WE must now look at a few things of interest that will throw light upon the practices and internal condition of the church. The things here described were introduced gradually, and were not the same in all parts at the same time, some preserving a measure of primitive purity much longer than others.
Reception Into the Church.
It is surprising how little we read of conversions in the early church. Of "regeneration" we do read, but it is almost invariably connected with baptism. There seems to have been a settled conviction that "born of water," in John 3, refers to baptism, instead of its being connected with "the word:" as "of his own will begat he us with the word of truth" (James 1:1818Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:18)); while another passage—"washing of water by the word"—clearly connects "water" and "the word." In opposition to this, persons were said to be regenerated, or born again, in their baptism.
Another thing we miss is the record of persons believing—a truth so clearly brought out in the scriptures. Take for instance, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth:" and so in many other passages. Instead of this, there was what appears to have been a being educated into Christianity. We have little insight as to how the gospel was really preached; in the sermons of Chrysostom it was sadly mixed up with what would now be called ritualism—a trusting to the efficacy of the sacraments.
For any applying for fellowship there was a long process of education before they were received: so different from when Peter preached on the day of Pentecost, and "they that gladly received his word were baptized; and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.”
The person applying was at first received as a Catechumen, if his outward conduct was commendable; that is, he became a pupil—one to be taught by catechizing. Here he might be kept for a year, or even two or three years; and if, in the meantime, he fell into idolatry, he must begin again, or the time be further prolonged. He was called a Christian all this time, but not a fidelis, one of the Faithful. This distinction was kept up, so that even on tombs it was not enough to say the one buried was a Christian, "fidelis" must be added, if such were the case.
Another curious custom was that the Catechumens were not allowed to hear the Lord's Prayer nor the creed; but when a portion of the service was completed, a deacon would tell them to leave. This is the more remarkable, seeing that the Lord's Prayer forms a part of scripture, and should have been, but for the scarcity of the manuscript copies, in the hands of every one, as now happily is the case.
Another class of persons—or another name for the Catechumens—was Audientes, those who were allowed to listen (hence the name). In the East it would appear that this name especially referred to the fallen seeking restoration, though in other places it may simply have been another name for the Catechumens: both classes were allowed to hear the scriptures read, and the sermons, but not to join in the worship. All were told to leave, except the Faithful.
In certain places further divisions existed, and some were allowed to kneel (called Genuflectentes) and pray before their full reception. When ready for baptism they were called Competentes. The instruction included the whole of sacred history, from the creation downwards, and after this the gospel narratives. Then instructions in the subjects of God, of Christ, of the Holy Ghost, of the judgment to come, of the body, soul, &c.
At length the time approached for their reception, and for forty days special preparation was made for baptism by prayer and fasting. Instruction was given in the creed, the nature of the sacraments, and discipline in the church; and special inquiries were now made as to their walk. A few days before baptism, they were taught the Lord's Prayer and the creed. In some places, they were now allowed to lay aside their heathen names and take Christian ones.
The time for baptism was between Easter and Pentecost of each year; and it was administered by the bishop or presbyter. Midnight was the appointed hour, and torches were burned to give the necessary light; curtains were hung from the pillars to separate the sexes. Each candidate faced the west, and, as he stretched forth his hand, said, "I renounce thee, Satan, and all thy works, and all thy pumps, and all thy service." Then turning to the east, he repeated the belief in the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. He was then rubbed from head to foot with oil, and on approaching the pool was questioned by the bishop, and on his confession was immersed (by some thrice, by some once): he was again anointed with oil, and then, dressed in white, received the kiss of peace, and a little honey and milk. Now for the first time he repeated the Lord's Prayer. He was now a Fidelis, and ready for the Lord's Supper.
Surely one cannot but see in this how the simplicity of the gospel had been elaborated and spoiled. Compare, for example, all this with the conversion of the Philippian jailor in Acts 16 "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" he asked. "And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house." That same night, the jailor and all his house were baptized. Not entirely ignorant, for we read, "They spake unto him the word of the Lord." But an hour was enough when the Lord had wrought upon the soul. True, an apostle was there, and was doubtless able to discern that the work was real; whereas now a little time may be needed, to discover if the seed has fallen into good ground according to the parable of the sower. But not a word of being a Catechumen for a year or more, and no room for the thought of being educated into a Christian. And how simple the baptism! At midnight, it is true, but in a prison or the jailor's house. Doubtless on his confession of faith, but no renouncing of the devil, nor repetition of a creed learned by heart, ready for the occasion. God acts upon a soul: he believes and is baptized, and his house. Alas, how the presentation of the gospel, the mode of reception, and all else failed and was corrupted in the hands of man!
Forms of Worship.
There is but little information given by the early writers as to how their meetings were conducted. Justin Martyr gives some interesting particulars. He says, " On the day called Sunday all who live in cities or in the country gather to one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when the reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts to the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and pray, and, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine with water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers and thanksgivings, according to his ability, and the people assent, saying, Amen; and there is a distribution to each, and a participation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those who are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And they who are well-to-do, and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is collected is deposited with the president, who succors the orphans and widows, and those who, through sickness or any other cause, are in want, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning among us, and in a word he takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is a day on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first day on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter, made the world; and Jesus Christ, our Savior, on the same day rose from the dead. For He was crucified on the day before that of Saturn (Saturday); and on the day after that of Saturn, which is the day of the sun, having appeared to His apostles and disciples, He taught them these things.”
Of the Lord's supper he also says, "This food is called among us the Eucharist, of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but in like manner as Jesus Christ our Savior, having been made flesh by the word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayers of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh. For the apostles in the memoirs composed by them, which are called Gospels, have thus delivered unto us what was enjoined upon them; that Jesus took bread, and, when He had given thanks, said, This do ye in remembrance of me: this is my body; ' and that, after the same manner, having taken the cup and given thanks, He said, This is my blood,' and gave it to them alone."
It is pleasing to see that in the days of Justin (second century), the Lord's supper was partaken of weekly, the same as is implied in Acts 20 '7, when "upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them." We also see that the scriptures were always read to the saints. This was the more needed in those days, when the books were only in manuscript and very scarce, and could only be heard in this way. Indeed, we find copies of the Gospels prepared specially for public reading, called Lectionaries, with slight alterations, so that, for instance, a portion might commence with the words, "Jesus said," instead of "He said;" and which alterations have been preserved in a few places in the Authorized Version.
We find that they had exhortation and instruction at their meetings, as Paul also "preached" to the saints in Acts 20:77And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached unto them, ready to depart on the morrow; and continued his speech until midnight. (Acts 20:7). There was special need of this in the early church, when there were no books of Christian instruction, though needed indeed at all times. The bishop was to be "apt to teach" (1 Tim. 3:2; 22A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach; (1 Timothy 3:2) Tim. 2:24); "teachers" were among those set in the church (1 Cor. 12:2828And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:28)). "He that prophesieth speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort." (Chapter 14:3.)
We also find that a collection for the poor was made at these meetings, but it says that the money was given to the " president,' and that he succored the orphans and widows—a work generally thought more suited to those called deacons; for in the Acts such were appointed that the apostles might not have to serve tables. (Acts 6:22Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. (Acts 6:2).)
Another custom we find introduced here was to send the bread and wine to those who were absent. Scripture says nothing of this, and it may be questioned whether it did not lose its assembly character by being carried forth. In 1 Cor. 11, we read they were "come together in the church.... come together into one place." And because of the disorders in the assembly at Corinth, some were sick. Surely it would not be according to God's order to carry the bread and wine to these on whom He had laid His hand in discipline. And it might be discipline that kept others from the Lord's Supper.
Some will, no doubt, wonder why water was mixed with the wine. Of this also nothing is said in scripture. It certainly became a practice thus early in the church, but from what source it is not known. Some have endeavored to prove that water was mingled with wine at the paschal suppers of the Jews, and hence it was the same as the Lord used at the institution of the supper. But this cannot be proved. The reason given by some of the early writers why it was used in the church, is that it alludes to the blood and water that ran from the side of our Lord when pierced with the spear. It is still the custom in some churches, but has no warrant from scripture.
The above passage, referring to the bread and wine being the flesh and blood of our Lord, is not at all clear in its meaning, and indeed it has been claimed alike by Protestants and Catholics as having very opposite meanings. It would however appear, that the words of our Lord were taken in their literal sense at an early date in the church. Thus Cyril of Jerusalem (died about A.D. 386), speaking of the Lord's supper, says, "Then, after hallowing ourselves by the spiritual hymns [sanctus, &c.] we beseech the merciful God to send forth His Holy Spirit upon the elements displayed on the table, to make the bread the body of Christ and the wine the blood of Christ. For most certainly, whatever the Holy Spirit may have touched, that is hallowed and transformed. Then, after that the spiritual sacrifice, the un-bloody service, is completed, over that sacrifice of propitiation we beseech God for the common peace of the churches," &c. He then goes on to speak of the intercession of the saints and martyrs, whom God would doubtless hear thus calling the Lord's supper a sacrifice, and laying early the foundation for some of the gross perversions in the Church of Rome. It will easily be seen why the Roman Church so constantly appeals to the Fathers as its authority, instead of to scripture.
Love Feasts.
The "feasts of charity" we read of in Jude 1212These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear: clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead, plucked up by the roots; (Jude 12) were continued in the early church. It is not clear whether they were associated with the Lord's supper or not. In the account we have given from Justin Martyr respecting the Lord's Supper, he does not name the Love Feast. Tertullian mentions the Feast, without naming the Lord's Supper. He says, "Our souls ascend in prayer to God before we sit down to meat. We eat only what suffices nature, and drink no more than is strictly becoming chaste and regular persons. We sup as servants that know we must wake in the night to the service of our Master, and discourse as those who are in the hearing of God. When supper is ended, everyone is invited forth to sing praises to God; and by this you may judge of the manner of drinking at a Christian feast. As we begin, so we conclude, with prayer, and depart with the same tenor of temperance and modesty as we came; as men who have not so properly been drinking as imbibing religion." The same writer does not always speak thus of their Love Feasts, for abuses crept in, as indeed may be alluded to in 2 Peter 2:1313And shall receive the reward of unrighteousness, as they that count it pleasure to riot in the day time. Spots they are and blemishes, sporting themselves with their own deceivings while they feast with you; (2 Peter 2:13), and the feasts were forbidden by some.
There can be no doubt that superstitions began at an early period. Thus PRAYERS FOR THE DEAD are supposed to have been in use in Tertullian's time. In speaking against second marriages, he says the first wife has been "already received into the Lord's presence; for whose spirit you make request; for whom you render annual oblations." He elsewhere speaks of commemoration and intercession for the dead. So also does Cyprian. Cyril of Jerusalem explains, that at the prayers and intercessions of the martyrs, &c., God would receive our supplications; and also that the greatest benefit would accrue to their souls for whom the living supplicated. Again we need not wonder that the Fathers should be quoted in support of false doctrines and practices. It is the most that can be done where scripture is silent.
THE SIGN OF THE CROSS.—This was introduced quite early. Justin Martyr says, "The sign of the cross is on our brow and on our heart. It is on our brow that we may always confess Christ, on our hearts that we may always love Him, on our arm that we may always work for Him." Tertullian says, "In all our travels and movements, in all our coming in and going out, in putting on our shoes, at the bath, at the table, in lighting our candles, in lying down, in sitting down, whatever employment occupieth us, we mark our foreheads with the sign of the cross." He also recommends the sign of the cross being immediately resorted to, as protection from the bite of a scorpion! So the sign of the cross was made on the forehead, on entering and leaving the meetings.
CLERGY AND LAITY.—The division of Christians into clergy and laity took place quite early in the Church. The term "clergy" is from the Greek kleros, and is found in 1 Peter 5:33Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. (1 Peter 5:3), where all Christians are included in God's "heritage." The use of the word, however, soon wandered from this, to mean the bishops, presbyters, and deacons, to distinguish these from the laity (from Laos, the people). The bishops and presbyters were also called "priests," but here again in scripture, the term applies to all Christians, as in Rev. 1, which clearly teaches the priesthood of all Christians. "In holy orders" is another term applied to the clergy, as if they were more holy than other Christians.
THE LORD'S SUPPER AND ABSOLUTION.—The idea crept in early, that the Eucharist conveyed grace and safety in some way. Those who fell during the persecutions were in some places kept for years before they were restored, but in very few instances was the Eucharist refused to them when they came to die. The following letter by Dionysius of Alexandria (A.D. 247-265), as given by Eusebius, will chew in what light this was regarded:—
“There was a certain Serapion, an aged believer, who had passed his long life irreproachably; but, as he had sacrificed during the persecution, though he frequently begged, no one would listen to him. He was taken sick, and continued three days in succession, speechless and senseless. On the fourth day, recovering a little, he called his grandchild to him and said, 'O son, how long do you detain me? I beseech you hasten, and quickly absolve me. Call one of the presbyters to me.' Saying this, he again became speechless. The boy ran to the presbyter. But it was night, and the presbyter was sick. As I had, however, before issued an injunction, that those at the point of death, if they desired it, and especially if they had entreated for it before, should receive absolution, that they might depart from life in comfortable hope, I gave the boy a small portion of the Eucharist, telling him to dip it in water, and to drop it into the mouth of the old man. The boy returned with the morsel. When he came near, before he entered, Serapion, having again recovered himself, said, Thou halt come, my son, but the presbyter could not come. But do thou quickly perform what thou art commanded, and dismiss me.' The boy moistened it, and at the same time dropped it into the old man's mouth. And he, having swallowed a little, immediately expired, Was he not, then, evidently preserved, and did he not continue living until he was absolved; and his sins being wiped away, he could be acknowledged as a believer for the many good acts he had done?”
What a strange mixture we get here! Discipline, when rightly exercised by the assembly, is recognized in heaven (Matt. 18:1818Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:18); 2 Cor. 2:77So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. (2 Corinthians 2:7)), but forgiveness is altogether apart from receiving the Eucharist, though of course the Eucharist would be given when the person was restored. But here the morsel of bread is said to restore, and to wipe away the old man's sins! and then it is strangely added, that he could be counted a believer for the many good works he had done! Alas, the darkness that was overshadowing the church at this early date!
THE CELIBACY OF THE CLERGY.—It was taught by some, quite early in the church, that it was much holier for men and women to remain unmarried. This led to asceticism and dwelling alone, and then it was demanded, from time to time, that the clergy should not marry after their appointment, and never take a second wife; and by some, that they should separate from their wives if married before election. This was strongly opposed by others, and it was only by degrees that the celibacy of the clergy was demanded. We may illustrate this by an account of HIPPOLYTUS AND CALLISTUS.
The emperor Commodus (died 192) had a favorite mistress, named Marcia, who was supposed to be a professing Christian: she was styled by Hippolytus a "God-fearing woman." She had great influence over that profligate tyrant. Victor was at that time bishop of Rome. One, named Carpophorus, kept a sort of bank in which the Christians put their savings, and a slave, a professed Christian, Callistus, had the management of the same. But Callistus made away with the money and fled. His master pursued him, and when Callistus saw him, he threw himself into the sea, but was rescued by the sailors and given up to his master, who brought him back, and kept him in prison, until some interceded and he was liberated. But he was neither grateful nor penitent, and one day he created such a disturbance in a Jewish synagogue that he was seized and carried before the prefect, His master claimed him, but he was publicly scourged and sent to the mines in Sardinia.
Some time afterward Marcia, wishing to extend her influence for the benefit of the Christians, asked Victor for a list of those who had been banished to Sardinia, and then used her influence with Commodus to have them recalled. The name of Callistus was not included; he was too well known to be trusted, The list was given to an honorable eunuch, who proceeded to Sardinia to fetch back the convicts. Callistus was vexed to find his name omitted, but by great persuasion he induced the eunuch to claim him also, and the governor submitted, upon the eunuch promising to bear all blame. On arriving at Rome, the bishop was greatly annoyed at seeing the reprobate Callistus among the prisoners, and ha was banished to Antium.
For a time Callistus was lost sight of, but was next heard of as assistant to Zephyrinus, who came to Rome and succeeded Victor as bishop, Hippolytus describes Zephyrinus as an ignorant person, greedy of gain, and who left much to his more sharp-witted deacon, Callistus, who managed, in helping his bishop, to ingratiate himself with many persons of influence, so that at the death of Zephyrinus he was actually chosen bishop.
Hippolytus charges him with heresy, and with great presumption, for he professed to be able to forgive sins, and he also ruled that if a bishop sinned, even if it were a sin unto death, he could not be deposed. One would think this was specially framed to shield himself.
But it is remarkable that one of the principal things Hippolytus brings against Callistus is that he was very careless about discipline, and ordained as bishops, presbyters, and deacons, those who had been twice and even thrice married! "Even a man," says Hippolytus, "who had married while in orders was subject to no kind of penalty, as if he had not sinned." And then listen to the reply of Callistus: he asks, "Did not the Lord say, Let the tares grow with the wheat?" and "Were there not unclean beasts in the ark?" and such there must always be in the church!
Now while this, with the grave sins charged on Callistus, gives a fearful picture of the low state of the church at this time in Rome, it chews what a dreadful sin it was accounted for a bishop to marry: and yet this forbidding to marry was only an ordinance of man, and one in direct conflict with the word of God, where the bishop is spoken of as having a wife, and ruling his children well. (1 Tim. 3:2-42A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (1 Timothy 3:2‑4).)
It is a disputed question as to where Hippolytus was settled. He is often styled bishop in Pontus, but by others is represented as being at Rome, and by some he is supposed to have been anti-bishop of Rome at the same time as Callistus. The latter is the one named in the lists of the bishops of Rome; though Hippolytus is often called bishop of Rome and martyr.
Hippolytus wrote many works, and several commentaries, of which latter only fragments remain. A larger work, "The Refutation of all Heresies," is also attributed to him. The above Account of Callistus is taken from this.