Yet what must be keep in mind is that progression to the fullness of truth will not have been a steady upward path, for the faith was not handed down to the Church in the form of a book that was progressively to be unravelled, but from a depository preserved and transmitted in written and verbal form:
679 Mt11:25
680 Acts14:15-17
681 Jn16:13
682 Eph4:13
104
“Therefore, brethren stand fast and hold the traditions which you were taught,
whether by word or our epistle”683
Whilst the Bible was a vital part of that depository, it was Scripture that had already
been explained to the churches receiving it, or at least those aspects vital to their salvation.
Such essentials were not to be unpacked through the centuries. So, although relatively little is known about the Church’s development in the critical late first century period, one should reflect upon the missionary journeys of Paul in the middle of that century: their geographical extent and the numerous individuals that would have been appointed by him and his fellow missionaries. Then consider such biblical personages as Timothy (c. AD17-97), Titus (c. AD13-107) and Philemon (timeline uncertain) to whom Paul wrote epistles and envisage the numerous and worthy men they in turn will have appointed to continue the ministry in accordance with Paul’s instructions. Finally, reflect on the second century Church and its writers and perceive that it is quite impossible that all known witnesses from that era could have been in error concerning vital aspects of gospel truth. For Irenaeus’
testimony (below) affirms the churches at that time had a reasonably uniform understanding of the essentials of the faith:
“The Church having received this preaching and this faith although scattered throughout the whole world yet as if occupying one house carefully preserves it. She also believes these points of doctrine just as if she had one soul and one and the same heart and proclaims and teaches them and hands them down with perfect harmony as if she only possessed one mouth. For the churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain or Gaul. . . But as the sun, that creature of God is one and the same throughout the whole world, so also the preaching of the truth shines everywhere and enlightens all men that are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth” [Irenaeus 2nd Century]684
Even if such a report of ecclesiological unity were exaggerated, the point is surely made: the essentials of gospel salvation were known and taught by the second and third century churches. We may therefore safely regard ante-Nicene teaching and praxis as
normative, at least for matters essential to gospel salvation, allowance being made for a progressive deepening and maturing of the faith over time through the action of the Holy Spirit and the collective sense of the faithful. For any subsequent progressive revelation
cannot pertain to the attainment of gospel salvation: its means of initiation and any essential provisions for ongoing sanctification. Given that it was not until the fourth or fifth century that theology was moulded into any precision and doctrines were systematised utilizing a relatively recently agreed plenary canon of Scripture, the interpretations that Late Antiquity exegetes came to when interpreting the abstruse pastoral letters of Paul in particular, needed to have been tested against the universal witness of the immediate post-apostolic Fathers.
For these men had not been entirely reliant upon the precarious process of biblical exegesis using texts written in a language with which the Latin Fathers in particular were unfamiliar. The faith “once for all delivered to the saints” had been received by them either from the apostles themselves or their direct appointees. What they had received must have 683 2Thes2:15
684 Irenaeus against heresies Book I chap. 10 para 2
105
incorporated all of Paul’s teaching that was essential to the practice of the faith. It follows that there can be nothing essential to gospel salvation that could be discovered, recovered or re-interpreted by Augustine or any of his successors four centuries later, still less fifteen centuries later. It is quite impossible that the second and third century churches could have been uniformly in error concerning such matters as the nature of repentance (that it pertained to moral reform, not acknowledging oneself to be morally bankrupt and hateful to the core) or the economy of grace (that God had provided certain spiritual faculties to fallen man: natural precepts by which he had effectual free will to desire and do some good such as exercise compassion and practice justice, albeit not to be raised to eternal life apart from gospel grace). It will have been necessary to understand these matters, not only to discern the true essence of human nature and the disposition required for saving faith, but also to give the Creator due praise for His gracious magnanimity towards humanity.
In many of these considerations, especially those pertaining to natural precepts, grace and free will, Augustine came to an understanding markedly different from the teaching of those who had been personally trained by the apostles and their immediate successors. In so doing he deformed the living tradition of the Church, as some in the East have asserted, albeit he never received any formal conciliar condemnation from the Greek Church. Some of the distortions derived from flawed exegesis became embedded in the doctrines formulated by the Western Church. These were later built upon and reinforced by those (Protestants) who separated from her in the Middle Ages. It should therefore be of no surprise that once the Bible is unravelled, the outcome is to be much closer to the understanding of the very early Fathers than it is to Augustine, still less to the “Reformers”, especially in those areas that were heavily dependent upon an understanding of the Pauline epistles.
Yet a final resolution should not be expected precisely to match the teaching of the earliest post-Apostolic Christian witnesses, partly in view of authentic development and partly because Scripture itself affirms there are concepts that were never intended to be grasped until the very end, the most fundamental being that the benefits of the Saviour of the World’s atonement avail at a forensic level for the world as whole, not just for those who have been called out from her to be the human agents of her healing and reconciliation:
“He gave Himself as a ransom for all; (a fact) to be testified in due time”685