Early Church Fathers & Apologists

A lecture delivered by the Rev Ronald Mackenzie in the Free Church Seminary.

Having already looked at Irenaeus (c.125-202) of Lyons and his work in combatting Gnosticism, we may now consider some of the other early Fathers and their significance.
 
Hyppolytus (c.170-236), appears to have been an eminent scholar since Eusebius mentions seven of his works.   These and other of his works have been lost apart from one of his main works, 'Philosophumena',  written about 223 AD, which came to light again in 1851.   In it, Hyppolytus  attacks various heresies, as Irenaeus did;  but he also takes two contemporary bishops of Rome, Zephyrinus and  Callistus, to task - both of whom were rivals for the Roman See.   Zephyrinus he rebukes for his ignorance and weakness in giving way to Patripassianism (i.e. the Father suffering on the cross).   Callistus he exposes as an unscrupulous character who worked himself into the favour of Zephyrinus, and, after his death, obtained the bishopric of Rome.

According to the 'Philosophumena',  Callistus taught heresy, and ruined the discipline of the church  'by extreme leniency to offenders' (Schaff, p.765).   Hyppolytus, however, may have been biassed on account of his intense dislike of Callistus.   Some (e.g. Irenaeus) considered Hyppolytus to have been Montanist - in tendancy, if not in fact.   However, if what he says of the Roman bishops of his time is anywhere near the truth, the church in Rome must have been, even then, in a deplorable moral and spiritual condition!

Tertullian (160-220).    Born in Carthage c.160 AD, he was converted to Christ when about 30.   Already highly educated (a lawyer), he employed his abilities immediately in the defence of his new-found faith.   Though he lived all his life in North Africa, he is generally regarded as the first of the Latin Fathers because he was the first to orientate to Latin culture and to write in Latin.   He was married, and during most of his life considered marriage a noble estate,  but in his later Montanist zeal,  began to place celibacy on a higher moral level than marriage and taught that any second marriage was tantamount to adultery.

It is difficult to find any evidence of whether he gained the office of presbyter in the Catholic Church before he joined the Montanist sect (c.201-205 AD).   But the Montanists appointed him to that office, and he reamained in that sect for the rest of his life.   Tertullian attributed his defection to Montanism as due to personal motives, but it is apparent that the envy and insults of the Roman clergy - from whose indignities he personally suffered - were also a factor.   He also opposed the declining morality and discipline within the church.   Tertullian adds his own testimony to Hyppolytus' criticism of the church hierarchy in the city of Rome.   It is remarkable that the church in Rome - most criticised by these early Church Fathers for its wrong-doing, - nevertheless rose to dominate the entire Catholic Church!

To Tertullian, the Montanists seemed to be nearer to primitive Christianity than the Catholic Church.   Hence he brought upon himself the church's disapproval, and, as a result, has never been canonised by the Church of Rome (though all parties have recognised him as a great and dynamic early Father who seems to have exerted a modifying influence on the African wing of the Greek Montanists).

His Writings and Theology.   Like Hyppolytus, Tertullian seems to have been a prolific writer, (although there is today some uncertainty as to the writngs attributed to him).   Nevertheless, a number of them give sufficient certainty to grasp his theology.   One thing, however, is evident,  Tertullian displays a remarkable knowledge of the contents of the Sacred Books,  and has an ability to quote and paraphrase texts freely from almost every book of the Bible.

His main contribution to the orthodox faith is his increased understanding of the doctrine of the Trinity. He was the first to clearly ascribe  distinct personality to each Person in the Trinity,  and the first to express the concept of  a trinity of Persons as in the following: 'I say that the Father is one, the Son is another, and the Spirit is another.   Nevertheless, the Son is not another than the Father by  diversity (of essence), but by  distribution (of essence).....In this way, One is All,  in that All are One  by  unity of substance' (quoted by Shedd).

However,  Cunningham is somewhat critical of Tertullian, and sums up his theology as follows:- 'He gives less prominence than any preceding writer to the peculiar principles of evangelical truth....and teaches some things rather more explicitly opposed to them.   He entertained orthodox opinions, in the main, on the subject of the person of Christ.... But in regard to the offices and work of Christ, even about the the atonement of Christ as the ground of the sinner's forgiveness, there is scarcely any clear, full, and satisfactory statement to be found in Tertullian's voluminous writings.  Although  he has made statements on the subject of the justfication of the sinner which are scriptural...he has made others which are clearly opposed to it.   He has asserted the doctrine of the justification of works, he has ascribed a meritorious bearing upon the forgiveness of sins to celibacy and almsgiving and he has attaching to him the discredit of being the first to apply the word 'satisfaction' to men's good deeds in their bearing upon the favour of God and the remission of sins.' (Hist.Th.Vol.1,pps.159-161).

It may be argued that this fails to do full justice to Tertullian, since the doctrine of the atonement does not appear to have been satisfactorily understood until the Reformation.   What is noticeable in Tertullian's understanding is, that on the one hand he is representative of a struggle towards greater biblical light on some basic doctrines of the Godhead.   On the other hand, there is, in his writings, evidence of  increasing darkness descending on the church through false doctrines relating to her worship and practice.   For example, Tertullian was the first to recommend prayers for the dead (martyrs), to be offered on the anniversary of their deaths.    Tertullian's shortcoming was his lack of moderation, and his emphasis upon external ritual.   In the area of church practice, he was foremost among a new class of legalists who failed to understand the liberty believers have in Christ. 

Cyprian (c.200-58).     It was said of Cyprian (born in Carthage of a wealthy family), that after he was converted, never a day passed without him reading some portion of Tertullian's Works. (He was converted through his reading of the Scriptures and Tertullian's writings).   Following his conversion in his late 40's, he gave much of his wealth to the poor.   A year later he was elected a presbyter, and the following year (c.248), he filled the office of bishop of Carthage,after the death of the previous bishop.   It is possible that this may have been an instance of  'laying hands suddenly' on an untried man (1.Tim.3.v.6),  and may well account for what appears to have been his overbearing nature.   When appointed bishop of Carthage, he accepted the honourable title of 'Papa' (i.e.pope or father).   The bishop of Alexandria was the first to accept this title.   Afterwards it was adopted by the bishop of Rome.

For the remaining ten years of his life, Cyprian laboured incessantly.   It was a stormy period of persecution without, and agitation within, the church.   When the Decian persecution came upon the the church, Cyprian saw in it God's judgment upon her for her laxity, desire for wealth, fraudulance, false oaths, slander and deceit.   During the persecution, Cyprian fled, but justified his own action by saying that it was not the time for his martyrdom - maintaining that it was biblical to flee from such persecution rather than court martyrdom.   While in hiding, he wrote many letters of encouragement to his presbyters and deacons.  When persecution died down, he returned to Carthage and presided over the Council of Carthage in 251 AD, which decided that pardon could only be granted to lapsed Christians after a proper period of penitence.

Two later councils held in 254 and 256 AD, again presided over by Cyprian, dealt with the issue of the validity of heretical baptism, and decided that it was invalid - even though performed in the name of the Trinity.   This was opposed by bishop Stephen of Rome and occasioned much controversy.   Shortly afterwards, Cyprian was martyred in the Valerian persecution - displaying inflexible courage and faithfulness in his stand as a Christian.

Cyprian's Theology.    In many respects Cyprian was a disciple of Tertullian and drew heavily on his writings.   Yet there were differences, for the two Africans were unlike each other.   Intellectually, Tertullian was an originator,  Cyprian, a populariser.   As a churchman, Tertullian was the vigorous opponent of what may be termed the  'episcopal'  party,  whereas Cyprian was their foremost representative!  (Tertullian has been called 'the father of Latin theology',  Cyprian, 'the father of the hierarchy').   Tertullian was vehement and impulsive by nature, whereas Cyprian was calm, practical and authoritative.

The main aspects of theological difference between the two church Fathers was  (a) Cyprian strongly favoured infant baptism, whereas Tertullian did not;  and  (b) Cyprian elevated the the idea of the metropolitan bishop - with some particular importance being attached to the bishopric of Rome.   He felt the need for a bishop of bishops who at the same time could be none other than the bishop of the church in the capital of the Empire.   However, he quarrelled with Stephen bishop of Rome, and condemned most strenuously both his behaviour and his belief.   It was Stephen who held that heretical baptism did not require rebaptism - if such believers applied for membership in the Catholic Church. 

It would appear that Stephen acted most arrogantly against all who differed from him - even assuming to lay down the law to the churches in Asia.   Of his own accord, he had excommunicated Firmilian, bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, together with his congregation, because they rebaptised those who came from heretical fringe churches.   Cyprian stood out against such high-handed action because he asserted the absolute independence of other regional churches, and their right to resist the encroachments of the Roman See.   In this stand, confirmed by the Carthagenian Councils, Cyprian had the support of Firmilian who, in a letter to Cyprian in 256 AD wrote,  'I am justly indignant at this so open and manifest folly of Stephen who thus glories about the place of his episcopate, and maintains that he holds the succession of Peter.'    In no uncertain terms he goes on to condemn the audacity, insolence and cruelty of the bishop of Rome whom he compares to Judas!   While Cyprian did hold that the bishop of Rome sat in the chair of Peter, he did not thereby concede infallibility to that office, nor absolute rule over the whole church.

In the long run, the Catholic Church inclined towards the practice of not rebaptising believers coming from the sects.   But the whole issue illustrates that a vigorous defence was made by substantial sections of the church against the assertions of ecclesiastical power claimed by the Roman bishop.   However, Cyprian's arguments for the primacy of the bishop of Rome in the church were seized upon by the later Church Fathers - while they failed at the same time to maintain the qualifications of episcopal and territorial independence of the other bishops of the church.

Nevertheless, some of Tertullian's errors were strongly reinforced by Cyprian.   Only where Cyprian upheld hierarchical tendencies was his authority as a Church Father preferred to Tertullian.   The authority of these two men had vast influence on the church.   But the strict abstinence and celibate tendencies of Tertullian together with the emphasis on the authority of the bishop by Cyprian, meant disaster for a church where human traditions and the writings of the Fathers were becoming disproportionately important.

Origen (c.185-254).     One of the few early Church Fathers who grew up in a Christian home, he was converted at an early age and spent his youth in Alexandria during a time of persecution and turmoil, - his father being imprisoned for the faith and eventually martyred.   Origen, though very young, wanted to give himself up to the authorities, but his mother prevented him.   When only 18, he was appointed by the bishop of Alexandria to be in charge of the catechetical school for catechumens.   He set out to master Christian theology and also became aquainted with Gnostic heresy and Greek philosophy.   He mastered Hebrew, and made journeys, - to Rome in 211 (where he made the aquaintance of Hyppolytus), - to Palestine in 215, and also to Greece.

His ascetic life of piety and humility encouraged others to copy him.   He also became such a prolific writer that he needed seven shorthand writers and as many copyists to keep up with his output.   He was disqualified from office for having become a eunuch in order to fight temptations felt while teaching female catechumens - foolishly taking literally Matt.l9.v.12.   However c.228 AD, on a visit to Caesarea, he allowed himself to be ordained as a presbyter by two bishops from Palestine, which brought upon him the wrath and jealousy of his own bishop,  Demetrius of  Alexandria. 

His ordination was of course highly irregular.   But so great was the jealousy of Demetrius against Origen (whose reputation was increasing), that he called together two councils of bishops in 231 and 232 AD to have him excommunicated on the grounds of false doctrine, self-mutilation, and supposed violation of other church laws.   The first synod would not excommunicate Origen, but only forbade him to teach in Alexandria.   Demetrius then called a second synod composed of only three bishops beside himself, which procured his excommunication.   This decision was then circulated throughout the church.   Though many concurred in this action - apparently motivated by jealousy - yet the churches in Palestine, Phoenicia, and Achaia, condemned the decision.

Origen bore all this with meekness and fortitude.   On Firmilian's invitation he retired to Caesarea where he commenced a theological school which for twenty years surpassed the one at Alexandria.   He was seized in the Decian persecution and died after mistreatment in prison in 254.

Origen's Writings and Theology.

Much of Origen's later literary labour was taken up with writing commentaries on Books of the Bible.   They breathe speculative interpretation and display a shallow understanding of Scripture - though he is frequently quoted by modern commentators.   But he also wrote other works which were very influential in the church.   Nevertheless, he can by no means be called orthodox, - either.in a catholic or a protestant sense!   His leanings towards Plato, and his tendency to reconcile human reasoning with Christianity, led him into error.   In his asceticism and neglect of his body there is indication of his contempt for the body and its needs which also led him to deny the bodily resurrection of the saints at Christ's Coming.   He believed in the pre-existence of the human soul of Christ, and incorrectly taught (before Arius) that Christ's nature was not of identical, but of similar substance to that of the Father.

On the other hand, Origen's positive contribution lay in the fact that he was the first to teach the eternal generation of the Son.   But he was in error in his view that Christ's divine nature was not united with  the body of Christ, but only with His soul.   This in turn virtually forced Origen into denying that Christ offered any proper vicarious atonement for the sins of men!    Its signifinace was that it was an overturning of the gospel of our salvation.

More influential - in its effects on the church - was that Origen in essence taught  Pelagianism, though he never taught its system.    In Cunningham's words,  'It is certain that he has laid down principles which naturally and by fair consquence lead to the establishment of the Pelagian heresy, and consequently to the overthrow of gospel grace.' (Hist.Th.Vol.1,p.156).    Origen taught that pre-existent souls were condemned to dwell in human bodies as a punishment for sins committed in a previous state.   He also taught the freedom of the human will, and consequently doubts were cast on the omnipotence of God.   As a result, there was a retreat from the sovereignty of God.  It was the theology which began to infect the church from this time onwards.

Conclusion.    A problem with the Church Fathers is that, in general, they appear to have been godly men - often exemplary, unselfish men, whose lives were blameless.   In fact many died as martyrs.   Also, their literary abilities and education outshone the vast majority of bishops.   Consequently, their writings came to be regarded as carrying more weight than they should.   Again, in days of persecution it was often difficult to call together synods to deal with the heresies these men introduced.   As a result, error grew up side by side with positive development in true understanding of the doctrine of Scripture.

One common feature of most of these Church Fathers is deserving of particular note: -  almost without exception they were critical of the bishops of Rome, and of the growing laxity in that church.   The attempts by the bishops of Rome to elevate themselves were not being checked, although the Church Fathers had given early warning of the evils that would result.

Rev Ronald Mackenzie
ronaldmackenzie@freechurchseminary.org

Article in pdf format