Liberty Baptist Theological Seminary

ORIGIN OF THE SACRAMENTS AND THE EPISCOPATE AND THE ENSUINGPROGRESSIVE INFLUENCE ON CYPRIAN

A Paper Submitted to

Dr. Edward L. Smither

in partial fulfillment of the requirements

for completion of the course,

THEO 943

Latin Fathers

by

Floyd E. Schneider

3324 E. 33rd Ave., Spokane, WA 99223

Cell: 509-590-8308

Floyd.schneider@liberty.edu

floydschneider24@gmail.com

20 July 2012

CONTENTS

I. Introduction

II. Origins of the Rituals of Baptism and Communion

III. Origin of the Episcopate

IV. The development of the Episcopate and the

continued rise of the

Sacramental Theology of the rituals of

Baptism and the Eucharist

under Cyprian.

V. Summary

2

I. Introduction

Within the span of one generation, the Reformation

rejected more than a century of Roman Catholic hermeneutics

and established sola scriptura as the foundation of the

Protestant movement. At a fundamental level, the Protestant

interpretation of those passages of Scripture that deal

specifically with salvation1 differed radically from the

hermeneutics of the Catholic Church. Three doctrines that 1 Justification plus sanctification plus glorification

3

affected the doctrine of salvation and evidenced these

profound differences were the rituals of baptism and

communion, and the hierarchy of the episcopate. This paper

will determine 1) when and how the believers in the first

and second century after Pentecost began to develop the

doctrines on baptism, communion, 2) how the episcopate

developed and contributed to the progressive understanding

of baptism and communion within the Church, and 3) how

Cyprian advanced and used the episcopate and these two

doctrines to preserve the unity of the Church2 during his

lifetime.

II. Origins of the Rituals of Baptism and Communion

The earliest mention of baptism and communion outside

the New Testament appears in the Didache. The document is

composed of two parts: (1) instruction about the "Two Ways,"

and (2) a manual of church order and practice. The first

2 “Church” will be defined in this paper as the disorganized body of all believers during the first four centuries of Christianity. Centers of local churches formed along the way, but an official, centralized Roman Church had not yet developed during this time period.

4

part summarizes how those preparing to be baptized should be

taught to live the Christian life. The document displays a

Christian adaptation of Jewish moral instruction and, as a

written catechism, exemplifies similar material which has

been discovered in other Christian writings dating from the

1st to the 5th centuries.3 Although the Didache is difficult to

date due to a lack of contemporary references, the materials

used to write it mirror the condition and concerns of the

church at the time of and previous to its composition.

Although it could have been penned during the second

century, J. P. Audet’s commentary suggests a composition

date of around 70 CE,4 J.A.T. Robinson dates it earlier c.

40-60,5 and Aaron Milavec agrees with these two scholars

with a date between c. 50-70.6

3 The Epistle of Barnabas, the Didascalia, the Apostolic Church Ordinances, theSummary of Doctrine, the Apostolic Constitutions, the Life of Schnudi, and On the Teaching of the Apostles (or Doctrina), some of which are dependent on the Didache. The interrelationships between these documents has not been completely worked out.

4 J. P. Audet, La Didachè; Instructions des Apôtres. (Paris: Études Bibliques, Gabalda, 1958).

5 John A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament (SCM Press, 1976).

6 Aaron Milavec, “The Purifying Confession of Failings Required bythe Didache’s Eucharistic Sacrifice,” Biblical Theology Bulletin (volume 33):

5

This document was only discovered in 1873,7 but C. C.

Robinson states that the study of the Church Fathers has

uncovered references to it by Athanasius (AD 298-373),

Didymus (313-398), and Eusebius (263-339), while Serapion of

Thmuis (4th century) quoted it in one of his Eucharistic

prayers.8 The document provides evidence of a mode of

baptism other than immersion, as well as recording the

oldest known Eucharist prayers.

The second part of the Didache (chapters 7 to 10)

begins with the subject of baptism, which is to be performed

"in the Name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy

Spirit,”9 allowing for the use of both “living water” (like

a natural flowing stream), if it is available, but if not,

1.

7 Philotheos Bryennios discovered a Greek manuscript in the codex Hierosolymitanus which contained the full text of the Didache, and he published it in 1883. A Latin version of the first five chapters was discovered in 1900 by J. Schlecht [John Chapman (1913). “Didache”. Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company.]

8 C.C. Richardson, ed. Early Christian Fathers. (Philadelphia. Westminster, 1953, reprinted Macmillan 1970), 163.

9 The Didache or Teaching of the Apostles, trans. and ed., J. B. Lightfoot,7:2,5.

6

then in cold or warm water. Everyone taking part in the

baptism was requested to fast for one or two days

beforehand. If deep running water was not available (for

immersion), the baptizer was allowed to use a container to

pour water on the candidate or catechumen’s head three

times. The relevance of this information is seen in the fact

that every religion develops a framework and a set of

logistics for carrying out its rituals. The New Testament

presents no such items for the performance of baptism.10

Therefore the early church had to determine its own set of

criteria for carrying out the Lord’s Great Commission,11

which included baptism. Within the first generation of the

Church, the believers had established concrete details of

performing baptism and outlined these in a document that

came to influence the Church for the next three hundred

years. This document did not specifically demand that its

own set of criteria be exclusively legitimized, but its

10 Other than immersion as evidenced by the definition of the wordbaptize and John the Baptist’s example of baptizing people in the Jordan “because there was plenty of water.”

11 Matthew 28:19.

7

recommendations were meant for the Church at large, thus

limiting by general consensus the freedom of each local

church to determine the methods of performing baptism in

different ways as determined by the leaders of that local

body. Since there was only one Church, it apparently made

sense to the author(s) of the Didache to prescribe the

logistics of the ceremony for all the churches.

Establishing the logistics of baptism naturally led to

the discussion of baptism’s possible efficaciousness. J.N.D.

Kelly states that baptism “was always held to convey the

remission of sins, but the earlier Pauline conception of it

as the application of Christ’s atoning death to the believer

seems to have faded.”12 Clement of Rome seems to have

believed that baptism bestowed the Holy Spirit on the

believer in his reference to “one Spirit of grace poured out

upon us,”13 through the process of baptism. The description

12 J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1978), 194.

13 Clement, Letter to the Corinthians, chapter 46, verse 6?? On-line, line: http://www.dabar.org/ChurchHistory/Fathers/Clement_Rome/4601G46enuine-Corinthians.html#46-6 (accessed July 15, 2012).

8

of baptism as “the seal of the Son of God” in 2 Clement14 and

Hermas15 indicate adherence to the same understanding. The

concept of the seal confirmed a person’s identity in the

family of God. The remission of sins is also emphasized in

the Epistle of Barnabas when it describes the believer weighed

down by sins before baptism and emerging from baptism

“bearing fruit in our hearts.”16 This led to the belief that

baptism was a prerequisite for the believer’s reception of

the fruits of the Spirit as listed in Galatians 5. This

document claims that before baptism, a person’s heart is

filled with demons, while Ignatius, in his letter to

Polycarp,17 suggests that baptism actually provides the

14 Clement, 2 Clement, chapter 7, verse 6, chapter 8, verse 6, On-line, line:See note 11 …http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/2clement-lightfoot.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

15 The Shepherd of Hermas, Parable 9, 15[92]:3, On-line, line: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/shepherd-lightfoot.html (accessed July 15, 2012)

, 8, 2, 2f.; 8, 6, 3; 9, 16, 16 The Epistle of Barnabas, 11:11, 16:7, On-line, line:

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/barnabas-lightfoot.html (accessed Julyne 158, 2012), 11, 11; 16, 7f.

17 Ignatius to Polycarp, chapter 6, verse 2, On-line, line: (LXX n.d.)(Sandt 2011)(Didache n.d.)(Irenaeus n.d.)(Martyr n.d.)http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-polycarp-lightfoot.html, (accessed July 15, 2012).

9

believer with weapons for our spiritual warfare. These

“speculations”18 about baptism replaced the simple symbolism

of the believer’s participation in the death and

resurrection of Christ with a ritual that came to be viewed

as essential for salvation.

Justin Martyr, who wrote in the middle of the second

century, based the authority for baptism on Isaiah 1:16-29

(“Wash, make yourselves clean, etc.”) as well as John 3:5

(“Unless you are born again, etc.”). He concluded that

washing with water, when done in the name of the Trinity, is

specifically efficacious for regeneration, illumination and

remission of sins.19 For Justin, baptism replaced Jewish

circumcision as entrance into salvation.20 Irenaeus, an

older contemporary of Tertullian, confirmed the development

of the accepted view that baptism was the seal of eternal

18 This term is used descriptively of Speculative theology, defined as theology founded upon, or influenced by, speculation or metaphysical philosophy. Speculative Theology, Online, line: http://dictionary.die.net/speculative%20theology (accessed July 20, 2012).

19 Justin Martyr: First Apology, chapter 61, On-line, line: ly5

20 Ibid., chapter 44.

10

life and caused us to be born of God, thereby transforming

us into the sons of God; it imparts to us the Holy Spirit,

and cleanses the soul as well as the body, bestowing the

Spirit as an earnest of resurrection.21

The lack of primary documents revealing any contrary

understanding that viewed baptism as simply an outward sign

of an inward reality22 leads to a couple of possible

conclusions. First, the symbolic understanding of baptism

may have been rejected for reasons unknown to modern

scholars and removed from the mainstream of local church

baptisms. Second, the Church during persecution saw no need

(or had no opportunity) to develop any additional system of

checks and balances, other than the rule of faith, that

could have prevented the doctrine of baptism from taking on

a salvic meaning for everyone within the Church.

21 St. Irenaeus: The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching, The doctrine of the Holy Spirit in Justin and Irenaeus, chapter 3, On-line, line: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.preaching_introduction_III.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

22 This author’s view of baptism.

11

The second ritual that took on major signficance in the

struggle for unity within the Church was the Eucharist. The

statements in the Didache relevant to this study are found

in chapter 9.23 First, the Didache explained the cup. "Now

concerning the Eucharist, give thanks this way. First,

concerning the cup: We thank thee, our Father, for the holy

vine of David Thy servant, which Thou madest known to us

through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory for ever.”

Then the broken bread:

We thank Thee, our Father, for the life and knowledge which Thou madest known to us through Jesus Thy Servant; to Thee be the glory forever. Even as this broken bread was scattered over the hills, and was gathered together and became one, so let Thy Church be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Thy kingdom; for Thine is the glory and the power through Jesus Christ for ever.But let no one eat or drink of your Eucharist, unless they have been baptized into the name of the Lord; for concerning this also the Lord has said, "Give not that which is holy to the dogs.”

The Didache follows the same ritual that took place in

Corinth, and includes a thanksgiving after a meal. The

document does not mention which food should be eaten for the23 Didache, http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-

roberts.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

12

meal, nor does it list or prescribe the elements, not even

wine and bread. The document referrers to the "spiritual

food and drink and life eternal through Thy Servant," and it

distinguishes the elements from the "food and drink (given)

to men for enjoyment that they might give thanks to (God)."

Huub van de Sandt proposes that the Eucharist developed into

a holy meal due to the fact that the “temple setting was

generally seen as the natural context for religious rites,

temple and temple thinking were used to describe and define

non-temple ritual settings.”24 The wordking the holy usually

refers to sacrificial food25 and points to ”the divine

service and temple sanctity to non-sacrificial communal

meals,”26 As corporate worship in the Old Testament took

place within the temple setting, in the same way, the

Eucharist meal came to be viewed as a corporate necessity

for worship in the Church.

24 Huub van de Sandt, “Why does the Didache Conceive of the Eucharist as a Holy Meal?”, brill.nl/vc, Vigiliae Christianae 65 (2011) 1-20, 1.

25 LXX Lev. 2:3; 22:6,7, 10-16.

26 Ibid., 196.

13

Although the prayers before and after the meal resemble

those used during the offering of a Jewish sacrifice, these

prayers make no mention of the redemptive work of Christ,

nor refer to the remembrance of Christ’s sacrifice as

commanded by Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:23-34. Chapter 10 of

the Didache does not even include the word “Christ” which

appears only once in the entire document. There is no overt

indication in the Didache that communion had developed any

efficacious significance. The document does, however,

promote baptism as being a prerequisite for partaking of the

Eucharist,27 and more fundamentally, as a visible sign of

salvation. The Eucharist had only achieved the status of a

sacrifice, with no mention of its possible efficaciousness.

Kelly affirms this view by stating that “the Eucharist

was regarded as the distinctly Christian sacrifice from the

closing decade of the first century, if not earlier.”28

Kelly says that believers at that time interpreted Malachi’s

27 A view debated today, as well.

28 J.N.D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1978), 196.

14

prediction (1:10f.) to mean that the Lord would reject the

Jewish sacrifices and accept the Gentiles’ “pure offering”

instead.29 Support for this is found in the Didache 14:1

where the Eucharist is given the term thusia, or sacrifice.

Justin sanctions this view when he states, "Accordingly,

God, anticipating all the sacrifices which we offer through

this name, and which Jesus the Christ enjoined us to offer,

i.e., in the Eucharist of the bread and the cup, and which

are presented by Christians in all places throughout the

world, bears witness that they are well-pleasing to Him.”30

Clearly, Justin connects the Eucharist with the “pure

offering” of Malachi. Kelly notes that Justin used the term

“thanksgiving” as equivalent to the Eucharist bread and

wine, and was offered as a memorial of the passion. Kelly

claims that a memorial implies more than mere

recollection.31

29 Ibid., 196.

30 S. Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho, chapter 117, verse 1, On-line, line: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-dialoguetrypho.html, (accessed July 15, 2012),.

31 Kelly, 197.

15

Clement supports this interpretation by paralleling the

Church’s “ministers”32 with the Old Testament priests and

Levites, who offered sacrifices.33 Ignatius thought in terms

of a sacrifice, as well.34 Justin wrote, “We do not receive

these as common bread or common drink. But just as our

Saviour Jesus Christ was made flesh through the Word of God

and had both flesh and blood which has been Eucharistized by

the word of prayer from Him (that food which by process of

assimilation nourishes our flesh and blood) is the flesh and

blood of the incarnate Jesus.”35 Quite independent of

Justin, Irenaeus, in refuting the Gnostics and Docetics,

32 i.e., bishops and priests, who have now risen above elders in power.

33 Clement, Letter to the Corinthians, chapter 40, verse 4, On-line, line: http://www.dabar.org/ChurchHistory/Fathers/Clement_Rome/4601Genuine-Corinthians.html#4 0 - 4 , (Ignatius, The Epistle of St Ignatius of Antiochto the Magnesians n.d.)(Irenaeus, Adversus haereses n.d.)(accessed July 15, 2012).

34 Ignatius to the Philadelphians, chapter 4, On-line, line: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-philadelphians-lightfoot.html, (accessed July 15, 2012).

35 Justin Martyr: First Apology, chapter 66, verse 2, On-line, line: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-firstapology.html (accessed July 15, 2012),.

16

declares a change in the elements, adding that the Eucharist

is composed of two elements, “a terrestrial one and a

celestial, so that our bodies are no longer commonplace when

they receive the Eucharist, since they have the hope of

resurrection to eternity.”36 The technical terms for

sacrament (mustarion in Greek and sacramentum in Latin) were

never used in recorded history before the Alexandrian

fathers and Tertullian respectively,37 but the early Church

Fathers laid the foundation for this added meaning of the

Eucharist.

By the end of the second century, the Lord’s command to

his followers to “Do this”38 had become a ritual to “Offer

this,” hinting that a sacrificial offering was being

performed, not simply a remembrance service. None of the

Church Fathers had defined the elements of this sacrifice.

36 Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, book 4, chapter 18, verse 5; book 5, chapter 2, verse 3, On-line, line: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-book4.html (accessedJuly 15, 2012).

37 Kelly, 193.

38 1 Cor. 11:24, 25.

17

Ignatius declared that the “Eucharist is the flesh of our

Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins and which

the Father in His goodness raised.”39 Ignatius uses this

interpretation to refute the Docetist’s denial of the Lord’s

physical body.40 Justin and Ignatius attributed a spiritual

meaning to the elements of the Eucharist that made them

categorically different from common bread and wine. Justin

boldly states this change and supports his assertion by

comparing the change in the elements with the incarnation

itself.

In summary, sacramental theology actually came out of

soteriology. Salvation

was free to all who would accept it, but different theories

arose as to how salvation was transmitted to the individual.

Each Church Father built his view of baptism and communion

on the teaching of those who had gone before, until both of

these rituals became sacraments within the Church.

39 Ignatius, VI. The Epistle to the Smyrnaeans., chapter 6, verse 2, On-line, line: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/srawley/smyrnaeans.html, (accessed on July 15, 2012).

40 Ibid., verse 6 f.

18

III. Origin of the Episcopate

This development of sacramental theology probably would

never have occurred without the parallel development of the

episcopate within the Church. In order for baptism and

communion to have achieved their position of necessity

within the doctrine of soteriology, the episcopate had to

have reached a position of importance and influence within

the entire Church. The first Church authority to clearly

develop within Christianity were the Jewish Apostles in Acts

6, who gave the congregation the assignment of choosing

seven men to carry out the function of solving the food

distribution to the widows in the church in Jerusalem at

that time. The Apostles’ position and authority are derived

from their justification for not personally taking care of

the food distribution.41 By the time of Cornelius’

conversion, the church in Jerusalem had established “elders”

(πρεσβυτέρους, Acts 11:30). As Paul and Barnabas established

churches in Asia Minor, they appointed “elders” in each

41 “It is not desirable for us to neglect the word of God in orderto serve tables . . . but we will devote ourselves to prayer and to the ministry of the word.” Acts 6:2, 4.

19

local church. Paul wrote to Timothy about the character

quality requirements for an “overseer” (ἐπισκοπῆς) in 1

Timothy 3:1. The term ἐπισκοπῆς has been translated “bishop”

in some English translations, and “overseer” in others.

As the Church hierarchy developed during the first two

centuries, the position of “bishop” rose to prominence, and

the “common” elder/prebyter relinquished the ultimate

authority for the local church to a bishop. These bishops

and their churches faced numerous persecutions during their

lifetimes. In their attempt to defend Christianity against

the Jewish and pagan worlds, as well as establish unity

within the Church, these bishops attributed more and more

authority and importance to Christianity’s rituals of

baptism and communion. Those bishops who defended the faith

through their writings impacted the entire Church with these

views of baptism and communion, and the evolving authority

structure within the Church contributed to the acceptance by

the laity of the growing importance of baptism and communion

as sacramental. The increasing combination of clerical power

and efficacious sacraments will work together to produce a

20

dominant hierarchy that becomes the gatekeeper for

salvation, and written evidence will demonstrate that

Clement of Rome was the first bishop to assert that the

bishop of Rome held a preeminence over all other bishops.

In a letter to the believers in Corinth, Clement

admonished the believers to submit to their bishops as to

the Lord and for the sake of unity. This letter establishes

the "epiphany of the Roman primacy." Eusebius’ opinion was

that this letter is the first official statement of Rome’s

consciousness of this entitlement of eminence in the

spiritual realm of the Church. He believed that this letter

contains the first patristic affirmation of the divine right

of the hierarchy.42

Clement’s contemporary, Ignatius of Antioch, is the

earliest known believer to stress the importance of loyalty

to a single bishop43 in each city. Ignatius placed the 42 Ibid., xlii, 1, 2, 4; xliv, 2. First Period, Beginning and

Growth of early Christian Literature – the Fathers of the First Three Centuries, Section I: The Apostolic Fathers, http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tixeront/section1-1.html#1clement (accessed July 15, 2012).

43 The Epistle of St. Ignatius of Antioch to the Magnesians, chapter 2, verse 1, chapter 6, verse 1, chapter 7, verse 1, chapter 13, verse 2, On-line, line: http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-magnesians-

21

bishop in ultimate authority over the presbyters, who were

possibly elders, and the deacons. At this stage in the

development of the Church’s hierarchy, the bishop would have

consulted the other leaders in the local church, but

Ignatius supported and recommended that one man in the local

church be given the title of bishop and a level of

authority, which goes beyond the passages in the New

Testament on leadership in a local church.

The biblical text does not support the establishment of

different offices in the Church based on the different names

in the Scriptures used to describe the local church

leaders,44 but since the Church Fathers borrowed part of

their theology from the historical items in the Old

Testament, just as Cyprian would do in the future, the

hoole.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

44 presbuteros = elder, an older man, emphasizing experience; episcopos = overseer or bishop, guardian or superintendent, emphasizing oversight; poimen = shepherd or pastor, metaphoric term for tending flocks, emphasizing direction and protection; oikonomo = steward, metaphoric term for treasurer, emphasizing trustworthiness. In addition,every mention of the presbuterion in the New Testament referred to a plurality of elders in each local church. The New Testament reveals no hierarchy above the elders in a local church. Acts 20:17, 28; Phil. 1:1;Titus 1:5, 7; 1 Peter 5:1, 2.

22

Levitical priesthood presented itself as an obvious parallel

to an institution that would require a future hierarchy in

order to provide a “unity” that could withstand persecution

from the pagan world and internal strife of groups competing

for ascendancy.

IV. The development of the Episcopate and the continued

rise of the Sacramental Theology of the rituals of Baptism

and the Eucharist under Cyprian.

By the time Cyprian had become a bishop, Tertullian’s

contribution had further advanced theologically the growing

unofficial episcopacy and the sacramental function of

baptism and communion, and had influenced Cyprian in the

process. Tertullian believed that salvation required valid

baptism inside the only Church.45 He worried that in an

emergency situation the prerogatives of the bishop might be

usurped, since opposition to the episcopacy is the “mother

of schism.”46 Martyrdom was recognized as a fail-safe ticket

45 “Baptismal Rites and Architecture,” in Late Ancient Christianity: A People’s History of Christianity, volume 2, Robin M. Jensen, 125 Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2005.

46 Ibid.

23

into heaven, but during Cyprian’s time, this forced a

revision of the place that baptism played in defining

membership in the Church, which guaranteed salvation, and

the part that baptism played in a person’s life who needed

forgiveness for having lapsed under persecution.

Concerning the episcopacy, Tertullian had criticized

the Church hierarchy on a regular basis. In attacking the

Church authorities, Osborn claims that Tertullian

foreshadows the protestant reaction to papal claims,

“Tertullian has suffered chiefly in the history of the

church because of his polemic against bishops in general and

the bishop of Rome in particular. Most Christians have said

negative things about bishops; but Tertullian said them

extremely well.”47 Tertullian has been called the first

Protestant, as the first Christian writer who taught that

the church was not a conclave of bishops, but the people of

the Holy Spirit.48

47 Eric Osborn, Tertullian: First Theologian of the West (Cambridge UniversityPress, 1997), 175-6.

48 Timothy D. Barnes, Tertullian: A Historical and Literary Study. Rev. ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1985, 1971 1st edn), 84, quoting De pudicitia 21.17.

24

Although Tertullian had his issues with many Church

bishops, Irenaeus’s ecclesiology still impacted Tertullian

in a significant manner. Irenaeus taught that a church could

only be considered apostolic if it shared the same faith as

the apostles. By the end of the second century, this “faith”

had developed an ecclesiastical “structure” that was viewed

as the only religious entity that could embody the apostolic

faith. This embedded belief led Tertullian to continue the

third-century ecclesiastical teaching that the monarchial

bishops had originated with the apostles. Philip Schaff

states that, “While abusing the multitude of bishops,

Tertullian indicated the most decisive step in early

Christian ecclesiology. In him the church acquired the

magnitude which Cyprian was to expound in the classic

catholic doctrine which has endured to this present day.”49

Tertullian’s support of the incipient hierarchical system

contributed to his acceptance and advancement of the

49 Ibid., 182.

25

teachings on baptism and the Eucharist that had been handed

down by the Church Fathers who had preceded him.

Tertullian’s legacy shaped Latin Christianity,50 as

well as Cyprian, who apparently never went a day without

reading him, and called him “the master.” Tertullian’s

connections and initial support of the African expression of

Montanistism, which opposed the Church’s developing

hierarchy, ostensibly made no impact on Cyprian. Tertullian

eventually rejected the Montanist movement, which may be the

reason why Cyprian never made any allusions to Montanism.

Although Tertullian often criticized many bishops, Cyprian

became the Church’s main advocate of the status quo during

his lifetime. In Cyprian’s fight against schism and those

rebel bishops who attempted to form a Church of their own,

Cyprian could have placed these bishops in the same category

as those whom Tertullian denounced. Instead of rejecting

Tertullian’s actions against the bishopric, Cyprian would

50 The introductions to Bardenhewer and Quasten make his position in Latin Christianity clear. Otto Bardenhewer, Patrology, transl. by T. Shahan, Herder, 1908; J. Quasten, Patrology, Vol II, Christian Classics library.

26

have welcomed and agreed with Tertullian’s actions and

viewed his own actions as a continuation of Tertullian’s

struggle for “the” apostolic Church (since Tertullian never

did leave the Church).

During Cyprian’s lifetime, the Church had experienced

one of the worst persecutions since the stoning of Stephen.

The fallout within the Church from the Emperor Decius’

persecution drove Cyprian to strive for “unity”51 within the

Church. The majority of church “members,” who became known

as the “lapsed,” buckled under the pressure of the

persecution and either gave up copies of the scriptures or

offered worship to the Emperor. Those few who held fast,

either experiencing imprisonment or exile, became known as

the “confessors.” The question arose as to whether and how

the Church should forgive the lapsed and allow them back

into fellowship.52

51 See Cyprian’s The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise I, On the Unity of the Church, 5:421-429, http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.i.html (accessed July 15, 2012). Cyprian’s theology came out of a setting of extreme persecution and schismatic movements which threatened to dismantle the Church structure.

52 J. Patout Burns, Jr. Cyprian The Bishop (London and New York: Routledge, 2002).

27

Three different groups offered three very different

answers to this question.53 The Laxists provided the least

strict answer. This group of “rebellious” bishops leveraged

the newly-attained authority of the “martyrs.” These martyrs

had not lapsed and had suffered for their faith, ranging

from mild persecution to physical death. At some point these

“martyrs” gained the authority to grant forgiveness to the

lapsed by issuing certificates of forgiveness. The

rebellious bishops accepted these certificates and allowed

all the lapsed to take the Eucharist and to receive

membership back into the Church. These bishops required no

penance or repentance on the part of the lapsed.

The strictest group, led by Novatian, refused to grant

forgiveness to anyone who lapsed. This group developed their

own Church54 with their own bishops. This group judged the

intentions of the individual as well as the outward, visible

53 Ibid., ch. 4.

54 Even during Novatian’s time, the official Roman Catholic Churchhad not come into existence yet. The “Church” still consisted of numerous regions of believers holding differing positions on ecclesiastical structure.

28

actions. By this time in the development of sacramental

theology, the lapsed believed that they could achieve

salvation only by taking the Eucharist and being reunited as

members of the Church. Novatian’s position forced these

people into the other two groups.

Cyprian took a middle road that allowed the lapsed back

into membership of the Church on the basis of two new

criteria developed for this historically unique situation.

First, Cyprian believed that only God could ultimately see a

person’s heart and forgive sin. Therefore Cyprian’s group

set up external criteria for evaluating a person’s internal

repentance. The lapsed were required to demonstrate

repentance by submitting to the “ritual of reconciliation,”

doing penance, and allowing the bishops to lay hands on

them, which demonstrated obedience to the bishops’ and

Cyprian’s leadership. Second, Cyprian developed a

restructuring of the social roles, thus “downgrading” the

status of each category of the lapsed, but allowing each

category to remain in the Church. Anyone who had “fallen”

29

would be placed in a “lower” category of people who still

had access to the Eucharist and membership in the Church.55

If Cyprian had not developed such a system, the schisms

caused by the Laxists and Novatian’s groups would have

usurped the authority of Cyprian (and those bishops loyal to

him) and placed the entire Church hierarchy in jeopardy. At

first, many bishops wanted to reject any and all letters

from the martyrs, but in one town after another, riots broke

out as the crowds of apostates, armed with their letters

from the confessors, besieged the churches demanding re-

admission to the Church and to the Eucharist from the local

clergy. Cyprian stood his ground and reminded the lapsed

that it is the bishop who rules in the Church, and that

episcopal rule is the Church's foundation. Cyprian demanded

that the act of the martyr had to be an act of intercession

with the bishop. The martyr could not intercede on his own.

Cyprian rejected the concept of collective notes that

provided forgiveness to every lapsed person in an entire

area. Cyprian demanded that the martyr specify the name of 55 Virgins were told to marry, clergy became lay people, apostates

became believers (again), etc.

30

the person for whom the “indulgence” was sought, and that

the person must be someone whom the martyr knew personally.

The bishop would then make the final decision. Exceptions

were made for the lapsed who were in danger of death and

could not wait for the bishop’s decision. In that case, any

priest could reconcile him to the Church and the Eucharist.

Cyprian eventually won the majority of the Africans over to

his view and discredited the rebellious bishops who had

wanted to replace him and his faithful bishops.

The Church had never faced these problems before.

Cyprian developed his theology to accommodate the situation

as he attempted to save the Church from these schisms and

the destruction of the Church’s structural hierarchy. Both

schisms held views not acceptable to Cyprian’s understanding

of Scripture. The Novatians rejected the repentance of the

lapsed, and the Laxists made repentance completely

unnecessary. Contrary to Novatian, Cyprian accepted the

repentance of those willing to demonstrate it through

obedience to Cyprian’s criteria. Opposed to the Laxists, he

demanded repentance and the visible evidence thereof. He

31

supported his views with various Scriptures56 and his belief

in the primacy of the bishops over the Laxist and Novatian

bishops, as well as over all the laity, including the

confessors and martyrs. Although each group wanted to

achieve prominence (or simply establish their own Church),

whatever motive (power or unity), by this time in the

development of the understanding of the doctrines of the

rituals of baptism and communion and Church leadership, all

three groups were functioning under the same presupposition

that baptism, the Eucharist, and Church “membership” were

necessary for salvation.

During the persecution, staying alive and holding onto

one’s property had been paramount in the minds of the lapsed

when they had bowed to the Church’s demands. This paper will

not attempt to answer the question as to why so many of the

Church lapsed, but will instead move forward to demonstrate

their motivation for wanting to be readmitted to the Church

after the persecution end. The progressive development of

the doctrines of baptism, communion, and the episcopate had

56 Matthew 16, Ephesians 2, et. al.

32

convinced them that both baptism and the Eucharist were

necessary for salvation, and that the bishops alone had the

authority to administer these sacraments to the laity,

lapsed or not.

Throughout the persecution, Cyprian had contributed to

the development of sacramental theology by reinforcing and

strengthening the teaching that baptism was necessary for

admittance into the Church and that the Eucharist was

efficacious. First, he stated that there was only one

Church. The possibility of more than one Church had never

occurred to anyone (in documented written history) before

Cyprian. Ephesians clearly taught that the Church was one

body, not a number of splinter groups. However, Cyprian saw

no difference between the visible and invisible Church,

which would not be promoted until centuries later.

Considering the developing character of Church history, it

seems impossible that Cyprian could have made that

theological distinction before the issue surfaced in all its

glory during the Reformation. For Cyprian, the one Church

was visible and was the only one that God had established.

33

In his treatise on unity, he continued to refer to

“the” Church as the only possibility for believers to exist

in the world. He refers to the Devil seeing his idols

rejected by many people coming to “the Church,” so the Devil

devised another deception, and “under the very title of the

Christian name [. . .] he snatches men from the Church

itself [. . .] they still call themselves Christians, and

walking in darkness, they think that they have the light.”57

Cyprian believed that “the source of truth” was in the

Church, and nowhere else.58 He claims that there is an easy

proof of this, and he refers to Matthew 16:18-19, making the

assumption that these verses can only refer to the visible

Church of his day. He admits that the Lord gave all the

apostles equal authority, but he hedges this by claiming

that God wanted unity within the Church, and therefore

“arranged by His authority the origin of that unity, as

57 Cyprian, (Cyprian, On the Lapsed n.d.)(Cyprian, The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise I, On the Unity of the Church n.d.)The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise I, On the Unity of the Church, chapter 3, On-line, line: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.i.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

58 Ibid., 3.

34

beginning from one,” referring to Peter, whom Cyprian

equates with the Church.59 He continued his line of

reasoning by asking the rhetorical question, “Does he who

does not hold this unity of the Church think that he holds

the faith?”60 Cyprian goes beyond equating Peter with the

Church and the Church with the faith, to claiming that

anyone who does not agree with Cyprian’s view is actually

striving against and resisting the Church.61 Cyprian claims

this definition of unity especially for those bishops who

align themselves with Cyprian,62 thereby rejecting those

bishops who desired to form an alternative Church with their

views of how to treat the situation of the Lapsed.

An additional problem concerning the lapsed would have

arisen if Cyprian had not developed a way of retrieving them

back into the Church. The Church taught that Christ would

accept the confessors when they arrived in heaven. If some 59 Ibid., 4.

60 Ibid., 4.

61 Ibid., 4.

62 Ibid., 4, “who preside in the Church”.

35

of the lapsed were forced to remain outside the Church, and

if these lapsed had successfully become confessors during

the next persecution, the Church would be put in the

untenable position of claiming that anyone outside the

Church automatically went to hell.63 Even if a person

outside the Church appeared to confess Christ, and even if

he was martyred for his faith, that person was still sent to

hell. Only the Church, through the bishops and their

rituals, could grant peace and entrance to Christ.64

After establishing that there was only one church,

Cyprian affirmed that no true sacraments could exist outside

the Church, and therefore, there cannot be any salvation

outside the Church.65 This line of reasoning and these

statements gave Cyprian the distinction of being the first

Church Father to make salvation contingent on participation

in the Eucharist ritual, thereby making the Eucharist

63 J. Patout Burns, Jr. Cyprian The Bishop (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), ch. 4, 62.

64 Ibid., 63.

65 Cyprian, Letter 73.11; idem, Unit. Eccl. 6.

36

theologically necessary for salvation. During times of

persecution, the majority of the people gave in for various

reasons. After the persecution was over, they fought to be

readmitted to the Church, because they continued to believe

that the Eucharist was necessary for salvation.

Taking the doctrine of the Eucharist further, Cyprian

increased its importance in the minds of the recipients by

teaching that the purity of the elements, and not just the

ritual itself, had to be protected. In his effort to

demonstrate God’s view of the purity of the elements, he

reported66 the story of a misuse of the elements of the

sacraments. He related how a young girl who had been left

behind by her believing parents as they were escaping

persecution. In the presence of an idol, the “pagans” gave

the girl bread mingled with wine, which had been used

previously in a pagan sacrifice (immolation). When the

mother recovered the child, she took the girl with her to

take part in the Eucharist (labeled as a sacrifice). When

66 Whether this incident actually occurred is debatable, but Cyprian could very well have believed it, even if he had not personally experienced it.

37

the mother brought the girl in with her the deacon began to

offer the cup to the girl. Cyprian claimed that

the little child, by the instinct of the divine majesty, turned away its face, compressed its mouth with resisting life, and refused the cup. Still the deacon persisted, and, although against her efforts, forced on her some of the sacrament of the cup. Then there followed a sobbing and vomiting. In a profane body and mouth the Eucharist could not remain; the draught sanctified in the blood of the Lord burst forthfrom the polluted stomach.67

Apparently Cyprian believed that the elements in the

Eucharist were so holy, that God was judging this young girl

for involuntarily participating in two religious services

that had been forced on her.

In addition to his views of the existence of just one

Church and the purity of the Eucharist, Cyprian also

believed, in order to preserve Church unity, that he needed

to protect the structural hierarchy of the Church.

Throughout Cyprian’s argument in “On the Unity of the

Church,” he equates “the faith” and “the truth” and “the

Church itself” with “the gospel of Christ.” As noted above,

67 Cyprian, On the Lapsed, Treatise III, 25, On-line, line: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.iii.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

38

he felt compelled to establish the Church as the only source

of truth,68 which placed the power of salvation in the

Church, not just in the faith of the individual. Cyprian

states, “how can we possess immortality, unless we keep

those commands of Christ.”69 This statement could possibly

indicate his view that the believer’s eternal security rests

in continued obedience to the Church.

In his closing remarks in On the Lapsed, Cyprian

challenged the lapsed to visibly repent, so that “after

losing the raiment of Christ, you must be willing to have no

clothing; after the devil’s mean, you must prefer fasting;

be earnest in righteous works, whereby sins may be purged;

frequently apply yourself to almsgiving, whereby souls are

freed from death.”70 Cyprian believed that only God could

forgive sins, but these comments seem to go beyond a lack of

68Cyprian, The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise I, On the Unity of the Church, chapter3, On-line, line: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.i.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

69 Ibid., 2.

70 Cyprian, On the Lapsed, Treatise III, 35, On-line, line: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.iii.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

39

what Evangelicals have come to believe as “eternal

security.” A lack of such eternal security would motivate a

believer to keep returning in renewed faith to the Lord to

regain salvation. Cyprian’s statements border on salvation

by works, at least for those who lapsed and needed to be

restored. Further indication of this teaching comes from

Cyprian’s view that loyalty to the Church was required to

win God’s forgiveness.71 In effect, a lapsed person had to

be “re-saved.” The bishops, not the faith of the lapsed, had

to “strengthen these penitents with the blood of Christ

[Eucharist] and impart to them the gift of the Spirit.”72

Cyprian went further to claim that anyone who had received

the Eucharist from a failed priest would lose their

salvation.73

This situation naturally led to the “insecurity” of the

believer. Since submitting to the bishops only promised a

71 J. Patout Burns, Jr. Cyprian The Bishop (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), ch. 4, 63.

72 Ibid., 62.

73 Ibid., 143.

40

hearing in heaven, Christ might overturn the forgiveness

granted the lapsed by the bishops if Christ’s omniscience

revealed an unrepentant heart within a hypocritical church

member,. Therefore, if a person left the Church, he was

damned, whereas if he stayed in the Church, he might receive

eternal life after death. From a scriptural perspective, the

believer’s faith results in his “security” of eternal life,

whereas the believer’s “assurance” depends on his knowledge

and understanding of the biblical witness of the Holy Spirit

to the believer.74 Cyprian’s soteriology fostered a complete

lack of assurance of salvation by forcing its members to

look to the hierarchy of the Church for its salvation.

Cyprian furthered this attachment to the Church by

equating the New Testament ministry of bishops with the Old

Testament priesthood,75 which strengthened sacerdotalism.

The bishop became a sacrificing priest in the order of the

Jewish priesthood. To Cyprian it seemed logical that since

Christ had begun the Jewish priesthood, the Hebrew priests 74 1 John 5:13.

75 Lev. 7:20.

41

would become Christian priests.76 This new terminology was

applied to both baptism and the Eucharist, and Cyprian

claimed that the bishop was the only celebrant.77 Eventually,

Cyprian and the Church would champion a one-bishop-per-

church system of church government.78

The progressive sacramental teaching on baptism and the

Eucharist, and the developing sacerdotal aspect of the

embryonic episcopacy, as well as the unique situation of the

lapsed and the errant bishops, prohibited Cyprian from

recognizing the possibility that true believers could exist

outside the official structure79 of the Church, as his

famous statement demonstrates: “He can no longer have God

for his Father, who has not the Church for his mother.”80

76 Cyprian, Letter 67.4; 64.

77 Ibid., Letter 62. The title “priest” was originally given only tothe bishop, but later on, presbyters increasingly replaced bishops at the eucharist, and they were eventually called priests.

78 J. Patout Burns, Jr. Cyprian the Bishop (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), ch. 5, 88-89.

79 Ibid., 23, “nor can one body be separated by a division of its structure, nor torn into pieces . . ..”

80 Ibid., 6.

42

Adding to his allegorical interpretation of the Old

Testament,81 Cyprian’s hermeneutics selectively left out the

Lord’s words to His disciples in Luke 9:49-50, “Do not

forbid him, for he who is not against us is on our side.”

Cyprian’s desire to protect the unity of the Church resulted

in firmly establishing sacerdotalism, which elevated the

authority of the structural Church hierarchy even higher,

and eventually replaced the priesthood82 of the believer (1

Peter 2) with clericalism, a doctrine that promotes the

separation of the clergy and laity. Sacerdotalism forced the

laity to place their spiritual lives in the hands of the

bishops. Cyprian even wrote, “Whence you ought to know that

the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop;

and if any one be not with the bishop, then he is not in the

Church.”83

V. Summary

81 Ibid., 18.

82 Cyprian’s view of the priesthood would be a rewarding study, but would probably not contribute directly to the thesis statement.

83 Ibid., Letter 68.8.

43

The believers during the first three hundred years

faced severe persistent persecutions that challenged them to

present the Gospel of love and peace to a hostile world full

of hatred that did not want to give up its own religions.

Two major objectives surfaced for the Church from these

persecutions. The believers needed to evangelize the pagans

by standing up for their faith, and the Church needed to

protect the believers from schisms within the Church. Many

believers realized that unity was essential during times of

persecution. Before the end of the first century, the local

churches had developed a system of bishops who would

represent each local church and provide the teaching and

shepherding of the flocks. Although these bishops worked

alongside of elders, the position of bishop gained an

authority over the other leaders in the local church. These

bishops wrote their theological treatises in order to defend

and teach the Church. The believers listened to their

bishops. By the end of the second century, these bishops had

developed the doctrines of baptism and communion to the

44

point of turning them into sacraments that were considered

necessary for admittance into the Church and for salvation.

Tertullian contributed to the sacramental and

sacerdotal theology of the Church, and Cyprian accepted

these views and contributed his own modifications to fit his

own unique historical situation. Cyprian’s worldview

contained only one Church, and especially during those times

between persecutions, he believed that he was called by God

as a bishop to protect the unity of that one Church. He

expanded Tertullian’s views on the authority of the Church’s

structural hierarchy, and his impact led to a sacerdotal

system that established the episcopacy as necessary for

salvation.

On the positive side, Cyprian demanded true repentance

before performing the rituals,84 requiring the lapsed to

“repent abundantly, prove the sorrow of a grieving and

lamenting mind.”85 For Cyprian, failure to repent of a sin

84 Cyprian, On the Lapsed ,Treatise III, 30, On-lind, line: http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.iii.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

85 Ibid., 32.

45

closed the way of atonement.86 This author does not believe

that Cyprian was on a power trip. Cyprian studied and wrote

and taught from the Scriptures his entire life.87

Methodologically, many, many of the Church Fathers resorted

to allegorical interpretation for numerous reasons.88

Cyprian was no exception. He employed extensive allegory

from the Old Testament in order to promote the developed

doctrines of baptism and communion, along with the increased

power of the episcopacy, for the purpose of bringing unity

to the Church he loved.

Reflecting on the early Church Fathers should help the

Church today recognize the influence that their historical

contexts had on the process of developing their theology as

they sought to protect the Church from heresy and help the

Church through persecution. The generally accepted 86 Ibid., 34.

87 All of his writings contain numerous Scriptures throughout.

88 Henry A. Virlkler and Karelynne Avayo, Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of Biblical Interpretation (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007), chapter 2.

46

hermeneutics of allegorical interpretations combined with

the seemingly unchallenged acceptance of the theological

views of previous (like-minded) theologians led the Church

Fathers to build an exclusively hierarchical system that

alone had the authority to administer the (apparently)

essential “sacraments” for salvation. Studying this entire

process that led to those conclusions should motivate

theologians today to apply Second Timothy 2:15 more

diligently, while avoiding the territorialism89 that leads

to the same results experienced by the early Church.

89 Sincere as Cyprian seemed to be, or otherwise, as evidenced by Jerome later, especially in his correspondence with Vigilantius. Vigilantius is an example of someone who saw through the errors when theapparent majority did not. J. T. Hornsby, “Vigilantius; an early Gallic Protestant,” The Evangelical Quarterly, vol. 17, issue 3 (1945): 182-196. David G. Hunter, “Vigilantius of Calagurris and Victricius of Rouen,” Journal of early Christian studies, vol. 7, number 3 (1993): 401-430.

47

Bibliography

Audet, J. P. La Didache; Instructions des Aportres. Paris: Etudes Bibliques, Gabalda,

1958.Barnes, Timothy D. Tertullian: A Historical and Literary Study. Oxford: Clarendon

Press, 1985.Burres, Virginia. "Baptismal Rites and Architecture." In Late Ancient Christianity: A

People's History of Christianity, by Robin M. Jensen, 125. Minneapolis, MN:

Augsburg Fortress Press, 2005.Clement. 2 Clement. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/2clement-lightfoot.html

(accessed July 15, 2012).—. Letter to the Corinthians.

http://www.dabar.org/ChurchHistory/Fathers/Clement_Rome/4601GG46enuine-Corinthians.html#46-6. (accessed July 15, 2012).

Cyprian. On the Lapsed. http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.i.html (accessed July

15, 2012).—. The Treatises of Cyprian, Treatise I, On the Unity of the Church.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf05.iv.v.i.html (accessed July 15, 2012).—. Unity of the Church. Epistle of Barnabas. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/barnabas-lightfoot.html

(accessed July 15, 2012).Ignatius. Ignatius to Polycarp. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-

polycarp-lightfoot.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

48

—. Ignatius to the Philadelphians. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-

philadelphians-lightfoot.html (accessed July 15, 2012).—. The Epistle of St Ignatius of Antioch to the Magnesians.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/ignatius-magnesians-hoole.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

Irenaeus. Adversus haereses. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/irenaeus-

book4.html (accessed July 15, 2012).—. St. Irenaeus: The Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching.

http://www.ccel.org/ccel/irenaeus/demonstr.preaching_introduction_III.html (accessed July15, 2012).

Kelly, J. N. D. Early Christian Doctrines. New York: Harper Collins, 1978.Lightfoot, J. B., trans. The Didache. LXX. Martyr, Justin. First Apology. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-

firstapology.html (accessed July 15, 2012).—. Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/justinmartyr-dialoguetrypho.html (accessed July 15, 2012).

Milavec, Aaron. "The Purifying Confession of Failings Required by the Didache's

Eucharistic Sacrifice." Biblical Theology Bulletin 33.Osborn, Eric. Tertullian: First Theologian of the West. Cambridge University Press,

1997.Richardson, C. C. Early Christian Fathers. Philadelphia: Macmillan, 1970.Robinson, John A. T. Redating the New Testament. SCM Press, 1976.Sandt, Huub van de. "Why does the Didache Conceive of the Eucharist as a Holy Meal?"

Vigiliae Christianae (brill.nl.vc), no. 65 (2011): 1-20.Shepherd of Hermas. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/shepherd-lightfoot.html

49

(accessed July 15, 2012).Roberts, ed. The Didache. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-

roberts.html (accessed July 15, 2012).Virkler, Henry A., and Karelynne Avayo. Hermeneutics: Principles and Processes of

Biblical Interpretation. Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007.

50