I. The Apostolic Fathers and Their Doctrinal Views
History of Doctrines. It is a work of considerable value for the student.
Questions for Further Study: How do the Roman Catholic and the Protestant conceptions of dogma differ? How did Newman's theory change the Roman Catholic view of the history of dogma? What objections are there to Harnack's view of dogma? Has his view met with general favor among the Ritschlians? Are Roman Catholics and Protestants agreed as to the task of the history of dogma? Is the changeable element of dogma, presupposed in its history, found in its form or in its content or in both? What can be said for and against the Hegelian method as applied to the History of Dogma? Did Baur in applying it do justice to the external historical facts? Must the history of dogma, in order to be truly scientific, be written in a purely objective way?
Literature: Harnack, History of Dogma I, pp. 1–40; Seeberg, History of Doctrines I, pp.
19–27; Loofs, Handboek der Dogmengeschiedenis, pp. 1–9; Neander, History of Christian
Dogmas I, pp. 1–32; Fisher, History of Christian Doctrine, pp. 1–22; Hagenbach, History of Doctrines, I, pp. 1–47; Shedd, History of Christian Doctrine, I, pp. 1–48; Rainy, Delivery and Development of Christian Doctrine; Kuyper, Encyclopaedie der Heilige Godgeleerdheid, III, pp. 370–386.
PREPARATORY DOCTRINAL
DEVELOPMENT
I. The Apostolic Fathers and Their Doctrinal Views 1. THEIR REPUTED WRITINGS. The Apostolic Fathers are the Fathers who are supposed to have lived before the last of the apostles died, of whom some are said to have been disciples of the apostles,
and to whom the earliest Christian writings now extant are ascribed.
There are especially six names which have come down to us, namely, Barnabas, Hermas, Clement of Rome, Polycarp, Papias, and Ignatius.
The first is generally regarded, though with doubtful warrant, as the Barnabas who is known as the companion of Paul in the Acts of the Apostles. He is the reputed author of a strongly anti-Judaic Epistle of doubtful genuineness. Hermas is supposed to have been the person mentioned in Rom. 16:14, though on insufficient grounds. The Shepherd of Hermas ascribed to him contains a series of visions, commands, and similitudes. It is a work of doubtful authenticity, though it was held in high esteem by the early Church. Clement of Rome may have been Paul's fellow-worker named in Phil. 4:3. He is commonly represented as bishop of Rome, though he may have been, and most likely was, merely an influential pastor there. He was author of an Epistle to the Corinthians, containing general moral injunctions and special exhortations, occasioned by discords in the Corinthian church. The authentictiy of this Epistle is also doubted by some, though without good reasons. It is probably the earliest of the genuine remains of early Christian literature. Polycarp is usually designated "bishop of Smyrna", but Eusebius speaks of him more correctly as "that blessed and apostolic presbyter." He was a disciple of John and wrote a short Epistle to the Philippians, consisting chiefly of practical exhortations in Scripture language. Papias, called
"bishop of Hierapolis", was a contemporary of Polycarp, and perhaps also a disciple of John. He was the author of an "Exposition of the Oracles of the Lord," of which only a few doctrinally insignificant fragments were preserved by Eusebius. Ignatius, commonly known as "bishop of Antioch", also lived in the days of the last of the apostles. Fifteen letters were ascribed to him, but only seven are now regarded as genuine, and even these are doubted by some. To these writings two of unknown authorship must be added, namely, the Epistle to Diognetes and the Didache. The former is sometimes ascribed to Justin Martyr, since he wrote an Apology to Diognetes.
His authorship is very unlikely, however, in view of internal evidence. The writer gives an account of the grounds on which many
Christians had abandoned Paganism and Judaism, describes the
leading features of the character and conduct of Christians, and traces this to the doctrine of Christianity, of which he gives an admirable summary. The Didache, discovered in 1873, was probably written about the year 100 A. D. The first part contains moral precepts under the scheme of the Two Ways, the way of life and the way of death, while the second part gives directions pertaining to worship and church government, interspersed with statements respecting the last things.
2. FORMAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THEIR TEACHINGS. It is
frequently remarked that in passing from the study of the New Testament to that of the Apostolic Fathers one is conscious of a tremendous change. There is not the same freshness and originality, depth and clearness. And this is no wonder, for it means the transition from truth given by infallible inspiration to truth reproduced by fallible pioneers. Their productions were bound to lean rather heavily on Scripture and to be of a primitive type, concerning itself with the first principles of faith rather than with the deeper truths of religion.
Their teachings are characterized by a certain meagerness. They are generally in full agreement with the teachings of Scripture, are often couched in the very words of the Bible, but add very little by way of explication and are not at all systematized. And this need not surprise any one, for there had as yet been but a short time for reflection on the truths of Scripture and for assimilation of the great mass of material contained in the Bible. The canon of the New
Testament was not yet fixed, and this explains why these early Fathers so often quote oral tradition rather than the written word.
Moreover, it should be borne in mind that there were no philosophical minds among them with special training for the pursuit of the truth and outstanding ability for its systematic presentation. In spite of their comparative poverty, however, the writings of the Apostolic Fathers are of considerable importance, since they witness to the canonicity and integrity of the New
Testament Books and form a doctrinal link between the New
Testament and the more speculative writings of the Apologetes which appeared during the second century.
A second characteristic of the teachings of the Apostolic Fathers is their want of definiteness. The New Testament records various types of the Apostolic kerugma (preaching): the Petrine, the Pauline, and the Johannine. The three are in fundamental agreement, but each one of them represents a different emphasis on the truth. Now it may seem surprising that the Apostolic Fathers, while revealing some preference for the Johannine type, with which they may have been best acquainted, yet did not definitely attach themselves to any one of these types. However, several considerations may be offered in explanation. It requires considerable reflection to distinguish these types. These early Fathers stood too near the Apostles to grasp the distinctive features of their teachings. Then, too, for them
Christianity was not in the first place a knowledge to be acquired, but the principle of a new obedience to God. While they were conscious of the normative value of the words of Jesus and the Apostolic kerugma, they did not attempt to define the truths of revelation, but simply to restate them in the light of their understanding. And, finally, the general conditions of their life, in so far as these were influenced by the popular heathen philosophy of the day, and by heathen and Jewish-Helenistic piety, were not favorable to the proper understanding of the characteristic differences between the several types of the Apostolic kerugma.
3. MATERIAL CONTENTS OF THEIR TEACHINGS. It is a matter of common observation that the writings of the Apostolic Fathers contain very little that is doctrinally important. Their teachings are generally in harmony with the truth revealed in the Word of God, and are often represented in the very word of Scripture, but for that very reason cannot be said to increase or deepen our insight into the truth or to shed light on the interrelations of the doctrinal teachings of Scripture. They testify to a common faith in God as the Creator and Ruler of the universe and in Jesus Christ, who was active in creation and throughout the old dispensation, and finally appeared
in the flesh. While they use the scriptural designation of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and also speak of Christ as God and man, they do not testify to an awareness of the implications and problems involved. The work of Christ as the Redeemer is not always represented in the same way. Sometimes His great significance is seen in the fact that He, by His passion and death, freed mankind from sin and death; and sometimes in the related, but not correlated fact that He revealed the Father and taught the new moral law. In some cases the death of Christ is represented as procuring for men the grace of repentance and as opening the way for a new obedience, rather than as the ground of man's justification. This moralistic strain is, perhaps, the weakest point in the teachings of the Apostolic
Fathers. It was related to the moralism present in the heathen world of that day and characteristic of the natural man as such, and was bound to serve the interests of legalism. The sacraments are represented as the means by which the blessings of salvation are communicated to man. Baptism begets the new life and secures the forgiveness of all sins or of past sins only (Hermas and II Clement); and the Lord's Supper is the means of communicating to man a blessed immortality or eternal life.
The individual Christian apprehends God in faith, which consists in true knowledge of God, confidence in Him, and self-committal to Him. Man is said to be justified by faith, but the relation of faith to justification and the new life is not clearly understood. An antiPauline strain of legalism becomes manifest at this point. Faith is simply the first step in the way of life, on which the moral development of the individual depends. But after the forgiveness of sins is once granted in baptism and apprehended by faith, man next merits this blessing by his good works, which become a second and independent principle alongside of faith. Christianity is often represented as a nova lex, and love, leading on to a new obedience, takes the leading place. Not the grace of God, but the good works of man sometimes appear in the foreground.
The Christian is represented as living in a Christian community, the church, which still rejoices in the possession of charismatic gifts, but also shows an increasing respect for the ecclesiastical offices mentioned in the New Testament. In some instances the bishop stands out as superior to the presbyters. A vivid sense of the vanity and transitory character of the present world, and of the eternal glory of the future world, is manifest in their writings. The end of all things is thought to be very near, and the representations of the end of the present world are derived from Old Testament prophecy. The Kingdom of God is regarded as the supreme good and as a purely future blessing. According to some (Barnabas, Hermas, Papias) its final form is preceded by a millennial kingdom. But whatever attention is devoted to the millennium, there is far greater emphasis on the coming judgment, when the people of God will receive the rewards of heaven, and the wicked will be condemned to everlasting destruction.
Questions for Further Study: How is the indefinite character of the teachings of the Apostolic Fathers to be explained? On which point are these teachings defective? What seeds of the doctrines peculiar to Roman Catholicism are already present in these writings? How can we account for their different representations of the work of Christ?
In what particular points does the moralism or legalism of the early Fathers appear? What can be said in explanation of this phenomenon? Could it have been occasioned in any way by Scripture statements? Is Harnack correct when he says that the Christology of the Apostolic Fathers is in part "Adoption Christology"?
Literature: Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers; Lechler, Das apostol. u. nachap. Zeitalter; Moxom, From Jerusalem to Nicaea, pp. 99–162;
Cunningham, Historical Theology I, pp. 94–120; Scott, The Nicene Theology, pp. 82–87, 142–160; Moody, C. N., The Mind of the Early
Converts, pp. 10–101; Harnack, History of Dogma I, pp. 141–221; Seeberg, History of Doctrines I, pp.55–82; Loofs, Handboek der
Dogmengeschiedenis, pp. 57–66; Otten, Manual of the History of