The Truth About Sacred Texts and Sacred Men in the Early Church

I mentioned in my last post that I've listened to Andy Stanley's most recent sermon, titled Recycled, three times.  One of the things I found so frustrating about the sermon, among many things I found frustrating, was his distorted presentation of church history.  It would be impossible to give a comprehensive treatment of the history of the church in 30 minutes, but Stanley made several statements that are demonstrably false.  

Particularly troubling was his insistence that for the first three hundred years of the church, sacred men and sacred texts were uninportant in the church. The truth is the opposite. In the earliest non-Scriptural writings, the church fathers repeatedly quoted and referenced the Scriptures, and directed Chrsitians to obey their pastors. 

I've been reading the church fathers this year, and below are some quotes from the very earliest non-Apostolic church fathers.  Though not inspired Scripture, these writings give us a clear picture of what the early church actually believed and practiced.  Included below are quotes from Clement of Rome in his epistle to the Corinthian church, "Mathetes" (a disciple) of the Apostles to Diognetus, Polycarp to the Philippians, and Ignatius to the Ephesians and Magnesians.

Clement of Rome to the Church in Corinth

These are only three brief quotes from a very long letter, but even in these few words we see Clement instructing the Corinthians to submit to the authority of the presbyters (pastors) and to look carefully into the Scriptures, which are true utterances of the Holy Spirit.  You can't read more than a few sentences of Clement without finding a direct quote of the Scriptures or a reference.

Mathetes to Diognetus

Notice the doctrinal richness? Although Mathetes is not quoting a passage of Scripture here, he is compiling numerous phrases that do come directly from the Scriptures, Old Testament and New.  For this anonymous disciple the faith was grounded not in loving actions, but in the truth drawn from  Scripture.

Polycarp to the Church in Philippi

Polycarp was a disciple of the Apostle John, the beloved disciple who wrote one of the gospels, three epistles, and the book of Revelation.  Notice that Polycarp directly quotes 1 John 4:2 as authoritative truth.  Notice that Polycarp, a disciple of one of Jesus' twelve, taught that were beliefs that a person must hold to in order to be Christian - among them humanity of Christ, the death and resurrection of Jesus, and the coming judgment (Hell).  

Ignatius to the Church in Ephesus

Ignatius to the Magnesians

Ignatius, like Polycarp, was a disciple of John.  He was only one person removed from the words of Jesus.  Ignatius taught a respect for and obedience to church leaders that far exceeds anything ever practiced in America.  The problem in the American church is not giving too much authority to and trust in men who have studied and shown themselves approved, we give too little respect and obedience compared with the early church.  We also see Ignatius teaching that both beliefs and actions are important in the life of a Christian.  

Putting it Together

These are just a few selected writings of the early church.  It is true that the early church was known by outsiders for their love.  I can't remember the source, but it was recorded by one outsider that the Christians not only cared for their own poor, but also the poor outside the church.  Inside though, the church was characterized by study and teaching of the Old Testament and New and leadership by faithful men who were given an elevated position of authority.

Sacred texts and sacred men are not a corruption of the true faith.  They have been the foundation of the church from the earliest days of its existence.

Reading the Church Fathers: Clement of Rome's Epistle to the Corinthians

Over the last two Fridays I've read Clement's epistle to the Corinthians as part of my 2015 reading plan.  Clement's letter is one of the earliest non-Scriptural church documents that we have today.  While it obviously doesn't carry the same weight and the authority as the God-breathed sacred writings, it does give us a window into the early church to see the beliefs and practices of the first generation of non-Apostolic Christians. 

Here are four brief observations I made while reading Clement.

Clement was a man saturated in Scripture. Throughout his lengthy letter, Clement repeatedly directly quotes and alludes to Scripture, both Old Testament and New.  He knew the Scriptures and his thinking was controlled by the Scriptures.  He praised the Corinthians using Scripture. He chastised the Corinthians using Scripture.  He exhorted the Corinthians using Scripture.  He encouraged the Corinthians using Scripture.  The words of Clement were his own, but the message was not his own.  He spoke as an ambassador of the King, not the originator of a new message.

There is a noticeable difference between Clement's writing and the God-breathed Scriptures.  One of the most notable elements of Clement's letter in my mind was his reference to the fable of the phoenix as a naturally occurring event that points to the resurrection of Jesus.  I don't hold Clement in low esteem for this. There was no Snopes in the first and second centuries to determine the truth of a legend.  The Scriptures are free from such errors though.  In all the Scriptural writings concerning nature, there is no reference to anything like the phoenix that we now know is not truth.   

Furthermore, reading passages like Ephesians 1:3-14 and 1 Peter 1:3-9 moves me beyond words. Even when reading the practical instructions of James there's a knowledge that I am reading the very words of God. Not so with Clement.  Feelings are very subjective, I know, but reading Clement and other non-Biblical authors is just not the same as reading God's word.

Clement labels those who are full of zeal for anything other than salvation as contentious and causing division.  It was Paul who delivered to the Corinthians as of first importance that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, was buried, and was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures. And even in Paul's letters we see that the Corinthians were distracted by debates over other matters, a problem that obviously continued long beyond the life of Paul.  In chapter 45 Clement reminds them to stop being zealous for anything but salvation and, what else, look to the Scriptures, which are the true utterances of the Holy Spirit. Jesus came to seek and to save the lost, and he told the first disciples he would make them fishers of men.  Christians who are not focused on the proclamation and defense of the gospel, no matter how good their other works may be, such as racial reconciliation and ending human trafficking, are off mission and need to become gospel people first and foremost.

Clement held the office of pastor in very high regard.  There is an idea today, that as best I can tell has been heavily influenced by Frank Viola's book Pagan Christianity, that the early church had no authority structure.  This is simply not true.  Clement is clear that those who serve as pastors must prove themselves qualified.  He accuses the Corinthians of great sin for removing faithful pastors from their office.  He tells those guilty of sedition to submit to and be subject to the presbyters.  The inherent distrust of authority and rebelliousness of Americans has led to a tragically low view of the office of pastor in the American church.  It is that low view that has in turn produced many unqualified pastors who have further damaged the reputation of the office.  The American church very much needs a Biblical understanding of the office of pastor and the expectations Scripture places on church members under the authority of qualified elders/pastors. 

So, my first reading of one the church fathers this year has been very thought-provoking and fruitful in my efforts to understand more of the church's long, rich history.  I thank God for faithful men like Clement of Rome who preached Christ crucified and demanded obedience to all of Scripture's teaching. 

My 2015 Reading Plan

What follows is my plan for reading in 2015.  The key word here is plan.  With our first child due in June and my current job ending around the same time with no idea what’s next, we’ll see how things go.  

For most of the last 4.5 years I’ve been working, taking seminary courses, and teaching regularly in our young adults groups in Beijing and Jakarta.  For six months in the middle I was a full-time seminary student.  That hasn’t left much time or mental energy for non-required/non-teaching prep reading.  Now that I’m done with seminary and taking an indefinite break from weekly teaching I’m looking forward to doing some personal reading again.

I’m planning to follow a schedule of daily reading and weekly reading that should amount to about an hour a day.  The plan is as follows.

Daily Reading

I’ll follow Denny Burk’s daily Bible reading plan.  This plan goes straight through the Bible, reading three or four chapters a day.  He schedules catch up days throughout the year, so if you miss a day or two you’ll have some opportunities to make up the missed days without doubling or tripling one day's reading.  

I’m also going to try to follow Burk’s Greek New Testament reading plan.  My Greek is not nearly proficient enough to read without major help, but fortunately Logos Bible software can help me with the time consuming task of identifying words.  The plan involves reading one chapter a day in Greek and also leaves a number of catch-up days throughout the year.  

I also plan to read one chapter of Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion every day.  I’ve been a “Calvinist” (soteriologically) for several years now, but this will be the first time I’ve read Institutes.  Earlier this year I wrote a short biography of Calvin for a Church History class, but like most Calvinists, I became one not by reading Calvin, but simply by reading the Bible.

Weekly Reading

Monday - On Mondays I plan to read one or two chapters of Wayne Grudem’s Systematic Theology.  I read Grudem for my seminary courses 3-4 years ago, so this will be a refresher.

Tuesday - Most Tuesdays I will read the chapter of Gregg Allison’s Historical Theology that corresponds with the chapter of Grudem I read the day before.  Allison’s book examines the history of the doctrines covered by Grudem rather than being a chronological history of the church.  The book is only 33 chapters, so some Tuesdays I will read something from the Wednesday-Thursday list.  

Wednesday and Thursday - Wednesdays and Thursdays I will plan to read 20-30 minutes of a scholarly work on issues or Bible passages that are of interest to me.  The list so far, in no particular order:

• From Heaven He Came and Sought Her: Definite Atonement in Historical, Biblical, Theological, and Pastoral Perspective by Various Authors
• Canon Revisited: Establishing the Origins and Authority of the New Testament Books by Michael J. Kruger
• The End of the Law: Mosaic Covenant in Pauline Theology by Jason C. Meyer
• The Lord’s Supper: Remembering and Proclaiming Christ Until He Comes by Thomas R. Schreiner & Matthew R. Crawford
• The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic? by Michael Rydelnik
• Sermon on the Mount: Restoring Christ’s Message to the Modern Church by Charles L. Quarles

Friday - On Fridays I plan to spend 20-30 minutes reading the writings of the church fathers.  I'll start with Volume One of the Ante-Nicene Fathers which includes the writings of Clement of Rome, Mathetes, Polycarp, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and Irenaeus.  The church fathers didn't get everything right, but understanding the history of the church is of great importance.  The church has been working through theological and cultural issues for 2,000 years.  It would be foolish to ignore that history.

I'll leave Saturday and Sunday open in case I miss a day or two during the week.

So, that’s the plan.  I hope to share some of the things I’m learning here on the blog.  

What’s your plan for the coming year?