The Early Church I-2: Organization of the Church

If you haven't read part I-1, you can read it here: History, Morality
You can find I-3 here: Why "Catholic"? 
Section I-4: The Origins of the Pope in Rome, Lessons 
 

(Part II is now out! Since this is part I, I'll just link to II-1. If you're interested and enjoy this series, please see the next parts.)

Part I-2: Organization of the Church

Understanding Christ as the foundation of the Church is of the utmost importance. From there, however, it is important to understand that it was the Apostles, their example and their actions, that laid the bricks of the Church we dwell in today. This is what we mean by “Tradition” most accurately: the beliefs, practices, and precedents left to us by the Apostles and those men to whom they entrusted their ministry. Our “Tradition” is faith in Christ as handed down and protected by the Apostles, the ones whom Jesus personally taught and authorized. For it is written “he breathed on them and said to them, 'Receive the holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven, and whose sins you retain are retained” (Jn 20:22-23). The Apostles, or the Twelve, were distinguished by name.  

 

The men whom build our Catholic faith firmly upon the foundation of Christ.

(A side note to consider:When Peter calls for the Apostles to choose Judas' successor he quotes Psalm 109 in Greek. While it translates “Let another take his office” the word for office is “episkopein” which became the word for bishop. One could reasonably conceive that the Apostles at this point saw themselves as having a unique office.)

The Acts of the Apostles in Scripture is our best and most explicit source for early Christian life. It says that those who came to believe “devoted themselves to the teaching of the apostles and to communal life, to the breaking of the bread, and prayers” (Acts 2:42).

Clement of Rome, in his letter to the Corinthians (written about 96 AD), says “Christ … comes with a message from God, and the Apostles with a message from Christ. … After receiving their instructions and being fully assured through the Resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ … they went forth, fully equipped with the fullness of the Holy Spirit, to preach the good news" (1 Cor, sec. 42)

The earliest Christian communities were founded by the Apostles and Paul. As the early communities grew the Apostles recognized that they could no longer labor alone. Those who followed them began to complain that they were being neglected. The Apostles gathered together and said “It is not right for us to neglect the word of God to serve at table. Brothers, select from among you seven reputable men … whom we shall appoint to this task whereas we shall devote ourselves to prayer and ministry of the word” (Acts 6:2-5). All those present approved and brought forth seven men. It then says that the Apostles “prayed and laid hands on them” (6:6).

This is our foundational story of ordination. While these men were deacons who were called to serve in practical ministries, the Apostles distinguished their own ministry as that of prayer and ministry of the Word above that of a ministry of just service. While the Apostles certain did various ministries among those who believed they felt the need to pray (breaking bread was considered a prayer and ritual), to proclaim the Word, and to teach. As the Church grew more and more the Apostles needed others to carry out their own ministry as overseers of the people of God.

We have indication in Scripture of a gradual progression and understanding of the Apostles and human leadership in the Church. As we just saw, the Apostles were distinguished from the deacons that they appointed. The Apostles conferred authority to those selected from among the people.

Eventually, the Apostles appointed men to be like them, that is to say that these men would be the chief authority in their own assemblies. In the beginning these were the only two offices that were distinct. Communities, while growing, were still local and needed only one bishop and his attendant deacons (cf. 1 Tim 3:1-13). Bishops at this early point were also considered “presbyters” which in Greek was typically translated as “elder.” This term was used among the Jews when referring to the elders who were charged with leading and teaching their people.

While many presbyters among the early Christians were older, Paul indicates to us a change occurring in this vocabulary: “Command and teach these things. Let no one have contempt for your youth, but set an example for those who believe. … Do not neglect the gift you have, which was conferred on you through the prophetic word with the imposition of hands of the presbyterate” (1 Tim 4:11-12a, 14). Timothy must have been a younger man, certainly not old enough to be called an “elder” in the traditional sense. Elder, or presbyter, was now changing to refer to the authority and responsibility one had in a community and not simply age. Paul additionally warns Timothy that with his new authority that he may also lay hands upon another and transfer authority to them. Paul says “Presbyters who preside well deserve double honor, especially those who toil in preaching and teaching. … [Do] nothing out of favoritism. Do not lay hands too readily on anyone, and do not share in another's sins” (1 Tim 5:21b-22).

The epistle of James, dated around 90-100 AD, recounts that if anyone is sick “he should summon the presbyters of the Church, and they should pray over him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the prayer of faith will save the sick person” (James 5:14). The presbyters were local ministers and performed special tasks with regard to both prayer, authority, and teaching.

While these passages, a few among many more, show how Scripture regards the hierarchy of the Church, we have literature outside of Scripture that helps us understand how the early Christians enacted what the Apostles entrusted to them.

The early bishops also played an important role in establishing themselves as head of their representative churches. Ignatius of Antioch is a pivotal figure in this development. He is believed to be the third bishop of Antioch, to have been taught for a time by John the Apostle, and was martyred around 110-115 AD. He wrote a number of letters to various churches on his way to Rome, the place of his martyrdom. Many have survived the centuries and offer us a keen insight in two ways: the first is the content of the letters themselves since they tell us what Ignatius believed to be important. The second is that these letters survived. In the first centuries of the Church distribution was not only time-consuming but also dangerous since carrying such letters could expose one as Christian to persecutors. Nevertheless these letters became influential across the entire Church in a very short period.

"The proper thing, then, is not merely to be styled Christians, but also to be such--just as there are those who style a man a bishop, but completely disregard him in their conduct. Such persons do not seem to me to have a good conscience, inasmuch as they do not assemble in the fixed order ascribed to them" (Letter to the Magnesians, sec. 4).
Follow the bishop, and he will lead you to God, as Ignatius did.

In one letter he says “It is proper for you to act in agreement with the bishop ...Certain it is that your presbytery, which is a credit to its name, is a credit to God; for it harmonizes with the bishop as completely as the strings of a harp. This is why in the symphony of your concord and love the praises of Jesus Christ are sung" (Letter to the Ephesians, sec. 4)

He says elsewhere “he that does anything apart from bishop, presbyter, or deacon has no pure conscience" (Letter to the Trallians, sec. 7).

He says once more, “Surely, when you submit to the bishop as representing Jesus Christ, it is clear to me that you are not living the life of men, but that of Jesus Christ, who died for us … It is needful, then … that you do nothing without your bishop; but be subject also to the presbytery as representing the Apostles of Jesus Christ, our hope, in whom we are expected to live forever" (Letter to the Trallians, sec. 2).

Clement of Rome, who will be important in understanding the papacy and Rome in the next segment, wrote that the Apostles “appointed men whom they had tested by the Spirit to act as bishops and deacons for the future believers" (1 Cor, sec. 42). Furthermore, while the Apostles lived “they appointed the men mentioned before, and afterwards laid down a rule once for all to this effect: when these men die, other approved men shall succeed to their sacred ministry" (1 Cor, sec. 44). Note that it says those men approved by the Apostles, and as a rule, those men that the successors approve would inherit that unique authority.

The man whose writing solidified the primacy of Rome and the chair of Peter. The martyrdom of Peter's successors helped also, but their martyrdom was coupled with their knowledge, their leadership, and the seriousness with which they claimed to be the Bishop of Rome.

The Early Church I-1: History and Morality

(This is the first part of a presentation given on 4/23/2013. This is the extended version. The shorter, presentation version will be the last piece posted after some time for revision.)

See part I-2 here: Organization of the Early Church. 
See part I-3 here: Why "Catholic"?

See part I-4: The Origins of the Pope in Rome, Lessons

(Part II is now out! Since this is part I, I'll just link to II-1. If you're interested and enjoy this series, please see the next parts.)

Prologue

The early Church for many Christians is something that receives little attention. Many see the early Church as a people who were persecuted by the Roman empire and eventually rose to prominence after Christianity was legalized in 313 AD. While these persecutions were very real and Christianity really did triumph, the early Church has a rich history while at the same time a very human history. This is not a bad thing, however, for the mission of the Church is the interaction with sinful humanity in hopes of redeeming it. The Church, the Body of Christ, is both human and divine—a great mystery, and one worth entering. 

Throughout our Catholic history there are been great saints and great sinners, both sorts have been at the highest office in our Church. This should not give us reason to believe that the Church is purely man-made, however, but it rather speaks to the whole history and situation of Israel that came before us. God saw fit to use both good and wicked men to effect His designs, both enemies and anointed leaders (e.g., both good: 2 Kings 22:10-13, 18-20; Ruth 3: 13-17. And the bad: Isaiah 10:5-13; 1 Kings 11). Good men and women drew others to God by their example and obedience to both Jesus and Church. Wicked men and women served as an example that drove people away from vice and led to God by different paths. When power becomes addictive men will abuse power. As a result, those who love the Lord will strive to live heroic humility. Great sinners inspire saints to be even greater.

May we all grow to love the Church in a greater capacity for she is the bride of Christ. Christ's promise has been held since he proclaimed it: the powers of hell have not prevailed against the Church. Even in the midst of corruption and sin she has been protected and safeguarded. Pray that one day we might all be one.

Part I: History

I.A Jew and Gentile

The Catholic Church began in Jerusalem (cf. Acts 1:8, 12) which was a part of the Roman Empire. The Apostles, filled with the Spirit at Pentecost then proceeded to preach the name of Jesus to everyone. Their word spread very quickly and they put a fire in a great number of people from Jews to Gentiles. How Christianity spread was unique to both the Jews and the Gentiles.

For the Jews who came to believe, they followed the prophets and the law of Moses faithfully. They recognized that Jesus was the “suffering servant” as proclaimed by Isaiah nearly 700 years before (Is 42 – 43:12). Similarly, the words and actions of Christ were prefigured in many other utterances by the prophets. These Jews joined the Apostles as followers of Christ. The Jews had the benefit of a rich symbolism, culture, understanding of God, and history of their people to aid their understanding and faith. The Gospel of Matthew is the first precisely because it is meant to bridge the history of Israel with the advent of Christ who is a continuation of that history. This is why Paul said salvation came to all who believed, but “for Jew first, then Greek [i.e., Gentile]” (Rom 1:16). The Jews who accepted Christ could accept Him more fully at this time.

Simeon, a sage of Israel, receives the Messiah whom he has long waited for. Many of the greatest first-generation bishops were Jewish-born and expounded beautifully on Scripture when explaining Christ to both Jew and Gentile.

How the Gentiles (that is, everyone else) were converted was a different story. Many did not believe that the Hebrew Scriptures were inspired, nor were they aware of the history of Israel or salvation. This was not a disadvantage, however, because Christians were now to carry on the mission Israel had been given, to be “a light to the Gentiles” (Is 49:6b, Acts 14:47). In order to convince the Gentiles it must be done with deeds. In this manner, the early Christians could not rely on words, but rather the very life they led (or bled) would be the proof behind their words. It echoed James who said “I will demonstrate my faith to you from my works” (James 2:18). Likewise, Peter had told his followers to “always be ready to give an explanation who asks you for a reason for your hope” (1 Pet 3:15). This attitude, showing Christ to the world by our deeds, inspired Ignatius of Antioch when he said, “Whenever Christianity is hated by the world, what counts is not the power of persuasion, but greatness” (Letter to the Romans 3:3).

The Romans at this time had enjoyed a great period of peace and prosperity. As they gathered more gods to their pantheon, which was their practice when they conquered a people or territory, their religion became more convoluted.

The culture, likewise, was one of leisure and experimentation. Since a large portion of the manual labor in the Empire was done by slaves many Romans occupied their times with education and entertainment. Many opted for entertainment in the form of blood sports, drinking, and gambling. As time progressed many began to grow weary of the of local religious practices and sought out exotic practices and cults. For the Roman citizen, then, religion was either an exercise of bland mechanism or dangerous extremism. A large number of Roman men and women believed in gods out of tradition or compulsion. To others still it was just folklore.

Many of these Romans, however, were tired of the indulgent, apathetic, and impulsive culture that surrounded them. Educated and noble Romans sought out “schools” which were philosophical communities that proposed a particular way of life. Some such schools were the Stoics, the Epicureans, and the Neo-Platonists. While each had their merits and preached moderation, self-control, and intellectual contemplation none of them were particular concerned with the spiritual. The “spiritual” for them was intellectual and personal. If there were gods, they didn't care about humanity. The gods enjoyed higher things and if they truly were gods they would find pleasure in temporal, human affairs. Many of these schools of thought were concerned with ascending humanity or accepting the human condition with a sort of defeated-resignation.

I.B: Morality

When Christianity entered the scene it was something familiar yet entirely exotic. Christians proclaimed a man who was killed as a criminal-revolutionary as God. They claimed that there was one God, that He was a personal God who lowered Himself for the sake of His people. His son “took the form of a slave” (Phil 2:7) and gave his flesh to eat. While this sounded like the extremism that Romans were wary of many onlookers took note of the unusual moral strictness of these Christians. They fasted and denied their bodies overindulgence in pleasures, they prayed at regular intervals, they cared for those who were sick, they cared for widows, and they cared for all those who came to them. Justin Martyr, a 2^nd century saint, wrote that “Straightaway a flame was kindled in my soul; and a love of the prophets, and of those men who are friends of Christ, possessed me; and whilst revolving his words in my mind, I found this philosophy alone to be safe and profitable" (Dialogue with Trypho, sec. 8). What attracted Justin and men like him to Christianity was a Christian's perseverance in suffering and the joy they found, even in death.

Justin, like many other educated men of his day, were not looking for an amusing philosophy but for a way of life that led to happiness and allowed one to face trial with courage.

Christianity did not see humanity as wicked, but it also saw humanity as lacking—something experience makes readily apparent to us. They held that “In the beginning He made the human race with the power of thought and choosing the truth and acting rightly, so that all people are without excuse before God; for they have been born capable of exercising reason and intelligence" (1st Apology, sec. 28). While Christians believed in many strange and mysterious things they also conducted themselves in the world with reason, moderation, and order—something that would pique the interest of someone looking for order and meaning in their life.

One such example of this strange belief was the virtue of loving one's enemy. Ignatius of Antioch, a bishop of the 2^nd century, instructs others to “pray unceasingly for the rest of men, for they offer ground for hoping that they may be converted and win their way to God. Give them an opportunity therefore, at least by your conduct, of becoming your disciples. Meet their angry outbursts with your own gentleness, their boastfulness with your humility, … [and] their error with your constancy in the faith; beware of trying to match their example" (Letter to the Ephesians, sec. 10). A Christian not only expressed common, everyday virtues that were accepted. They practiced exemplary virtue in the face of injustice, ridicule, and death. This sort of courage, a well-regarded virtue for a Roman, could not come from one who was deluded but from someone who really did possess a sort of divine inspiration.

We have records of what early Christians were taught in the form of handbooks and catechisms. One of the earliest “handbooks” was the Didache, or “The Teachings of the Twelve Apostles.” A short excerpt of its teaching will suffice: “You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery; you shall not corrupt children; you shall not be sexually immoral; you shall not steal; you shall not practice magic; you shall not engage in sorcery; you shall not abort a child or commit infanticide … You shall not hate any one; instead you shall reprove some, and pray for some, and some you shall love more than your own life” (Didache 2:2, 7).

Strengthening this sentiment Christians were further distinguished by living in such a manner that did not destroy a culture but transformed it. This has been a hallmark of Catholic history: maintain what is good and sacred in another culture but order it to God. We may see the wisdom of the Didache echoed in The Epistle to Diognetus, written in the mid-to-late 2^nd century, which recounts that the Christians “[inhabit] Greek as well as barbarian cities … and [follow] the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct … they marry, as do all others; they beget children; but they do not destroy their offspring. They have a common table, but not a common bed” (cf. Ep. Diognetus 5:1-6)

Socially, the Roman world respected women if they were noble or wealthy, but typically they were considered as property (at least if they were inconvenient). Children were not respected in either Jewish or Gentile communities. In most philosophical and cultural traditions men were the pure embodiment of humanity while women, children, and slaves were weak derivations of humanity. Christians, however, claimed that “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free person, there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal 3:28). With regard to husbands and wives St. Paul taught “Be subordinate to one another out of reverence for Christ. … So [also] husbands should love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself” (Eph 5:21, 28).

This attracted a large number of women, both noble and common, to the Church. Children also followed because they were instructed as ones with equal dignity to their elders. Many children of this period were exposed to the elements and beasts if the father of a household did not want them. Christians routinely sought out the places where families would abandon their children and rescue them, raising them as their own. Justin Martyr also recounts, “We have been taught that to expose newly born infants is the work of wicked people; firstly because we see that almost all those exposed, not only the girls but also the boys, are growing up in prostitution" (1st Apology, sec. 27). So on top of preserving the lives of children, they also sought to protect them from predators and those who raised these children as sex slaves and sub-human objects. Slaves were accepted as brothers and sisters, whether they were freed or not. That Christians considered man, no matter who, dignified was one of the primary causes of Christianity's favorable reception.

With this foundation in place, namely the word of God coming to many, we will not see what the Church looked like in these circumstances—how was it formed and governed? What is “Tradition” as Catholics describe it, and in what manner do we say we are “universal”? We shall pick up these topics in Part II: Organization of the Church.

======

This was a presentation given to a group of 40 parishioners as part of a adult-education series on the Early Church. The hope is to generate discussion but more so I hope to inspire others to learn about the zeal of our early faith, to be confident in the history of the Church, to proclaim her with intelligence and patience, and to teach our children and fellow adults the Truth of Christ by understanding the divinity and humanity of our Church.

Early Christian Authors Worth Considering

Below is a brief list of some early Catholic authors that I believe are worth your attention. If you do wish to buy the books, I recommend the Ancient Christian Writers editions myself. Typically 17-28 dollars a book, I find their notes very helpful.

[A word of caution: ancient problems are not always our problems, so what they look at will not always address 1800 years of advancements]

1)Clement of Rome to the Corinthians--
A book almost accepted as Scripture by the early Church, it is one of the most produced non-biblical manuscripts dating to slightly after St. Paul in about 80-85AD. The head bishop of Rome, already in this book we see the trend of abuses and questions of conduct being sent to Rome or addressed by Rome. The abuse here in a phrase was that young members of the assembly ousted the older priests and instituted themselves as priests of that community.
Clement corrected the abuses in Corinth with this (and his 2nd) letter and strengthened the precedent of Rome being involved in other affairs. The history is not always clean, but it is also important to note that the "martyrology" played a big role in cities. If an Apostle or great saint was martyred in your city it was a sign of authority (because they taught there) and a belief that that saint was one who prayed and watched over that city. In this case Rome was where Peter and Paul were martyred, something respected widely in the early Church.

Pope St. Clement I, a "principal" figure who had to call the Corinthians to his office in one of the most famous non-canon letters of all time.

2) Ignatius of Antioch
Already an old man when he wrote (maybe 70) he wrote to various cities as he himself was instructed by St. John and a friend of his. John died around 100-105AD (aged, perhaps, 89-95). He defended the Church and, as you can see in my signature, was the first to utter the word "catholic" to describe the Church. Now I've attended the services of other denominations who have "one, holy, catholic (Christian), church." It may be worth reflecting on the man who used this word first and how it was used. As you can see from my quote it's different than you might expect. He was taken from his home where he presided in Antioch and was fed to lions in Rome at what was believed to be the Flavian Amphitheater.

“I am the wheat of God. Let me be ground by the teeth of the wild beasts, that I may be found the pure bread of Christ.”

3) Origen
Prominent early theologian who shaped much of biblical interpretation and was also a brilliant scholar in many fields. He wanted to die of martyrdom (you read this in "Subtle Crosses"). He was not sainted because some of his theology became suspect. An early example of a great mind in the Church who was lauded and used, but whose own personal piety was particularly severe. Though not proven, it was rumored that he took the Scriptures "if it causes you to sin cut it off" and, as such, he castrated himself. Not sure if that's true, but he was a very severe ascetic who had a profound influence.

His expert learning was also an occasion for him to write elaborate commentaries on Scripture in an attempt to blend and synthesize Scripture in its literal (the truths being expressed), moral (how we apply it), and allegorical senses (truths derived from Scripture as they are found in events, history, and geography--but my explanation fails to capture it exactly).

Also worth noting is that Origen pioneered the posture many philosophy and theology students would adopt for centuries after.

4) Eusebius (I will probably write on him later)

2nd-3rd century father who was the first Church historian who made a comprehensive history of Jewish patriarchs to Christ, the Apostles, and the bishops they ordained.

Somewhat dry but somewhat like the James Monroe of the Church who wrote a sort of "Federalist Papers" in that he charted how the canon of Scripture was decided upon and why and many other early traditions and their origins in Scripture and the teachings of the Apostles.

Not the easiest read, but I'm slowly getting through him myself.

He's about as exciting as he looks in this picture, but it doesn't detract from his invaluable research, learning, or importance in understanding the early Church

I hope this inspired someone to pick one of these men (and there are plenty others) up.

M