The Thinklings

"Membership in the family of God is neither inconsequential or something to be casually ignored. The church is God's agenda for the world. Jesus said, "I will build my church, and all the powers of hell will not conquer it." The church is indestructable and will exist for eternity. It will outlive this universe, and so will your role in it."

- Rick Warren

Saturday, April 25, 2009

The Apostolic Fathers

Posted by Bird @ 9:12 am CDT
Filed under: Theology, Literature

Many, if not most, writings in this category [Apostolic Fathers] were treated as Scripture alongside the Gospels and apostles' epistles by some Christian churches in the second century. In fact, one way of understanding this category is as the books that came to be judged orthodox but barely missed being judged canonical, inspired Scripture when the Christian canon was being determined. In other words, these writings were hardly distinguished from the writings of the apostles by some Christians in the Roman Empire but were ultimately excluded because they received no universal agreement as Scripture . . .
-- Roger E. Olsen, The Story of Christian Theology

I've been reading a translation of the Apostolic Fathers lately, and, despite their inclination toward moralism, they're very refreshing to read. In fact, if Christians used the Apostolic Fathers as a theological resource on certain issues, they could help shed light on the way many first-generation believers viewed certain cultural and doctrinal issues. For example ...

Abortion

You shall not murder ... you shall not abort a child or commit infanticide.

-- Didache 2:2

Baptism

Now concerning baptism, baptize as follows: after you have reviewed all these things, baptize in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit in running water. But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water; and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times in the name of the Father and Son and Holy Spirit.
-- Didache 7:1-3

The Godhead

The Lord submitted to suffer for our souls, even though he is Lord of the whole world, to whom God said at the foundation of the world, "Let us make humankind according to our image and likeness," . . .

-- Barnabas 5:5

Those are only a few examples of certain theological and moral issues that the Apostolic Fathers have something to say about. To be sure, the Apostolic Fathers are not Scripture, but, as Olsen said, they are by-and-large considered orthodox. Sure, in many ways they truly didn't understand the Gospel of Grace, but they didn't have the luxury of the full revelation of Scripture that we now possess.

Furthermore, it's important to note that the Apostolic Fathers were the guys who, in many instances, knew the apostles. For example, Polycarp was a disciple of John. While they didn't have the full canon of Scripture to rely on, they did have a close association with the apostles. They were Christianity's first theologians.

no trackbacks 16 comments

Trackbacks:

Trackback URL: http://thinklings.org/bloo.trackback.php/5375.

Comments on "The Apostolic Fathers":

1. The Ancient Mariner - 04/25/2009 9:23 am CDT

I would say it's more than "by and large"--those giants of the early church are the ones who did the heavy lifting when it came to working out the implications of Christian faith; they are, collectively, the gold standard of orthodoxy, and everyone who's come along since is standing on their shoulders, building on their work.

2. Bird - 04/25/2009 9:31 am CDT

Amen.

3. Shrode - 04/26/2009 5:48 am CDT

I used to have a copy of the Church Fathers (the whole set of however many books.) I also used to have an electronic version. I lost them both.

You're making me wish I had them again.

Here' my question, how can guys who were so close to the apostles and so "right" on everything else miss grace?

Paul's letters were considered "scripture" by even Peter! And I've read many times that except a verse or two, all of the New Testament can be recreated from the quotes of the Church Fathers. (Of course, that doesn't include the "Apostolic Fathers".)

But still, how could they miss that?

And in light of the fact that they didn't teach the gospel of grace, but so many other elements of orthodoxy, how do we counter people that argue that Christianity is a corruption of Christ's original teachings?

And if I can let my emotions show, I'm mad at them for missing that...I'm kind of hoping you guys are wrong. Maybe there is some grace in there?

4. Bill - 04/26/2009 7:52 am CDT

Here' my question, how can guys who were so close to the apostles and so "right" on everything else miss grace?

Not having ever read them, this question also seems pretty urgent to me. I thought it strange to read this review, which seems to say "The Apostolic Fathers are great. They knew the apostles, and are way closer to the time when the gospel was first preached, etc. They did miss one tiny detail - they preach salvation by works instead of grace. But other than that, they're great!"

So, for those of you who have read the AF, are you saying they didn't teach grace at all? If so, I'd say we have a big problem. Are we unbalanced toward grace? Do works play a part? Etc.

5. Bird - 04/26/2009 8:25 am CDT

how can guys who were so close to the apostles and so "right" on everything else miss grace?

6. Bird - 04/26/2009 8:26 am CDT

how can guys who were so close to the apostles and so "right" on everything else miss grace?

They did miss one tiny detail - they preach salvation by works instead of grace. But other than that, they're great!"

I'm sorry my review came across that way. Sure, they tended toward moralism, but I don't believe that they preached salvation by works.

A couple of quick points:

1. In Christian history, it's generally accepted that no theologian truly grasped grace until Augustine in the 4th and 5th Century. I attribute that, in part, to grace being such a radical concept ... so different from the way human experience and religion had interpreted our relationship with each and with God.

2. I believe it was F.F. Bruce who said that of all the early church figures, the heretic Marcion was the only one who understood Paul, "and he misunderstood him." Again, Paul's message -- grace -- was so new and revolutionary, it doesn't surprise me that it took centuries to truly sink in.

3. The Apostolic Fathers, as I said before, didn't have the luxury of a leather-bound NKJV.

4. The Apostolic Fathers were fighting rampant antinomianism (lawlessness), so they tended the other way theologically. I think much of their moralism was in response to lawlessness.

Hope that helps. :-)

7. Bill - 04/26/2009 1:38 pm CDT

1. In Christian history, it's generally accepted that no theologian truly grasped grace until Augustine in the 4th and 5th Century. I attribute that, in part, to grace being such a radical concept ... so different from the way human experience and religion had interpreted our relationship with each and with God.

Doesn't this bother you? I get uncomfortable with the idea that Paul invented Christianity and the gospel of grace.

I think John, Peter and others also got it. Even James. But it's troubling if the leaders of the church in the early centuries didn't. And not just a little troubling - it's a lot troubling. It makes me wonder if we, 20 centuries later, are the ones who have it wrong.

8. Bird - 04/26/2009 1:47 pm CDT

Doesn't this bother you? I get uncomfortable with the idea that Paul invented Christianity and the gospel of grace.

It doesn't bother me in the least. Paul didn't "invent" grace anymore than the church "invented" the Bible. I will say, though, that more than any other apostle, I believe Paul had the greatest revelation of grace. (And I agree with you that the other guys got it.)

But it's troubling if the leaders of the church in the early centuries didn't. And not just a little troubling - it's a lot troubling. It makes me wonder if we, 20 centuries later, are the ones who have it wrong.

I think it's easy to lose sight of how radical the concepts of NT Christianity really were (and are). Grace was/is radical. The Trinity was/is radical. Speaking of the Trinity, that model wasn't truly hammered out for several hundred years as well.

Be not troubled, Billboy. :-)

9. Les - 04/26/2009 8:13 pm CDT

Because I have not read the Fathers I so appreciated this post and this discussion. Fascinating. Good one, Bird.

10. Bird - 04/26/2009 8:42 pm CDT

Thanks, Les.

11. ruben - 04/27/2009 11:04 am CDT

I feel a bit uncomfortable also with the idea that the earliest Christians didn't get the concept of grace fully. I do understand that it took hundreds of years before the basic Christian doctrines were finalized and that later fathers like Augustine would make their contribution. And the Lord also promised that the Holy Spirit would lead His church to the truth so that the Christian faith as it was beginning was a work in progress. I always had this idea that works and faith were 2 sides of the same coin, our works show that we have faith and our faith produces good works (not by sheer effort but by grace). Maybe this is what the early church had in mind, then again it may be just as you said, Paul has always been difficult to understand and that later generations (including the reformers) would uncover his teaching more fully.

12. Bob Sacamento - 04/27/2009 12:43 pm CDT

I think it's easy to lose sight of how radical the concepts of NT Christianity really were (and are). Grace was/is radical. The Trinity was/is radical.

But, then again, the power of the Holy Spirit is such as to overcome all preconceptions, human dumbness, etc., I would think. And I would think he was just as active then as now. So I'm with Bill: But it's troubling if the leaders of the church in the early centuries didn't. And not just a little troubling - it's a lot troubling.

Speaking of the Trinity, that model wasn't truly hammered out for several hundred years as well.

This doesn't bother me as much because, face it, it's never going to get hammered out. Not really.

13. Bird - 04/27/2009 12:53 pm CDT

But, then again, the power of the Holy Spirit is such as to overcome all preconceptions, human dumbness, etc.

Sure the HS can overcome those things, but for whatever reason He doesn't always work that way. If He did, we never would have had need for the Protestant Reformation. :-)

14. Bob Sacamento - 04/27/2009 4:25 pm CDT

If He did, we never would have had need for the Protestant Reformation. :-)

Great. Now there's something else to worry about. Got anymore while you're at it? :)

15. Bird - 04/27/2009 6:59 pm CDT

I can think of something ...

:gwah:

16. Rev.Matthew Sullivan - 06/03/2009 2:07 am CDT

Ok. Grace is not anything we can achieve on our own. God gives us this. God forgives our innability to obey him through the blood of Christ.
God Justifies us through Christ by Faith and Works.(James 2:24)

Now i agree that it is by faith that we are saved by grace and not by works. But it is by works that we show our faith. Our faith brings us to christ, who reconciles us to God who gives us mercy based upon Christ and our obedience to him.

Name:
URL:	(optional)
Email:	(optional - will not be published)