Meeting with the Early Church – Barnabas
The Epistle of Barnabas is a very early Christian document. It was probably written sometime between 70 AD and 132 AD, but it was probably not written by the Barnabas who was a friend and fellow-traveller of Paul. The epistle was included in Codex Sinaiticus, one of the earliest complete manuscripts of the New Testament.
In at least one passage, the author writes about the the gathering of the church:
Now, because I want to write many things to you, not as a teacher, but as suitable for one who loves you, I have taken care not to fail to write to you from what I myself possess, with a view to your purification. For this reason, we should be attentive in these last days; for the whole past time of your life and faith will be of no benefit to us, unless now in this wicked time we should stand against coming temptation, as is suitable for children of God. Therefore, in order that the Black One may find no means of entrance, we should flee from every futility (frustration?), and we should completely hate the works of the way of evil. Do not live separate lives, by each going his own way, as those who have already been justified; but by coming together in harmony, you must discuss what leads to the benefit of all. For Scripture says, “Woe to those who are wise to themselves, and have understanding in their own sight!” We should be spiritual; a complete temple to God. As much as depends on us, we should meditate on the fear of God, and we should strive to observe His commandments, in order that we may rejoice in His requirements. (Epistle of Barnabas 4:9-11)
Once again, we see the important of gathering together in unity with other believers. This has been a very important common theme to many of the early Christian writers.
Furthermore, according to the Epistle of Barnabas, there is a danger to every believers going their separate ways without gathering together with other believers. That danger is described as the entrance of the Black One, and – according to the Scripture quoted – pride in assuming that each believer has enough wisdom and understanding on their own.
The remedy is to come together in order to discuss things that lead to the benefit of the entire group. The phrase that I translated “that leads to the benefit of all” is very similar to Paul’s instructions in 1 Corinthians:
“All things are lawful,” but not all things are helpful. “All things are lawful,” but not all things build up. (1 Corinthians 10:23 ESV)
To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good. (1 Corinthians 12:7 ESV)
While Paul seems to focus on each person speaking and serving for the benefit of others, the author of the Epistle of Barnabas has a different focus – the individual. The individual benefits when he or she comes together with other believers to discuss mutually beneficial things. Thus Paul and this author are talking about the same type of meeting, but from different perspectives.
Given the close proximity, the author of the Epistle of Barnabas may also be connecting the gathering of believers with meditating on the fear of God and striving to keep God’s commandments. If so, then a meeting of believers should aid all present in thinking about God and in obeying him.
One final note, the verb that I translated “discuss” in the phrase “you must discuss what leads to the benefit of all” is a Greek verb that means “discuss”, “carry on a discussion”, “dispute”, “debate”, or “argue”. It is a compound verb combining the verb “to seek” with the preposition “together with”. You can find it in many passages in the gospels and twice in Acts (6:9, 9:29). This verb is stronger than the verb that is usually used to describe “discussion” in the church such as in Acts 19:9 where Paul “spoke to” or “dialogued with” Christian disciples in the school or Tyrannus or in Acts 20:7 when Paul “spoke to” or “dialogued with” the church in Troas.
At the time of the writing of the Epistle of Barnabas, the church meeting had not turned into a time for one teacher to present a monologue type sermon.
——————————————————–
Meeting with the Early Church Series
1. Introduction
2. Pliny’s Letter
3. The Didache
4. Ignatius’ Letters
5. Clement of Rome
6. Epistle of Barnabas
7. Justin Martyr
8. Conclusion
Patrick and Celtic Christianity
Since today is St. Patrick’s Day, I thought I would write a little about my fascination with Celtic Christianity. This post will be very short, because I don’t know much about Celtic Christianity. However, I am still fascinated by the early history of Christianity in the British Isles.
So, what fascinates me about this facet of history? Well, St. Alban (200’s – 300’s AD), Palladius (400’s AD), and St. Patrick (400’s AD) were among several famous early Christians in Roman Britain. But, we do not know exactly when the gospel was introduced to the British Isles. What we do know is very interesting, especially the story of St. Patrick, his captivity and transport to Ireland, and his return to Ireland as a missionary.
But, there is something about early British Christianity that is even more fascinating to me. Sometime around 596 AD, Pope Gregory the Great sent Augustine (NOT Augustine of Hippo) to Britain. When he got there, he found that Christianity was already present in Britain, but it was different from Roman Christianity. King Ethelbert of Canterbury was eventually persuaded that the Roman brand of Christianity was better than the English brand, and he and his subjects were “converted” and baptized into Roman Christianity.
I have always wanted to study this early period of British Christianity. If Christianity was introduced very early in Britain (Tertullian mentions Britain around 200 AD), and if Britain was cut off from Roman Christianity, then it would be interesting to study the Christianity that developed in Britain from around 400 to 600 AD and compare that the Christianity that developed in Rome from the same time period.
If anyone knows a good book on this subject, please let me know. I’d love to read it during one of my school breaks.
By the way, speaking of St. Patrick’s Day, I was excited to see some Southern Baptist proudly displaying their “green” here: Southern Baptist Environment and Climate Initiative.
Meeting with the Early Church – Clement
Clement was bishop in Rome from around 88 AD until his death in 99 AD. His best known writing is the First Epistle of Clement, or 1 Clement, which he wrote to the church in Corinth. This letter is considered by some to be the oldest non canonical Christian writing. In fact, it was considered Scripture by many in the early church. A second epistle (2 Clement) was probably written at a much later date by someone other than Clement of Rome.
In writing to the church in Corinth in 1 Clement, he admonished the believers for their factious actions. While Paul wrote about the divisions in Corinth, Clement indicates that these schisms were corrected. However, discord happened again, which led many of the believers to refuse to acknowledge the elders in the church, and instead to recognize different elders. In this letter, Clement covers many topics related to leadership and “followership”, including humility, service, and faithfulness. At one point, Clement mentions the importance of meeting together as the church:
For the Scripture says, Ten thousand times ten thousand stood around Him, and thousands of thousands served Him, and cried, Holy, holy, holy, is the Lord Sabaoth; the whole creation is full of His glory. Therefore, by being gathered together conscientiously in harmony, we should call out to Him eagerly, as with one mouth, that we may become partakers of His great and glorious promises. (1 Clement 34:6-7)
We can learn several important aspects of gathering together according to Clement from this short passage. First, Clement associates the church meeting with the eschatological, heavenly worship of God. This worship is carried out by those around God’s throne and by creation.
Second, the church should gather together “conscientiously”. This word is very important for Clement. He uses it several times to refer to the “good conscience” of those in Scripture who pleased God, and the “good conscience” with which the believers in Corinth should live. Apparently, for Clement, gathering together should be carried out in a good conscience, just as the rest of life should be lived.
Third, believers should come together in harmony with one another. We’ve seen several times that these early believers focused on unity and harmony among brothers and sisters, especially when they meet together as the church. In this passage, harmony is emphasized by three different phrases: two different phrases for “harmony” which are usually just translated once, and the phrase “as with one mouth”. This is understandable given the division at Corinth.
Finally, the focus of Clement’s meeting seems to be on the promises of God. Perhaps this is similar to the passage in Hebrews 10 where the author also associates trusting in the promises of God and gathering together with other believers:
[L]et us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, with our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for he who promised is faithful. And let us consider how to stir up one another to love and good works, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day drawing near. (Hebrews 10:22-25 ESV)
So, we have seen many of the same emphases in Clement’s letter that we’ve seen in other early writings about the gathering of the church. Primarily, the authors continue to focus on unity among brothers and sisters. Also, important to a study of the church meeting, we also begin to see an association between the meeting of the church and worship.
——————————————————–
Meeting with the Early Church Series
1. Introduction
2. Pliny’s Letter
3. The Didache
4. Ignatius’ Letters
5. Clement of Rome
6. Epistle of Barnabas
7. Justin Martyr
8. Conclusion
Meeting with the Early Church – Ignatius
Ignatius of Antioch was sent to Rome to be killed sometime around 110 AD. During his trip to Rome, he wrote at least seven letters to churches and individuals. A letter to Polycarp as well as letters to the churches in Ephesus, Magnesia, Trallia, Rome, Philadelphia, and Smyrna exist today. If you are interested in Ignatius, I’ve written about him in several posts: “Singing a Song of Unity“, “Gospel and Monoepiscopacy in Ignatius“, and “Ignatius, the church, and others“.
For Ignatius, unity was very important. Unity begins with One God, One Lord, and One faith. This also means that there must therefore be one gospel and one bishop. So, for Ignatius, unity with the Lord, the bishop, and one another will be very important when he discusses the meeting of the church:
Therefore, make every effort to come together frequently for gratitude and praise of God. For whenever you are together frequently, the powers of Satan are destroyed, and his destructive plan is ruined by your unity of faith. (Ign. Eph. 13:1)
[I will do this] especially if the Lord makes known to me that you all – man to man – come together in common through grace, individually, in one faith, and in Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David according to the flesh, being both the Son of man and the Son of God, so that you obey the bishop and the presbytery with an undivided mind, breaking one and the same bread, which is the medicine of immortality – that is, the antidote so that we would not die but live for ever in Jesus Christ. (Ign. Eph. 20:2)
Let your assemblies be more frequent. Seek all by name. (Ign. Pol. 4:2)
In the first passage, Ignatius focuses on the purpose of gathering together and the results of gathering together. In Ign. Eph. 13:1, he says that we should come together to proclaim both our gratitude for God and to proclaim God’s glory. The result of our meeting together is the destruction of Satan’s powers and his destructive plans. Ignatius does not fully explain what he means by this. However, in the next verse he writes, “Nothing is more precious than peace, by which all war, both in heaven and earth, is brought to an end.” In this context, it seems that Ignatius is saying that war is the work of Satan and that Christians defeat Satan by remaining in peace.
In the second passage (Ign. Eph. 20:2), the bishop focuses on coming together in unity. He emphasizes unity with one another due to our common grace and faith and the Lord Jesus. Primarily, this unity will be displayed in our mutual submission to leaders (the bishop and the presbyters) and in our partaking of a common meal (which would probably include the Lord’s Supper). It is very interesting that Ignatius associated the breaking of bread together with eternal life in Christ.
In the last passage, Ignatius only focuses on meeting together frequently. We don’t learn much more about his understanding of the church meeting from this.
As we can see, both the frequency of meetings and the unity of those involved is extremely important to Ignatius. Ignatius places much emphasis – both in the second passage and in other parts of his letters – on remaining in unity with the bishop. If you read through his letters, you will see that besides meeting together, Ignatius does not think that believers should do anything without the consent of the bishop. I believe this arises from his concern for unity among followers of Jesus Christ.
——————————————————–
Meeting with the Early Church Series
1. Introduction
2. Pliny’s Letter
3. The Didache
4. Ignatius’ Letters
5. Clement of Rome
6. Epistle of Barnabas
7. Justin Martyr
8. Conclusion
Meeting with the Early Church – The Didache
The Didache (“Teaching”) was probably written in the late first century or early second century (80-150 AD). While it was referenced very early (Eusebius ~ 324 AD), the actual text of the document was not discovered until 1873.
The book is easily divided into two parts. The first part (chapters 1-6) deal with “the two ways”: the way of life and the way of death. The second part (chapters 7-16) deals primarily with living the Christian life and touches on topics such as communion, baptism, travelling apostles and prophets, and fasting.
While the sections concerning the Lord’s Supper, baptism, and teachers affects the meeting of the church, there are two passages that clearly speak about Christians gathering together:
But gathering together every Lord’s, break bread and give thanks after confessing your transgressions, so that your sacrifice may be pure. But do not let anyone who is at variance with his friend come together with you, until they are reconciled, so that your sacrifice may not be defiled. (Didache 14:1-2)
But you should come together frequently, seeking the things which are proper for your souls: for the whole time of your faith will not be profitable to your souls, if you are not made perfect in the last time. (Didache 16:2)
In these two passages, the primary concerns for meeting together is 1) the purity of our sacrifice before God and 2) the benefit to each other.
The word “sacrifice” is only used in Didache 14:1-3, and it is not explained further. If it carries the same meaning as found in the New Testament, it refers to both our praises to God (Hebrews 13:15) and the good deeds we do for others (Hebrews 13:16). Meeting together should aid us in both of these endeavors. Notice that the author includes “breaking bread” (eating together) and “giving thanks” (prayer or sharing the Eucharist) as well as confessing our sins to one another. It is also important to the author that believers come together in a spirit of unity, dealing with any disagreements or divisions between brothers and sisters before they are allowed to meet with the remainder of the group.
The second passage (Didache 16:2) focuses on meeting together for the benefit of those gathered. It seems that gathering with other believers should help us mature (“made perfect”) in the faith – looking forward to that time when we will be completely perfect in Christ Jesus (Ephesians 4:13; 1 Corinthians 13:9-12). Individual activities are not in focus in this passage. Instead the focus is on the outcome or the purpose of meeting together – mainly for the benefit of maturing one another in the faith.
There is also a secondary focus on the time of the gathering. In 14:1, the focus is on the day of the gathering, called here simply κυÏιακός (kuriakos – “belonging to the Lord” meaning “the day belonging to the Lord”). In 16:2, the focus is on the frequency of gathering together. The believers were to gather together frequently – a subjective description that becomes clearer only when used in conjunction with κυÏιακός (kuriakos) in 14:1. The author is encouraging his readers to gather together frequently on the Lord’s Day.
As I said earlier, the Didache includes many instructions for the Lord’s Supper, baptism, dealing with travelling apostles and prophets, choosing bishops and deacons, and other activities that probably take place during the church meeting. All of these passages are important for us to understand what the author of the Didache thought about the church meeting. But, only in these two passages (14:1-2; 16:2) do we see a primary focus on the meeting itself.
——————————————————–
Meeting with the Early Church Series
1. Introduction
2. Pliny’s Letter
3. The Didache
4. Ignatius’ Letters
5. Clement of Rome
6. Epistle of Barnabas
7. Justin Martyr
8. Conclusion
Meeting with the Early Church – Pliny’s Letter
Around 110 AD, about fifty years after Paul was executed in Rome and perhaps only 20 years after John penned the Revelation, Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus (Pliny the Younger) was appointed governor of the Roman province of Bithynia. During his travels through the region, Pliny often wrote letters to the Emperor Trajan. Many of these letters and the emperor’s responses have survived to the present day.
In one letter and response, Pliny and Trajan discuss the problem of Christians who were gathering in illegal “political associations”. (Note: The “persecution” listed below did not occur because the Christians worshiped Christ. In fact, other groups who associated together illegally were also arrested, tortured, and killed.) If you have never read this correspondence between Pliny and Trajan concerning Christians, please take the time to read the complete letter in a post called “Pliny, Trajan, and the Christians“.
Pliny became aware of an anonymous list of Christians who were unlawfully associated together. Some of the people on the list claimed that they were not Christians, and immediately demonstrated this by invoking the gods, offering prayers with incense and wine to an image of the emperor, and cursing Christ. Interestingly, in regards to the things that these people agreed to do, Pliny says, “None of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do”.
Other people whose names were found on the list declared that they were Christians at first, but then denied Christ. Pliny does not say that this denial came about after torture, but it can probably be assumed from his treatment of two “deaconesses” later in the later. These who professed then denied Christ also invoked the gods, worshipped the image of the emperor, and cursed Christ. However, it is from this group and the two “deaconesses” who apparently refused to renounce Christ that Pliny learns something about the gathering of the church in the area of Bithynia. He writes:
They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food–but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.
In this short passage, we learn many things about these early church meetings. First, they included the singing of songs that proclaimed Christ to be a god (in the words of the Roman Pliny). Thus, the recognition of the deity of Jesus was important to these early Christians.
Second, these early Christians helped each other live ethical lives. The words that Pliny uses (“to bind themselves by oath”) indicates that they took their manner of life to be very important. Thus they encouraged and exhorted one another not to defraud, commit adultery, lie, etc. In Pliny’s understanding, this was a mutual exhortation.
Finally, these early Christians ate together. Now, this could simply signify that they shared the bread and cup of the Lord’s Supper together, but it could also indicate that they ate a meal together. Apparently, at this time, there were already rumors that Christians were cannibals, because Pliny specifies that they ate only “ordinary and innocent food”. There was nothing special about their food.
Interestingly, it seems that there were two separate gatherings held the same day (a fixed day). One gathering included the singing and some type of mutual exhortation which was held very early – before dawn. The other gathering included the meal, and was probably held during the time for the main meal of the day, probably mid-afternoon.
To me, the most interesting aspect of this letter is the source. This letter was not written by Christians trying to explain what they did during their meetings. Instead, it was written by a Roman pagan who was simply reporting the facts as he discovered them to his emperor. I would think that he would want to get his facts straight before he made this report.
By the way, in his reply, Emperor Trajan told Pliny that he had acted correctly in punishing these Christians (and others) for forming illegal associations. However, he tells Pliny to no longer accept anonymous accusations, nor should Pliny look for Christians. Instead, he should only interrogate Christians who are brought to him.
——————————————————–
Meeting with the Early Church Series
1. Introduction
2. Pliny’s Letter
3. The Didache
4. Ignatius’ Letters
5. Clement of Rome
6. Epistle of Barnabas
7. Justin Martyr
8. Conclusion
Meeting with the Early Church – Introduction
In this blog, I primarily talk about the church as described in the New Testament. However, it is also important to consider how different believers thought about the church through history. In this series, I plan to look at various non-canonical texts from 1st and 2nd century AD that describe the meeting of the church.
These texts are important to help us understand what the author thought about many aspects of the church and of theology in particular. However, since I am studying the meeting of the church, that will be the focus of my examination. Primarily, I will try to answer the following question: What can we learn about the meeting of the church from this particular text?
Obviously, this brief series will not be exhaustive. In some cases, I will not even be able to exhaust everything that a particular author said about the meeting of the church. However, even if I cannot list or discuss every text, I will attempt to at least mention or summarize the texts that I am not able to discuss fully.
Also, I do not plan to list texts that only agree with my position. While that would be a great way of defending my position historically, and a method that is often used today, it would not be honest to the historical data. I plan to discuss several texts in which the author presents a picture of the meeting of the church that if different from the way that I think the church meets.
Finally, I do not plan to make judgment calls about the various authors. Instead, I intend this to simply be a historical survey for various perspectives of the meeting of the church. I will not even attempt to compare what we read with scriptural references to the meeting of the church. That is an important exercise, but it is outside the scope of this study.
Here are some of the texts/authors that I will discuss: 1) one of Pliny’s letter to Trajan, 2) the Didache, 3) Ignatius, 4) Clement of Rome, 5) Justin Martyr, and 6) the Epistle of Barnabas. I hope that through this study we can learn something about the meetings of the church in the first 200 years after Pentecost.
——————————————————–
Meeting with the Early Church Series
1. Introduction
2. Pliny’s Letter
3. The Didache
4. Ignatius’ Letters
5. Clement of Rome
6. Epistle of Barnabas
7. Justin Martyr
8. Conclusion
Singing a song of unity
As I’ve mentioned previously (here and here), during the last few months I’ve been studying the writings of Ignatius of Antioch. While I disagree with Ignatius in some points, there are many other areas where we are in agreement. For example, Ignatius often emphasizes unity among believers. For example, consider this passage:
In your unanimity and harmonious love, Jesus Christ is sung. You must join this chorus, every one of you, so that by being harmonious in unanimity and taking your pitch from God you may sing in unison with one voice through Jesus Christ to the Father, in order that he may both hear you and, on the basis of what you do well, acknowledge that you are members of his Son. It is, therefore, advantageous for you to be in perfect unity, in order that you may always have a share in God. (Ign. Eph. 4:1b-2)
I love the imagery of the church singing together to God the Father through Jesus Christ. The Greek word translated “harmonious” above is the word from which we get the English word “symphony”. A conductor leading an orchestra portrays the beautiful picture of how God leads his children. We may be different (play different instruments) and God may use us in different ways (play different parts), but when we are following his lead, we will find ourselves walking in unity with one another and with God.
When something goes awry – when someone strikes a wrong note – when their is discord – that’s a clear indication that we are not following our conductor. Our goal should not be to get people back on the same page with us, but to point ourselves and others back to the conductor – back to God – and allow him to bring us back into his will and back into unity.
My goal – your goal – each of our goal – is to follow our conductor, using the instruments that he has provided, playing the score as he has arranged it. We may not understand how it all fits together, but when we are playing together as God arranges the music, we will find ourselves in symphonic unity – and the world will recognize the beautiful results. By the way, the world can also recognize the results when we are not following our conductor.
I don’t expect you to play the same instrument as me. I do not expect you to play the same piece of music as me. However, as your brother in Christ, I do expect you to follow the same conductor that I’m following.
Old Testament Structures and the Church
Often, when I’m talking to people about church structures and organizations, they usually point me to Old Testament structure to defend hierarchies, authorities, buildings, positions, etc. After a discussion with Lew from “The Pursuit” and his Question of the Week #17, I’ve been thinking about the trend of associating Old Testament priests, temples, tithes, etc. to New Testament practices.
The conversations tend to go something like this (in a condensed form, of course):
Person #1: “The pastor has authority over the local church.”
Me: “I can’t find anything in Scripture that gives the pastors authority over anyone.”
Person #1: “Well, you have to go back to the priest system of the Old Testament.”
Person #2: “You should give tithes to the local church.”
Me: “I can’t find any teaching in Scripture that tells us to give money to a local church.”
Person #2: “Well, you have to go back to the tithe system of the Old Testament.”
Person #3: “You need someone trained in music to lead your worship.”
Me: “I’m sorry but I don’t see that in Scripture. Nor do I see music called worship.”
Person #3: “Well, you have to go back to the Levites of the Old Testament.”
Person #4: “Why are you not saving money to build a church (meaning, ‘church building’).”
Me: “I don’t see a requirement for having a church building in the new testament.”
Person #4: “Well, you have to go back to the temple in the Old Testament.”
Here’s my concern: I don’t see the New Testament authors making these connections. Instead, I see the New Testament writers calling all believers “priests” (Rom 15:16; 1 Pet 2:5,9; Rev 1:6; Heb 10:19-22 – notice the resemblance to the sanctification of priests). But, pastors/elders/overseers are never specifically referred to as “priests”.
Once again, all believers are taught to share generously with those who are in need, with those who are travelling away from home in order to proclaim the gospel, and with those who teach and lead them well (Acts 2:45; 4:34-35; James 2:15-16; Gal 6:6; 1 Thess 5:12-13; 1 Tim 5:17; 3 John 3-6). But, I do not see the New Testament authors comparing this to the tithe of the Old Testament, nor requiring a tithe to be given to the “local church”.
Similarly, all believers are encouraged to exhort one another with songs, hymns, and spiritual songs (Eph 5:19; Col 3:16; 1 Cor 14:26). However, I don’t see where training, practice, or even talent is a prerequisite for this singing (although, it does seem that being filled with the Spirit is a prerequisite). Also, I can’t find any connection between singing in the New Testament and the Levites of the Old Testament.
Finally, I also see that all followers of Jesus Christ are compared to the “temple” (1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor 6:16; Eph 2:21). But, as far as I can tell, “temple” is never associated with a designated meeting place for Christians.
So, where did this contemporary practices come from? When did we start going back to the Old Testament to find systems of organization and leadership and finances? When did the Book of Nehemiah start teaching how to have a successful church building campaign? The exact details of how and when and why these interpretations of the Old Testament filtered into the church continue to be debated among church historians today. I think they all started when the church ceased to be the people of God and started to become an institution. In order to justify the institution, the leaders had to go back to the Old Testament system – the very system that the author of Hebrews calls a “shadow” of the reality that we have in Jesus Christ.
Gospel and Monoepiscopacy in Ignatius
I am writing a paper on the gospel and monoepiscopacy in the seven letters of Ignatius. This is a synopsis of the paper which I presented a few days ago.
[UPDATE: “Monoepiscopacy” is the doctrine that there should be one bishop per city (church). This is usually combined in a hiearchical fashion with elders (presbyters) under the bishop, and deacons under the elders. (Thanks, Jonathan.)]
—————————————————————————
Leadership in early Christian writings
(107-117 AD) Ignatius to the Magnesians 6.1 – “Make every effort to do all things in the harmony of God, while the bishop presides over you in the place of God and the elders [preside over you] in the place of the assembly of the apostles and the deacons, who are dear, [preside over you]…”
(80-120 AD) Didache 15:1 – “Therefore, choose for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of God, men who are gentle, not lovers of money, dependable, and proven, for they also serve you with the service of prophets and teachers.” (The Didache does not mention elders, and bishops are only mentioned in the plural.)
(110-140 AD) Polycarp to the Philippians 5:3 – “Therefore, it is necessary to keep away from all these things, subjecting yourselves to the elders and to the deacons as to God and to Christ.” (Polycarp does not mention bishops, much less a single bishop. He does not call himself a bishop although Ignatius does call him by the title “bishop.”)
For Ignatius, it is important that believers stay in harmony with the single bishop of their area. From reading the Didache and Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians, Ignatius’ view is not the only view of leadership at the beginning of the second century. Why would Ignatius put so much emphasis on the monoepiscopacy?
Theological Sources in Ignatius’ Letters
Sometime between 107 and 117 AD, Ignatius, the Bishop of Smyrna, was arrested and taken to Rome for execution. On the way to Rome, he wrote seven letters: one each to the churches in Tralles, Magnesia, Ephesus, Philadelphia, Smyrna, and Rome, and one to Polycarp, the bishop of the church in Smyrna.
From the text of these seven letters, it is clear that Ignatius knows of the Old Testament Scriptures. He quotes the Old Testament three times: he quotes Proverbs 3:34 in Ign. Eph. 5.3, he quotes Proverbs 18:17 in Ign. Magn. 12, and he quotes Isaiah 52:5 in Ign. Trall. 8.2. He introduces the first two citations with the scriptural formulation, “It is written†(ge,graptai). These three citations are minimal compared to Old Testament citations in the writings of other apostolic fathers. Ignatius recognizes the Old Testament as an early, but incomplete witness to Jesus Christ.
Ignatius’ recognition of and use of the New Testament writings are even more difficult to determine. From a statement in Ign. Eph. 12.2, it is clear that Ignatius knows of more than one of Paul’s letters. Most scholars agree that there are allusions to some of these letters, especially 1 Corinthians. Similarly, there may be allusions to Matthew’s Gospel in Ignatius’ letters. However, he does not quote from the New Testament writings with the formula, “It is written.â€
For the most part, Ignatius seems to downplay written records and holds “the Gospel†as authoritative. For example, he says:
Moreover, I urge you to do nothing in a spirit of contentiousness, but in accordance with the teaching of Christ. For I heard some people say, “If I do not find it in the archives, I do not believe it in the gospel.†And when I said to them, “It is written,†they answered me, “That is precisely the question.†But for me, the “archives†are Jesus Christ, the inviolable archives are his cross and death and his resurrection and the faith which comes through him; by these things I want, through your prayers, to be justified. (in Ign. Phil. 8.2)
What does Ignatius mean by “the gospelâ€? For the most part, he identifies the gospel with the tradition handed down to him concerning the birth, life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. He does not use the standard term for “traditionâ€, nor does he use the phrase “rule of faith.†However, his teaching concerning “the gospel†is similar to later references to the “rule of faith.†He uses the term “gospel†six times and the term “passion†fifteen times within his letters. At times, Ignatius uses “passion†to refer to “the gospel†as a whole and, at other times, “passion†only refers to Christ’s suffering or death. To a lesser extent, he refers to this tradition as “the teaching of Christ†and “stewardshipâ€.
Ignatius’ statements about “the gospel†are very similar to later creeds. He exhorts his readers to believe in various aspects of the birth, life, death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. However, unlike the creeds, his statements do not appear to be standardized, memorized, or verbatim. For example, consider these two statements (along with the above citation from Ign. Phil. 8.2):
But the Gospel possesses something transcendent: the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ, His passion and resurrection. (Ign. Phil. 9:2a)
There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first able to suffer and then not able to suffer, even Jesus Christ our Lord. (Ign. Eph. 7.2)
Throughout the seven letters, there are ten instances of these “gospel†sayings; however, none of the ten are identical. If all of the elements of the ten gospel sayings are combined, none of the ten instances include all of the elements. From this data, it seems that even though the tradition of “the gospel†was very important to Ignatius, this was not a creedal-type tradition (yet). Instead of focusing on specific words to express the gospel, Ignatius was more interested in the content of the gospel. Thus, whether someone calls it suffering, passion, or crucifixion did not concern Ignatius. Instead, he was concerned that Christians believed in this gospel.
Ignatius did not turn to either Old Testament or New Testament Scriptures for his authority, although he did recognize the writings as being very important witnesses to the gospel. Similarly, he did not find authority in specific creedal statements that may have been handed down (as some suggest are found in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4). Instead, for Ignatius, authority is found in the gospel: the events surrounded the life of Jesus Christ and the correct interpretation of those events.
The Unity of the Gospel
Importantly, even though “the gospel†was not a formulaic creed, there was still only one gospel for Ignatius. He states that there is one God, one faith, and one Eucharist. Based on this unity, Ignatius, encourages his readers to maintain harmony with God and with one another, and the proper way of maintaining harmony is found in the bishop. Since there is one God, and one gospel, there should be one bishop. He says:
Therefore, make every effort to take advantage of the one Eucharist. For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ and one cup for the unity of his blood, one altar, as there is one bishop along with the elders and the deacons, my fellow servants, in order that whatever you might do, you might do according to God. (Ign. Phil. 4:1)
For Ignatius, the monoepiscopacy was necessary to maintain the unity of the gospel. Since Ignatius found his authority in the gospel, he took this unity very seriously. Anyone who found himself outside of the teachings or the practices of the bishop also found himself outside of the gospel, because the one bishop maintained the unity of the one gospel. Living according to the bishop was the same as living according to the gospel and Jesus Christ.
However, Ignatius does not seem to envision a “ruling†bishop. While he instructed the believers in each city to submit themselves to the gospel as well as to the bishop, he did not instruct the bishops to take an authoritarian position over the Christians. In fact, this would be contrary to Ignatius’ understanding, since he finds the gospel to be the authority. Instead, Ignatius commends the bishops that he meets along the way for being humble and gentle.
Conclusion
For Ignatius, there is one gospel because there is one God and one Lord Jesus Christ. Within this one gospel he finds his authority. The gospel is not primarily written or recited verbatim. Instead, the gospel is the events and interpretation of the events surrounding the life of Jesus Christ. From his concerns of protecting the one gospel, he derives a need for a single human leader (the one bishop) as well as the one Eucharist, the one altar, and the one meeting. Other writers from the same time period did not derive a monoepiscopacy from the one gospel.
During the first thousand years of the history of the church, Ignatius’ letters were arguably the most cited and most influential writings of any of the apostolic fathers. However, later church figures latched onto Ignatius’ derivatives (one bishop, one Eucharist, one altar, etc.) while losing his primary emphasis on the one gospel. For Ignatius, the monoepiscopacy should exist only as an extension of the one gospel in order to protect that gospel.