The Early Development of Ecclesiology
The Early Development of Ecclesiology
Ecclesiology was not a major issue in the early church. The eastern church showed no awareness of the potential importance of the issue. Most Greek patristic writers of the first five centuries contented themselves with describing the church using recognizably scriptural images, without choosing to probe further. Thus, Isidore of Pelusium (died c.450) defined the church as “the assembly of saints joined together by correct faith and an excellent manner of life.” A number of themes can be identified in early Christian reflection on the nature of the church, including the following:
Yet these themes were not woven together into a comprehensive theory of the nature of the church in the first four centuries. In part, this relative lack of interest in developing the doctrine of the church reflected the political situation of the time. The church was at best a barely tolerated, and at worst a vigorously persecuted, organization within the sphere of authority of a hostile pagan state – namely, the Roman empire.
With the conversion of Constantine (272–337; reigned 306–37), the situation changed radically. Increasingly, theologians began to draw parallels between the Roman empire and the Christian church – whether negatively (as with Hippolytus of Rome, 170–235, who saw the empire as a satanic imitation of the church) or positively (as with Eusebius of Caesarea (c.263–339), who saw the empire as a divinely ordained institution charged with the task of preparing the world for the coming of the kingdom of Christ).
One practical issue led to increased reflection on an ecclesiological issue. At an early stage, rivalry developed between the leaders of the churches, especially those at Rome and Constantinople. A number of centers were held in particular esteem during the first four centuries; of these, Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, Jerusalem, and Rome were of notable importance. However, by the end of the fourth century it was becoming increasingly clear that Rome, as the center of the Roman empire, had acquired a position of especial prominence. The term “pope” (from the Latin papa, “father”) was initially used of any Christian bishop; gradually, the term came to be used more often of the most important bishop in the church – the bishop of Rome. From 1073, the title papa was used exclusively to refer to the bishop of Rome. The question therefore began to arise: what authority did the bishop of Rome have outside his own diocese?
Figure 15.1 The martyrdom of St. Peter in the city of Rome as depicted by Giotto di Bondone (c.1330).
Source: Photo: akg-images / De Agostini Picture Library.
In practical terms, the answer was quite simple – a lot. The bishop of Rome (we shall use the term “pope” from now on, despite the slight anachronism this involves) was often called upon to arbitrate in church disputes of various kinds, throughout the entire Mediterranean. When Nestorius (c.386–c.451) and Cyril of Jerusalem (c.313–86) became embroiled in endless Christological debates in the fifth century and it became clear that no resolution was in sight, they each hastened to Rome to gain papal support.
But did this priority rest upon any theological foundation? The eastern churches had no hesitation in declaring that it did not. Others, however, were not so sure. The pope was the successor to St. Peter, who had been martyred at Rome. In view of the apparent “primacy of Peter” in the New Testament (Matthew 16: 18), did this not give the successors of Peter authority over others? It seemed to many, even within the eastern churches, that, in some inscrutable manner, the spiritual authority of Peter had been transmitted to his successors as bishops of Rome. Furthermore, Rome was the “eternal city,” the capital of the great Roman empire. It is not difficult to see how this political authority could be translated into theological terms. Cyprian of Carthage (died 258) is an example of a western writer who was a vigorous defender of the primacy of the Roman see throughout the Christian world. This question would become of renewed importance at a number of junctures in church history, of which the Reformation is a particularly obvious instance.