| |
; |
Hell is paved with the skulls of priests. |
St John Chrysostom (c.347-407), Letters |
Since the Bible fails to mention certain doctrines and practices that are now considered characteristically Christian, some branches of Christianity have looked to early traditions to justify them. But the results are disappointing. Few genuine traditions can be justified in this way, and worse still, early authorities often confirm many practices that are now regarded as unacceptable. For example, a return to the earliest practices would mean that no religious icons would be allowed, either pictures or statues. The use of incense would be prohibited as pagan. On the other hand, Christians would hold love feasts, and celebrate the Sabbath on Saturdays. Easter would be celebrated on the 14th day of the Jewish month of Nisan. Infants would not be baptised, and adults would not be baptised except between Easter and Pentecost. Baptisms would then involve the triple immersion of the naked baptismal candidate. There would be no sacrament of confession or penance, or if we accept the earliest (third century) practices there would be only public penance (exomologesis), permitted once after baptism*. There would be no priests or bishops, only elders and supervisors, freely elected by the community.
The whole area of "tradition" is riddled with difficulties. The early Church leader and writer Tertullian, who invented the idea of appealing to tradition, used it to justify the practice of triple immersion at baptism, the requirement that the Eucharist should be taken in the early morning, and the prohibition of kneeling at Easter or on Sundays. There is no doubt about the position of the early Church on these matters and it is for this reason that various reformed Churches have returned to at least some of these ancient practices.
The Roman Church is in a less comfortable position. It purports to give great weight to tradition – the importance of traditions dating back to the apostles was emphasised by the Council of Trent (Session 4). Yet it has persecuted and killed people for the heresies of adhering to apostolic practices – rejecting infant baptism, keeping the Sabbath on Saturday, celebrating Easter on the 14th of Nisan, and so on. Protestant Churches have also persecuted and killed other Christians (e.g. Anabaptists) for such "heresies". It is strange enough that apostolic practices are sometimes at variance with mainstream Christian views. Worse is the fact that not a single Church doctrine can be justified by appeal to a reliable apostolic tradition.
In the absence of any first-hand apostolic record, Christian
scholars often referred to the Fathers of the Church –
early Christians who left a written record of doctrine and practices.
The Roman Church purports to ascribe authority to them equal
to that accorded to the gospels. But there are problems here
as well. In the first place the earliest Fathers knew nothing
of doctrines such as the Incarnation or Trinity, and so were
liable to make statements that are now heretical. Also, on many
matters the Church Fathers contradict each other, and where
they unanimously concur they often condemn practices that are
now common, for example, the wearing of distinctive clothing
by clerics. Often, specific directions by the Fathers are simply
ignored. Hippolytus instructed Christians to pray at the third,
sixth, and ninth hours of the day, a practice mentioned by many
early authorities, such as Tertullian, Origen of Alexandria,
and Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage. The practice was inconvenient
so it was dropped for those not belonging to religious Orders
(though Muslims manage to follow similar rules, taking care
to face a certain direction, as Christians once did, and adopting
the same posture for prayer as early Christians).
The Fathers held strong views on a wide range of matters. As
Gibbon observed:
In their censures of luxury the fathers were extremely minute
and circumstantial; and among the various articles that excite
their pious indignation we may enumerate false hair, garments
of any colour except white, instruments of music, vases of
gold or silver, downy pillows (as Jacob reposed his head on
a stone), white bread, foreign wines, public salutations,
the use of warm baths, and the practice of shaving the beard,
which, according to Tertullian, is a lie against our own faces
and an impious attempt to improve the works of the Creator*.
The Roman Church"s commitment to tradition is widely regarded
as questionable. The Church has never attempted to collect together
a comprehensive body of tradition, and it is not unknown for
Roman Catholic writers to be charged by other Christians with
being evasive, and even "fugitive", on the subject*.
This is not altogether surprising since numerous Roman doctrines
are not evidenced by the Church Fathers, and are universally
acknowledged to date from later times (papal infallibility,
the Immaculate Conception, and Mary"s Assumption, to name
but three ).
It is difficult to find any Church Fathers who were consistently
orthodox by modern standards. Indeed the problem of deciding
who counted as a Church Father was much like deciding which
books were canonical. People tended to include anyone who agreed
with them and to reject anyone who did not. Since there were
so few accepted Fathers, broad agreement was eventually reached,
though once again there is no definitive list, and Eastern and
Western Churches still accord vastly different weights to different
Fathers*. Since it was
difficult, often impossible, to find orthodox writers who confirmed
certain doctrines or practices, Churches were driven to accept
as authoritative men who had been condemned as heretics. Some
of them had been considered heretical even in their own day.
Their original writings were conveniently "lost" or
tampered with. Many of these early Christians had extremely
unfortunate views on sex and punishment, shared extreme anti-Semitic
views, and firmly believed a range of absurdities. The most
influential were:
St Ignatius of Antioch (AD c.35-c.107). Ignatius
was an unusually credulous man, given to embellishing stories
, and with an unusual personality (he prayed for his own death,
preferably by horrific means). He held that only bishops could
conduct baptisms and love feasts*.
He left little else of doctrinal value, and what little he did
leave is universally acknowledged to have been radically tampered
with by later Christians.
St Clement of Rome (fl. AD c.96). Clement
wrote letters that were initially accepted into but later rejected
from the canon of Christian scripture. They deal largely with
the great dissent then current within the Church, and suggest
that there was no established bishopric at Rome during his lifetime*.
He seems to have been as credulous as others of his age (he
was convinced in the reality of the phoenix). Much of his surviving
work is now known to be forged, and little is known of his life,
beliefs or death.
St Justin Martyr (AD c.100-c.165). Justin
was a man generally acknowledged to have been of no great intelligence,
nor philosophical nor literary skill. He had studied Stoic and
Pythagorean philosophy, but had failed to comprehend either
and turned instead to Christianity. His writings are of little
doctrinal value. He was concerned mainly to refute various charges
made against Christians by members of other religions. He has
been accused of believing in two Gods, having referred to the
Word (logos) as "second God". According
to him Christ was worshipped in the "second rank",
and the Holy Spirit in the "third rank", a view that
is now regarded as heretical*.
St Irenaeus of Lyons (AD c.130-c.200). Irenaeus
was another exceptionally credulous man, who believed stories
that are now accepted to be apocryphal*.
Like many of his contemporaries, Irenaeus accepted the millenarian
heresy, the belief in a 1,000-year period of divine rule following
Christ"s imminent return to living on Earth. For this reason
he was not well regarded by the Eastern Churches. His writings
have not been preserved in the original Greek, and Latin translations
show evidence of his views having been edited to erase evidence
of his heresy*. His idea
of the Incarnation was that the Word (logos)
was God the Father incarnate in Jesus Christ – a view
now considered heretical. He also held that Jesus died as a
ransom paid to Satan*,
a view that might well have come to be regarded as heretical
if it had not been almost universal until the eleventh century.
St Clement of Alexandria (AD c.150-c.215).
Clement held Gnostic views, denying that Christ had experienced
the physical passions of an ordinary man and holding that he
had been exempt from human desire*.
Such views would later be condemned as heretical. Clement is
also known to have suppressed authentic gospel material that
he wanted kept for an inner élite. He expressed doubts
as to whether he even wanted to be associated with those who
called themselves orthodox and found it hard to use the word
without a half-ironic apology*.
(Quintus Septimus Florens) Tertullian (AD c.160-c.225).
Like many later Christians, Tertullian delighted in the prospect
of his enemies suffering in Hell. He adopted Montanist views
(see page 123), which came to be considered heretical, and held
that the orthodox line was the heretical one. He accused bishops
of Rome of the Sabellian heresy, the doctrine that Father, Son,
and Spirit represent different states (or modes or aspects)
of a single god at different times (see also page 123). He died
fulminating against what is now regarded as orthodoxy.
St Hippolytus (AD c.170-c.236). Hippolytus
was a prolific Greek writer and another supporter of the millenarian
heresy, whose works have been "lost" in the original.
Later Latin versions of his Apostolic Traditions have
clearly been tampered with. He was elected Bishop of Rome in
competition to the existing bishop (Callistus), who claimed
that Hippolytus believed in two gods. Hippolytus accused two
bishops of Rome (Zephyrinus and Callistus) of heresy. Saint
Hippolytus is now regarded as the first anti-pope , though he
still keeps his sainthood.
Origen of Alexandria (AD c.185-254). Origen
was a biblical critic, teacher and writer. Most of his works
have been "lost". Of those that are extant most are
known only in translation. He was accused of holding beliefs
that would later be regarded as heretical ("Adoptionist").
He held that Jesus Christ was divine, but only in a lesser sense
than the Father*. He
said that Christian worship should be directed solely to the
Father and not to Christ , a view that was later to become heretical,
as were a number of his other teachings. He also held that all
beings will eventually be saved, even Satan himself, a view
that was heretical for many centuries but is now fashionable
again. Like some of his contemporaries he voluntarily castrated
himself to remove a sinful source of temptation. He insisted
on observing Jesus" instructions, such as the ones about
not carrying an extra coat and not wearing shoes (Matthew 10:10).
During his lifetime he was deposed from the priesthood and deprived
of his teaching post by the Bishop of Alexandria. He was also
condemned by the Bishop of Rome and by a synod of Egyptian bishops.
St Jerome held that he had deliberately tried to mislead the
orthodox into heresy. Views attributed to him were condemned
by further bishops, emperors and councils. To clear up any remnant
of doubt, Origen"s teachings were condemned by the Second
Ecumenical Council of Constantinople in 553.
Eusebius of Caesarea (c.260-c.340).
Eusebius is regarded as the Father of Church history. He was
a supporter of the Libyan preacher Arius (c.256-336) and his
heresy that Jesus Christ was not coequal with the Father, until
he was pressured to subscribe to the new official line at the
first great Council of the Church. He said that Jesus shared
the glory of God, but only in the sense that the saints shared
the same glory*. Like
St Justin Martyr he thought of the Holy Spirit as being lower
than either the Father or the Son, describing it as "in
the third rank", "a third power", and "third
from the Supreme Cause"*.
He was accused of adultery, among other things, on the evidence
of a prostitute, and was replaced as leader of the moderate
party. His history contains statements that still smack of the
Arian heresy*.
St John Chrysostom (c.347-407).
John was an anti-Semite who interpreted the Bible literally
and historically rather than allegorically. He was deposed from
his post of Patriarch of Constantinople by the synod of the
Oak in 403, condemned and banished. He was recalled but then
banished again and died in exile.
St Augustine of Hippo (354-430). Augustine
was brought up as a Christian, but took a mistress and abandoned
his religion. He considered the Old Testament to be a collection
of old wives" fables , though he himself was unusually
gullible, even by standards of the day*.
In 374 he converted to a rival religion, Manichæism, and
managed to convert some friends as well. But he never managed
to graduate as one of the elect. Some nine years after his conversion
he became a neoplatonist and then converted back to Christianity,
in response to an oracle. He introduced new doctrines into the
Church, drawn largely from his Manichæan phase. His views
about the evils of sex seem to be due partly to guilt about
his mistresses*, and
partly to his Manichæan training, a fact recognised by
at least one of his contemporaries. His views on contraception
are not consistent with those of the Roman Church*.
He was frankly predestinarian (believing people are powerless
to change their destiny). He also mentioned the death of the
Virgin Mary, not remarkable at the time, but now contrary to
Roman dogma. He was also open to charges of a heresy called
Sabellianism or Modal Monarchianism (see page 123). His consecration
as coadjutor bishop in 395 was illegal, contravening the eighth
canon of Nicæa.
St Jerome (c.342-420.) Jerome was a scholar
with a reputation for being offensive to his fellow scholars.
He was responsible for creating the version of the Bible called
the Vulgate. He surrounded himself by wealthy women in Rome
and was involved in a series of scandals there. He left Rome
in disgrace, after one of his female acolytes died from the
severity of her bodily mortification. He settled in Bethlehem,
along with selected women followers.
Other important early theologians, now dismissed as heretics,
are nevertheless cited when they agree with the currently acceptable
line, especially when they provide the only support for the
point in question. Among them are Helvidius (who held that Jesus
had brothers) ; Jovinian (d. c.405), a monk who was excommunicated
for criticising fasting and celibacy, and for suggesting that
Mary lost her virginity in giving birth ; and Vigilantius (fl.
c.400), who deprecated popular devotions, such as vigils and
the cultus of the saints, as pagan practices.
It would be fair to say that the most significant thing that
the Church Fathers establish is that much Christian doctrine
was developed in the fourth century, or afterwards.
|
|
