persecution when
anyone could make an accusation against them, and many accusations were based
on these rumours. Thus there was a need for Christian scholars to defend their
faith by refuting the rumours. The objective was to convince the leaders of the
state that Christians had done nothing to deserve persecutions. These apologists
wrote as philosophers rather than theologians.
·
Apologetic
method: Negatively, they sought to refute the
false accusations of atheism, immorality, incest, cannibalism, disloyalty, and
anti-social behaviour that pagans levelled against them. Positively, they developed a constructive approach by
showing that in contrast to Christianity, Judaism, pagan religions, and emperor
worship were foolish and sinful. While rejecting paganism, they accepted that
paganism had produced a valuable culture. While accepting the truth written by
the philosophers, they insisted on the superiority of Christian revelation.
·
Negative
defense: Apologists argued against the following
charges.
o
That Christians were atheists because they believed in an
invisible God—apologists said that gods from pagan culture are man-made.
o
That Christian were immoral—apologists judged that the pagans
are immoral, not the Christians.
o
That Christians practiced incest, because Christians’ using the term
“love feast” and calling each other “brothers and sisters”—apologists explained
the meaning of Christian terminology.
o
That Christians practice cannabalism, that Christians concealed a
newborn in a loaf of bread during communion, because Christians spoke of being
nourished by the body and blood of Christ—apologists showed the reality and
symbolism of Christian meetings.
o
That Christians were disloyal and subversive by refusing to worship the
emperor—apologists defended that Christians were still loyal to the empire, and
that the emperor should be served, not worshipped.
o
That Christianity destroyed the fibre of
society because Christians abstained from most social
activities—apologists showed how Christians were good citizens of the empire.
o
That Christianity was intellectually wanting, foolish and even self-contradictory—apologists
showed how Christianity was the superior faith. Class prejudice was one thing
that caused the criticism. People in the upper class or intellectual groups did
not believe a religion derived, not from Greeks or Romans, but from Jews (a
primitive race in their opinions) would be sophisticated.
o
That Christians were foolish in believing the final resurrection—apologists asserted the divine
omnipotence of God who can create lives.
·
Positive
approach: Apologists argued about the superiority of
Christianity.
o
Ancient philosophy: Christianity was the oldest
religion and philosophy because the Pentateuch predated the Trojan War as
described in Homer’s book Iliad
[c.900 BC].
o
Original philosophy: Whatever truth in Greek thought
was borrowed from Christianity or Judaism.
o
Highest philosophy: Christianity was the highest philosophy based on the pure life of Christ,
His miracles, and the fulfilment of OT prophecies about Christ.
† 3.1.2 Christian faith & pagan culture
·
Attitudes
on pagan culture: Different Christians held 2
different types of attitudes toward the pagan culture surrounding them: [1] opposition, or [2] accommodation.
·
Opposition: This attitude was represented by
Tertullian. Most Christians tried to avoid civil ceremonies where there were
sacrifice and vows made to the pagan gods. But some even avoided the study of
classical literature where gods and immorality were described. They claimed
that the Greek culture was not better than the “Barbarian” culture as the Greek
claimed. People who had this point of view isolate themselves from pagan
culture. Later, some withdrew completely from the society and lived as hermits.
o
Tertullian: “What does
o Tatian: The Greeks learned astronomy from the Babylonians, geometry from the Egyptians, and writing from the Phoenicians. They learned philosophy and religion from the writings of Moses which were earlier than Homer. Moreover, pagan gods (based on Greek mythology) were all immoral.
·
Accommodation: This attitude was represented by
Justin Martyr. They tried to show and explain the connection between Christian
faith and pagan culture, or philosophies, and pointed out their agreements.
They pointed out good things in pagan culture which even Christians could
appreciate.
o Supreme being: The best Greek philosophers spoke of a supreme being from which all other beings derive their existence.
o Immortality: Socrates and Plato affirmed life beyond physical death. Plato posited another world of eternal realities.
o Logos: The agreement between Greek philosophy and Christianity is because of the doctrine of Logos. The word means “word” and “reason”. Greek philosophy believed that human mind can understand reality because it shares in the Logos or universal reason. The Gospel of John affirms that in Jesus, the Logos or “Word” was made flesh. He is therefore the source of all true knowledge.
† 3.1.3 Leading apologists
·
Earliest: The earliest apologetical document
was To Diognetus by an unknown
author. It described Christians as: “Christians are no different from
the rest in their nationality, language or customs…. They live in their own
countries, but as sojourners. They fulfil all their duties as citizens, but
they suffer as foreigners. They find their homeland wherever they are, but
their homeland is not in any one place…. They are in the flesh, but do not live
according to the flesh. They live on earth, but are citizens of heaven. They
obey all laws, but they live at a level higher than that required by law. They
love all, but all persecute them.” (Sections 5.1-11)
·
East
vs West: Eastern apologists (using Greek)—Aristides,
Justin Martyr, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus. Western apologists (using
Latin)—Tertullian, Minucius Felix.
·
Aristides (2nd-c)—He was a Christian
philosopher in
·
Justin
Martyr (100–165)—He was a teacher in
·
Tatian (110–172)—He was student of Justin.
He argued that since Christianity is superior
to Greek religion and thought, Christians should be given fair treatment, and
that Christianity is far more ancient than
Greek thought.
·
Athenagoras (133–190)—He was a professor of
·
Theophilus (??–185)—He was the bishop in
·
Tertullian (160–225)—He was an elder in
·
Minucius
Felix (2nd-c to 3rd-c)—He was a Christian in
† 3.2.1 Major heresies during 2nd-c
·
Reasons
for heresies: Different interpretations of Christianity
arose as Christianity was spread to various regions. Before there was a NT canon (Scripture), people chose the documents as
they pleased to support their own interpretation of the religion. Some people
also mixed other religions and philosophy with Christian teachings together (syncretism) and built up new teachings which violated
the core teachings of Christianity. These had huge impact on the early church.
·
Classes
of heresies: [1]
Legalistic heresies: Ebionites. [2]
Philosophical heresies: Gnosticism, Manicheanism, Marcionism, Neoplatonism. [3] Theological errors: Montanism,
Monarchianism. [4] Ecclesiastical
schisms: Easter controversy, Donatism.
Perversions of the doctrine of Christ (from Buswell’s book)
|
Party |
Time |
Condemned |
Human
nature |
Divine
nature |
|
Docetists |
late 1st-c |
|
denied |
affirmed |
|
Ebionites |
2nd-c |
|
affirmed |
denied |
|
Arians |
4th-c |
Nicea
[325] |
affirmed |
reduced |
|
Apollinarians |
4th-c |
|
reduced |
affirmed |
|
Nestorians |
5th-c |
|
affirmed |
affirmed |
|
Eutychians |
5th-c |
|
reduced |
reduced |
|
ORTHODOX |
|
|
affirmed |
affirmed |
NOTE: Nestorians held that Christ was 2
persons.
Eutychians held that Christ
had one mixed nature, neither fully human nor fully divine.
Orthodox
view: Christ is one person with a fully divine nature
& a fully human nature.
† 3.2.2 Ebionites—The Son is not God
·
Influence
of Judaism: Ebionites were converts from
Judaism. They continued to hold some unorthodox beliefs from their Jewish
heritage. They lived in Judea and
·
Beliefs: They emphasized the unity of God. They believed that the Jewish Law was
the highest expression of His will and that it was still binding on man,
including all Christians. They believed that Jesus was Joseph’s son who
attained a measure of divinity when the Spirit came upon Him at baptism. They
denied the virgin birth and the deity of Christ.
† 3.2.3 Gnosticism—secret knowledge to salvation
·
Time
frame: It was a vast and amorphous movement that existed both within and
outside the church. The name came from Greek word gnosis (knowledge). It claimed that the Gospel of Thomas contained
the true teachings of Jesus. In 1st-c, there was an incipient form of
Gnosticism that Paul fought against. A well-developed Gnosticism threatened the
church in 2nd-c.
·
On the
origin of evil: It sprang from the natural human desire to
create a theodicy, an explanation of the origin of evil. They tried to separate
God from associating with evil. They believed that a lesser god, identified as
Jehovah of the OT, created the evil material world.
·
On knowledge: They claimed to have secret and mystic knowledge which leads to salvation. This
knowledge was taught by “messengers” from the Supreme Being. In Christian
Gnosticism, Jesus was said to be a messenger. Only the pneumatic Gnostics
(those possessing the esoteric gnosis),
and the psychic group (those having faith but no access to the gnosis) would get to heaven.
·
Dualism: This was the foundation of their
philosophy. They claimed that only spiritual things
are good, while matter which is an error of creation is bad. The final
goal is to escape from the body and this material world in which we are exiled.
This leads to a few conclusions:
o
[1] Docetism [c.110]: It came from
the Greek word dokein meaning “to
seem”. They believed that the body of Jesus was a phantom which appeared to be
fully human but was not. Gnostics picked up this idea because matter (flesh) for them is
evil.
o
[2] Asceticism: Flesh is bad, so
fulfilling desire from the flesh is bad. One must control the body and its
passions and thus weaken its power over the spirit. An ascetic life was
emphasized.
o
[3] Libertinism: Flesh is bad
but spirit is good, so let the flesh enjoy its evil desire, while the spirit
remains good (amazingly exactly opposite to the second conclusion). What one
needs to do is to leave the body to its own devices and let it follow the
guidance of its own passions.
·
Problems: [1] It denied many important Christian doctrines, including
creation, incarnation, sacrificial death, and resurrection. [2] It pandered to spiritual pride with
its belief that only an aristocratic elite would go to heaven. [3] Its asceticism was a contributing
factor to the medieval ascetic monasticism. [4] Its libertinism encouraged Christians to live in sin.
† 3.2.4 Manicheanism—dualism: god of darkness
· Syncretism: It was developed by Mani or Manichaeus (216–276), combining Christianity, Zoroastrianism, and other oriental ideas.
o Zoroastrianism: It was a religion based on the teachings of a Persian named Zoroaster (6th-c BC). He believed in a universal conflict between the creator and evil. He believed that fire is an agent of ritual purity, and a medium for spirutal insight.
· Dualism: Manicheans believed in dualism, two opposing and eternal principles—the king of light and the king of darkness. Man was created by the king of light but he was tricked by the king of darkness, so man’s soul linked him with the kingdom of light, but his body brought him into bondage to the kingdom of darkness.
· Emphases: Salvation was the liberation of the light in his soul, brought about by exposure to the Light, Christ. They lived ascetic lives and emphasized the superiority of celibacy.
·
Influence:
They were influential even after the death of Mani in
† 3.2.5 Marcionism—OT inspired by an inferior god
·
Influence: It was developed by Marcion
(110–160), the son of a bishop. At one time, it was successful with their own
churches and bishops. After Marcion was excommunicated [144], Marcionism
continued in the West for 3 centuries, although Marcionistic ideas persisted
much longer.
·
Beliefs: Marcionites denied that the Old Testament was inspired by the Supreme God, but by
an inferior, judgmental god called Jehovah. It claimed that Old Testaments
teachings are not legitimate. It did not believe there would be a final
judgment because the Supreme God (the Father of Christians) is a kind god who
only forgives.
·
Scripture: They chose the Gospel of Luke and
Paul’s Epistles as the basis of faith while the entire OT were cut away.
† 3.2.6 Neoplatonism—absorption into the Absolute Being
·
Beliefs: The leading philosophers of
Neoplatonism were Plontinus (205–270) and Porphyry (232–305). They believed an
Absolute Being as the transcendent source of all that exists and from which all
was created by a process of overflow (like the concentric circles on water when
a pebble drops into water). This overflow or emanation resulted in the creation
of man as a reasoning soul and body. The goal of the universe was re-absorption
into the divine essence. One’s highest state for enjoyment is the experience of
ecstasy. This can be achieved with rational contemplation, by mystical intuition seeking to know God, and by being
absorbed into the Absolute Being.
·
Influence: Emperor Julian the Apostate [361–363]
embraced this thought during his short reign. This movement no doubt
contributed to the rise of mysticism in
Christianity. Many leaders in the ancient church were influenced by this
philosophy.
·
Mysticism: It was originated from the
mystical philosophy of Neoplatonism. There are 3 forms of mysticism:
o
[1] Epistemological type: The
emphasis is on how man comes to know God. They believe that our knowledge of
God comes directly by intuition or spiritual illumination. Examples are
Christian medieval mystics, Quietists, and Quakers.
o
[2] Metaphysical type: The
emphasis is on how the spiritual essence of man is absorbed mystically into the
divine being. Following death, man’s spirit becomes a part of the divine being.
Examples are Neoplatonists and Buddhists.
o
[3] Ethical type: The emphasis
is on how the individual is related to God through his identification with
Christ and with the indwelling Holy Spirit. This is Biblical teaching.
† 3.2.7 Montanism—new age revealed
·
Reaction
to formalism: It was developed by Montanus (2nd-c) to meet
the problems of formalism (particularly the prominence of the bishop) in the
church. He claimed that their movement was the beginning
of a new age with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to them. It was an
age characterized by a more rigorous moral life than the previous age. They
claimed that the last age of history had dawned with them. This contradicted
the Bible which teaches that the last days began with the resurrection of
Jesus.
·
Eschatology: Montanus believed that he himself was
the advocate through whom the Holy Spirit spoke to the church. He also believed
that the heavenly
·
Warning
for today: Montanism was a warning to the church not to
forget that organization and doctrine must not be divorced from the
satisfaction of the emotional side of believers. Because of the attraction of
such teachings, even Tertullian erroneously joined them.
† 3.2.8 Monarchianism—one Father God
·
Dynamic
or Adoptionist Monarchianism: It was developed by Paul of
Samosata (200–275), bishop of Antioch, who taught that Christ was not divine
but was merely a good man who, by righteousness and possession of his being by
the divine Logos at baptism, achieved divinity and saviourhood. This emphasis
of the unity of God and the denial of the deity of
Christ was an ancient form of unitarianism.
·
Sabellianism
or Modalistic Monarchianism: It was developed by Sabellius
(3rd-c) who taught that Trinity is a manifestation of
forms rather than essence. God was manifested as Father in OT times, as
the Son to redeem man, and as the Holy Spirit to inspire the Apostles after the
resurrection of Christ.
† 3.2.9 Finding the common ground against heresies
·
Responses: Facing the malicious teachings
from the many heresies, the church responded by: [1] setting the Canon, [2]
establishing the Creed, and [3]
pointing out the source of authority: teachings brought down only by the
Apostles.
·
Compilation
of the Canon:
o
Concensus: A list of sacred Christian writings was
compiled by various leaders. Consensus on which books are in the Canon
developed gradually until universal acceptance
was reached in 4th-c. The 27 books of the NT canon was confirmed at the
non-ecumenical councils at
o
OT: The Hebrew Scripture (OT) was accepted as part of the Christian Canon.
Christian faith was regarded as the fulfilment of the hope of
o
Multiple gospels: There was agreement to include
more than one Gospels, even when the differences were known.
·
Establishment
of the Creed: The creed was a “symbol
of faith” which was used to distinguish between Christians and the main
heresies. The Apostles’ Creed was written in
o The 1st part about the Father: The Greek word pantokrator means “all ruling”—nothing is outside God’s rule.
o The 2nd part about the Son: It affirms that Jesus is the Son of God who rules over all, and that He was born, and that He died and resurrected in a historical time frame.
o The 3rd part about the Holy Spirit and others: It affirms the authority of the church and the importance of the flesh in resurrection.
·
Apostolic
succession: This emphasis had 3 implications: [1] It was a proof that the church’s
teachings was originated from Jesus’ disciples.
It became crucial to claim authority on the church’s teachings in order to
refute heretic teachings. [2] There
were no secret teachings; teachings were
according to the total witness of all the Apostles for the universal church. [3] Bishops of the time were regarded
as successors of the Apostles, although the
circulating lists of bishops linking to Apostles may not be totally
trustworthy.
† 3.3.1 Defense against heresies
· Background: Polemics (Greek polemikos) means warlike. Polemicists were those scholars who defended the Christianity faith by pointing out the errors of heresies which grew out from inside the church. They met the challenge of false teaching by heretics with an aggressive condemnation. While the apologists wrote against false accusations—an external threat to the safety of the church, the polemicists wrote against heresies—an internal threat to the peace and purity of the church.
·
The
Alexandrian School:
o Greek: Eastern polemicists wrote in Greek, including Irenaeus of Lyons, Clement of Alexandria, Origen.
o Main concerns: The Eastern polemicists were concerned with speculative theology and gave most attention to metaphysical problems. They wanted to develop a system of theology that by the use of philosophy would give a systematic exposition of Christianity.
o Method of exposition: They developed an allegorical system of interpretation of the Bible. The supposition was that Scripture has more than one meaning. Using the analogy of man’s body, soul, and spirit, they argued that Scripture had a literal, historical meaning that corresponded to the human body; a hidden moral meaning that corresponded to the human soul; and a deeper, underlying spiritual meaning that only the more spiritually advanced Christians could understand.
o Problem: The allegorical method of Biblical interpretation has done much harm to Biblical exposition and has resulted in absurd and often unscriptural theological ideas.
·
The
o Latin: Western polemicists wrote in Latin, including Tertullian, Cyprian.
o Main concerns: The Western polemicists were more concerned with practical problems, such as aberrations of the polity of the church. They endeavoured to formulate a sound practical answer.
o Method of exposition: They tended to emphasize a grammatico-historical interpretation of the Bible.
† 3.3.2 Leading polemicists
·
Irenaeus
of
o
Life: He was
a disciple of Polycarp at
o
On Scripture:
He was one of the first to talk of NT Scripture which was apostolic writings
that were accorded authority.
o
On Gnosticism:
His book Against Heresies refuted Gnosticism, using the Scripture and relevant
tradition. He challenged their claims to secret apostolic traditions. He argued
that all churches founded by the Apostles had the same doctrine.
o
On unity: He
emphasized the organic unity of the church through apostolic
succession of leaders.
o
On incarnation:
For him, the incarnation of God in Jesus Christ was not the result of sin.
God’s initial purpose was to unite with mankind. The incarnate Word was the
model that God followed in making man after the divine image. Adam and Eve were
created so that after a process of growth and instruction, they could become
like the incarnate Word. But because of sin, the incarnation had an added
purpose of offering a remedy for sin, and a means for defeating Satan. Some of
these ideas are non-orthodox.
o
On man’s destiny: He took God as a shepherd who leads creation to its final goal. The
crown of creation is man. We are to become increasingly conformed to the divine
will and nature, and thus to enjoy an ever-growing communion
with our Creator. Man is to be instructed by the Word and the Holy
Spirit. Even at the end, when the
·
Pantaenus (2nd-c):
o
Life: He
founded the Catechetical School of Alexandria [c.190]. Clement of
·
Clement
of
o
Life: He was
a teacher in
o
Intelligent orthodoxy: His goal was not to expound the traditional Christian faith but to convince pagan intellectuals that Christianity was
not a superstition. In his Exhortation to
the Pagans, he showed that most Christian doctrines can be supported by
Plato’s philosophy. His aim was to present an educated and intellectually
viable form of orthodoxy.
o
On faith & reason: He believed that there is only one truth; philosophy has been given to
the Greeks just as the Law has been given to the Jews. There is a close
relationship between faith and reason. Faith is
a the first principle, the starting point, on which reason is to build.
o
On Christian life: He advocated a path of austerity or simple
living as a mean between the extremes of luxury and asceticism
(renunciation). The ideal is a Christian gnostic, the spiritual man who has
progressed beyond faith to knowledge. This is not merely academic knowledge but
a spiritual perception, requiring ethical purity and having the contemplation
of God as its goal.
o
Platonic idea:
His allegorical exegesis allowed him to find in the Scripture ideas and
doctrines that are really Platonic. God is the ineffable (impassible) and one
can only speak in metaphors and in negative terms about God, as God is beyond
all emotion or feeling. God is revealed to us in the Word or Logos, from which
the philosophers and prophets received truth, and which has become incarnate in
Jesus. The danger of his position is that one
may imperceptibly synthesize Christianity and Greek learning and support
syncretism.
·
Origen
of
o
Life: His
father suffered martyrdom. He was Clement’s student. He later became bishop of
o
Works: He
wrote many books. De principiis—On First
Principles was a systematic theology,
divided into 4 books: God, the world, freedom, Scripture. Hexapla was the text of the OT in 6 columns, comparing Hebrew and
different Greek texts. He did more exegetical work than anyone did before the
Reformation. However, he felt that the Bible could not be properly understood
without the use of allegory.
o
Apology: In Against Celsus, he dealt with Celsus’
charge concerning the irrationality of Christians. He emphasized the change in
conduct that Christianity produces in contrast with paganism; the open-minded
investigations of truth by Christians; and the purity and influence of Christ
and His followers.
o
Main teachings:
[1] There is a danger in accepting
teachings of the philosophers such as Neoplatonism. He stated: “nothing which
is at variance with the tradition of the Apostles and of the church is to be
accepted as true.” [2] Jesus Christ
is the son of God, begotten before all creation, becoming human but remaining
divine. The Holy Spirit’s glory is no less than the Father and the Son. [3] The soul will be punished or
rewarded according to its life in this world. There will be a final
resurrection of the body which will be incorruptible.
o
Tentative speculations: [1] There are two
narratives of creations because there were in fact two creations. The first was
purely spiritual, without bodies. Some strayed and fell so God made the second
creation which was material, serving as a shelter for fallen spirits. Those
spirits who fell further became demons. [2]
All human souls existed as pure spirits before being born. [3] The devil and his demons made man captive so Jesus Christ came
to break the power of Satan. Christ’s death was a ransom to Satan. [4] Since God is love, all spirits will
be saved, even Satan. [5] But
spirits are capable to fall again so the cycle of fall, restoration, and fall
will go on forever. (Origen said this was based on the Bible but was actually
based on the Platonic tradition.)
o
On Trinity:
He strongly opposed Monarchianism (the Father is the Son). He insisted that Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit are eternally 3 hypostases (beings) but the Son was not
born or begotten or generated at one particular moment in time. Yet he
maintained that the Son is eternally generated
or begotten by the Father. This is an eternal process or relationship. It is
eternally happening, even today. It came to be seen as orthodox.
o
Heretical ideas: [1] He believed the essence
of salvation is to become like God, being “deified” through contemplation Him. [2] In explaining Trinity, he taught a
graded Trinity—the Father is greater than the Son who is greater than the Holy
Spirit. It is the Father alone who is “true God”. Arius took this further to
form Arianism which was accepted widely in the Eastern church. [3] He argued that if the generation of
the Son was not eternal, it would mean that previously the Father was either
unable or unwilling to generate the Son. Either suggestion is unworthy of God,
so the Son’s generation must be eternal. Yet he used the same argument to prove
that all rational beings have existed eternally. [4] When rational beings fell away from contemplating God, they
became angels, human beings, or demons, according to how far they fell. The
physical universe was created to accommodate them. The process of salvation is
the reversal of the fall, ending with all rational beings again contemplating God.
o
Condemned:
Some of these groundless speculations and heretical ideas were originated from
Platonism. He was officially condemned in the Council of Constantinople II
[553].
·
Tertullian
of
o
Life: He was
an elder in
o
Apology:
Tertullian’s writings bore a stamp of a legal mind. He wrote as if there was a
lawsuit between orthodox Christians and the heretics. He used logical arguments
against his adversaries. His aim was to show not only that the heretics were
wrong, but also that they did not even have the right to dispute with the
church. He claimed that the Scripture belonged to the church and the heretics
had not right to use the Bible or to interpret it.
o
Against speculation: He condemned all speculation. For example, to speak of what God’s
omnipotence can do is a dangerous occupation. What we are to ask is not what
God could not, but rather what is it that God has in fact done.
o
On Trinity:
In his brief treatise Against Praxeas,
he formulated the doctrine of Trinity. It seemed that Praxeas regarded Trinity
as simply 3 modes in which God appeared (modalistic monarchianism). Tertullian
proposed the formula “one substance and three persons.”
In discussing how Jesus can be both human and divine, he spoke of “one person”
and “two substances” or “two natures”. These
would later become the hallmark of orthodoxy.
o
Traducianism:
He supported the traducian doctrine of the transmission of the soul from the
parents to the child in the reproductive process. He believed that
postbaptismal sins were mortal sin. He opposed infant baptism.
·
Cyprian
of
o
Life: He was
bishop of
o
On centrality of bishops: He magnified the office of the bishop by making a clear distinction
between bishop and elder; he emphasized the bishop as
the centre of unity in the church because the bishop acts as a guarantee
against schism. He emphasized that if anyone is not with the bishop, he is not
in the church. For him, bishops are the successors of the Apostles. He asserted
the primacy of honour of Peter in tracing the
line of apostolic succession. This led later to the primacy of honour of the
Roman bishop.
o
On unity of the church: He believed that the unity of the church is a given fact. The only
true church is the catholic church. It is not possible
to divide the church, only to leave it. Those who leave the church
commits spiritual suicide. The bishops must remain in solidarity with one
another and yet each is independent in his own church.
o
On independence of bishops: On the question of whether someone converted to Christianity through a
schismatic church and later wishes to joined the Catholic Church need
rebaptism. The Roman church said no but Cyprian said yes. Bishop Stephen of
o
On sacrifice in the communion: He took the clergy as the sacrificing priests
in offering up Christ’s body and blood in the communion. This idea later was
developed into the concept of transubstantiation.
|
[1] treasure our heritage |
The
orthodox doctrine of Trinity was developed from struggles. |
|
[2] appreciate God’s providence |
God
raised outstanding apologists and polemicists at the right time. |
|
[3] avoid past errors |
Many
heresies came from groundless speculations. |
|
[4] apply our knowledge |
We
can apply some of the methods used by the apologists in defending our faith. |
|
[5] follow past saints |
Polemicists
recognized the threat of heresies and dared to encounter them. |
●
Against
whom do we defend our faith?
o We defend our faith in 2 ways: [a] like the apologists, against those from outside the church: refuting the misunderstanding about Christianity and rejecting attacks by showing that Christianity is truth, [b] like the polemicists, against those from inside the church: showing how heresies are wrong.
●
What
are their reasons when non-believers attack Christianity?
o They may believe false rumours about Christians and Christianity.
o They may have misunderstandings about Christianity.
o They may think that Christianity is foolish.
o They may think that Christians destroy the social fibre by abstaining from many social activities.
o They may think that Christians’ loyalty is not of this world so that they are disloyal to the government.
o They may judge that Christians are hypocrites.
●
How
far should we isolate ourselves from the “pagan culture”?
o We have to abstain from the participation in rituals or cultural activities that deny our faith or that can lead to sin. Otherwise, Christians should participate in the society and live like others.
●
What
were the main teachings of Gnosticism?
o Only selected people can gain secret and mystic knowledge to salvation.
o Such knowledge is taught by messengers from the Supreme Being, Jesus being one of them.
o Spirit is good but matter is evil.
o Since matter is evil, Jesus did not have a body. He was not actually born.
o Some Gnostics believe that one needs to control the flesh and weaken its power over spirit. Yet, some Gnostics believe just the opposite: since the bad flesh cannot influence the good spirit, one can follow one’s passions.
●
When
someone spread their “gospel” to us, how do we know if it is true/legitimate or
not?
o Christian teachings are based on the Apostles. Early church needed to trace the apostolic succession in order to claim legitimacy.
o Now, the teachings are based on the Bible which grew out of consensus of the church which was guided by the Holy Spirit. Any teachings not following the Bible cannot claim legitimacy.
●
What
does “Catholic” mean?
o It means “universal” or “according to the whole.” The word is used to separate the church from heretical groups and sects.
o It emphasizes the universality and the inclusiveness of the witness on which the church stood. It also emphasizes the total witness of all the Apostles. This point excluded heretical teachings which were usually based on the claim of secret traditions handed down through a single apostle.
o Unfortunately, through an evolution in many centuries, debates on the word “catholic” now centre on the person and authority a single apostle—Peter. Thus, the claim of the Roman Catholic Church has twisted the original meaning of the word.
●
Which
beliefs of these Church Fathers are not Biblical? How did this happen to mature
Christians like these?
o Unbiblical beliefs:
◦ Irenaeus: The incarnation of God in Jesus Christ was not because of sin. God’s initial purpose was to unite with mankind. The incarnate Word was the model that God followed in making man after the divine image.
◦
Clement of
◦ Tertullian: Tertullian joined the Montanist movement which claimed that their movement was the beginning of a new age with the outpouring of the Holy Spirit to them.
◦ Origen: There were two creations. The first was purely spiritual, without bodies. Some strayed and fell so God made the second creation which was material, serving as a shelter for fallen spirits. Those spirits who fell further became demons.
o The early church did not have detailed doctrines so Christians freely speculated or used allegorical method of exegesis, resulting in unbiblical speculations. It should be noted, however, that these speculations were not held by the Church Fathers as basic doctrines.
●
Will
these non-Biblical beliefs reduce the credibility of their theological
arguments?
o Their theological arguments should be judged by the consensus of the universal church. Any theologian is vulnerable to making theological errors yet their teachings should be judged by the direction of their theology (whether they are faithful to the Bible) and by the orthodox teachings that they pass along in influencing the church. All these Church Fathers are judged by the universal church as messengers from God in building the foundation of the universal church.