Well, I have invented a time machine. Working with my astute son, we have constructed out of star wars lego pieces, aluminum foil and duct tape a functioning time machine. Now, my first thought was to use this to get rich, or at least pay off student loans. But, I decided it would be more fun to use this new power to answer a question that is really caused alot of ruckus in the modern study of Christianity. Inquiring minds want to know. Does our Christian faith derive from an apostolic tradition which goes back to the life and teaching of Christ?” If so, is this tradition a “rule of faith” and is it a consistent measure of orthodoxy? Has this tradition changed substantially over time, or is our confession fundamentally that of the apostles? Much of modern scholarship (without access to a time machine) denies any central orthodoxy to the Christian faith and they say that what we now believe only came about in the third and fourth centuries through much conflict and infighting. What people believed about Jesus was very diverse and what we now think of as “orthodox” was an option among many, and not even the first option available. Well, lets fire up our new invention and take a little trip back in time. Hold on, because we are going to cover a great deal of church history pretty quickly and see if we find mostly consensus on the central belief of the Christian faith, or if we struggle to do so.
Lets begin our journey by setting the time dial all the way back to 33 C.E., the time of the death of Christ. I’m thinking that If he had actually taught some important information about who he was, then his followers would have likely made this important information into brief memorable statements in order to remember and share them.
(Remember, this culture is very oral/aural. They did not have an attention span programmed by the distance of time between TV commercials. In fact, much learning was done by memorizing entire books. This culture was not like ours, they were very good with the faculty of memory.)
Now it is likely these important teachings of Christ were shared and became traditional ways of remembering the essentials of what was believed. It is also likely that the apostles worked to preserve and further spread this traditional list of things believed about Jesus. Since they held a special place as students of Jesus, they would be looked at as the primary source for the tradition, so many would think of the “Apostolic Tradition.” It seems like the “late to the party apostle” Paul believed in this tradition.
1Cor. 15:3 “I passed on to you what I received, which is of the greatest importance: that Christ died for our sins, as written in the Scriptures; 4 that he was buried and that he was raised to life three days later, as written in the Scriptures; 5 that he appeared to Peter and then to all twelve apostles. 6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred of his followers at once, most of whom are still alive, although some have died. 7 Then he appeared to James, and afterward to all the apostles.”
Remember those key elements from what Paul received from the tradition that the Apostles were teaching. Now we had to skip our machine ahead a bit to the early 50s to actually see this letter, only a few years after Jesus death. But remember, Paul states that this was what he received, so the teaching here goes back before the time of writing.
Ok, jump back in the machine and be careful not to knock lego pieces off with your foot! We are going to jump ahead about 40 or 50 years to see one of the earliest writing apostolic fathers. Did he believe in the Apostolic Tradition?
1Clem. 7:2 “Therefore let us abandon empty and futile thoughts, and let us conform to the glorious and holy rule of our tradition”
1Clem. 42:1 “The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus the Christ was sent forth from God. 2 So then Christ is from God, and theApostles are from Christ. Both, therefore, came of the will of God in good order.”
Yes, it appears that he did believe in this tradition, but what is the content of these oral statements of belief that made their way into the texts that become the New Testament? Well, we are going to jump back and bounce around a little to look at some of these. Remember that many of these statements were being passed around, and that the writer is putting this tradition, this teaching of the apostle into written form to better preserve it. That means that the actual date of these sayings is earlier that the text we find them recorded in. Keep an eye out for the content of these sayings so that we can compare them to later formulations in the fourth century, when the discussion really heats up.
So we skip along to 52-55 and find the letter to the church at Corinth. BTW, for those who want to get persnickety about these dates, for petes sake my needle is a cat hair held down by chewed bubble gum, it might be a little off, give or take!
1Cor. 8:6 “yet there is for us only one God, the Father, who is the Creator of all things and for whom we live; and there is only one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom all things were created and through whom we live.”
1Cor. 12:3 “I want you to know that no one who is led by God’s Spirit can say “A curse on Jesus!” and no one can confess “Jesus is Lord,” without being guided by the Holy Spirit.”
A few years later, another letter to this church
2Cor. 13:13 “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit be with you all.”
We get into the mid to late 50s and find the theological magnum opus:
Rom. 1:3 “It is about his Son, our Lord Jesus Christ: as to his humanity, he was born a descendant of David; 4 as to his divine holiness, he was shown with great power to be the Son of God by being raised from death.”
Rom. 10:9 “If you confess that Jesus is Lord and believe that God raised him from death, you will be saved.”
In the early to mid 60s we here some ancient statements of belief.
Phil. 2:6 “He always had the nature of God, but he did not think that by force he should try to remain equal with God. 7 Instead of this, of his own free will he gave up all he had, and took the nature of a servant. He became like a human being and appeared in human likeness. 8 He was humble and walked the path of obedience all the way to death— his death on the cross. 9 For this reason God raised him to the highest place above and gave him the name that is greater than any other name. 10And so, in honor of the name of Jesus all beings in heaven, on earth, and in the world below will fall on their knees, 11 and all will openly proclaim that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
1Tim. 3:16 “No one can deny how great is the secret of our religion: He appeared in human form, was shown to be right by the Spirit, and was seen by angels. He was preached among the nations, was believed in throughout the world, and was taken up to heaven.”
Acts 2:36 “All the people of Israel, then, are to know for sure that this Jesus, whom you crucified, is the one that God has made Lord and Messiah!”
Let’s travel to the mid 60s and find the hot off the press Gospel of Mark.
Mark 8:29 “What about you?” he asked them. “Who do you say I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Messiah.”
And, just before 70…
Matt. 28:19 “Go, then, to all peoples everywhere and make them my disciples: baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit”
OK, now here the ride might get bumpy, we are going to jump ahead to after all the apostles had died, and the men they picked to lead the churches were teaching. Do they know of and adhere to a “Apostolic tradition” concerning Jesus?
Here is a letter written close to 110 by Ignatius. He was a student of the Apostle John and became bishop of Antioch. He died a martyr shortly after writing this letter.
Tral. 9:1 “Be deaf, therefore, whenever anyone speaks to you apart from Jesus Christ, who was of the family of David, who was the son of Mary; who really was born, who both ate and drank; who really was persecuted under Pontius Pilate, who really was crucified and died while those in heaven and on earth and under the earth looked on; 2 who, moreover, really was raised from the dead when his Father raised him up, who—his Father, that is—in the same way will likewise also raise us up in Christ Jesus who believe in him, apart from whom we have no true life.”
How about Irenaeus who wrote around 190. He was bishop of Lyons, and a student of Polycarp, who was a disciple of John.
Against Heresies 1.10.1. “The Church, though dispersed through our the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the apostles and their disciples this faith: [She believes] in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all things that are in them; and in one Christ Jesus, the Son of God, who became incarnate for our salvation; and in the Holy Spirit, who proclaimed through the prophets the dispensations of God, and the advents, and the birth from a virgin, and the passion, and the resurrection from the dead, and the ascension into heaven in the flesh of the beloved Christ Jesus, our Lord, and His [future] manifestation from heaven in the glory of the Father “to gather all things in one,” and to raise up anew all flesh of the whole human race, in order that to Christ Jesus, our Lord, and God, and Saviour, and King, according to the will of the invisible Father, “every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue should confess” to Him, and that He should execute just judgment towards all; that He may send “spiritual wickednesses,” and the angels who transgressed and became apostates, together with the ungodly, and unrighteous, and wicked, and profane among men, into everlasting fire; but may, in the exercise of His grace, confer immortality on the righteous, and holy, and those who have kept His commandments, and have persevered in His love, some from the beginning [of their Christian course], and others from [the date of] their repentance, and may surround them with everlasting glory.”
Around 150 we find a compilation of creedal confessions and instruction called the Epistula Apostolorum.
“What mean these five loaves? They are the symbol of our faith in the Lord of the Christians (in the great christendom), even in the Father, the Lord Almighty, and in Jesus Christ our redeemer, in the Holy Spirit the paraclete, in the holy church, and in the remission of sins.”
Just a few years later we get to a priest named Tertullian, who writes around 200
Against Praxeas: “We, however, as we indeed always have done and more especially since we have been better instructed by the Paraclete, who leads men indeed into all truth), believe that there is one only God, but under the following dispensation, or oikonomia, as it is called, that this one only God has also a Son, His Word, who proceeded from Himself, by whom all things were made, and without whom nothing was made. Him we believe to have been sent by the Father into the Virgin, and to have been born of her-being both Man and God, the Son of Man and the Son of God, and to have been called by the name of Jesus Christ; we believe Him to have suffered, died, and been buried, according to the Scriptures, and, after He had been raised again by the Father and taken back to heaven, to be sitting at the right hand of the Father, and that He will come to judge the quick and the dead; who sent also from heaven from the Father, according to His own promise, the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete, the sanctifier of the faith of those who believe in the Father, and in the Son, and in the Holy Ghost. That this rule of faith has come down to us from the beginning of the gospel, even before any of the older heretics, much more before Praxeas, a pretender of yesterday, will be apparent both from the lateness of date which marks all heresies, and also from the absolutely novel character of our new-fangled Praxeas.”
Whew, now we finally get to the. 4th Cent Conciliar creeds and definitions. Much ink has been spilt denying orthodoxy because of the politics and dissention which occured during this time. While much more conflict than we know of is sure to have occured, let us examine the resulting statement of beleif that resulted from the Council of Nicea in 325 and the Constantoplian meetings of 381.
We believe in one God, the Father,
the Almighty, maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.
We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God, eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, light from light, true God from true God,
begotten, not made, of one Being with the Father;
through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation he came down from heaven,
was incarnate of the Holy Spirit and the Virgin Mary and became truly human.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father,
who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified,
who has spoken through the prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.
Now, we do see some interesting things here, there has been much development of thinking from the 50’s and 60’s in relation to Christ. Challenges arose which needed a more nuanced, detailed description of how exactly there is one God and yet Christ the son is also God and man. The church believed this but had never worked through how it all fit together and it’s implications. Some people made mistakes in trying to work this out, for sure. The questions is though, is what this creed says congruent with what has been said before, or is it contradictory?
Yes, there were many debates and challenges to the Apostolic tradition which had been handed down. Lets see if the continued debates caused the Orthodox understanding to chance in a contradictory manner by looing at the definition of Chalcedeon which was written in 451.
“Therefore, following the holy fathers, we all with one accord teach men to acknowledge one and the same Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, at once complete in Godhead and complete in manhood, truly God and truly man, consisting also of a reasonable soul and body; of one substance with the Father as regards his Godhead, and at the same time of one substance with us as regards his manhood; like us in all respects, apart from sin; as regards his Godhead, begotten of the Father before the ages, but yet as regards his manhood begotten, for us men and for our salvation, of Mary the Virgin, the God-bearer; one and the same Christ, Son, Lord, Only-begotten, recognized in two natures, without confusion, without change, without division, without separation; the distinction of natures being in no way annulled by the union, but rather the characteristics of each nature being preserved and coming together to form one person and subsistence, not as parted or separated into two persons, but one and the same Son and Only-begotten God the Word, Lord Jesus Christ; even as the prophets from earliest times spoke of him, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself taught us, and the creed of the fathers has handed down to us.”
Wow, it seems to accord with what has been taught since the first century and it even acknowledges the vehicle of the apostolic tradition in the “creed of the fathers.”
Now I’m pretty tired from our travels, however before we leave I think there is a final question?
But..But , what about all the CONFLICT! I have read recent authors that say that orthodoxy is just another form of violence! Ok, good question, fair enough. It is good Christian doctrine to posit that these councils were made up of a bunch of sinners who made mistakes and did bad things sometimes. It also seems likely that the process left purely up to man would fail miserably.
But did that happen? You have the text above from the time of Christ, covering over two centuries until the great councils and you can see what they came up with. Is the product from this messy human endeavor orthodox according to the earlier formulation of Christian statements of belief? Could so many modern scholars be wrong?
Here is a great idea, lets pop over to the falafel stand on the corner and ask someone who WAS ACTUALLY THERE. His name is Theodoret and he was a bishop in Syria. He was actually friends with Nestorius and so was intimately involved both in the christological discussions and in the hotly debated controversy. Here is what he says about the apostolic teaching regarding Christ:
“This is the doctrine delivered to us by the divine prophets; this is the doctrine of the company of the holy apostles; this is the doctrine of the great saints of the East and of the West; of the far-famed Ignatius, who received his archpriesthood by the right hand of the great Peter, and for the sake of his confession of Christ was devoured by savage beasts; and of the great Eustathius, who presided over the assembled council, and on account of his fiery zeal for true religion was driven into exile. This doctrine was preached by the illustrious Meletius, at the cost of no less pains, for thrice was he driven from his flock in the cause of the apostles’ doctrines; by Flavianus, glory of the imperial see; and by the admirable Ephraim, instrument of divine grace, who has left us in the Syriac tongue a written heritage of good things; by Cyprian, the illustrious ruler of Carthage and of all Libya, who for Christ’s sake found a death in the fire; by Damasus, bishop of great Rome, and by Ambrose, glory of Milan, who preached and wrote it in the language of Rome.
The same was taught by the great luminaries of Alexandria, Alexander and Athanasius, men of one mind, who underwent sufferings celebrated throughout the world. This was the pasture given to their flocks by the great teachers of the imperial city, byGregory, shining friend and supporter of the truth; by John, teacher of the world, by Atticus, their successor alike in see and in sentiment. By these doctrines Basil, great light of the truth, and Gregory sprung from the same parents, and Amphilochius, who from him received the gift of the high-priesthood, taught their contemporaries, and have left the same to us in their writings for a goodly heritage. Time would fail me to tell of Polycarp, and Irenæus, of Methodius and Hippolytus, and the rest of the teachers of the Church. In a word I assert that I follow the divine oracles and at the same time all these saints. By the grace of the spirit they dived into the depths of God-inspired scripture and both themselves perceived its mind, and made it plain to all that are willing to learn. Difference in tongue has wrought no difference in doctrine, for they were channels of the grace of the divine spirit, using the stream from one and the same fount.”
Well, I’m beat and we’ve almost run out our dilithiam crystal and must get back home. I don’t know about you, but I see alot of uniformity of belief here in these the church as recognized as “Fathers.” So if there was a central and earliest teaching about Christ that correct, that corresponds to truth, then we could call that “Orthodox” If the teachings we have received from all those who struggled, fought and often gave their lives for this message corresponds with this earliest teaching, then we could say that this is also “orthodox.”
