Clement of Rome: Clement was the third pastor of Rome from Peter (A.D. 90-99). There’s much thought to Clement of Rome being the same person as the Clement mentioned by Paul in Philippians 4:3 (“And I entreat thee also, true yokefellow, help those women which labor with me in the gospel, with Clement also,...”).
The Oneness Christological views of Clement are seen in 1 Clement 16:2, "the Majestic scepter of God, our Lord Jesus Christ,…". Clement recognizes the Dual nature of Christ in 32:2 where his subject is Jacob: "from him comes the Lord Jesus according to the flesh;" In the sermon called 2 Clement the author is clear that he acknowledges Jesus as the very God, indeed. We look to 2 Clement 1:1, 8 cf 4:2. 2 Clement 1:1, “Brethren, we are so to think of Jesus Christ as of God, and as of the judge of the living and the dead;... v8 for he called us when we did not exist, and out of nothing he willed us into being.” Compare to: 2 Clement 4:2 “We must, therefore, keep our flesh as a temple of God. For in like manner as you were called in the flesh, you should also come to judgment in the flesh. Our one Lord Jesus Christ, who has saved us, being first a spirit, was made flesh, and so called us; even so we also shall in this flesh receive the reward.”∼ In this passage Clement shows a parallel between Jesus and the Church. Jesus is shown to have been the Spirit, before He came in the flesh; and further, that he would return as the Spirit (to inhabit His temple, i.e. the Church). It is not surprising that the Father is not mentioned here, because even among those who were not Monarchians, the thought that the Spirit of God was a separate person from Himself had not yet occurred. To Clement, when he spoke of the Spirit, he was speaking of God; also when he spoke of Jesus, he was speaking of God. Therefore, in this passage we see clearly that Clement taught that Jesus, as God, had pre-existence as the Spirit before He was incarnated, and that He returned to the Spirit and now indwells the believers as they are the “temple of God.”
Ignatius of Antioch: (martyred, A.D. 107). Ignatius was Bishop of Antioch. He died the death of a martyr under the reign of Trajan. Papias, himself a disciple of John and pastor at Hierapolis in Phrygia, Asia Minor, informs us that Ignatius sat under the teachings of Peter, Paul and Barnabas.44
Because many in the oneness camp, during the 20th and 21st centuries have been too quick to paint Bishop Ignatius with the brush of trinitarianism, we will take some time and space to set the record straight here. We feel that those of Pentecostal evangelicalism have flenched from Ignatius because of his highly developed ecclesiastical theology. This has been a serious mistake in our view. The Bishop of Antioch was a champion of the apostolic Faith; to surrender him to the camp of the Pluralists has been done to our hurt. Virginia Corwin,45 who did her Ph.D.
44 Quasten and Plumpe, page 109
45 Virginia Corwin was born in Orange, New Jersey, on August 17, 1901, She graduated from Wellesley College in 1923 and received the B.D. from Union Theological Seminary in New York City in 1929; at Union she was a Kent Fellow. In 1930 she came to Smith College as an Instructor of Religion and Biblical Literature. Prof. Corwin entered Yale University in 1932 and received her Ph.D. from it in 1937. Her dissertation was on St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch; Yale University Press published a revision of the text in 1960. Prof. Corwin taught at Smith until 1939 when she went to Western Reserve University as Harkness Professor of Biblical Literature and acting head of the Department of Religion. In 1942 Miss Corwin returned to Smith College as an Associate Professor of Religion and was made Professor of Religion in 1953. She retired from Smith College in 1966. After Prof. Corwin’s retirement she was visiting professor at Claremont College in California and at Wells College in New York.
dissertation at Yale on Ignatius, stated: “If one term must be chosen to indicate the tendency of his thought, Ignatius must be said to be Monarchian.”46
The Modalistic views of Ignatius are seen in Magnesians 7:2, ” Everyone hasten to come together to one temple of God, to one altar, to one Jesus Christ, who came forth from the one Father, abiding in the one, and returning to the one.” His Modalism is especially evident in his letter to Polycarp (Bishop Of Smyrna, with whom he shared the same faith), where he expounded on the modal aspect of the existence of God: Polycarp 3:2, “... and expect Him, who is above all time, eternal, invisible, though for our sakes made visible; impalpable, and impassable, yet for us subject to sufferings; enduring all manner of ways for our salvation.” For this statement, Ignatius would have been branded as a Patripassian (one who teaches that the Father suffered) by Tertullian, and anathematized by those of the logos-christology.
Ignatius’ Godhead Theology
In the writings of Ignatius, Christ is the central figure; He is the Bishop’s all and all. No less than fourteen times Ignatius calls Jesus God (Eph. inscr. 1.1, 7.2, 15.3, 17.2, 18.2, 19.3; Trall. 7.1; Rom. inscr. 3.3, 6.3; Smyrn. 1.1; Polyc. 8.3).
The bishop lets us know that there is but one God, whom he identifies as the Father (Magnesians 8:2). This one God-the-Father has made Himself known to the world through, and by, Jesus Christ, His Son. Ignatius identifies the Son as the “Word” of the Father that proceeded forth from silence. He writes it this way: “... there is one God who manifested Himself through Jesus Christ His Son, who is His Word that proceeded from silence,...” (Magnesians 8:2). This is but an echo of 1 Corinthians 8:6 where Paul writes, “But to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him.” Ignatius agrees with John (John 1:1, 14) that the preexistent Christ was the Word of God. Ignatius calls Jesus the “thought” of God (Ephesians 3:2). J. N. D. Kelly observes, as does
46 “St Ignatius and Christianity in Antioch” New Haven: Yale University Press, 1960, page 126.
this author, that, for Ignatius, the divine Son of God dates only from God’s Incarnation into Mary’s baby (Early Christian Doctrines, Second Edition, page 92). The bishop writes of it this way: “... and firmly grounded in love in the blood of Christ, fully persuaded as touching our Lord that He is truly of the race of David according to the flesh, but Son of God by the Divine will and power, ...” (Smyrnaeans 1:1) The preexistent Christ, then, dwelt with the Father as the mind or thought of the Father, and not as a separate individual from Him, in Ignatius’ thinking. This is what Ignatius meant when he wrote: “... Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the worlds and appeared at the end of time” (Magnesians 6:1). When Ignatius wrote that the “Word ... proceeded from silence” he was stating what the Apologists after him would confirm. Athenagoras would write in A.D. 177 that the Son was God’s “Word” proceeding from God’s “thought.”
According to this concept God is God, alone, without any companions, and when God had a thought it was His “Word” or “Son,” because it was His offspring. He “birthed” a thought, a word. There is no separate ‘person’ here; only the thought or word of the One eternal person of God. This Word/Son of God that is His mind/thought can be said to be eternal and “with” God in the beginning, because God is a sentient-being who does not exist without thought or mind. Therefore, Ignatius writes that Jesus is God’s Word from silence. Kelly writes: “Christ is the Father’s ‘thought’ (gnōmē), the unlying mouth by which the Father spoke truly” (Ephesians 3:2; Romans 8:2). Ignatius even declares that Jesus is “our God” (Ephesians inscr. 18:2; Trallians 7:1; Romans inscr.), describing Him as “God incarnate” ( Ephesians 7:2; 19:3) (en sari genomenos theos) and “God made manifest as man” (theou anthrōpinōs phaneroumenou). He was “in spirit (penumatikōs) united with the Father” (Smyrna 3:3). “... He was the timeless, invisible, impalpable, impassable one who for our sakes entered time and became visible, palpable and passable” (Ephesians 7:2; Polycarp 3:2). Further, according to F. Loofs,47 Ignatius regarded God “as an undifferentiated monad in His
47 Friedrich Loofs, (1858-1928) Professor of Church History at the University of Halle-Wittenberg in Germany,
essential being, the Son and the Spirit being merely forms or MODES of the Father’s self-revelation” (Kelly; emphasis on “MODES” mine) .
There is nothing in Ignatius even coming close to a Trinitarian dogma. The monotheism of the prophets and apostles is adhered to at every turn. If any label is to be placed on the Bishop of Syria it must be that of Modalistic Monarchianism. The Modalism of Ignatius can easily be demonstrated in the following way:
-
Ignatius acknowledges that the one God is the Father
(Magnesians 8:2 cf 1 Corinthians 8:6): Magnesians 8:2 “...there is one God who manifested Himself through Jesus Christ His Son, ..”
-
Jesus is the one God incarnated in human form (Ephesians 7:2; 19:3 cf Isaiah 9:6; Matthew 1:23; John 1:1-3, 14): Ephesians 7:2 “There is one only physician, of flesh and of spirit, generate and ungenerate, God in man, true Life in death, Son of Mary and Son of God, first passible and then impassible, Jesus Christ our Lord.”
-
The Holy Spirit is, in fact, Jesus Christ (Magnesians 15:1 cf Matthew 3:11; John 14:17-18; Ephesians (NT) 4:5; John 7:29; 1 Corinthians 12:13; 2 Corinthians 3:17): Magnesians 15:1 “... The rest of the Churches, in honour of Jesus Christ, also salute you. Fare ye well in the harmony of God, ye who have obtained the inseparable Spirit, who is Jesus Christ.”
-
The Holy Spirit is, in fact, the Father of the Son (Ephesians 18:2 cf Luke 1:35; Matthew 1:18): Ephesians 18:2 “For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary according to God’s plan, both from the seed of David and from the Holy Spirit. ...”
-
Ignatius teaches the dual nature of Christ by drawing a sharp distinction between His deity and His humanity (Ephesians 7:2; 18:2; 20:2; Smyræans 1:1; 3:3; Polycarp 3:2 cf Isaiah 9:6; Acts 2:30; Romans 1:3-4; 9:5): Ephesians 7:2 “There is one Physician who is possessed both of flesh and spirit; both made and not made; God existing in flesh; true life in death; both of Mary and of God; first passible and then impassible, even Jesus Christ our Lord.” 18:2 “For our God, Jesus Christ, was conceived by Mary according to God’s plan, both from the seed of David and from the Holy Spirit. ...” 20:2 “... in Jesus Christ, who was of the seed of David according to the flesh, being both the Son of man and the Son of God, ...” Smyræans 1:1 “...established in love through the blood of Christ, being fully persuaded with respect to our Lord, that He was truly of the seed of David according to the flesh, and the Son of God according to the will and power of God;...” 3:3 “And after his resurrection He did eat and drink with them, as being possessed of flesh, although spiritually He was united to the Father.” Polycarp 3:2 “Look for Him who is above all time, eternal and invisible, yet who became visible for our sakes; impalpable and impassible, yet who became passible on our account; and who in every kind of way suffered for our sakes.”
-
When a distinction is made between Jesus and the Father the bishop qualifies it by emphasizing the humanity of Christ (Magnesians 13:2 cf 1 Timothy 2:5): Mag. 13:2 “Be obedient to the bishop and to one another, as Jesus Christ was to the Father [according to the flesh], ...”
-
The Modalistic views of Ignatius are seen in Magnesians 7:2, ” Everyone hasten to come together to one temple of God, to one altar, to one Jesus Christ, who came forth from the one Father, abiding in the one, and returning to the one.” His Modalism is especially evident in his letter to Polycarp (Bishop Of Smyrna, with whom he shared the same faith), where he expounded on the modal aspect of the existence of God: Polycarp 1:15, “... and expect Him, who is above all time, eternal, invisible, though for our sakes made visible; impalpable, and impassable, yet for us subject to sufferings; enduring all manner of ways for our salvation.” For this statement, Ignatius would have been branded as a Patripassian (one who teaches that the Father suffered) by Tertullian and anathematized by the those of the logos-christology.
Ignatius writes of the triad of Father, Son and Holy Spirit within the Godhead often. It is clear that he sees this triad as the economy of the deity, and not as a trinity of individuals. This is presented as colorfully as words can paint a picture, in his letter to the Ephesians,
“ye are stones of a temple, which were prepared beforehand for a building of God the Father, being hoisted up to the heights through the engine of Jesus Christ, which is the Cross, and using for a rope the Holy Spirit; while your faith is your windlass, and love is the way that leadeth up to God” —Ephesians 9:1.
With this allegory, Bishop Ignatius portrays the economy of God working to facilitate the salvation of fallen man, and restore him to relationship with God. This is accomplished through the cross of the Son of God and the strength and power of the Holy Spirit of God, both of which are self-revelations of the Father necessary to build His building—the Church. The apostle Paul writes of God’s economy this way: “The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen” (2 Cor 13:14)
Hermas: the Shepherd of Hermas seems to have been written in Rome between A.D. 100-150. Hermas is thought to have been the brother of Pius (140-154), the Bishop of Rome. According to contemporary Oneness Pentecostal historian, William Chalfant, Pius was a Modalist; this would hold to reason, since the person who many supposed to have been his brother (namely Hermas) portrays strong Modalist views in his writings. In the following passage, the Shepherd of Hermas identifies the Holy Spirit with Christ, and as the Creator: “The preexistent Holy Spirit, which created all creation, God caused to dwell in the flesh which he wished.” According to the Shepherd of Hermas, it was the Holy Spirit that was incarnated in Jesus. Then he proceeds to speak of the flesh of Christ in a submissive role – showing the dual nature: “So this flesh, in which the Holy Spirit dwelled, served the Spirit well, living in reverence and purity, and did not defile the Spirit in any way.” (Shepherd of Hermas 59:5)
Melito, Bishop of Sardis (AD 170), ANF, 8.756, “Then did the whole creation see clearly that for man’s sake the Judge was condemned, and the Invisible was seen, and the Illimitable was circumscribed, and the Impassible suffered, and the Immortal died, and the Celestial was laid in the grave.” 8.758, “God was put to death, the King of Israel slain!
Apostolically Speaking,
Bp. Jerry L Hayes D.D.
No comments:
Post a Comment