The
writings of the Apostolic Fathers are the earliest extant patristic texts. One,
the Didache, was possibly written as early as 50 (though some scholars date it
closer to 150) and the latest, Second Clement, was likely complete before 170
(Galli, 10-14). They are called apostolic because they are by (or about, in the
case of the Martyrdom of Polycarp) figures who likely had direct experience of
the apostles. This is more likely in some cases than in others, but at any
rate, the recently living apostles of Jesus Christ certainly directly influenced
the era in which these Fathers wrote. This earliest age of Christianity
significantly predates the formulation of the creeds that have since endeavored
to ensure some degree of doctrinal unity within Christianity.
The
closest things to a creed found in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers are in
the epistles of Ignatius of Antioch, who, writing before 117, approvingly
observes that the Smyrnæans are
“fully persuaded with respect to our Lord, that He was truly of the seed of David according to the flesh, and the Son of God according to the will and power of God; that He was truly born of a virgin, was baptized by John, in order that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him; and was truly, under Pontius Pilate and Herod the tetrarch, nailed [to the cross] for us in His flesh. Of this fruit we are by His divinely-blessed passion, that He might set up a standard for all ages, through His resurrection, to all His holy and faithful, whether among Jews or Gentiles, in the one body of His Church” (86).
This statement of
Christian belief parallels significantly the order and content of the creed
that would eventually develop at the councils of Nicaea and Constantinople (see
page 10), and so it may be reasonable to suppose that the later councils built
the creed, in small part, upon this foundation, of course filtered through
centuries of baptismal creedal formulations.
Joanne McWilliam Dewart
suggests a different reading of the resurrection in this statement of Ignatius.
She reads, “Through the [rather than
‘His’] resurrection for his saints and faithful” (McWilliam Dewart, 47,
emphases mine), as though Ignatius means to refer to the resurrection of the
just and not simply of the resurrection of Christ. Ignatius’ omission of
reference here to universal resurrection may or may not imply, as McWilliam
Dewart suggests, that Ignatius believed in resurrection exclusively for the
just (37).
While Ignatius might imply that God
will not raise the unjust, the Didache states this plainly. Being primarily a
guide for living according to “the way of life” (377), the Didache has very
little to say about the resurrection of the dead, but what it does say is
interesting. It ends with a simple apocalypse similar to that found in the
Gospel of Mark (Mark 13:14-37) and it is in this context that it makes its only
statement about the resurrection: “And then shall appear… the resurrection of the dead, yet not of all, but as it is said: The Lord shall come and all His
saints with Him” (382, emphasis mine). The Didache is here interpreting a
passage in Zechariah, which states, “Then the LORD your God will come, and all
the holy ones with him” (Zech 14:5). The Didache erroneously identifies “coming
with the Lord” with “resurrection,” rather than with “reigning with Christ
Jesus” (cf. 2 Tim 2:12) or with the “resurrection of life” (John 5:29) This
interpretation is contrary to the understanding of the Church, as it would
develop in the following centuries.
One
important and distinctive article of the Christian faith expressed in the
Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed is that, “we look forward to a resurrection of
the dead and life in the age to come” (Constantinople I, 24). Importantly, this
“resurrection of the dead” does not include a qualification like that found in
the Didache and consequently implies a resurrection of all the dead. Interestingly,
this article was not included in the creed from the first council of Nicaea in
325 (Nicaea I, 5), but the first council of Constantinople added it in 381.
Clearly, the Church only gradually realized the necessity of including this
statement in the creed. Perhaps the first council of Nicaea considered it
sufficient to attest to the resurrection of Christ, in which all resurrection
is accomplished. The first council of Constantinople, however, encountered the
need to clarify this belief further. Of course, the real foundation of this
belief is Sacred Scripture, but to what extent do the Apostolic Fathers,
hundreds of years before Nicaea, maintain and pass down the scriptural belief?
Although
not without occasional ambiguity, there is ample support, in fact, for belief
in the resurrection of the dead among the Apostolic Fathers, bearing in mind
that the purpose of their writings was not doctrinal formulation, but more
often exhortatory. Clement of Rome, in his epistle to the Corinthians, written
in 96 or 97, offers a reasonably lengthy discussion of the resurrection of the
body, considering that this is not the primary intention of his writing. During
the course of this discussion, he associates the resurrection of the Lord Jesus
Christ with the coming resurrection. He writes, “There shall be a future
resurrection, of which He has rendered the Lord Jesus Christ the first-fruits
by raising Him from the dead” (Clement, 11). The Apostolic Fathers
frequently us this image of Christ as the first fruits, which implies that
others will rise as He did (McWilliam Dewart, 36). The image also appears in
Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians (1 Cor 15:23). Clement further states
that “the Lord continually proves [this] to us” through the testimony of
nature’s numerous and continuous “resurrections.” He gives the cycle of night
and day and the cycle of sowing and harvesting of grain as examples. (11). He
also compares resurrection of the flesh to the fabulous life cycle of the
phoenix (12). The fleshly and physical nature of these analogies suggests that
Clement probably understands resurrection to be embodied and not shadowy, as
would the contemporarily competing Gnosticism. Clement’s citation of Job as
scriptural proof for the reality of the resurrection further strengthens the
understanding of its physicality. He paraphrases the passage of Job that says,
“After my skin has been thus destroyed, then from my flesh I shall see God”
(Job 19:25-26). Clement’s cyclical analogies, however, do not repeat his
initial association of resurrection with that of Christ. Consequently, it is
not entirely clear whether Clement understands the universal resurrection as
primarily caused by Christ’s resurrection and triumph over death, or as
primarily a function of good created nature. Furthermore, Clement never in his
epistle specifically declares that resurrection is universal, as do certain
other Apostolic Fathers, but rather limits his discussion to the positive
resurrection of the just. Clement does not directly imply that resurrection was
limited to the just, as did Ignatius, arguably; he simply leaves the issue of
the resurrection of the unjust unaddressed.
That resurrection will take place for
all people, Ignatius may actually imply in his Epistle to the Ephesians, which,
in the course of a reflection on the newly established kingdom of God, states,
“God… meditated the abolition of death” (57). Ignatius’ use of the term
“abolition” as opposed to, for example, “relaxation” implies a total and
complete end to the finality of death. For the abolition of death to be
complete, the resurrection of all the dead would be necessary. However,
declarations of Ignatius’ actual understanding of this issue, considering how
scant his discussion of it is, are conjectural at best.
Despite his possible ambiguity on the
universality of resurrection, Ignatius does provide some further patristic
support for the orthodox Christian belief in the bodily resurrection of the
dead, which the council would later describe in the symbol of faith. He
provides this foundation primarily in his discussion of the bodily resurrection
of Christ contained in his Epistle to the Smyrnæans, in which he writes, “I
know that after His resurrection also He was still in the flesh, and
I believe that He is so now” (Ignatius, 87). He then quotes a passage from the
apocryphal Gospel of the Nazarenes, which echoes a passage in the canonical
Gospel of Luke, in which the eleven apostles, having seen the risen Lord,
believe Him to be a spirit, to which the Lord replies, “See my hands and my
feet, that it is I myself; handle me, and see; for a spirit has not flesh and
bones as you see that I have" (Luke 24:39). Ignatius maintains and passes
on this scriptural basis for belief in the resurrection of the flesh, writing
also, “After his resurrection He did eat and drink with them, as being
possessed of flesh” (87). This emphasis is typical of Ignatius, who is
consistently careful, against Docetism, to affirm the fleshly character of the
resurrection of Christ and the essential unity of the body and the spirit in
the human person (McWilliam Dewart, 48-49).
Ignatius, more clearly than Clement,
connects the resurrection of Christ with the resurrection of others in his
Epistle to the Magnesians, writing, “[On] the Lord’s Day…, our life has sprung
up again by Him and by His death” (62). He reaffirms this point still more
clearly in his Epistle to the Trallians, in which he writes, “Jesus Christ… was
also truly raised from the dead, His Father quickening Him, even as after the
same manner His Father will so raise up us who believe in Him by Christ Jesus”
(70). Here, once again, Ignatius provides a passage open to an accusation of
denial of the resurrection of nonbelievers.
To this possible interpretation,
Polycarp, whom Ignatius greatly admired[1],
provides a possible corrective. In the context of exhorting deacons, youths and
virgins to a virtuous life, Polycarp reminds his readers of the purpose in
acting in ways that are pleasing to God: that in the resurrection, they may “reign
with Him” (2 Tim 2:12). Some of those God raises, by inference, will not reign with Him. In his Epistle to the Philippians, likely written
before 120, Polycarp writes,
“If we please Him in this present world, we shall receive also the future world, according as He has promised to us that He will raise us again from the dead, and that if we live worthily of Him, ‘we shall also reign together with Him,’ provided only we believe” (Polycarp, 34).In this statement, belief does not necessarily appear as a prerequisite to resurrection, but rather only as a prerequisite to “also” reigning with the Lord.
Polycarp offers the
Church a more poignant testimony to his sure faith in the coming resurrection
during his martyrdom. As he is preparing to hand his body over to be burned, he
offers his prayer to God:
“O Lord God Almighty, the Father of thy beloved and blessed Son Jesus Christ…, I give Thee thanks that… I should have a part in… the resurrection of eternal life, both of soul and body, through the incorruption [imparted] by the Holy Ghost” (Martyrdom of Polycarp, 42).In Polycarp’s reference to the “resurrection of eternal life,” he implies, in agreement with the Gospel according to John, of whom Polycarp is traditionally considered a disciple, that there is also another kind of resurrection, a “resurrection of condemnation” (John 5:29), and not all those who are raised will also inherit eternal life. In fact, this is the faith as the Church would come to understand it, despite certain implications to the contrary in other apostolic writings (for example, in the Didache and Ignatius[2]), which is why the creed would later refer to the resurrection “of the dead” and not only of the saved.
However, another
statement of Polycarp, found in his Epistle to Philippians, tends in the same
direction as Ignatius and one could interpret it as a denial of universal
resurrection. He writes, “He who raised [our Lord Jesus Christ] up from the
dead will raise up us also, if
we do His will” (33, emphasis mine). This could imply, of course, that if we do
not do His will, He will not raise us. Polycarp wrote this epistle about forty
years before his martyrdom. Read from the point of view of the later account of
his martyrdom (or even within the context of the rest of the epistle), Polycarp
may simply be saying that the Father will not raise those who do not do His
will to eternal life, but rather to condemnation. A certain Pionius (copying Caius,
copying Irenæus, a disciple of Polycarp (Polycarp, 43)) wrote the Martyrdom of
Polycarp not long after Polycarp’s death, probably around 155. It is not
entirely clear whether the “resurrection of eternal life” spoken of in this
later document is a more mature expression of the Christian faith from an older
Polycarp or an idea read into Polycarp’s words by one of the copyists that
passed down the account of his martyrdom. Neither is it entirely clear that the
author intended by this phrase the implication of a “resurrection of
condemnation” as discussed above. However, regardless of what Polycarp’s or his
disciples’ understandings may have been, the Church would ultimately accept universal
bodily resurrection prior to the final judgment as the true belief.
The homily commonly
ascribed to Clement clearly defends this orthodox belief. It states, “Let none
of you say that this very flesh will not be judged, nor rise again…. For just
as you were called in the flesh, you will also come to be judged in the flesh”
(Second Clement, 519). Second Clement clearly insists that the resurrection
precedes the final judgment and, consequently, that there will be, as it says
in Scripture, a resurrection “both of the just and the unjust” (Acts 24:15).
As is found in the
other writings of the Apostolic Fathers, the primary purpose of Second Clement is to encourage the
faithful in righteousness. Therefore, even as it admits that salvation is not
universal among those who will rise from the dead, it uses the resurrection as
a means of encouragement for those who are suffering and may be tempted to
forsake the faith.
“Even if for a little time they suffer evil in the world, they shall enjoy the immortal fruit of the resurrection. Let not then the godly man be grieved, if he be wretched in the times that now are; a blessed time waits for him” (Second Clement, 522).In Second Clement, reminders of the future fleshly resurrection serve both as a consolation to the just (“we… receive the reward in this flesh”) and a warning to the unjust (“you will… be judged in the flesh”) and in both cases serve to exhort the faithful to “repent with the whole heart” and to “practice righteousness” and obedience (519, 523). Further demonstrating belief in the bodily resurrection of the ungodly, Second Clement describes their condemnation in explicitly material terms, quoting Isaiah as a description of their torment, “their worm shall not die, their fire shall not be quenched” (Isa 66:24), and stating, “those that have gone astray and denied Jesus through their words or through their works, how that they are punished with grievous torments in unquenchable fire.”
As is clear from the multiplicity of
perspectives found among the Apostolic Fathers on this subject of the
resurrection of the dead, while it is certainly the case that the creeds that
would develop later do have a foundation of a sort in their writings, the need
for clarification that the creeds would later seek to answer was already
present in the sub-apostolic age. This need only intensified with the passing
of time and the strengthening of various heretical movements, such as Gnosticism
and Docetism, which were already present when the Apostolic Fathers were
writing. Ultimately, the Church convened councils and settled this matter as
well as many others that had been in dispute even from the earliest times. Now,
at every liturgy, every orthodox Christian professes, in the
Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed, expectation of the coming resurrection of the
dead. Every orthodox Christian owes their knowledge of this truth of the faith
to the Scripture, and also to the Apostolic Fathers and to the subsequent
Fathers of the Ecumenical Councils who worked to preserve and pass down this
and, in truth, the entire Christian faith.
[1] Ignatius wrote to Polycarp, “I
may be found [your] disciple in the resurrection” (Ignatius, 96; Galli, 123).
[2] McWilliam Dewart claims these
works hold this perspective (37).
|
from
the Epistle of Ignatius to the Smyrnæans
|
from
the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed
|
|
fully persuaded with respect
to our Lord,
that He was truly of the seed
of David
|
We believe in… one Lord Jesus Christ,
|
|
according to the flesh, and
the Son of God according to the will and power of God;
|
the only begotten Son of God, and born of
the Father before all ages….
|
|
that He was truly born
of a virgin,
was baptized by John, in
order that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him;
|
And was incarnate of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary and was made
man;
|
|
and was truly, under Pontius
Pilate and Herod the tetrarch, nailed [to the cross] for us in His flesh. Of
this fruit we are by His divinely-blessed passion, that He might
set up a standard for all ages,
|
was crucified also for us
under Pontius
Pilate, suffered and was buried;
|
|
through His resurrection,
|
and the third day rose again….
|
|
to
all His holy and faithful [followers], whether among Jews or Gentiles, in the
one body of His Church.
|
And one holy, catholic, and apostolic Church….
we
look for the resurrection
of the dead….
|
Works Cited
Clement
of Rome. “The First Epistle of Clement
to the Corinthians.” Ante-Nicene
Fathers. Ed.
Alexander Roberts and James
Donaldson. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1885. 5-22.
Print.
“Constantinople
I.” Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils.
Ed. Norman P. Tanner. Vol. 1.
Washington: Sheed & Ward, 1990.
21-36. Print.
“Didache.”
Ante-Nicene Fathers. Ed.
Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. Vol. 7. Grand
Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1885. 377-382. Print.
McWilliam
Dewart, Joanne. Death and Resurrection:
Message of the Fathers of the Church 22.
Wilmington: Michael Glazier, 1986.
Print
Galli,
Mark. The Apostolic Fathers. Chicago:
Moody Publishers, 2009. Print.
Ignatius.
“The Epistles of Ignatius.” Ante-Nicene
Fathers. Ed. Alexander
Roberts and James
Donaldson. Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Wm
B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1885. 49-126.
Print.
“Martyrdom
of Polycarp.” Ante-Nicene Fathers. Ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson.
Vol. 1. Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1885. 37-44. Print.
“Nicaea
I.” Decrees of the Ecumenical Councils.
Ed. Norman P. Tanner. Vol. 1. Washington:
Sheed & Ward, 1990. 1-20. Print.
Roberts and James Donaldson. Vol. 1.
Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1885. 33-36. Print.
“Resurrection of Christ” and
“Resurrection of the Dead.” A Dictionary of Early Christian
Beliefs. Ed. David W.
Bercot. Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, Inc., 1998. 558-564. Print.
“Second
Clement.” Ante-Nicene Fathers.
Ed. Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson.
Vol. 7. Grand Rapids: Wm B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1885. 509-523. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment