Nevile, Donald C.

English

Scholars Commons

The Role of \u27Confessor\u27 in the Ministry of the Early Church

Wilfrid Laurier University

ConsensusVolume 20Issue 1 A Ministry Miscellany Article 35-1-1994The Role of 'Confessor' in the Ministry of the EarlyChurchDonald C. NevileFollow this and additional works at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensusThis Articles is brought to you for free and open access by Scholars Commons @ Laurier. It has been accepted for inclusion in Consensus by anauthorized editor of Scholars Commons @ Laurier. For more information, please contact scholarscommons@wlu.ca.Recommended CitationNevile, Donald C. (1994) "The Role of 'Confessor' in the Ministry of the Early Church," Consensus: Vol. 20 : Iss. 1 , Article 3.Available at: http://scholars.wlu.ca/consensus/vol20/iss1/3The Role of “Confessor” inthe Ministry of the Early ChurchDonald C. NevilePastor, Peace Lutheran Church,Pickering, Ontario“The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.” Thisearly Christian aphorism, sometimes attributed to Tertullian,is often used to describe the function and result of martyrdomsin the early Christian communities. It tries to persuade us thatthe lives of those who suffered martyrdom at the hands of theauthorities were not lost, but served as an inspiration to thosewho remained, in fact causing the church to grow and reap agreater harvest of souls.But what of those early Christians who were arrested, in-terrogated, sometimes tortured, and who “confessed” the apos-tolic faith without losing their lives in martyrdom? EarlyChristian sources indicate that these persons were numerous,and that they often returned to their communities, assumedthe title of confessor, and occupied positions of influence andleadership in the young churches. In this paper we will lookat several early sources, to discover how these confessors, whowielded considerable spiritual and moral authority on accountof their ordeals, were included in the developing hierarchy ofthe church’s leadership. We will compare three documents, tosee how they deal with the presence of confessors, their rolein the church, and their relation to the “normally” ordainedclergy. We will examine The Shepherd of Hermas, the Apos-tolic Tradition of Hippolytus, and the document by Cyprianof Carthage called Letter 38.The Shepherd of HermasThis document, an apocalyptic treatise written probably inRome about 140-154 C.E., is a series of visions allegedly re-ported by a certain Hermas. In the Third Vision, Hermas is30 Consensustaken in a dream to a room containing a couch. Hermas movesto sit at the right side of the couch, but is forbidden to do soby his guide, who addresses these words to him: “You are sad,Hermas? The place at the right belongs to others who havealready been pleasing to God and have suffered for his name.To sit with them, there remains much for you to do.”l Later,the guide indicates that those on the right enjoy “a certaindistinction” 2 because of their suffering for the faith. Althoughallegedly referring to the place in God’s eternal kingdom pre-pared for those who have suffered martyrdom, various scholarshave suggested that this passage also refers to the status ofconfessors in the church at the time and location of Hermas’writing; that is, confessors were considered to hold equal sta-tus with prophets and presbyters. Thus Burton Scott Eastonstates that “the correct ranks of those who occupy the ‘bench’(of the clergy) are given as ‘confessors, prophets, presbyters’,as three distinct orders.”^Gregory Dix, although agreeing that the passage from Her-mas is speaking of confessors, is not as certain as Easton oftheir temporal status: “The older Roman writer Hermas hasan obscure allegorical passage of which the most likely mean-ing seems to be that, while confessors are not as such to bereckoned as presbyters, they will be their equals or superiorsin heavenly glory.”4 We agree with Dix here. Although theShepherd of Hermas no doubt is referring to confessors in thispassage, the evidence is too slim at this point to affirm thatthey represent an order of ministry with the same rank as pres-byters and prophets.The Apostolic TraditionOur second document, the Apostolic Tradition of Hippoly-tus, is much clearer and more helpful. In Section Nine, there isan apparently clear statement of the position of the confessor Iwithin the clerical hierarchy:jBut a confessor, if he was in chains for the Lord, shall not havejhands laid on him for the diaconate or the presbyterate, for hehas the honour of the presbyterate by his confession. But if he is Iappointed bishop, hands shall be laid on him.But if there is a confessor who was not brought before the au-jthorities, nor punished with chains, nor shut up in prison, nor con-demned to any other penalty, but has only been derided on occasionjConfessor 31for the name of the Lord, and punished with a domestic punishment:if he confessed, let hands be laid on him for any order of which heis worthy.^From this it appears that the confessor retains status equalwith that of the presbyter; his suffering for the faith will bereckoned to him as equal to the imposition of hands for thepresbyterate, but not equal to that of the episcopate. Further-more, Hippolytus recognizes two levels or grades of confession,one much more demanding than the other. Although thereseems to be little connection between this passage and the pas-sage quoted above from the Shepherd of Hermas^ the dearthin the early documents of other references to the confessorsand the presbyterate has led some scholars to make a connec-tion. Thus Easton sees a clear link between confession and thepresbyterate, and draws the connection with The Shepherd ofHermas \A true confessor is, iyso facto, a presbyter. This declaration. . . fol-lows logically from the definition of a presbyter’s duties: since hisprimary function is to bear witness to the truth, and since no wit-ness can be more impressively borne than when in danger of death,a confessor proves that he has the spirit of the presbyterate. Henceordination would be otiose. . ..(comparing Hippolytus to Hermas) InHippolytus, the prophets disappear and the confessors are mergedwith the “regular” presbyters.^Dix is, once again, more cautious, simply observing that,“It is conceivable that it is an indication that Hippolytus is re-porting a genuine second-century custom of the Roman Churchwhich was becoming obsolete in his own day.”^ Dix points out,further, that there had developed a theological tradition tojustify this exemption of ordination for confessors:In the later second century there had arisen a general belief (restingon Matthew 10:19-20 and Mark 13:11) that the martyrs and con-fessors endured their torment only by the aid of a special charismaof the Holy Spirit personally present with them The “baptismof blood” could dispense with the need of sacramental baptism forthe martyred catechumens. It would be no wonder if some thoughtthat the confessor, who was believed in some sense to incarnate thesuffering of Christ, and whose confession was the utterance of theSpirit within him giving him the power to suffer, was in no need ofthe sacramental gift of the Spirit for governing or serving the bodyof Christ. What is remarkable is that in the face of such ideas sacra-mental ordination to the episcopate was still regarded as absolutelynecessary, even for the confessor.^32 ConsensusThis appears to cast light on the acceptance of confessors asordained presbyters. However, as Dix points out, why not thenalso accept them as bishops? It would be easy to pass over thisquestion, and simply accept the equation of spirit-filled confes-sors with presbyters. This is the error Campenhausen makeswhen he says, “It is clear that the pneumatic-charismatic andthe official-sacramental conceptions are here still coexistingwithout great difficulty.” ^ One can imagine the kind of dis-ruption which would occur in the church during times of per-secution if many confessors would present themselves to claimthe presbyterate and thus overload its ranks. Hence, as Eas-ton points out, Hippolytus’ generous offer of the presbyter-ate to confessors was not universally extended throughout thechurch. The reference here is to the Apostolic Constitutions intheir various versions:But elsewhere the modification in Constitutions VII, 23, was nodoubt widely accepted: the office of a confessor was one of greatdignity, but it did not include its holder in the clergy. The Ethiopiccompromises: a confessor is not yet a presbyter, but can claimepiscopal ordination to the presbyterate as a right.John E. Stam, in an unpublished dissertation, also noticesthe confusion in the various documents, even within the textualvariants of the Apostolic Tradition, and claims that among thisconfusion, only one phrase can be presumed to be genuinelyoriginal:All the versions attest, in one form or another, the statement thatthe confessor “has the honour of the presbyterate by his confession.”No other explicit declaration to this effect has survived in our ex-tant patristic literature, and no other passage states directly thatconfessors held presbyteral status without the laying on of hands.Does this mean that Hippolytus simply invented the tradi-tion which states that the confessor may claim the presbyter-ate without the imposition of hands? Recognizing Hippolytus’conservative tendencies and faithfulness to tradition, this ishard to imagine. Furthermore, his opponent in Rome, Callis-tus, was himself a confessor, and one can scarcely imagine Hip-polytus inventing a tradition which would enhance the statusof his arch-enemy! One is driven to conclude that Hippolytusis passing along a local custom in which confessors are entitledto the presbyterate, but a custom not universally recognizedby the early church. It is certainly true that martyrdom andConfessor 33confessor-status are given a powerful valence in the writings ofthe patristic writers. As Stam observes:Since martyrdom was an undeniable and transcendently gloriousmanifestation of this same pneumatic dynamis^ it would be natu-ral to conclude that the confessors also shared in the “Spirit of thepresbyterate” . But on the other hand, the confessors, like all pres-byters, must be ordained by imposition of hands in order to receivethe high-priestly office and potestas of a bishop.So, although the clerical status of confessor seems to havevaried from place to place, there is no reason to doubt thatHippolytus was accurately passing along the custom of reck-oning confessors as ordained presbyters in Rome. And it maywell be that this tradition had its roots in the earlier custom,observed in The Shepherd of Hermas^ of giving confessors equalstatus with presbyters and prophets.Cyprian of Carthage: Letter 38We now turn to our third document. Letter 38 of Cyprian.Born at Carthage around 200 C.E., Cyprian was converted tothe Christian faith around 246, and became Bishop of Carthagein 248. Persecution by the Emperor Decius began about 250,which of course increased the number of confessors who identi-fied with the church in Carthage. In the document called Letter38^ written while he was absent from Carthage, Cyprian ad-dresses his people there to justify his ordination of a youngconfessor, Aurelius. Apart from the situation that Cyprian,a bishop, feels compelled to justify such an ordination to hispeople (indicating that they expect some involvement in thenomination process) this letter is of interest for several rea-sons:1 Aurelius is a confessor.2 Cyprian affirms that he ordained Aurelius.3 Aurelius was ordained by Cyprian to the position of lector.Cyprian writes:Our brother Aurelius, a distinguished young man, has already beentested by the Lord and is dear to God. In years he is still young, butin his praiseworthy virtue and faith he is already advanced. He isyounger in his natural years, but older in honour. He has struggledin a double contest. He twice confessed the faith, and was twiceglorified by the victory of his confessionSuch a man deserved the higher ranks of clerical ordination andgreater advancement; he should be judged not by his age but by his34 Consensusmerits. But for the time being it seemed right that he should beginwith the office of lector.Know therefore, dear brothers, that this man was ordained byme and by those colleagues who were present. I know that you willembrace him joyfully and hope that as many such men as possiblewill be ordained in our church.The contrasts of this passage with Hippolytus’ ApostolicTradition are significant. First of all, Hippolytus would notrequire that a confessor be ordained; secondly, he is quite clearelsewhere that a lector need not be ordained at all. Accord-ing to the Apostolic Tradition^ “A reader is appointed by thebishop, giving him the book, for he does not have hands laidupon him.”!"^ Dix sees two possibilities here;One may interpret this either as the trace left by an older customof reckoning confessors as presbyters ipso facto without ordination(now being adapted to Cyprian’s sacerdotalist ideas); or as the realgeneral rule (of which Hippolytus would give us an idiosyncraticperversion) that a confessor as such ought to be made a presbyter,but requires ordination like everyone else.^^However, as is often the case, things are more complex thanthey first appear. As Stam points out, during the Decian per-;secution, confessors in Carthage (and presumably elsewhere)were wont to abuse their charismatic privilege of enhanced sta-tus within the church. This was especially evident with respect|to the traditional role of confessors as those who led penitentsjthrough reconciliation and restored them to full communion iwith the church. He observes that, “Cyprian reacted sharplyjagainst their abuse of it and sought to bring the discipline andjrestoration of lapsi under the control of the hierarchy.” ThusjCyprian, as a remedy, finds it necessary to control the partici-jpation of all confessors through ordination, and even regulates|entry into minor offices such as that of lector through ordina-tion.The picture of the confessors which emerges, then, is ofja group of unique Christian leaders with charismatic, spirit-|filled qualities who do not fit well within the normal patternjof ministry. Unlike the teachers, apostles, and prophets of ear-jher times, who eventually disappeared, the periodical Romanjpersecutions generate a new crop of confessors every now andthen. These are not opposed to the official and formal ministry Iof the church, but neither do they fit easily and well within it.||Confessor 35So, what Douglas Powell says of Cyprian’s situation, may alsohave been the case in the Rome of Hippolytus:Thus Cyprian finds the confessors claiming an authority interwovenwith rather than independent of or rival to the authority of thebishop and clerus. The confessor, the martyr who does not die, canneither be fitted into the system nor rejected from it as an alienelement.With this scenario, one may speculate on two different so-lutions to the problem. In Rome, the Apostolic Tradition pre-served by Hippolytus and possibly rooted in The Shepherd ofHermas^ vision of martyrs/confessors, prophets and presbytersoccupying the same bench, permits the confessor to have pres-byteral status without the imposition of hands, but protectsthe episcopate and restricts the privileges of confessors by re-quiring ordination to the office of bishop. By contrast, inCarthage, possibly under Cyprian’s hand, but also possiblyestablished earlier, even minor offices such as that of lectorare open to the confessor only through ordination, with theapproval of the laity being a normal but not necessary prereq-uisite for this ordination.ConclusionThis study has interesting implications for the study of min-istry today. First, it throws into question some of the con-clusions of the widely-circulated World Council of ChurchesFaith & Order Paper #111^ “Baptism, Eucharist, and Min-istry”,which stresses the historicity of the threefold ministry ofdeacon, presbyter, and bishop, emphasizing that “the orderlytransmission of the ordained ministry is... a powerful expres-sion of the continuity of the church throughout history.” Infact, as we have just seen, the early church knew occasions androles in which this transmission of ministry was not such a neatand orderly process, but which involved dealing with forms ofministry, such as that of the confessor, which were outside thetypical threefold structure.Second, some churches find themselves in a position todayof having their traditional view of ministry challenged by thosewho do not fit the typical pattern, and by needs which cannotbe fulfilled within this typical pattern. A growing body ofliterature is appearing which questions and addresses this issuewithin the Roman communion. The issue will also occupy36 Consensusthe agenda of our Lutheran churches in the near future, asthey find themselves facing the questions of alternate paths toministry, and orders other than those of presbyter and bishop.One hopes that the churches with a more structured approachto ministry will recognize that in the history of the church,there have been legitimate exceptions to the typical route toordained ministry.Notes1“Shepherd of Hermas” 3:1, in The Apostolic Fathers,ti3,ns. Francis X.Glimm, Joseph M-F Marique, SJ, and Gerald G. Walsh, SJ (New York:GIMA Publishing Go., 1947) 241.2 Ibid. 242.^ Burton Scott Easton, The Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus (Gam-bridge: Gambridge University Press, 1934) 82-83.^ Dom Gregory Dix, “The Ministry in the Early Church,” in KennethE. Kirk (ed.). The Apostolic Ministry (London: Hodder & Stoughton,1946) 224.^ Geoffry Cuming (ed.), Hippolytus: A Text for Students (Bramcote, Not-tingham: Grove Books Limited, 1976) 14.^ Easton, Hippolytus, 81-82.7 Dix, “Ministry,” 224.^ Ibid.^ Hans von Campenhausen, Ecclesiastical Authority and Spiritual Powerin the Church of the First Three Centuries (London: Adam Sz CharlesBlack, 1969) 177.Easton, Hippolytus, 82.John E. Stam, “Episcopacy in the Apostolic Tradition of Hippolytus”(Th.D. dissertation. University of Basel, Switzerland, 1969) 50-51.12 Ibid. 57-58.1^ Cyprian of Carthage, “Letter 38,” in Joseph Lienhard, SJ (ed.). Min-istry (Wilmington, Delaware: Michael Glazier, Inc., 1984) 132-133.I"! Cuming, Hippolytus, 15.1^ Dix, “Ministry,” 224.1^ Stam, “Episcopacy,” 54.11" Douglas Powell, “Ordo Presbyterii,” Journal of Theological Studies27/2 (October 1975) 315.1^ World Council of Churches, Baptism, Eucharist, and Ministry (Geneva:Faith and Order Paper ^111, 1982) 44.1^ See, for example, “Sunday Celebration in the Absence of a Priest,”National Bulletin on Liturgy 21/114 (September 1988) 189-193; “Di-rectory for Sunday Celebration in the Absence of a Priest,” NationalBulletin on Liturgy, 22/117 (June 1989) 108-120; W. Huels, “SundayLiturgies without a Priest,” Worship 65/5 (September 1990) 451-460;Confessor 37Cyrille Vogel, “Is the Presbyteral Ordination of the Celebrant a Con-dition for the Celebration of the Eucharist?” in Roles in the LiturgicalAssembly: The 23rd Liturgical Conference M. O’Connell (NewYork: Pueblo Publishing Co., 1977) 253-264.

https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1759&amp;context=consensus

The Role of \u27Confessor\u27 in the Ministry of the Early Church

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Scholars Commons

Wilfrid Laurier University