Apostolic Succession; A Biblical Doctrine?

T he doctrine of apostolic succession is the belief that the 12 apostles passed on their authority to successors, who then passed that apostolic authority on to their successors, continuing on throughout the centuries, even to today. Whilst this might be a fascinating and intriguing concept, is it truly biblical?

The great thing about the New Testament is that it clearly establishes the major doctrines of the Church. One may find vital doctrines such as the atonement, resurrection and justification by faith alone, clearly outlined with many scriptural references (one may wish to check out this page). One is left in no doubt on the pivotal doctrines of the Church, neither is one left in any doubt regarding the specific content of the Gospel message (Acts 16: 30-31; Acts 26:1-23; Romans 4: 24-25; Romans 10: 9-10; 1 Corinthians 2: 1-2; 1 Cor. 15:1-4). In the face of such clarity, it might seem amazing how so many have managed to successfully teach extraneous, non-biblical messages but this they have certainly done.

One has to say that 'apostolic succession' is conspicuous by it's absence within the New Testament. The basic idea is that Peter the Apostle was the first pope, or chief leader (based on Matthew 16:18), and that this somewhat grandiose conception of 'chief church leader' should then be passed on through the entirely biblical principle of the 'laying on of hands,' and this certainly does seem to be a New Testament principle of conferring authority. Roman Catholicism believes that Peter later became the first bishop of Rome, and that the Roman bishops that followed him were accepted by the early church as overall leaders. However, there are huge problems with this belief. Here are some of them:

1. Apart from the principle of governing elders, the New Testament is pretty much silent on any required church governing schema, or office. For sure, a range of possible church offices are listed in 1 Cor. 12:28 and Eph. 4:11 and one might expect to find some Christians having the necessary gifts to fulfill certain such offices (but not all), possibly depending on the size and scope of the area of responsibility, but the only required office appears to be that of Elder. See Titus 1:5. Also, one might note that neither 1 Cor. 12:28 nor Eph. 4:11 suggest any system or principle of 'apostolic succession' - but wouldn't these have been the ideal places to mention it?? After all, both Eph. 4:11 and 1 Cor. 12:28 do refer to the office of 'apostle,' however, that does not imply, of course, that that particular office would be continually repeated throughout the church age. 'Bishops' are pretty much essential to the concept of apostolic succession, but even Bishop Lightfoot, one of the greatest New Testament scholars of all time, freely admitted that 'bishop' (the office which he himself eventually inherited within Anglicanism), was not truly a New Testament office. The word is based on 'overseer,' but biblically, it appears that it was certain of the elders who were to be overseers, but with no indications of a separate 'overseer' office. The fact that the office of 'bishop' has no New Testament authority or precedent already seriously weakens the 'apostolic succession' argument.

2. Peter might well have been, in a somewhat loose sense, overall apostolic leader in the New Testament, but if he was, it was a very, very loose sense. For example, on one occasion, Paul the Apostle quite strongly challenges and disagrees with him in public (Galatians 2:11-14). Peter's New Testament epistles are not, perhaps, major epistles, as the Pauline ones are, indeed, they are somewhat short and not high on doctrinal content. Later, he appears to disappear altogether from any New Testament consideration with scarcely a mention anywhere. Peter may well have been the overall leader for taking the gospel to the Jews (as Paul was with respect to the Gentiles), yet the epistle of James (James almost certainly being the Senior Elder at Jerusalem), does not even mention him once! Moreover, there is no evidence that Peter ever became 'bishop' of Rome as Roman Catholicism - even now - continues to (erroneously, in my opinion) teach.
Surely all of this would be utterly inconceivable if Peter had understood Jesus' comment to him in Matthew 16:18 to mean that he should adopt a grandiose and pope-like style of leadership! If he was a leader at all (which seems quite debatable), it was possibly only with regard to the work among the Jewish people.

3. In the New Testament, no 'bishop' (overseer) had jurisdiction over the bishops or presbyters of other churches (carefully check out Ignatius of Antioch, in his Letter to Polycarp); rather, that function was reserved for the apostles, which was obviously a foundational office of the Church (Eph. 2:20; 4:11; 1 Cor. 12:28; 2 Cor. 11:28). But today the office of Apostle is obviously closed.

4. The Roman Catholic Church itself has not maintained it's own concept of apostolic succession through the laying on of hands upon holy men. In fact, 'Simony' (that is, the buying of the office of 'pope' or 'bishop' for money, or favours) was an absolute disgrace when the Church of Rome was at it's peak, which it no longer is. Unless I am misunderstanding something here, appointing a corrupt bishop or pope just once would destroy the whole structure and principle of 'apostolic succession' for all time. Frankly, I think that most studied RCs know this which could be why they tend to play down the teaching on 'apostolic succession.'

“Yes it is. Peter made this argument. Why not one of the other 11? Why did the rest of them accept Peter’s decision to appoint another?”

Peter was an “older man”, possibly in years but certainly in experience having been with Christ all during his ministry. Peter was an important man, an “elder”.
Peter's understanding of the prophecy was not in question nor his statement of the requirements for being counted among the twelve.

But Acts 1:23 says, “They” (plural) not Peter alone, put forward two possible choices to replace Judas and “they” drew lots indicating who should be accepted.

Peter had a great privilege in this matter but he he was not the decision maker.

“Then why is it that Clement of Rome argues that he was ordained by St. Peter and that he has apostolic authority as appointed as a successor to Peter?”

It's a bit difficult to read minds. But claiming association with, ordination by, an apostle would add to his claim of authority, wouldn't it?

“Scripture doesn’t tell us who was appointed to replace James. That doesn’t mean they didn’t appoint one. Look, even the martyrdom of St Peter and Paul is not recorded in scripture. Does this mean that they didn’t die in Rome?”

Peter and Paul's death isn't recorded in the Scriptures but I feel safe in saying they did die. Not a good comparison.

“Where does scripture say this? You are arguing that ‘because scripture says nothing about it it didn’t happen’. Argument from silence.”

An argument from silence might well be superior to any other available. If James had a replacement chosen no one thought it important enough to even allude to it?
Mathias was counted as one of the twelve but a replacement for faithful James would have made thirteen apostles.
Yet in John's Revelation vision years later he sees only twelve names of the apostles on foundation stones.
Would it be possible to leave one name out and if so, who?

So the argument is not from complete silence.

As to the question of why the early church did not end with the last apostle the very broad answer might be that it had taken sufficient root to grow even if over seeded with weeds per Jesus’ parable of the wheat and weeds.

“It’s a bit difficult to read minds. But claiming
association with, ordination by, an apostle would add to his claim of authority, wouldn’t it?”

True. More importantly, it indicates that the early Church regarded ordination by the Apostles as sufficient proof of one’s authority.

“Peter had a great privilege in this matter but he he was not the decision maker.”

Great privilege? Is this another way to say that he was the leader of the Apostles and that they looked to him for guidance.

“Peter was an “older man”, possibly in years but certainly in experience having been with Christ all during his ministry.”

So was Andrew. Why was Peter the one given these ‘great privileges’.

“An argument from silence might well be superior to any other available.”

Nonsense. We could just as easily assert that China did not exist in those days because nothing is said of it. Arguments from silence are untenable under all circumstancees.

“If James had a replacement chosen no one thought it important enough to even allude to it?”

You would think that they would talk about the death of St. Peter and St. Paul?

“Yet in John’s Revelation vision years later he sees only twelve names of the apostles on foundation stones.
Would it be possible to leave one name out and if so, who?”

Judas one presumes since Revelations looks at the originals not the replacements.

"I was a fully mature adult when I left the RCC. And don't assume anyone was daydreaming because you do about the RCC being legitimate. No church is legitimate who does not believe God's Word is the Final Authority. And all their 'practices and traditions' void God's Word. They make it very clear they are not God's church - even a Holy Spirit filled seven year old knows that. It's not by age we know but by The Holy Spirit within."

So you did not figure it out as a seven old or adult in the Church either especially when you declare Christ came in the Flesh. Nicene Creed. Which we declare at every sunday mass.

Romans Chapter 10

9 because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved:..Read More[Read More]

10 for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation...Read More[Read More]

Romans Chapter 14

11 For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, to me every knee shall bow, And every tongue shall confess to God...Read More[Read More] 2 Corinthians Chapter 9

13 seeing that through the proving of you by this ministration they glorify God for the obedience of your confession unto the gospel of Christ, and for the liberality of your contribution unto them and unto all;..Read More[Read More]

Philippians Chapter 2

11 and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the...Read More[Read More]

1 Timothy Chapter 6

12 Fight the good fight of the faith, lay hold on the life eternal, whereunto thou wast called, and didst confess the good confession in the sight of many witnesses...Read More[Read More]

13 I charge thee in the sight of God, who giveth life to all things, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the good confession;..Read More[Read More]

Hebrews Chapter 3

1 Wherefore, holy brethren, partakers of a heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, even Jesus;..Read More[Read More]

Hebrews Chapter 4

14 Having then a great high priest, who hath passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession...Read More[Read More]

Hebrews Chapter 10

23 let us hold fast the confession of our hope that it waver not; for he is faithful that promised:..Read More[Read More]

Hebrews Chapter 11

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth...Read More[Read More]

Hebrews Chapter 13

15 Through him then let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of lips which make confession to his name...Read More[Read More]

James Chapter 5

16 Confess therefore your sins one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The supplication of a righteous man availeth much in its working...Read More[Read More]

1 John Chapter 1

9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness...Read More[Read More] 1 John Chapter 2

23 Whosoever denieth the Son, the same hath not the Father: he that confesseth the Son hath the Father also...Read More[Read More]

1 John Chapter 4

2 Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God:..Read More[Read More]

3 and every spirit that confesseth not Jesus is not of God: and this is the spirit of the antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it cometh; and now it is in the world already...Read More[Read More]

15 Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God abideth in him, and he in...Read More[Read More]

2 John Chapter 1

7 For many deceivers are gone forth into the world, even they that confess not that Jesus Christ cometh in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the antichrist...Read More[Read More]

Revelation Chapter 3

5 He that overcometh shall thus be arrayed in white garments; and I will in no wise blot his name out of the book of life, and I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels...Read More[Read More]

The Biblical Confession 1 John 4 of Faith.

I believe in one God the Father almighty,

maker of heaven and earth of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Only-begotten Son of God,

born of the Father before all ages. God from God, Light from Light,

true God from true God,

begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father; through Him all things were made.

For us and for our salvation

He came down from heaven.

(at the following words, up to and including “and became man”, all bow)

and by the Holy Spirit was incarnate of the Virgin Mary,< and became man.

For our sake He was crucified under Pontius Pilate, He suffered death and was buried, and rose again on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.

He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead.

His kingdom will have no end.

And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life who proceeds from the Father and the Son,

who with the Father and the Son is adored and glorified, who has spoken through the prophets;

And in one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church.

I confess one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. I look forward to the resurrection of the dead and the life of the world to come. Amen.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.