Doctrine of Grace in Apostolic Fathers

[Turgonian]

I recently heard something about a book by Thomas Torrence, called The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers. This man argues that the early church (90-300 AD) lost understanding of the doctrine of grace and started teaching a works-based salvation -- which he deduces from such literature as Barnabas, Hermes, Clement, the Didache, etc.

Does anybody know if this is true? It would be shocking if the early church fathers were Pelagians (or something like it) avant la lettre.

[Amazing Rando]

I recently heard something about a book by Thomas Torrence, called The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers. This man argues that the early church (90-300 AD) lost understanding of the doctrine of grace and started teaching a works-based salvation -- which he deduces from such literature as Barnabas, Hermes, Clement, the Didache, etc.

Does anybody know if this is true? It would be shocking if the early church fathers were Pelagians (or something like it) avant la lettre.

:smile: Here's a relevant passage- Judge for yourself...


CHAPTER 32 -- WE ARE JUSTIFIED NOT BY OUR OWN WORKS, BUT BY FAITH.

Whosoever will candidly consider each particular, will recognise the greatness of the gifts which were given by him. For from him have sprung the priests and all the Levites who minister at the altar of God. From him also [was descended] our Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh. From him [arose] kings, princes, and rulers of the race of Judah. Nor are his other tribes in small glory, inasmuch as God had promised, "Your seed shall be as the stars of heaven." All these, therefore, were highly honoured, and made great, not for their own sake, or for their own works, or for the righteousness which they wrought, but through the operation of His will. And we, too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.

CHAPTER 33 -- BUT LET US NOT OWE UP THE PRACTICE OF GOOD WORKS AND LOVE. GOD HIMSELF IS AN EXAMPLE TO US OF GOOD WORKS.

What shall we do, then, brethren? Shall we become slothful in well-doing, and cease from the practice of love? God forbid that any such course should be followed by us! But rather let us hasten with all energy and readiness of mind to perform every good work. For the Creator and Lord of all Himself rejoices in His works. For by His infinitely great power He established the heavens, and by His incomprehensible wisdom He adorned them. He also divided the earth from the water which surrounds it, and fixed it upon the immoveable foundation of His own will. The animals also which are upon it He commanded by His own word into existence. So likewise, when He had formed the sea, and the living creatures which are in it, He enclosed them [within their proper bounds] by His own power. Above all, with His holy and undefiled hands He formed man, the most excellent [of His creatures], and truly great through the understanding given him -- the express likeness of His own image. For thus says God: "Let us make man in Our image, and after Our likeness. So God made man; male and female He created them." Having thus finished all these things, He approved them, and blessed them, and said, "Increase and multiply." We see, then, how all righteous men have been adorned with good works, and how the Lord Himself, adorning Himself with His works, rejoiced. Having therefore such an example, let us without delay accede to His will, and let us work the work of righteousness with our whole strength.

CHAPTER 34 -- GREAT IS THE REWARD OF GOOD WORKS WITH GOD. JOINED TOGETHER IN HARMONY, LET US IMPLORE THAT REWARD FROM HIM.

The good servant receives the bread of his labour with confidence; the lazy and slothful cannot look his employer in the face. It is requisite, therefore, that we be prompt in the practice of well-doing; for of Him are all things. And thus He forewarns us: "Behold, the Lord [cometh], and His reward is before His face, to render to every man according to his work." He exhorts us, therefore, with our whole heart to attend to this, that we be not lazy or slothful in any good work. Let our boasting and our confidence be in Him. Let us submit ourselves to His will. Let us consider the whole multitude of His angels, how they stand ever ready to minister to His will. For the Scripture says, "Ten thousand times ten thousand stood around Him, and thousands of thousands ministered to Him, and cried, Holy, holy, holy, the Lord of Sabaoth; the whole creation is full of His glory." And let us therefore, conscientiously gathering together in harmony, cry to Him earnestly, as with one mouth, that we may be made partakers of His great and glorious promises. For [the Scripture] says, "Eye has not seen, nor ear heard, neither has it entered into the heart of man, the things which He has prepared for those who wait for Him."

[Turgonian]

:thumb: Thanks! :thumb:

[Turgonian]

I showed the Clement quote to the one who brought up the topic, but he responded:


Pick up the book, Turgy. Torrence has 11 pages of small print and heavy footnotes to demonstrate the validity of his claim. I think you'll be convinced. To give you but one small excerpt from that chapter:


In all this Clement is apt to use traditional New Testament expressions. The most notable of these is "justification by faith." It is quite clear, however, that there is no real problem here, as for example St. Paul had, and consequently it does not carry with it the note of overwhelming astonishment at the flaring act of God in forgiving the ungodly. The fundamental idea at the back of the words dikaiosune, dikaioumai [note: translated "righteousness" and "I am made righteous," respectively] seems to be the moral qualification which avails before God conceived as a quality of the soul. That is achieved by faith which is fear of God working itself out in obedience. And so Clement can say that we are "justified by works, not by words" . . . and insists that we are not justified by [faith] alone but by [faith] and [religion], [faith] and [hospitality], by [faith] and [truth]. (see 1.2; 11.1; 15.1; 32.4; 15.2; 21.8; 50.5; 60.4; 18.6; 19.1; 31.2; 25.2, 5; 47.3; 60.2; 62.2; 63.1)

Taken from the edition cited above, pages 48-49. I transliterated the Greek, and the words in brackets are actual translations rather than transliterations so that you can see the force of the argument more easily. I used the New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology for those translations.

Anyway, even in sample passage you cited, Turgy, faith is not in Christ, but in an omnipotent God who created the universe. There is some more background information here that is important to the discussion as it relates to the (well documented) Hellenistic mindset toward Judaism and thus early Christianity, but again . . . just get the book. You can get it from Amazon.com (http://www.amazon.com/Doctrine-Grace-Apostolic-Fathers/dp/0965351769/sr=8-1/qid=1172451143/ref=sr_1_1/102-9194552-5660923?ie=UTF8&s=books) for less than $20 plus shipping.

edit: and BW, no, I don't think the broader church can regain the true gospel. Yes, there will always be a remnent, if I may borrow from Jewish theology, but the church herself? No . . . she has been lost since 90 AD. The few of us who preach the clear and unadulterated gospel are maginalized by the "established church," and it will always be that way. Defeatest? No. Just realistic. It strengthens my drive to bring the lost to Christ . . . and a GREAT many of those are in the church pews. If you don't believe me, take this little test (http://www.biblelineministries.org/amigoing.html) and, further, look how many people have already failed it!
Thoughts?

[Rusty T]

The guy's hubris astounds me. That all are deceived, but he, among the few, is not . . . I look at the promises of Christ to the Church. That the gates of hell would not prevail. The parable of the mustard seed - and the great bush that the birds of the air rests upon. It is not a dim view of the power of God at work in the Church. As far as his argument, what you posted doesn't make much sense out of context.

rusty

[Flux]

I recently heard something about a book by Thomas Torrence, called The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers. This man argues that the early church (90-300 AD) lost understanding of the doctrine of grace and started teaching a works-based salvation -- which he deduces from such literature as Barnabas, Hermes, Clement, the Didache, etc.

Does anybody know if this is true? It would be shocking if the early church fathers were Pelagians (or something like it) avant la lettre.

Hey Turgonian. Just saw your thread here. It is impossible to get a feel for the beliefs of the early Church Fathers as a whole from looking at one or two passages. Torrence's observations seem very consistent with the majority opinion among scholars of the Early Church Fathers. It is reasonably clear to anyone who carefully studies their writings that their beliefs were substantially different from modern protestant beliefs. Scholars who note this discrepancy have two main options: they can believe the early Church Fathers were unfaithful to original Christianity, or they can believe their own ideas are inaccurate. Of course, no one writes books to argue that their own doctrines are inaccurate, so most of the books out there go with the former option. So you'll find many of the scholars who deal with this observation assume that somehow the early Christians somehow completely forgot what Christianity was about, but that it was later rediscovered in the 4th century. Implicit in such a view is that there really are significant differences in what the New Testament and early Church Fathers teach, and that the New Testament authors really held beliefs similar to modern protestantism.

Given my study of the early Church Fathers and New Testament theology, I think it very unlikely that these very early Church fathers, taught in person by some of the apostles or their disciples, had misunderstood the New Testament and the message of Jesus. The early Church Fathers seem to understand the New Testament very well, in my opinion, and I find no evidence to suggest they were not continuing the heart of authentic orthodoxy. If indeed it is the case that the early Church Fathers were faithfully continuing authentic orthodoxy (as they claim to have been), then the observations of scholars who study them that they believed different things to modern protestantism cannot be dismissed by simply claiming "they got it wrong." Rather, if the New Testament and Early Church fathers an congruent, but Protestantism and the Early Church Fathers are not, it suggests that modern protestant doctrines (and not those of the early Church Fathers) are the theological innovations. It seems to be your concern that this could be the case that has motivated your post in the first place. So on this point, while I wouldn't say the early Church Fathers were Pelagians (most Christians today don't even understand what Palegius believed anyway), it is very clear to me that the early Church Fathers (and indeed the New Testament authors) would be appalled at some modern Christian doctrines.

Hope this helps.

[Tercel]

I recently heard something about a book by Thomas Torrence, called The Doctrine of Grace in the Apostolic Fathers. This man argues that the early church (90-300 AD) lost understanding of the doctrine of grace and started teaching a works-based salvation -- which he deduces from such literature as Barnabas, Hermes, Clement, the Didache, etc.

Does anybody know if this is true? It would be shocking if the early church fathers were Pelagians (or something like it) avant la lettre.Torrence's work seems reasonably well accepted among historians of doctrine. I haven't read Torrance, but I have seen him cited by several scholars with comments to the effect that they agree with what he says about the general disinterest in any concepts of "grace" in the AFs. Note that Torrance was a Reformed theologian, and my understanding of this book is that he whinges that the early Church doesn't agree with his beliefs.

It's hardly a secret that the early Church all believed in works-based salvation. Offhand I can't think of any historian of doctrine that would deny that fairly obvious truth. Similarly with the Pelagian thing, it's pretty universally accepted among historians of doctrine that the pre-Augustinian fathers held roughly the same doctrine as Pelagius. (It was, after all, Pelagius who got upset at Augustine's innovations and who saw himself as defending against innovation)