Episcopal succession from St Peter

[Geoffrey Miller]

Can you cite any sources (short excerpts please) that prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Magisterium of the Catholic Church was never envisioned by the Church Fathers nor even the early Popes?

[Justin]

Even supposing that I had at my fingertips a lot of quotes to give, what you are asking would still be a tough one to "prove beyond the shadow of a doubt". What I mean to say is, why would someone (e.g., Chrysostom) speak forcefully and precisely about something that they didn't "envision"? If you begin with the premise that they didn't envision papal supremacy, then why would you expect them to speak against it? And in any event, it would be hard to prove much of anything about the early Church beyond the shadow of a doubt, that's why Christianity has the concept known as faith.

If this seems like a cop out, it might be because this issue has been discussed many times before, and never seems to get much of anywhere. Normally, Catholics give proof texts taken out of context (sorry, don't mean to offend, but that's been my normal experience), and then the Orthodox go on the defensive and try to show why the quote doesn't really mean what it seems to say upon first glance. I have no interest in getting into a proof-text swapping thread. However, if you are willing to entertain some practical examples that de facto speak against Roman supremacy (in lieu undoubtable evidence), I'd be happy to post a few examples I have come across over the years.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Can you cite any sources (short excerpts please) that prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Magisterium of the Catholic Church was never envisioned by the Church Fathers nor even the early Popes?
Quite a discussion was had on this back in 2002, from about post #67 in the 'Scripture and Tradition' thread (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1668#post19037). The topic has also come up variously in other places here in the Community through the years.

If you've some particular questions in mind, do of course feel free to raise them.

INXC, Matthew

[M.C. Steenberg]

Some things are hard to pin down with precise texts in the patristic heritage; matters which are so general as to be 'accepted by all' without anyone actually penning a text to define them, etc.

Fortunately, this is not one of them.

If you are looking for specific writings in the early fathers that demonstrate a clear vision of either the 'ecclesial magisterium' or (or 'and') the question of episcopal succession in particular, they abound. These are in some sense related matters, though independent. I'll offer a few quotations relevant to both; though since the original question was primarily directed toward succession, I'll focus on that.

The first clear text deals with both, and is found in the works of Clement of Rome:


"The Apostles have preached to us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ from God. Christ therefore was sent by God, the Apostles by Christ; so both were orderly sent, according to the will of God. For having received their command, and being thoroughly assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ; and convinced by the word of God, with the fulness of the Holy Spirit, they went abroad, publishing, That the kingdom of God was at hand. And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first fruits of their conversion to be bishops and ministers over such as should afterwards believe, having first proved them by the spirit [...] So likewise our Apostles knew by our Lord Jesus Christ, that there should be contentions arise, upon account of the ministry. And therefore having a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed persons, as we have before said, and then gave direction, how, when they should die, other chosen and approved men should succeed in their ministry. Wherefore we cannot think that those may justly be thrown out of their ministry, who were either appointed by them, or afterwards chosen by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole church; and who have with all lowliness and innocency ministered to the flock of Christ, in peace, and without self-interest, and were for a long time commended by all. For it would be no small sin in us, should we cast off those from their Bishoprick who holily and without blame fulfil the duties of it." (Clement of Rome, First epistle to the Corinthians 19.1-4,16-19; Wake Translation; originally posted by Justin in this post (http://www.monachos.net/forum/showpost.php?p=19037&postcount=67))

It is important to note Clement's convictions both that the structure of Church offices was instituted in a direct manner by Christ, and that it is intended to be carried on through orderly succession, as originally manifested by the apostles.

Another early source is Ignatius (c. AD 69-70). From his To the Magnesians:


"Since, then, in the persons already mentioned I have beheld the whole congregation in faith and have loved it, I exhort you, be eager to everything in God's harmony, with the bishop presiding in the place of God and the presbytery in the place of the council of the apostles, and the deacons, most sweet to me, entrusted with the service of Jesus Christ." (Epistle to the Magnesians 6.1)

Ignatius is one of the first (together with Clement, in other passages) to speak directly of the symbolic character of each of the offices (bishop, presbyter and deacon) as part of the liturgical character of the worshipping community. These was not a fixed symbolism at the time he writes (Clement's is slightly different, and there is particular variance in the distinction between the bishop and presbyter in some of these earliest writings), but it was quick becoming so.

Perhaps the most direct reference to a precise episcopal succession from a listing organised around the see of Rome is in Irenaeus (180s):


"We are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the churches, and to demonstrate the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these heretics rave about. For if the apostles had known the hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to 'the perfect' apart and privately from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the churches themselves." (Refutation 3.3.)

Note the specific emphasis here on the committing of churches from the apostles to their successors, as not only an organisational but also doctrinal succession (thus Irenaeus' emphasis on the continuity of teaching enshrined in the succession). He goes on to offer a succession listing of the see of Rome from Peter and Paul to his own day, under Eleutherius (c. 175). In summing up that succession, he notes:


"In this order, and by this succession, the ecclesiastical tradition from the apostles, and the preaching of the truth, have come down to us." (3.3.3)

It is clear that for Irenaeus, succession was not only a matter of administration and eucharistic life, but also of doctrinal preservation and proclamation. In an age of various competing theologies ('Gnostics', Marcion, etc.), it is the succession of teaching authority through the episcopal office that, for him, secures the doctrinal truth of the Church in Christ.

Other early references include Tertullian (cf. his De praescriptione haereticorum 20: 'On this account [the succession of the bishops] and this account alone that they will be able to deem themselves apostolic, as being the offspring of the apostolic churches [...] in this way all are primitive, and all are apostolic, whilst they are all proved to be one, in unbroken unity'); Hippolytus (cf. Philosophumena 1.Praef.6: 'We, having become the successors of the apostles, participate in the same grace of the high priesthood and ministry of the Word [...] which the Holy Spirit handed down in the Church, Whom the apostles first received and handed on to orthodox believers'); and notably Cyprian:


"Our Lord, whose precepts and warnings we ought to observe, determining the honour of a Bishop and to the ordering of His own Church, speaks in the Gospel, and says to Peter, I say unto thee, That thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build My Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Matt. 16:18-19). Thence the ordination of Bishops, and the ordering of the Church, runs down along the course of time and line of succession, so that the Church is settled upon her Bishops; and every act of the Church is regulated by these same Prelates." (Ep. 33.1)

I hope this gives some sufficient food for a 'starting point' in your discussions, Geoffrey.

XB, Matthew