Dogma, Part 3 - Ignatius

On to Ignatius: we have determined he was the Bishop of the church in Antioch (Syria at the time, Turkey today); born circa 35-50 A.D.; died circa 98-110 A.D. Only by virtue of the dogma of “apostolic succession” is Ignatius considered to be one of the “apostolic” church fathers. We don’t know at what age he was converted, but he wasn’t even born until sometime after the death of Jesus, and certainly his role as bishop would have occurred sometime after the death of the apostles Paul and Peter since they were killed in circa 64-66 A.D.; not giving him “apostolic church father” ranking in my mind (even though John was still alive, though quite old, during Ignatius’ term as bishop.)

Let’s get right to the heart of the matter, quoting from the letters of Ignatius written to either Polycarp (1 letter) or to various churches (6 letters). All of the letters that I have taken these quotes from can be found at:

http://web.archive.org/web/20080122064315/www.earlychristianwritings.com/

“Your reverent presbytery is tuned to the bishop as strings to a lyre. Let us be careful not to resist the bishop that thru our submission to the bishop we may belong to God...plainly therefore we ought to regard the bishop as the Lord Himself.” Epistle of Ignatius to the Ephesians.

Point #1: “Be careful not to resist the bishop” – the problem with this is that there might be times when one single man is in error, something that can be avoided with the biblical model of plurality in the elders. At the least, there might be a vote taken, similar to lots being cast for the 12th disciple to replace Judas, but never in a plurality would there be only one man’s direction being given and being commanded to observe, to not resist.

Point #2:“that through submission to the bishop we may belong to God” as though we will not belong to God if we do not submit to the bishop! This is where we begin to see that there is to be unquestioning obedience to one man in the local church. Do not resist him, go along with everything he says, and in this you will then belong to God. Funny, I thought that I would belong to God by repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

Point #3: This is the first use of the term “reverent” in regard to a presbyter or elder or what would later become known as priest. This simple statement will lead to, as you have already figured out most likely, a further dividing of and “lifting up” of the clergy above the laity or fellowship of believers. Even today, we still call ministers, pastors or priests, “Reverend” so and so. All believers in Christ are brothers and sisters of one another, not having titles of Father or Reverend or even Pastor, not esteeming one above another.

Point #4: Should actually be the first point: "Regard him as the Lord"? There are so many things wrong with this, but we see in all of this the beginnings of "monarchical" rule.

“Respect the bishop as the counterpart of the Father and the presbyter as the counsel of God and the college of apostles, without those no church is recognized…and this will surely be, if ye be not puffed up and if ye be inseparable from [God] Jesus Christ and from the bishop and from the ordinances of the Apostles...he that doeth aught without the bishop and presbytery and deacons, this man is not clean in his conscience.” Letter of Ignatius to the Trallians

Point: Separation from the bishop is comparable to separation from God?

“Therefore as the Lord did nothing without the Father, [being united with Him] either by Himself or by the Apostles, so neither do ye anything without the bishop and the presbyters. And attempt not to think anything right for yourselves apart from others: but let there be one prayer in common, one supplication, one mind, one hope, in love and in joy unblameable, which is Jesus Christ, than whom there is nothing better.” Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians

Point: “Attempt not to think anything right for yourselves apart from others” following as it does just after “neither do ye anything without the bishop and the presbyters” sounds warning bells in my brain. I believe we are being told here to not think for ourselves and to go along with whatever the bishop says. For many centuries the Bible was translated into languages that the common man did not know or could not read. Somewhere down the line it was determined that the understanding of what the Bible meant was to come only from the Bishop, as it appears to be stated here, not from the individual believers themselves. The Holy Spirit was not allowed to teach believers through the Word of God. Only the Bishop had that authority and that right. At least that’s what I’m hearing here, and that’s what history eventually proved to be the case.

"It is not lawful apart from the bishop either to baptize or to hold a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve, this is well-pleasing also to God; that everything which ye do may be sure and valid…. He that honoureth the bishop is honoured of God; he that doeth aught without the knowledge of the bishop rendereth service to the devil" Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnans

Now we get down to it! Not only are we to submit to this unbiblical form of church government, but now, if we do not submit, we are equated with the devil! And it is “not lawful”. So are we back to the law then? Well, yes, as a matter of fact. If you look closely, you can see the levitical priesthood being re-established, very subtly.

“But the spirit preached, saying these things: Do nothing apart from the bishop; keep your flesh as the temple of God; love unity, avoid divisions; be imitators of Jesus Christ, even as he is of his Father.” Letter from Ignatius to the Philadelphians

Point: Where exactly does it say in the Bible that "the spirit preached, saying these things: Do nothing apart from the bishop"? It doesn’t, of course. And here we see that they were speaking and teaching things that fit right in with other errors they were making, but not at all with scripture. When the Bible arrived, the corrections should have been applied. Sadly, they were not.

In fact, the further we get from the time of the apostles, the more in error things become. The true point of all of this is that things are no different today. Illustrious, famous, charming leaders of the churches today install practices, calling them biblical, when they are not, they are merely dogma. But we still follow the words of Ignatius and do not think apart from the leaders of the church. We do not test their words against THE WORD. I don’t think we can even call ourselves sheep, because sheep at least hear their masters’ own voice. The churches today seem to have many masters! We mistake the words of the hirelings as being the words of the master Himself, because we don’t know His Words; we don’t recognize His voice.

And it’s all because of two reasons normally: we are either too lazy to study and test things against the Word or, worse yet, we do not want to rock the boat, we avoid confrontations, we avoid calling things into question, we are more fearful of man than of God. We don’t test what it is we are taught, as we are commanded to in the Bible.

Do you know how many years I believed that Mary, the mother of God, was carried up into heaven in bodily form just as Jesus was? Do you know why I believed that? It was because my church taught me that, and I never read the Word (I was encouraged not to, because the only crazy people in the family were the ones who read the bible - no exaggeration), and so I never questioned anything.

When I did begin to read the Word, and I did begin to question, the answers I got didn’t match up with the Word (in so many areas more than just this one), and as my church wasn't concerned about staying biblical, I moved on.

By the way, here is how that particular “dogma” about Mary came into being:

“According to the belief of Christians of the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox, and Oriental Orthodox churches and by some Anglicans, the Assumption of Mary was the bodily taking up of the Virgin Mary into Heaven at the end of her life. The Catholic Church teaches as dogma that Mary, "having completed the course of her earthly life, was assumed body and soul into heavenly glory." This doctrine was dogmatically and infallibly defined by Pope Pius XII on November 1, 1950, in his Apostolic Constitution Munificentissimus Deus.”

Tomorrow, we will look at a few more letters of the Early Church Fathers...before moving on in our study.