Reading Topic: Christian Faith: Worship, Prayer and Church Order in the Early Centuries

There is a gradual move in the New Testament from the Jerusalem temple-based worship (shown in the early chapters of Acts) to a Gentile context.

Communion 1 Cor 12 – 14 is a largely gentile congregation, influenced by their pre-Christian understandings of meals. Meals were common occasions in pagan society, where the wine was offered to a pagan diety before drinking. First the meal (informal) then the 'symposium' (more ritualised). In these meals, the poor were sometimes invited, but a strict division was set-up between the rich hosts and the poor 'clients', who commonly had to arrive and eat after the privileged principal guests had dined first. Now how does your reading of 1Corinthians 11 get affected by this?

Acts talks about 'breaking of bread' on the 'Lord’s day' – either Saturday evening or Sunday morning. Unclear what 'breaking of bread' may mean: probably eucharist, but not certainly. (eg. Paul on the shipwreck 'broke bread' to encourage the sailors).

The Didache has an account of 'concerning the thanksgiving' (Greek: eucharist). It’s clear from what it says that it is talking about a meal (Didache is roughly dated 80–130).

Account in Justin Martyr’s Apology: here, no meal is mentioned (which doesn’t rule out that there was one). There are: 'the president', readings, homily, prayers, a thanksgiving by the president, sharing of bread and wine (with mixed water), distribution (including to the sick, via deacons).

Baptism: there are two 'formulae' in the New Testament – Matthew 28 ('in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit') and Acts ('in the Name of Jesus'). It is the former, rather than the latter, which dominated in the life of the Church and came to shape how the Church spoke about God. Although in Acts, we have evidence of baptism occurring at the point of conversion, by the second century (as evidenced in Tertullian, Hippolytus, Justin Martyr) there’s the growing practice of a period of preparation for baptism. By the end of the century, this can take up to three years: it was known as the catechumenate. The catechumens were examined for evidence that they could live the Christian life – by works of charity, by appropriate personal behaviour and manner of life. When they were judged ready for baptism, their names would be written down as 'chosen' (in Latin, this is electio – so from this point on they were known as the Elect). This second period of preparation was more intense, focussing on teaching and exorcism. (Those coming to the faith were assumed to be demonised and in need of exorcism). Baptism took place at Easter, during the celebration of the death and resurrection of Christ. After this, further instruction took place. Until they were baptised, nobody was allowed to be present at the communion, as it was regarded as too holy for anyone who wasn’t a fully-initiated Christian. This led to rumour and the basis of persecution (see next week).

Psalms, Hymns and Spiritual Songs The Psalms were an inheritance of Judaism and hymns were also used (so Jesus and his disciples sang a hymn before going out to the Mount of Olives on the night of betrayal – Mt 26:30/Mark 14:26) so Paul’s use of 'psalms, hymns and spiritual songs' (Eph 5:19/Col 3:16) is in continuity with Jewish practice. The NT itself has evidence of poetic forms of praise in Luke’s gospel, Revelation and the Epistles (eg. Phil 2:6-11).

The early Church continued this practice. There is a whole body of literature containing hymns which was largely ignored by scholars until relatively recently. An exception to this being the work of J.M. Neale (1818 – 1866) and other early Anglo-Catholics who translated some of these ancient hymns into English form. Examples being the hymns of Ambrose of Milan (340 – 397) and Aurelius Prudentius (348 – c. 413).

Of course, singing was a feature of pagan worship as well, so some of the forms of poetry used by the Early Church seem to reflect the style of religious poetry generally. However, it seems that the use of musical instruments was rejected by the early Church as too associated with pagan worship and attendant debauchery…​ “Leave the pipe to the shepherd, the flute to the men who are in fear of gods and intent on their idol worshipping. Such musical instruments must be excluded from our wingless feasts, for they are more suited for beasts and for the class of men that is least capable of reason than for men.” (Clement of Alexandria, Paedagogus) – Clement goes on to consider Psalm 150 and to spiritualise all the instruments! So also Augustine, Chrysostom, Eusebius. The use of accompanying instruments only becomes common again with developments of the pipe organ (which had been invented centuries before) in the early medieval period: until that point, singing was generally unaccompanied.

The Didache mentions the practice of Christians praying 'three times a day' although at that point makes no mention of what time of day Christians prayed. A number of Christian writers emphasise the importance of praying at night in imitation of the parable of the wise bridesmaids. (Hippolytus, Apostolic Tradition). Reference to fasting is also common in the early writers. With the conversion of Constantine, Christian devotional practice comes out into the open, and we see gatherings of Christians in towns on a daily basis for Morning and Evening Prayer. A feature of Evening Prayer was the singing of the hymn Hail gladdening light (Greek: phos hilaron) – which is recording in the 4th century Apostolic Constitutions and is sung to the present day. Around the 3rd century, we see the start of monastic communities which develop their own distinct way of prayer, which gave up the whole day to prayer, but were, in practice, grouped into sessions throughout the day. Eventually, this became a fixed 'daily office' which under St Benedict (480 – 550) became an 8-fold office (ie. 8 services per day, including at night). We also know that the Lord’s Prayer was taught to catechumens in the later stages of their training, but generally catechumens were not allowed into the Church’s prayer as their prayer was not regarded as holy until after baptism. (Tertullian, Hippolytus). Tertullian wrote a section on the Lord’s Prayer in his treatise On Prayer which indicates its importance.

The New Testament does not prescribe any single pattern of Church Ministry, despite what the Book of Common Prayer might say!

Acts and the earlier epistles of Paul mention elders and deacons (presbuteroi and diaconoi). Other epistles and the later pauline ones also mention deacons and bishops (diaconoi and episcopoi). However, by terms like ‘bishop' we cannot equate a bishop then with bishops now. The role in the NT was most likely to be restricted to one church, and dioceses didn’t exist. A bishop was a single overseer of a church, whereas in the NT era at least (and probably a lot later) elders worked as a team, probably without or sometimes with a bishop. It’s unclear whether there was a single pattern in the New Testament era or even that this pattern became unified across the different Christian communities for quite a long time.

The three-fold pattern only emerged after the New Testament era. Although it seems likely that Clement of Rome only knew a two-fold pattern of bishops and deacons (a bit like the pastoral epistles), Ignatius of Antioch (c. 35 – c. 107) talks clearly of three orders: bishops, priests and deacons. He is also insistent that the presence of a bishop, in each church, was a guarantor of apostolic authenticity (ie. that the church believed and taught the same things, the same Gospel, as the apostles had). For example:

[quote, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans 8,9) Flee divisions, as the beginning of evils. You must all follow the bishop, as Jesus Christ followed the Father, and follow the presbyters as you would the apostles; respect the deacons as the commandment of God. Let no one do anything that has to do with the church without the bishop. Only that eucharist which is under the authority of the bishop (or whomever he himself designates) is to be considered valid. Wherever the bishop appears, there let the congregation be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church. It is not permissible either to baptize or hold a love-feast (agape) without the bishop. But whatever he approves is also pleasing to God, in order that everything you do may be trustworthy and valid. Finally, it is reasonable for us to come to our senses while we still have time to repent and turn to God. It is good to acknowledge God and the bishop. The one who honours the bishop has been honoured by God; the one who does anything without the bishop’s knowledge serves the devil.

Even if Ignatius is taken as an enthusiastic and early exponent, the three-fold ministry established itself from that point on in the early decades of the second century.

In Irenaeus (Against the Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 3) outlines a clear understanding of the doctrine of Apostolic Succession. The argument is a straightforward one: the Apostles passed on the content of the Faith, along with authority, to Bishops before their deaths. The bishops, therefore, are custodians and teachers of the apostolic faith. Their 'authenticity' can be determined by the succession-line that the major and most ancient sees have. Irenaeus indicates that he hasn’t got enough room to do it for all the (then) bishoprics, but chooses Rome and Antioch as examples and cites their succession list. This was a key part of his argument against the so-called 'secret apostolic teaching' that the Gnostics were claiming to be in possession of.

The role of the non-ordained remained significant and their witness to their faith was key. There are examples of lay catechists and deaconesses (who helped to baptise women). It was possible for lay people to engage in theology and apologetics (it is uncertain that Tertullian was ordained, and Origen’s role as a teacher was recognised before his ordination).