Pages
▼
Friday, February 07, 2020
The Historical Untenability of Apostolic Succession
One of the most common procedural grounds on which Protestant churches can be critiqued is their lack of Apostolic Succession. It is very common for anti-Protestant apologists to argue that Protestants lack authentic ministerial orders because they cannot lay claim to this succession, and hence their churches can be dismissed without needing to engage with what they teach. Anxiety about whether Protestant churches are “real” churches for this and related reasons motivates many to explore Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy, or even to convert to one of those churches who allegedly enjoy a stronger claim to Apostolic Succession. Even some Anglicans, who are Protestants for all intents and purposes, look down on other Protestants or regard them with suspicion on grounds of their supposedly superior orders.
This essay intends to critique one form of the doctrine of Apostolic Succession often used against Protestants. The surprising truth is that the way this doctrine is commonly formulated has very little support in the historical record of how the early church was founded and continued. This critique is by no means a reflexive biblicism, finding no proof text for the doctrine, declaring victory, and going home. Rather, by engaging with the church fathers on this question we do not merely find an unexpected silence in terms of the fathers’ support for the doctrine of Apostolic Succession — we actually find evidence that undermines the claim.
This essay is not a comprehensive treatment of the doctrine of Apostolic Succession. It is concerned only with the formulation most commonly turned against Protestants. It leaves out an account of how and when the doctrine finally did develop and became the official teaching of many churches. It is merely content to give an overview of evidence from the early church fathers that demonstrate that the usual account of how Apostolic Succession occurred is historically untenable. To support this claim, we will consider in some detail St. Jerome’s arguments about the shape of early church polity, and then review a few other sources from the 1st-4th century that support Jerome’s account and give a few more important pieces of evidence. Read More
It is so high church. Oh well the Reformed and Lutheran tried to get some and now this. Hang it up Reformed and take that Via Media anglo-Catholic loophole with you. Too Catholic? That is flesh and the world talking. Puritan shmuritan!
ReplyDelete