In Part IV, I promised to continue on the issue of Apostolic Succession. So, here I want to present several passages from the Early Fathers and beyond which articulate belief in the Apostolic authority found in Scripture over and above their successors. As I have said from the beginning, the issue of authority flows to every other issue, to include Apostolic Succession. If the Scriptures have the authority and teachings of the Apostles, and the Apostles’ successors deviate from those Scriptures, then we must side with the Apostles instead of the Apostles’ successors. And while we may not have tactile ordination tracing back to the Apostles. We do have Apostolic faith tracing back to the Apostles. In this way, we become the true successors of the Apostles. Stones that God raises up to be the successors of Peter.
This approach to authority doesn’t even necessarily deny that those in tactile succession have some kind special priestly ordination conferred to them. It simply says that even if the bishops in Apostolic succession are some kind of New Covenant Levitical priesthood, they too are subject to the authority of the Apostles. And God can take away His special anointing on them, just as he did with the Levites in the OT. I do not think those in the Apostolic succession have any such privilege, any more than any faithful elder in the Church does. I only say that if they do, we still would not be bound to submit to them when they themselves oppose the Apostles.
In the next part, after several installments of going through quotes from The Fathers, we will deal with the specific arguments from Scripture about Apostolic Succession. But for now, let’s take a look at how the Early Fathers viewed Scripture. Of course, these quotes and passages ought to be read in their fullest context. I would encourage this. I am not trying to misrepresent The Fathers and so I will provide some brief context for each quote. I’m also not saying that these quotes in themselves absolutely prove my point. They simply weaken the Roman and Eastern claims, and supplement Protestant claims. So, here we go.
Irenaeus (c. 180 AD):
“We have learned from none others the plan of our salvation, than from those through whom the Gospel has come down to us, which they did at one time proclaim in public, and, at a later period, by the will of God, handed down to us in the Scriptures, to be the ground and pillar of our faith.” (Against Heresies: Book III: Chapter I)
Irenaeus is saying that the plan of our salvation was learned from the Apostles through the Scriptures. Notice he says the Apostles declared these things publicly, and then later those public proclamations were written down. He makes no mention of a secret oral tradition that the Apostles passed on to the bishops.
He then goes on to describe the Scriptures as the ground and pillar of our faith. Echoing strongly Paul’s statement about the Church being the ground and pillar of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15). We will get to this later. But for now, notice the strong language Irenaeus uses in talking about the plan of salvation derived from the Apostles through Scripture, going as far as saying the Scriptures are the ground and pillar of our faith.
Again, Irenaeus:
“Since, therefore, the entire Scriptures, the prophets, and the Gospels, can be clearly, unambiguously, and harmoniously understood by all, although all do not believe them; and since they proclaim that one only God, to the exclusion of all others, formed all things by His word, whether visible or invisible, heavenly or earthly, in the water or under the earth, as I have shown from the very words of Scripture; and since the very system of creation to which we belong testifies, by what falls under our notice, that one Being made and governs it—those persons will seem truly foolish who blind their eyes to such a clear demonstration, and will not behold the light of the announcement [made to them]…” (Against Heresies, Book II, Ch. 27)
Irenaeus begins this chapter by saying that the ability to interpret Scripture clearly comes from a mind devoted to piety, devoted to truth, and commits itself to the daily study thereof. He then goes on to say that the Scriptures are clear. They are perspicuous. The Reformers would call this the perspicuity of Scripture. That Scripture can be sufficiently understood for salvation, even though there may be parts which are difficult to understand. Irenaeus may even be overstating his a case a bit here. But his point is that the Scripture is clear, especially on the issue he is addressing against the Gnostics. That God alone created the heavens and the earth. He goes on to say that this truth is clearly apprehended in Scripture, and that Jesus did not teach ambiguous, obscure things, to a secret group of people that conveyed different meanings of the parables he gave. Point being, Irenaeus is affirming some form of the perspicuity of Scripture.
The Westminster Confession of Faith says, “All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all. Yet, those things that are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation are so clearly propounded, and opened in some place of Scripture or another, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them” (1.7)
Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 318-386):
“Have thou in thy mind this seal, which for the present has been lightly touched in my discourse, by way of summary, but shall be stated, should the Lord permit, to the best of my power with the proof from the Scriptures. For concerning the divine and holy mysteries of the Faith, not even a casual statement must be delivered without the Holy Scriptures; nor must we be drawn aside by mere plausibility and artifices of speech. Even to me, who tell thee these things, give not absolute credence, unless thou receive the proof of the things which I announce from the Divine Scriptures. For this salvation which we believe depends not on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Holy Scriptures.” (Catechetical Lectures, Lecture IV, 17)
Cyril bases this lecture on Paul’s warning to the Colossians, “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” (Col. 2:8) He then teaches on ten basic doctrines. What to believe about God, Jesus, the cross, the resurrection, the ascension. Things like this. In this particular section he is teaching about the Holy Spirit. But then he adds this section about testing the veracity of any statement or teaching, including his own. He says that everything must be proved by Scripture, and that it must not hang on ingenious reasoning, but on demonstration of the Scriptures. This is almost a Puritan, regulative principle of worship, way of approaching Scripture.
Athanasius (c. 298-373 AD):
“Wherefore the faithful Christian and true disciple of the Gospel, having grace to discern spiritual things, and having built the house of his faith upon a rock, stands continually firm and secure from their deceits. But the simple person, as I said before, that is not thoroughly grounded in knowledge, such an one, considering only the words that are spoken and not perceiving their meaning, is immediately drawn away by their wiles. Wherefore it is good and needful for us to pray that we may receive the gift of discerning spirits, so that every one may know, according to the precept of John, whom he ought to reject, and whom to receive as friends and of the same faith. Now one might write at great length concerning these things, if one desired to go into details respecting them; for the impiety and perverseness of heresies will appear to be manifold and various, and the craft of the deceivers to be very terrible. But since holy Scripture is of all things most sufficient for us, therefore recommending to those who desire to know more of these matters, to read the Divine word, I now hasten to set before you that which most claims attention, and for the sake of which principally I have written these things. (Ad Episcopus Aegypti et Libyae, Ch. 1.4)
The broader context of this particular section in chapter 1 is that he is criticizing the heresies of Marcionism and Manichaeism. He says they are wrong because they only accept part of the Scriptures, and not the entirety of them. That they reject the Law, but that the New Testament springs up out of the Law. He goes on to prove the unity of the Scriptures. He makes mention of the Arians who also are at odds with the Scriptural accounts. And he says that these heresies all have the common ground of being at odds with Scripture. That these heretics appropriate the language of Scripture to deceive the simple. That Scripture itself attests to the rise of false prophets like these men. And that the only thing these men have in common is lying.
He then states what is quoted above. He says true disciples are given the grace to discern these falsehoods. He then says it is necessary to pray that we receive the gift of discerning spirits. A very charismatic thing to say. Furthermore, he adds that we need the ability of discerning spirits so that we know who to accept and to reject as friends. An allusion to excommunication being more than just prohibition from partaking of the Eucharist, but also exclusion from the life of the saints in general.
Then the key statement is said. He says that Scripture is sufficient above all for addressing these things. And that if anyone wants to know more about the things he has mentioned, then to read the Word themselves. High commendatory language on the sufficiency of Scripture. He simply says, “Hey, you want to know more about these things? Read about it yourself.” Whoa! That’s a dangerous idea there, Athanasius. How can the mass of men understand the Bible apart from an authoritative magisterium?
Athanasius, again:
“Vainly then do they run about with the pretext that they have demanded Councils for the faith’s sake; for divine Scripture is sufficient above all things; but if a Council be needed on the point, there are the proceedings of the Fathers, for the Nicene Bishops did not neglect this matter, but stated the doctrine so exactly, that persons reading their words honestly, cannot but be reminded by them of the religion towards Christ announced in divine Scripture.” (De Synodis, Part 1.6)
The larger context of this one is a bit more difficult for me to discern. But it appears that Athanasius is writing against men who hold to some new form of Arianism. And that he is saying it’s not necessary to call a new council since the Nicene Council already dealt with this issue. And what is of interest to us, that the Scriptures are sufficient above all things (in this case, proving the full deity of Christ.) Also, that the Nicene Bishops simply articulated what is found in Scripture.
Athanasius, again:
“Let this, then, Christ-loving man, be our offering to you, just for a rudimentary sketch and outline, in a short compass, of the faith of Christ and of His Divine appearing to usward. But you, taking occasion by this, if you light upon the text of the Scriptures, by genuinely applying your mind to them, will learn from them more completely and clearly the exact detail of what we have said. For they were spoken and written by God, through men who spoke of God. But we impart of what we have learned from inspired teachers who have been conversant with them, who have also become martyrs for the deity of Christ, to your zeal for learning, in turn. (On the Incarnation of the Word, 56)
Athanasius encourages the man who loves Christ to read the Scriptures for himself. For, through the Scriptures, he “will learn more completely and clearly the exact detail” of what has been taught by Athanasius. Athanasius doesn’t appeal to an infallible magisterium to interpret it for him. He doesn’t appeal to the bishop of Rome. He simply says apply your mind to studying the Scriptures and you will learn.
In C. S. Lewis’ The Four Loves, he writes about the true love of a mother works for her child’s emancipation from her. A mother who labors to keep her child continually dependent on her is exercising a very perverted and selfish kind of love. This is the mistake I think Rome, the East, and even some Protestants, can fall into. It’s a sin of the elders in a way. They can sin by unconsciously or not desiring their parishioners to be dependent on them forever. Whereas, a good pastor is working for the emancipation of his spiritual children. He wants to teach them and equip them as saints who can go to Scriptures themselves, consult the Holy Spirit themselves, approach God unmediated. Athanasius is suggesting this kind of thing with these statements. Paul talks about this in Hebrews 5:12-14.
Athanasius, once again:
“The knowledge of our religion and of the truth of things is independently manifest rather than in need of human teachers, for almost day by day it asserts itself by facts, and manifests itself brighter than the sun by the doctrine of Christ. 2. Still, as you nevertheless desire to hear about it, Macarius , come let us as we may be able set forth a few points of the faith of Christ: able though you are to find it out from the divine oracles, but yet generously desiring to hear from others as well. 3. For although the sacred and inspired Scriptures are sufficient to declare the truth—while there are other works of our blessed teachers compiled for this purpose, if he meet with which a man will gain some knowledge of the interpretation of the Scriptures, and be able to learn what he wishes to know—still, as we have not at present in our hands the compositions of our teachers, we must communicate in writing to you what we learned from them—the faith, namely, of Christ the Saviour; lest any should hold cheap the doctrine taught among us, or think faith in Christ unreasonable.” (Against the Heathen: Part 1.1)
Here Athanasius is again affirming the sufficiency of Scripture in understanding the truth of the Christian religion. He goes as far as to say that these things are simply manifested apart from human teachers. However, he does affirm the edification and knowledge that human teachers can impart with their interpretation of Scripture. This, of course, is perfectly Scriptural, as Paul says that Jesus has given the church teachers, pastors, evangelists, and the like to equip the saints.
In the next part, I will simply continue an overview of early father quotations about Scripture. I will be doing this for the next few installments. Rome and the East arrogantly claim early church history to be exclusively theirs, but the reality is much more complicated. So I want to provide plenty of support from the early fathers on this issue. Not that they are the final authority, but that it may be demonstrated that the history of the Church is more complicated than Papists and Eastern Christians would have us think.
Feller of Trees 