The Question of Authorities in Forming Doctrine
|
|
Introduction
What is Christian doctrine? And where does the authorities in forming doctrine come from? This is a thesis of this paper. To answer the first question, I would like to quote late Church historian Jaroslav Pelikan’s book called The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, vol. 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600), Pelikan notes that “What the church of Jesus Christ believes, teaches, and confesses on the basis of the word of God: this is Christian doctrine.”(Pelikan, 1, 1971) Christian doctrine has its foundation on the teaching of the church. And a church would not be church without Christian doctrine, which is teaching of Jesus Christ.
Why is it important to study the question of authorities in forming doctrine in Christianity? There are many ways and elements that can help answer the questions. First, a study of this nature can help to confirm an origin and necessity of the Canon of Scripture; apocryphal sources, pseudepigraphal writings, Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession; 3 Ecumenical Creeds and numerous ecumenical councils. Second, a study of this nature can trace the development of false doctrines (commonly called heresies). Church history can also help show us how false doctrines originated and spread within Christendom. Third benefit of studying is learning about the past in order to understand present-day teaching of doctrines in the church today. We need to read more about the past or study the origin of doctrine in order to understand present day Christianity. Without a grasp of the question of authorities in forming doctrine, we will fall into a false teaching or might have defective view of Christianity.
In this article, I would like to survey numerous concepts of authorities in forming doctrine by looking into the Canonicity of Scripture, apocryphal sources, three Ecumenical creeds, church councils and a development of Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession.
If Christianity is a fact and impresses a doctrine on believers mind, it must have some origins or a source of origin. And then what gives doctrine authority and mandate? Christian doctrine had already undergone a long period of development by the time that the latest books in the canon of the New Testament had been written, and most of the known work of the ‘Apostolic Fathers’ had been written, such as Didache. According to Lampe, “Didache is very early indeed, perhaps dating from well within what is generally thought of as the New Testament period.”(Lampe, 23, 1978)
Now, with these backgrounds, I would like to take a look at the Canonicity of Scripture as the foundational authority in forming Christian doctrine.
Canonicity of Scripture
The question, however it is addressed, should be raised as to why the Scripture should be made the primary source and criterion for forming Christian doctrine? It is because like anything else there must be some sort of authority in any situation, in this case, its in forming doctrine.
Henry Newman notes that, “If Christianity be an universal religion, suited not simply to one locality or period but to all times and places, it cannot but vary in its relations and dealings towards the world around it, that is, it will develop… Hence all bodies of Christians, orthodox or not, develop the doctrine of Scripture.” (Newman, 79, 1960) Christianity is about a movement or belief, which follow Jesus Christ. Thus, it is logical to turn and look into his teaching and what he had said and did. On the assumpsion that Gospels are reliable source of historical information, and what Jesus endorsed must also be regarded as further source of authority in forming doctrine.
In choosing which books (or writings) to be considered a canon in Christian tradition is much more complex. There were many books of the Bible (Old Testament called Jewish Writings, Septuagint, Apocrypha, Gnostic writings, pseudepigraphal, Didache, and other New Testament manuscripts) were available in early period of Christianity. The development of the canon is a fascinating and important area of importance in Christian doctrine and teaching of apostles. Thus studying the origin of canonicity of Scripture is actually studying apostles’ teachings as well. For Jesus did not write anything. Pelikan agrees with John Knox who believed that “Canonicity and apostolicity became almost synonymous terms”(Pelikan, 114, 1971). The list of canonical or apostolic books continued to fluctuate for many centuries. But what did not fluctuate was the Christian doctrine, i. e. orthodox formulated doctrines that had originated from councils and later became known as Ecumenical creeds. (There are three recognized Ecumenical creeds, the Apostle’ Creed, the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed.)
Controversies surrounding the canonicity of Scripture range from Jewish bible, apocrypha, pseudepigraphal writings and many New Testament fragment and manuscripts. And there were also believers who were not sure of them on determining orthodox position in the church. Bernard David noted that, “Only fraction of the writings from early times still exist, and it is difficult to say how representative the remnant is. If a writer was a well-known bishop, pastor, or other church leader, we have some reason to believe he represented a significant view in the church. If a writer is unknown or had no significant position in the church, it is quite possible that he was not truly representative of the church of his time.”(Bernard, 104,1999) This was one way to establish an authority in canonicity of Scripture. Authority rested on the writer of bible’s position and influence.
Apostolic Fathers viewed the Scripture and the baptism formula to be regarded as presenting norm of Christian faith.(Reinhold, 82, 1935) According to Reinhold there were two sources for sources of authority. He noted that, “Jesus Himself describes and employs the Old Testament as an infallible authority (i. e. Matt. 5. 17. Lk. 24. 44), and the apostles also use it as such (e. g. Rom. 1. 2. Gal. 3. 8, 22; 4. 30, etc. But the Lord says of his own words also, that they shall outlast heaven and earth, and asserts the same of the principles to be proclaimed by his apostles (Matt. 10. 40; 16:19).”(Reinhold, 82, 1935)
On Apocrypha
In dealing with Apocrypha, many did question its authority. Yet there were many who identified the writings to be regarded with equal status, writings such as Hermas, Barnabas, the Didache, 1 and 2 Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter, etc. Some writers in the early Christendom, notably Tertullian and Augustine, gave full or partial approval to some of the Apocrypha. Bernard notes that, “Under the influence of Augustine, regional councils in North Africa in the late fourth and early fifth centuries endorsed the Apocrypha. Other writers, such as Origen and Athanasius, did not regard them as Scripture. Some did not deem them canonical but used them for study and preaching. Jerome, translator of the Vulgate (Latin Bible), insisted that they were not the Word of God.”(Bernard, 104, 1999) Thus the books were neither received as the Word of God or not as the Word of God as it is today.
On Creeds
In dealing with Creeds (here we are dealing with the three Ecumenical creeds, which all branches of Christianity recognized as the creeds of the church.), it played an important role in ancient doctrinal controversies, especially those on the Godhead. Bernard notes that, “The earliest ‘rule of faith’ (fundamental doctrines or statements that were accepted generally) focused on faith in the one God… It is the basis of the Apostles’ Creed used today.”(Bernard, 137, 1999) The Apostles’ Creed was not written by the apostles, but it contained their teaching and beliefs based on Jesus Christ. The creed was a respond to new doctrinal challenges, yet it did not contain some of important doctrinal issues that face the contemporary church. (Bernard, 137, 1999)
The Nicene Creed was the creed that was developed during the Council of Nicea in 325. The creed was a direct result of the council that reacted against teaching of Arius, who was a deacon in Alexandrian church, held a view that the Son or the Logos was created and adopted by the Father to be divine. And he taught that there was a time, which the Logos did not, existed and later created to be a divine. The Arian doctrine of Christ as creature collides with the tradition of describing him as God. Pelikan notes that, “But, the Arian use of the titles Logos and Son of God, which together had come to summarize the central meaning of that tradition…For while the tradition of describing Christ as God was indeed the basic doctrinal and liturgical issue at stake in the controversy fro the beginning.”(Pelikan, 200, 1971) The Nicene Creed reaffirmed the basic belief in Christ as divine and Homoousios (same essence as the Father). The Athanasian Creed was clear exposition after the Nicene Creed, of Trinitarian controversy and the Incarnation of the Son. It stated and restated the twofold nature in the one divine person of Jesus Christ. Three ecumenical creeds were the authority of the councils and creeds that originated the formation of early Christian doctrine.
Both Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox view the ancient creeds and councils as authoritative source of doctrine. Protestantism affirms the sole authority of Scripture, but in practice most protestant churches also appeal to the creeds as definitive and normative.(Bernard, 137, 1999)
On Apostolic Ministry
In dealing with development of apostolic ministry, it is necessary to look at Cyprian of Carthage (d. 258). He was a student of Tertullian and considered one who emphasized the importance of church. He even said that church is salvation or there is no salvation outside the church. His reason for such belief is based on wide- spread of persecution during his time (It was Decian persecution). Williston Walker notes that, “As he (Cyprian) saw it, the church was found ultimately upon the apostles whom Christ commissioned. It was therefore the apostles as single college (collegium: a body of colleagues), severally exercising a single undivided authority, who were the foundation of the church and hence in Cyprian’s view (and not his alone) devolved upon the bishops, the successors of the apostles, who severally exercised the authority of a single collective ministry.”(Walker, 1985)
For Cyprian, authority of Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession based on God, and Christ. For him, there is one God, and Christ is one, and there is one chair (episcopate) founded upon the rock by the word of the Lord. To denying the authority of the apostolic succession ministry is to denying church. This view led to the system of synodical government by bishops and they had authority of apostolic tradition.
Conclusion
The question of authorities in forming doctrine was long and combative at times. The canonicity of Scripture, development of the Ecumenical Creeds and numerous councils and rise of Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession had to do with both church history and development of Christian doctrine and dogma. Sole authority of Christian doctrine is based on the authority of Scripture. And from the Scripture everything begins and ends. Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodoxy do include apocrypha writings in their Bible along with both the Old Testament (commonly called Hebrew Bible) and New Testament, whereas Protestantism recognize only Old and the New Testament. In dealing with three Creeds, all branches recognized as a norm and authoritative.
References:
What is Christian doctrine? And where does the authorities in forming doctrine come from? This is a thesis of this paper. To answer the first question, I would like to quote late Church historian Jaroslav Pelikan’s book called The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, vol. 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600), Pelikan notes that “What the church of Jesus Christ believes, teaches, and confesses on the basis of the word of God: this is Christian doctrine.”(Pelikan, 1, 1971) Christian doctrine has its foundation on the teaching of the church. And a church would not be church without Christian doctrine, which is teaching of Jesus Christ.
Why is it important to study the question of authorities in forming doctrine in Christianity? There are many ways and elements that can help answer the questions. First, a study of this nature can help to confirm an origin and necessity of the Canon of Scripture; apocryphal sources, pseudepigraphal writings, Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession; 3 Ecumenical Creeds and numerous ecumenical councils. Second, a study of this nature can trace the development of false doctrines (commonly called heresies). Church history can also help show us how false doctrines originated and spread within Christendom. Third benefit of studying is learning about the past in order to understand present-day teaching of doctrines in the church today. We need to read more about the past or study the origin of doctrine in order to understand present day Christianity. Without a grasp of the question of authorities in forming doctrine, we will fall into a false teaching or might have defective view of Christianity.
In this article, I would like to survey numerous concepts of authorities in forming doctrine by looking into the Canonicity of Scripture, apocryphal sources, three Ecumenical creeds, church councils and a development of Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession.
If Christianity is a fact and impresses a doctrine on believers mind, it must have some origins or a source of origin. And then what gives doctrine authority and mandate? Christian doctrine had already undergone a long period of development by the time that the latest books in the canon of the New Testament had been written, and most of the known work of the ‘Apostolic Fathers’ had been written, such as Didache. According to Lampe, “Didache is very early indeed, perhaps dating from well within what is generally thought of as the New Testament period.”(Lampe, 23, 1978)
Now, with these backgrounds, I would like to take a look at the Canonicity of Scripture as the foundational authority in forming Christian doctrine.
Canonicity of Scripture
The question, however it is addressed, should be raised as to why the Scripture should be made the primary source and criterion for forming Christian doctrine? It is because like anything else there must be some sort of authority in any situation, in this case, its in forming doctrine.
Henry Newman notes that, “If Christianity be an universal religion, suited not simply to one locality or period but to all times and places, it cannot but vary in its relations and dealings towards the world around it, that is, it will develop… Hence all bodies of Christians, orthodox or not, develop the doctrine of Scripture.” (Newman, 79, 1960) Christianity is about a movement or belief, which follow Jesus Christ. Thus, it is logical to turn and look into his teaching and what he had said and did. On the assumpsion that Gospels are reliable source of historical information, and what Jesus endorsed must also be regarded as further source of authority in forming doctrine.
In choosing which books (or writings) to be considered a canon in Christian tradition is much more complex. There were many books of the Bible (Old Testament called Jewish Writings, Septuagint, Apocrypha, Gnostic writings, pseudepigraphal, Didache, and other New Testament manuscripts) were available in early period of Christianity. The development of the canon is a fascinating and important area of importance in Christian doctrine and teaching of apostles. Thus studying the origin of canonicity of Scripture is actually studying apostles’ teachings as well. For Jesus did not write anything. Pelikan agrees with John Knox who believed that “Canonicity and apostolicity became almost synonymous terms”(Pelikan, 114, 1971). The list of canonical or apostolic books continued to fluctuate for many centuries. But what did not fluctuate was the Christian doctrine, i. e. orthodox formulated doctrines that had originated from councils and later became known as Ecumenical creeds. (There are three recognized Ecumenical creeds, the Apostle’ Creed, the Nicene Creed and the Athanasian Creed.)
Controversies surrounding the canonicity of Scripture range from Jewish bible, apocrypha, pseudepigraphal writings and many New Testament fragment and manuscripts. And there were also believers who were not sure of them on determining orthodox position in the church. Bernard David noted that, “Only fraction of the writings from early times still exist, and it is difficult to say how representative the remnant is. If a writer was a well-known bishop, pastor, or other church leader, we have some reason to believe he represented a significant view in the church. If a writer is unknown or had no significant position in the church, it is quite possible that he was not truly representative of the church of his time.”(Bernard, 104,1999) This was one way to establish an authority in canonicity of Scripture. Authority rested on the writer of bible’s position and influence.
Apostolic Fathers viewed the Scripture and the baptism formula to be regarded as presenting norm of Christian faith.(Reinhold, 82, 1935) According to Reinhold there were two sources for sources of authority. He noted that, “Jesus Himself describes and employs the Old Testament as an infallible authority (i. e. Matt. 5. 17. Lk. 24. 44), and the apostles also use it as such (e. g. Rom. 1. 2. Gal. 3. 8, 22; 4. 30, etc. But the Lord says of his own words also, that they shall outlast heaven and earth, and asserts the same of the principles to be proclaimed by his apostles (Matt. 10. 40; 16:19).”(Reinhold, 82, 1935)
On Apocrypha
In dealing with Apocrypha, many did question its authority. Yet there were many who identified the writings to be regarded with equal status, writings such as Hermas, Barnabas, the Didache, 1 and 2 Clement, the Apocalypse of Peter, etc. Some writers in the early Christendom, notably Tertullian and Augustine, gave full or partial approval to some of the Apocrypha. Bernard notes that, “Under the influence of Augustine, regional councils in North Africa in the late fourth and early fifth centuries endorsed the Apocrypha. Other writers, such as Origen and Athanasius, did not regard them as Scripture. Some did not deem them canonical but used them for study and preaching. Jerome, translator of the Vulgate (Latin Bible), insisted that they were not the Word of God.”(Bernard, 104, 1999) Thus the books were neither received as the Word of God or not as the Word of God as it is today.
On Creeds
In dealing with Creeds (here we are dealing with the three Ecumenical creeds, which all branches of Christianity recognized as the creeds of the church.), it played an important role in ancient doctrinal controversies, especially those on the Godhead. Bernard notes that, “The earliest ‘rule of faith’ (fundamental doctrines or statements that were accepted generally) focused on faith in the one God… It is the basis of the Apostles’ Creed used today.”(Bernard, 137, 1999) The Apostles’ Creed was not written by the apostles, but it contained their teaching and beliefs based on Jesus Christ. The creed was a respond to new doctrinal challenges, yet it did not contain some of important doctrinal issues that face the contemporary church. (Bernard, 137, 1999)
The Nicene Creed was the creed that was developed during the Council of Nicea in 325. The creed was a direct result of the council that reacted against teaching of Arius, who was a deacon in Alexandrian church, held a view that the Son or the Logos was created and adopted by the Father to be divine. And he taught that there was a time, which the Logos did not, existed and later created to be a divine. The Arian doctrine of Christ as creature collides with the tradition of describing him as God. Pelikan notes that, “But, the Arian use of the titles Logos and Son of God, which together had come to summarize the central meaning of that tradition…For while the tradition of describing Christ as God was indeed the basic doctrinal and liturgical issue at stake in the controversy fro the beginning.”(Pelikan, 200, 1971) The Nicene Creed reaffirmed the basic belief in Christ as divine and Homoousios (same essence as the Father). The Athanasian Creed was clear exposition after the Nicene Creed, of Trinitarian controversy and the Incarnation of the Son. It stated and restated the twofold nature in the one divine person of Jesus Christ. Three ecumenical creeds were the authority of the councils and creeds that originated the formation of early Christian doctrine.
Both Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodox view the ancient creeds and councils as authoritative source of doctrine. Protestantism affirms the sole authority of Scripture, but in practice most protestant churches also appeal to the creeds as definitive and normative.(Bernard, 137, 1999)
On Apostolic Ministry
In dealing with development of apostolic ministry, it is necessary to look at Cyprian of Carthage (d. 258). He was a student of Tertullian and considered one who emphasized the importance of church. He even said that church is salvation or there is no salvation outside the church. His reason for such belief is based on wide- spread of persecution during his time (It was Decian persecution). Williston Walker notes that, “As he (Cyprian) saw it, the church was found ultimately upon the apostles whom Christ commissioned. It was therefore the apostles as single college (collegium: a body of colleagues), severally exercising a single undivided authority, who were the foundation of the church and hence in Cyprian’s view (and not his alone) devolved upon the bishops, the successors of the apostles, who severally exercised the authority of a single collective ministry.”(Walker, 1985)
For Cyprian, authority of Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession based on God, and Christ. For him, there is one God, and Christ is one, and there is one chair (episcopate) founded upon the rock by the word of the Lord. To denying the authority of the apostolic succession ministry is to denying church. This view led to the system of synodical government by bishops and they had authority of apostolic tradition.
Conclusion
The question of authorities in forming doctrine was long and combative at times. The canonicity of Scripture, development of the Ecumenical Creeds and numerous councils and rise of Episcopal ministry in apostolic succession had to do with both church history and development of Christian doctrine and dogma. Sole authority of Christian doctrine is based on the authority of Scripture. And from the Scripture everything begins and ends. Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodoxy do include apocrypha writings in their Bible along with both the Old Testament (commonly called Hebrew Bible) and New Testament, whereas Protestantism recognize only Old and the New Testament. In dealing with three Creeds, all branches recognized as a norm and authoritative.
References:
- Archer, S. (1993). "Hooker on Apostolic Succession: The Two Voices." Sixteenth Century Journal 24(1): 67-74.
- Elwell, Walter A. (Editor) (1984). Evangelical Dictionary of Theology. Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
- Evans, G. R. (Editor). (2004). The First Christian Theologians: An Introduction to Theology in the Early Church. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing
- Bernard, D. K. (1999). A History of Christian Doctrine. Hazelwood, MO, Word Atlane Press.
- Brakke, D. (1994). "Canon Formation and Social Conflict in Fourth-Century Egypt: Athanasius of Aleandria's Thirty-Ninth "Festal Letter"." The Harvard Theological Review 87(4): 395-419.
- Bray, G. L. (1984). Creeds, Councils and Christ. Downers Grove, Il, Inter-Varsity Press.
- Erickson, M. J. (1985). Christian Theology. Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
- Irenaeus (1987 (Reprinted). Against Heresies. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Company.
- Kelly, J. N. D. (1972). Early Christian Creeds. London, Longmans, Green and Co.
- Lampe, G. W. H. (1978). A History of Christian Doctrine. Edinburgh, T & T Clark.
- Leith, J. H. (1982). Creeds of the Churches: A Reader in Christian Doctrine from the Bible to the Present, John Knox Press.
- Matter, E. A. (1991). "The Bible in All Ages?" The Journal of Religion: 79-90.
- Meyendorff, J. (1960). The Orthodox Church: Its Past and Its Role in the World Today. New York, Pantheon Books.
- Newman, J. H. (1960). An Essay on the Development of Christian Doctrine. Garden City, Image Books.
- O'Donovan, Oliverr and Joan Lockwood O'Donovan, Editors (1999). From Irenaeus to Grotius: A Sourcebook in Christian Political Thoughts. Grand Rapids, Eerdmans Publishing Company.
- Pelikan, J. (1971). The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100-600). Chicago and London, The University of Chicago Press.
- Pelikan, J. (1974). The Spirit of Eastern Christiandom (600- 1700). Chicago and London, The University of Chicago Press.
- Reinhold, S. (1935). Textbook of the History of Doctrine. Eugene, OR, Wipf and Stock Publishers.
- Reiser, W. E. (1978). What Are They Saying About Dogma? New York, Paulist Press.
- Walker, Williston and Richard A. Norris, David W. Lotz, Roert T. Handy (1985). A History of the Christian Church. New York, Scribner.
- Willis, J. R., S.J. (2002). The Teachings of the Church Fathers. San Francisco, Ignatius Press.