Why does it matter? Because Protestants will say "do you think the Church is really Catholic, or do you think it's limited to this ONE organisation?" and my reply will be, the Biblical Church is just ONE organisation. Shall we see if this reply agrees with the Bible?
This question has two parts. A) In any given place, is the Christian Church one or several organisations? B) Between places, is the organisation of Rome and the organisation of Lyon and the organisation of Thessalonica one organisation or are they mutually independent?
But first, one clarification. By "one organisation" I do not mean to deny the existence of suborganisations within it (otherwise question B wouldn't make sense).
A) In any given place, is the Christian Church one or several organisations?
And at that time there was raised a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all dispersed through the countries of Judea, and Samaria, except the apostles
[Acts Of Apostles 8:1]
The Church which was at Jerusalem, not the "churches".
Now when the apostles, who were in Jerusalem, had heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John who, when they were come, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost for he was not as yet come upon any of them; but they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Then they laid their hands upon them, and they received the Holy Ghost
[Acts Of Apostles 8:14-17]
Not just is "Samaria" in the singular, but it comes down to one preaching by one Philip and it comes down to a visit from the Apostles from Jerusalem. So, the Church in Samaria clearly is one organisation and clearly is connected to the one in Jerusalem.
And when he had taken meat, he was strengthened. And he was with the disciples that were at Damascus, for some days
[Acts Of Apostles 9:19]
As Paul was with all of the disciples that were at Damascus, they were one organisation.
And it came to pass that Peter, as he passed through, visiting all, came to the saints who dwelt at Lydda
[Acts Of Apostles 9:32]
As Peter came to the saints who dwelt at Lydda, all of them, they were one organisation, and as Peter came to them, it was tied to the one in Jerusalem.
And forasmuch as Lydda was nigh to Joppe, the disciples hearing that Peter was there, sent unto him two men, desiring him that he would not be slack to come unto them
[Acts Of Apostles 9:38]
Since the disciples in Joppe could agree what two men, they were one organisation, and since they appealed to Peter, it was tied to the one in Jerusalem.
And the faithful of the circumcision, who came with Peter, were astonished, for that the grace of the Holy Ghost was poured out upon the Gentiles also. For they heard them speaking with tongues, and magnifying God Then Peter answered: Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost, as well as we And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ. Then they desired him to tarry with them some days
[Acts Of Apostles 10:45-48]
The Christian Jews weren't from Caesarea, so, the Church at Caesarea starts with Gentiles (and perhaps a few Jews too) being mass baptised, one baptism, making the Church of Caesarea one organisation. As it starts with Peter, it is tied to the one of Jerusalem.
And they* conversed there in the church a whole year; and they taught a great multitude, so that at Antioch the disciples were first named Christians
[Acts Of Apostles 11:26]
So, the disciples are recruited from a multitude by one set of two preachers and are sufficiently united to receive one nickname, the one we bear to this day. At Antioch, the Church was one.
But as the disciples stood round about him, he rose up and entered into the city, and the next day he departed with Barnabas to Derbe And when they had preached the gospel to that city, and had taught many, they returned again to Lystra, and to Iconium, and to Antioch Confirming the souls of the disciples, and exhorting them to continue in the faith: and that through many tribulations we must enter into the kingdom of God
[Acts Of Apostles 14:19-21]
In each of these places, the Church was one, started by the preaching of Barnabas and Saul.
And he came to Derbe and Lystra. And behold, there was a certain disciple there named Timothy, the son of a Jewish woman that believed; but his father was a Gentile To this man the brethren that were in Lystra and Iconium, gave a good testimony Him Paul would have to go along with him: and taking him he circumcised him, because of the Jews who were in those places. For they all knew that his father was a Gentile And as they passed through the cities, they delivered unto them the decrees for to keep, that were decreed by the apostles and ancients who were at Jerusalem And the churches were confirmed in faith, and increased in number daily
[Acts Of Apostles 16:1-5]
This pretty obviously says each city had a church. For "the churches" there is no mention they were more numerous than "the cities" (which were probably more than the ones mentioned by name, Derbe, Lystra, Iconium.
And sailing from Troas, we came with a straight course to Samothracia, and the day following to Neapolis And from thence to Philippi, which is the chief city of part of Macedonia, a colony. And we were in this city some days conferring together And upon the sabbath day, we went forth without the gate by a river side, where it seemed that there was prayer; and sitting down, we spoke to the women that were assembled And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, one that worshipped God, did hear: whose heart the Lord opened to attend to those things which were said by Paul And when she was baptized, and her household, she besought us, saying: If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house, and abide there. And she constrained us
[Acts Of Apostles 16:11-15]
This is how the Church started in Philippi of Macedonia. It can be noted, against the JW's, while only an individual person can be baptised in one baptism, a household can be baptised in several baptisms if every individual person in it is baptised, obeying the authority of the head of the household. This also means a nation can be discipled, if the central government thereof sees fit to make it a Christian nation. Christendom really was God's plan in Matthew 28:16—20, not an aberration.
And when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews And Paul, according to his custom, went in unto them; and for three sabbath days he reasoned with them out of the scriptures Declaring and insinuating that the Christ was to suffer, and to rise again from the dead; and that this is Jesus Christ, whom I preach to you And some of them believed, and were associated to Paul and Silas; and of those that served God, and of the Gentiles a great multitude, and of noble women not a few
[Acts Of Apostles 17:1-4]
Church of Thessalonica. One.
Paul and Sylvanus and Timothy: to the church of the Thessalonians, in God the Father, and in the Lord Jesus Christ
[1 Thessalonians 1:1]
Paul, and Sylvanus, and Timothy, to the church of the Thessalonians in God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ
[2 Thessalonians 1:1]
As said ... the "church" and not "churches" ... but here is a conundrum:
But the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea. Who, when they were come thither, went into the synagogue of the Jews Now these were more noble than those in Thessalonica, who received the word with all eagerness, daily searching the scriptures, whether these things were so And many indeed of them believed, and of honourable women that were Gentiles, and of men not a few And when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was also preached by Paul at Berea, they came thither also, stirring up and troubling the multitude And then immediately the brethren sent away Paul, to go unto the sea; but Silas and Timothy remained there
[Acts Of Apostles 17:10-14]
So, did Berea become a separate church from Thessalonica or did Berea become a separate location within the church of Thessalonica? I'd say the latter, and that the text argues this by stating that Timothy (the known first bishop of Thessalonica) remained in Berea. The distance is 73 km or 45 miles, suggesting the OT has 45 (or 46) books and the total that includes the NT has 73 (or 72).
And they that conducted Paul, brought him as far as Athens; and receiving a commandment from him to Silas and Timothy, that they should come to him with all speed, they departed
[Acts Of Apostles 17:15]
So Paul went out from among them But certain men adhering to him, did believe; among whom was also Dionysius, the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them
[Acts Of Apostles 17:33-34]
So, in chapter 17, Athens doesn't have a church yet. Just a handfull of believers. Perhaps a Church was founded after the events described, it's probable. It seems Athens and Paris dispute the honour of having St. Dionysius the Areapoagite as its first bishop. Wiki, relying on Orthodox sources rather than Catholic ones, states:
After his conversion, Dionysius became the first Bishop of Athens, though he is sometimes counted as the second after Hierotheus.
Why not grant Dionysius to the Parisians, if Hierotheus was summoned to the Dormition of the Blessed Virgin?
And departing thence, he entered into the house of a certain man, named Titus Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house was adjoining to the synagogue And Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing, believed, and were baptized
[Acts Of Apostles 18:7-8]
Acts records one founding event for the Church of Corinth. Presumably it was one organisation.
And he came to Ephesus, and left them there. But he himself entering into the synagogue, disputed with the Jews And when they desired him, that he would tarry a longer time, he consented not
[Acts Of Apostles 18:19-20]
Now a certain Jew, named Apollo, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, came to Ephesus, one mighty in the scriptures This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, spoke, and taught diligently the things that are of Jesus, knowing only the baptism of John This man therefore began to speak boldly in the synagogue. Whom when Priscilla and Aquila had heard, they took him to them, and expounded to him the way of the Lord more diligently
[Acts Of Apostles 18:24-26]
So, was Ephesus founded by Paul, by Apollo, by Priscilla and Aquila?
Anyway, the named Apollo here was not a baptised Christian, but already a believer, and an apologist. We can be sure he was baptised in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost after this diligent instruction, but we can note, he was not a priest or bishop while starting to defend the faith. Anyone who pretends that only a minister who is ordained (of whatever degree) can be apologist should reread Acts 18.
Giving diligent instruction about the faith is still a preliminary for receiving someone into the Church, whether through baptism, or when receiving an already baptised convert.
And it came to pass, while Apollo was at Corinth, that Paul having passed through the upper coasts, came to Ephesus, and found certain disciples And he said to them: Have you received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? But they said to him: We have not so much as heard whether there be a Holy Ghost And he said: In what then were you baptized? Who said: In John's baptism Then Paul said: John baptized the people with the baptism of penance, saying: That they should believe in him who was to come after him, that is to say, in Jesus Having heard these things, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus And when Paul had imposed his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied And all the men were about twelve
[Acts Of Apostles 19:1-7]
Ah, the church of Ephesus was founded by St. Paul, by twelve men converting. Or eleven or thirteen or sth.
And when these things were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying: After I have been there, I must see Rome also
[Acts Of Apostles 19:21]
So, later on, the Church of Rome had Peter and Paul as Apostles. Does Rome have two Apostles? Well, there is a third one, in a popular saying, St. Philip Neri. The man who ended the Paganism that Luther witnessed.
And when we were come to Rome, Paul was suffered to dwell by himself, with a soldier that kept him 17 And after the third day, he called together the chief of the Jews. And when they were assembled, he said to them: Men, brethren, I, having done nothing against the people, or the custom of our fathers, was delivered prisoner from Jerusalem into the hands of the Romans
[Acts Of Apostles 28:16-17]
But they said to him: We neither received letters concerning thee from Judea, neither did any of the brethren that came hither, relate or speak any evil of thee But we desire to hear of thee what thou thinkest; for as concerning this sect, we know that it is everywhere contradicted And when they had appointed him a day, there came very many to him unto his lodgings; to whom he expounded, testifying the kingdom of God, and persuading them concerning Jesus, out of the law of Moses and the prophets, from morning until evening
[Acts Of Apostles 28:21-23]
So, of the two universally accepted apostles of Rome, it would seem St. Paul arrived first, at least to that synagogue. But when St. Peter arrived, he took precedence, because he held precedence even among the Twelve.
B) Between places, is the organisation of Rome and the organisation of Lyon and the organisation of Thessalonica one organisation or are they mutually independent?
First, we can mention the traditional Western view that St. Dionysius was the first bishop of Paris. If this is true, there were loads of periods during the persecutions, when Paris lacked a bishop and so had to rely on bishops elsewhere (Lyon had more bishops from St. Pothinus to the time of Constantine than Paris in the longer period from the Areopagite and the time of Constantine. Clergy would come in from elsewhere, like from Lyon. And getting around outside Lyon (like to Paris) would have been one of the ways in which bishops of Lyon lasted some decade or two. But this out of the way, let's go to the Bible:
Now the church had peace throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria; and was edified, walking in the fear of the Lord, and was filled with the consolation of the Holy Ghost
[Acts Of Apostles 9:31]
It is spoken of as one Church.
And the apostles and brethren, who were in Judea, heard that the Gentiles also had received the word of God And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circumcision contended with him Saying: Why didst thou go in to men uncircumcised, and didst eat with them But Peter began and declared to them the matter in order, saying I was in the city of Joppe praying, and I saw in an ecstasy of mind a vision, a certain vessel descending, as it were a great sheet let down from heaven by four corners, and it came even unto me
[Acts Of Apostles 11:1-5]
The Church of Jerusalem feels responsible for what happens in Caesarea .... by the way, this also shows, a Catholic has the right to voice objections to the Pope.
And the tidings came to the ears of the church that was at Jerusalem, touching these things: and they sent Barnabas as far as Antioch Who, when he was come, and had seen the grace of God, rejoiced: and he exhorted them all with purpose of heart to continue in the Lord For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith. And a great multitude was added to the Lord And Barnabas went to Tarsus to seek Saul: whom, when he had found, he brought to Antioch And they conversed there in the church a whole year; and they taught a great multitude, so that at Antioch the disciples were first named Christians
[Acts Of Apostles 11:22-26]
Apostolic visitations are a feature of Catholic discipline. 11-13 November 1974 Mgr. Descamps, a biblical scholar, and Mgr. Onclin, a canonist** came up from Rome to Écône, a new Seminary run by a retired Archbishop, Mgr. Lefebvre. FSSPX (the congregation of this seminary) consider this as showing a failure in Rome around the Pope, and Sedevacantists consider it to show "Paul VI" wasn't even Pope. Conclavists agree on the latter item. Now, this feature of Catholic Church discipline obviously goes back to Barnabas being sent (though not yet a bishop) to Antioch. Again, the book of Acts shows the Church as being one, not just within the place, but around the map.
By the way, we get two great hints at where they are going to get their episcopal consecration:
And in these days there came prophets from Jerusalem to Antioch And one of them named Agabus, rising up, signified by the Spirit, that there should be a great famine over the whole world, which came to pass under Claudius
[Acts Of Apostles 11:27-28]
And Barnabas and Saul returned from Jerusalem, having fulfilled their ministry, taking with them John, who was surnamed Mark
[Acts Of Apostles 12:25]
It's possible Agabus and the other prophets were bishops before arriving in Antioch and it's probable that John Mark was one. Next we have a chapter basically starting with their consecration:
Now there were in the church which was at Antioch, prophets and doctors, among whom was Barnabas, and Simon who was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manahen, who was the foster brother of Herod the tetrarch, and Saul And as they were ministering to the Lord, and fasting, the Holy Ghost said to them: Separate me Saul and Barnabas, for the work whereunto I have taken them Then they, fasting and praying, and imposing their hands upon them, sent them away
[Acts Of Apostles 13:1-3]
If this means, Barnabas and Saul were themselves prophets or doctors, that either contradicts my view this (verse 3) is when they get consecrated or my view that "prophet" and "doctor / teacher" are two First Century words for bishops. I'd say they losely belonged to the set, but weren't yet ordained, but probably it was already a deal that eventually that would be, and in verse 3 they actually are consecrated.
Speaking of consecration and ordination:
And when they had ordained to them priests in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, in whom they believed
[Acts Of Apostles 14:22]
Disputes are taken to a reckoning in a centralised manner:
And some coming down from Judea, taught the brethren: That except you be circumcised after the manner of Moses, you cannot be saved And when Paul and Barnabas had no small contest with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain others of the other side, should go up to the apostles and priests to Jerusalem about this question They therefore being brought on their way by the church, passed through Phenice, and Samaria, relating the conversion of the Gentiles; and they caused great joy to all the brethren And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received by the church, and by the apostles and ancients, declaring how great things God had done with them
[Acts Of Apostles 15:1-4]
Which again shows ...
Forasmuch as we have heard, that some going out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls; to whom we gave no commandment It hath seemed good to us, being assembled together, to choose out men, and to send them unto you, with our well beloved Barnabas and Paul Men that have given their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who themselves also will, by word of mouth, tell you the same things For it hath seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us, to lay no further burden upon you than these necessary things That you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication; from which things keeping yourselves, you shall do well. Fare ye well They therefore being dismissed, went down to Antioch; and gathering together the multitude, delivered the epistle
[Acts Of Apostles 15:24-30]
... there is a central authority in Jerusalem, deciding for elsewhere, and elsewhere has to abide by what is sent from there and make light of what has no command from there (apart from also shunning it, because contradicting the commanded letters). So, in Pisidia and Pamphylia, if that's where Paul and Barnabas were when the quarrel broke out, there is no organisation that's strictly independent of Jerusalem.
Given that Jerusalem was destroyed and if Peter came to Rome, as Paul did, it's obvious why Rome would take over the role that Jerusalem had in the early years. One has asked, if Peter was in Jerusalem, Antioch and Rome, why are his successors in Rome the Popes? And the answer is, when St. Peter left St. James the Brother of God in charge over Jerusalem, to go to Antioch, St. Peter remained and St. James didn't become Pope. When St. Peter went from Antioch and left it to St. Eleutherus (whose successor St. Ignatius is better known), again, St. Peter took papacy away with him. But when St. Peter died just outside Rome (the Vatican Hill is NOT one of the seven hills), he did not take away papacy to any other city after that.
Now, I just (to some Protestant minds) opened a can of worms by taking Roman precedence as Petrine personal precedence of the Pope. Some would argue, no, actually it was a collective precedence, not a personal one.
One thing to reply is, the existence of a collective precedence, the "curia" as it was termed later acting along with the Pope, doesn't negate the personal precendence. In very patriarchal societies (and First Century Judaea was one of them, and so was Rome), a Father of the Family will often speak of "we" but he is doing the authority thing. If an absent son or daughter has "we" told him, he believes the "we" because of the authority of the father who says so. So, if First Clement in language seems to speak of a more collective precedence than a personal one, as I recall Gavin Ortlund making protestations about, this custom would reconcile the text with the papacy.
Another thing is, archaeology doesn't show one single cathedral or even house church of Rome in the first century. But recall what I said about "By 'one organisation' I do not mean to deny the existence of suborganisations within it" and Berea being a subset of the Church of Thessalonica? I think that settles this point. By the way, those house churches correspond to the oldest titles of cardinals, for instance "Cardinal of St. Sabina" (the last of which to a Sedevacantist is Ernesto Ruffini, this was actually a house church:
The church was built on the site of early Imperial houses, one of which is said to be of Sabina, a Roman matron originally from Avezzano in the Abruzzo region of Italy. Sabina was beheaded in AD 126 under Emperor Hadrian, because she had been converted to Christianity by her servant Serapia, who also had been beheaded in AD 119. Sabina and Serapia were later declared Catholic saints.
In Italian:
La costruzione avvenne sulla casa della matrona romana Sabina, poi divenuta santa, di cui resta all'interno, addossata alla parete di destra, una colonna di granito
The church was constructed on the house of the Roman matron Sabina, since having become a saint, of which there remains, leaning on the right wall, a granite pillar. St. Sabina's house was as much a house church in Rome, as St. Lydia's in Philippi. It's funny when some ask "where are cardinals in the Bible" and then add "we actually believe in house churches" ... because Roman cardinals are actually connected to Roman house churches.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Bpi, Georges Pompidou
Last Lord's Day after Pentecost
23.XI.2025
* Paul and Barnabas.
** SSPX Asia, Apologia pro Marcel Lefebvre, chapter 4, The Campaign Against Écône
https://www.sspxasia.com/Documents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/Apologia/Vol_one/Chapter_4.htm
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar