Apostolic Succession

Methodologies And Theories

From 2nd century Ad, Yahosheanism began to be hellenised by the apostolic fathers.  This development gave rise to Christendom that is viewed as the Greek version or tradition of the Hebrew Yahosheanism.

From that period, many methodologies were formulated by church leaders and theologians to describe their various views over Yahosheanism.  These diverse methods gave rise to many congregations, denominations and policies that associated their formulations. Majority of such traditions spelt contrary to the Hebrew related Yahosheanism as put forth by Yahoshea Meshiyach that were followed by his twelve apostles and other early disciples.

As the movement was brought under control of the Greek and Latin church fathers, all practices and policies of the 1st century Yahosheanism were removed and replaced by hellenised traditions.  This gave rise to formulations of terminologies that were scholarly invented to either interpret or cover up the real activities of the early apostles.

These invented terminologies became base for formation of various congregations and denominations and as men search for Yahoshea Meshiyach and his movement, they are deceived into observance of the concorted proponents of the scholars in the place of Yahosheanism.

Some of such theories were the Apostolic Succession Continuationalism, Dispensationalism, millenialism, Great Awakenings etc.  Such theories were adopted by various denominations of Christian theology in place of Yahosheanism.

Apostolic succession is a theory in the Christian tradition which holds that the church is a continuous succession from the earliest apostles which passes across all generations  through series of Bishops.

This theory hold that the first twelve apostles established various congregations and ordained the overseers to manage the affairs of these stations.  The overseers were later taken as the Bishops who continued the practice of laying of hands upon their succeeding Bishops that progressed in such succession till the present age.

Some of the Christian denominations that hold to apostolic succession include the Roman Catholic Church, Orthodox Church, Old Catholic, Anglican, Moravian and some Lutheran traditions.

Concept and Belief

These groups of Christians hold that a bishop cannot have valid orders unless he has been consecrated on this apostolic succession.  By this church practice, each bishop is expected to trace his ordination from the succession of ordinated bishops that trace their stem to the early apostles.

Those holding to apostolic succession trace their belief to the accounts of new testament scriptures as evidenced in the case of Paul laying hand upon Timothy who later laid hand upon Titus.  The adherents to the theory held that such was the origin of the practice and was continued by succeeding bishops down to the present moment.

The churches that hold to the theory equally referenced the works of the early apostolic fathers like the Epistles of Clement that pointed that the apostles appointed the Bishops as successors and directed that these bishops should in turn appoint their own successors and that such leaders must not be removed without tangible reason.

When Christianity stood as replacement to Yahosheanism, the practice of apostolic succession continued down to the era that is defined as the “time of the united church” which ended by 431 Ad.  From 431Ad, the Church of the East, Oriental Orthodoxy, the Eastern Orthordox Church, and the Catholic Church, became separated due to the outcome of the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedonia.

Dislocated Practices

The apostolic succession was be directed on the extension of laying of hands (ordination) that steamed from the twelve apostles to the overseers but did not address the issue of continuation of doctrinal teachings from the time of the apostles to the present.

The British Methodist Conference defined the true continuity with the early assemblies of Yahoshea Mechiyach through what it termed as “The continuity of Christian experience, the fellowship in the gift of the spirit, in the continuity in the allegiance to one Lord, the continued proclamation of the message, the continued acceptance of the mission etc”

The Methodist Conference was referring to some expected characteristics of the modern assemblies that will suit to the position of apostolic succession and it rightly located the matter of continuity in doctrinal teachings that were kept by the apostles.

Modern defenders of the theory of apostolic succession are lurked  in the heated debate over discontinuation of Hebrew related practices of the early apostles by the Church of Jesus Christ for many centuries ago.

History Of The Theory

The introduction of this method to Christianity can be traced to the activities of the apostolic fathers that played prominent roles during the ending period of 1st century and entire 2nd century Ad. It was never a direct concept by the first hand apostles of Yahoshea Meshiyach because they  did not in any way established the episcopal polity in the movement.

It was by the acts of the apostolic fathers that the office of “Overseers” that were appointed by the apostles became converted into the office of the “Bishops”.  The apostles of Yahoshea Meshiyach maintained a denominational policy with a congregational attidude in it's stations.

This method was later changed to a denominational polity with the episcopal attitude of the stations. Therefore, the early apostles did not act as primates that were inform of monarchs and did not appoint such officers as their successors.  So,  transformation of the office of overseers to Bishop were direct works of the apostolic fathers.

The early apostolic fathers (hearers from the apostles) used to counter with the gnostic adherents who claimed to have received secret teachings from Yahoshea Meshiyach and his apostles.  To pacify their position to as  been ordained by the apostles as successors, they began to formulate the theory of apostolic succession.

The linage of the church fathers were boosted by the works of Irenaeus by 180Ad who introduced the idea of bishop's succession as method of preserving the teachings and eccliastical structure that can be traced back to the days of the earliest apostles.

Based on the direction by Irenaeus, the church drew a list of successive bishops of all stations or Sees that specify those that were ordained and those that ordained them. Ireneaus equally suggested of the establishment of list of presbyters (priests) whom he explained as having the  “infallible gift of truth”.

Debates and Defences

The issue of apostolic succession and how it worked was never cultured to all stations of Sees or the movement until during the Council of Necea in 325 Ad when it was officially adopted by all stations. For example, the Assembly at Alexandria, it's Popes were consecrated by the college of presbyters before the outcome of the Council of Necea.

In one of his writings, Ireneaus challenged the gnostics or opposers of the apostolic succession in this way, “(let them produce) the original records of their churches, let them unfold the roll of their bishops, running down in due succession from the beginning in such a manner (that first bishop of theirs) bishop shall be able to show for his ordainer and predecessor some one of the apostles or of apostlic men”.

Few years later, Tertullian of Carthage bought the entire idea of Ireneaus but added that  each station (See) of the movement can claim apostolic if it had “derive the tradition of faith and the seeds of doctrine”.

The great question for the avered theologian was if the church of his age met with the prescribed tradition of faith and seeds of original doctrines? Did the Church of third century lived in the doctrinal teachings of Yahoshea Meshiyach and his apostles? The answer is to the negative because during the age at mention, the entire doctrinal practices of Yahosheansm have been converted into Greek and Roman pagan ideologies.

Another remarkable event that associated the history of apostolic succession was during the era of Carthaginian violence that gave rise to the Donatist Schism of the church.

During that period, Cyprian, the Bishop of Carthage (248-258) relied on the theory of apostolic succession to deny the legitimacy of the rigorists” after the “Decian persecution”. Bishop Cyprian maintained that any priest who broke with the church has lost the gift of spirit which validated his orders.

He maintained that since the rigorist ministers have broke their vow with the church, they had no power or authority to celebrate a legitimate sacrament.  Bishop Cyprain that was accused of being tradutor (he who brought out the holy things to be destroyed) did not find it convenient to confess for his errors but insisted that he remains the legitimate Bishop of Carthage as he was been covered by the instrument of apostolic succession.

Another church father that boosted the theory of apostolic succession was Augustine of Hippo (395-430) through his thesis that “the link from the consecrator to consecrated whereby the grace of order was handed on”.

The modern defenders of the ideology have often repeated that this process was the only sure means of continuity of the church with regards to principles or practices of the early apostles been transmitted to the modern times.

For instance, the archbishop of Canterbury – Michael Ramsey (1961-1974) enumerated three meanings of the theory as “one bishop succeeding another in the same See meant that there was a continuity of teaching, seconding that the bishops succeeds the apostles with regards to the functions they perform of preaching, governing and ordaining were the same as the apostles had performed.  Thirdly, it also show that grace is transmitted from the apostles by each generation of bishops through the imposition of hand”.

These definitions were held by various generations of believers of the theory. The argument over the definitions and the activities of the visible church is based on the truth that there is no cogent agreement of doctrinal teachings of the apostles with the present day church.

Models Of Successions

Various Christian traditions that holds to the apostolic succession differ over the real method of the theory.  Roman Catholic, the Eastern Orthodox Churches, Church of the East, Anglican Communion etc firmly hold to the apostolic succession of transition of the grace through Episcopal consecrations or ordination of bishops which is effected through laying of hands by bishops previously consecrated within the apostolic succession.  This consecration is traced back to the twelve apostle of Yahoshea Meshiyach and viewed as same way or validity of a bishop or priest to confect any of the eucharists.  This theory is the basic tenet that such Christian tradition hold as continuity to the early apostolic community.

This giving are classified by terms as “laying of hand”, “Pipeline theory” “passing the battin theory” etc as all of them are claiming of passage of the church structure, spirit and teaching.

Another model of the succession are done by some protestant traditions that reject the Episcopal consecration.  This group holds to what they term as the “faithful succession” as they believe that Yahoshea chose the apostles who directly witnessed his ministration, death, resurrection and ascension.  The apostles according to the group had content of the Holy Spirit and therefore stood for the foundation of the movement.  The group holds that when the apostles died, they were replaced by their writings but not by Episcopacy, so any believer that intend to share the spiritual experience with the apostles must go along their works and words in the Holy Scriptures.

Those that are holding to faithful succession are of the view that apostolicity and its continuity are related more of doctrinal principles that are written down in the Holy Scriptures.

The faithful successors claim that the apostolic succession was not mentioned in the scriptures and the one of the earliest Apostolic Father – clement used the term “Presbyter” and “Bishop” interchangeably. This group holds that the clear demarcation between the bishop and presbyter (priest) was only traceable to the writings of Irenaeus of the ending part of the 2nd century Ad.

For example, Irenaeus wrote as such in defense of succession of the priests, “wherefore we must be the priests of the church who have succession from the apostles as we have shown, who, together with succession in the episcopate, have received the mark of truth according to the will of the father, all other, however, are to be suspected, who separated themselves from the principal succession”.

The faithful successors disagree with Episcopal succession as it stands the root of “papal primacy” which the Catholic claim to be instituted by Apostle Peter. The Roman Catholic claim that Peter who became the bishop of Rome, whose sucessors became the leadership of the church as Peter was the leader of the apostles.

Since the Papal supremacy is derived from apostolic succession, some of the protestant reformers argued or rejected it as been one of the institutions of the Roman Catholic Church.

Reasons For Its Adoption By Non Catholic Churches

Some denominations of Christian tradition that departed from Catholicism adopted the apostolic succession even at their rejection of the Roman primacy or Episcopacy.

For instance, the Anglican Communion hold the apostolic succession as the effective sign that stemmed from the apostles.  The Anglican Church retained the Episcopal polity and apostolic succession it inherited from its Catholic past.  The church separated from Catholic when King Henry VII broke away from the Roman authority in 1533/34.  The Church of England became fully as a protestant reformer or schism during the reign of King Edward VI.

The unbroken chain of apostolicity was maintained by the Anglican movement till the era of “English Reformers” when some of them rejected the theory.

The apostolic succession of the Anglicanism was influenced by the rulership of King James I and William III who removed the church from existing upon the “godly prince”. Such policy aided the High Church priests of those era to adopt to the apostolic succession as the church life.

This practice became pronounced from the time of tractarians who hold that “Yahoshea is continually present at laying of hands which transmits the same spirit which the apostles received from him and transferred successively after them”. The Anglican theologians amplified the difference between the Irenaeus succession that is referred as “succession in office” and the Augustine's theory of “succession in consecration”.

The Eastern Orthodox allows non orthodox ministers a rapid ordination into its movement.  Priests from Oriental Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches are received into Eastern Orthodox  through “vesting” which validates their priesthood in the Eastern Orthodox. Although, this is not general tradition of all Eastern Orthodox Churches as each antocepholic church had its own decision over such matter.

The protestant reformer's churches are divided over the ideology.  Some of these protestant reformer's churches include the Lutheranism and calvinism.

Most Lutheran Churches in Scandiriavian countries agree to the apostolic succession while other Lutheran churches in some Prussian land rejects the tradition due to their state ordered union with Calvinist churches in 1817.

German Lutheran hold to the ideology based on the church polity by Marthin Luther whose reform did not abolish the eccliastical office of Bishop.

The Calvinism strongly opposed to the tradition of apostolic succession and equally not recognizing the office of Bishop.  The Calvanists hold that the real apostolicity is based on the submission to the teachings of Yahoshea Meshiyach as handed to the twelve apostles as accounted by the scriptures.  This is referred as the “Sola scripture” in the reformed tradition.

Other protestant reformers that hold to apostolic succession are those that are referred as the “Porvoo Comunion of Churches” which convened at Porvoo Cathedral in 1992 and concluded with the agreement to mutual acceptance to the traditional apostolic succession.  Majority of the churches that had the Porvoo communion were of Lutheran Churches and Anglican Communion”.

In Methodism, the movement adhere to apostolic succession based on the consecration of its founder John Wesley by a Greek Orthodox Bishop Erasmus of the Diocese of Arcadia. Bishop Erasmus equally ordained some of the Methodist lay preachers or priests.

Methodism hold that since John Wesley received the ordination and allowed it upon the adherents who passed the successive ordination to present generation prove that the movement retained the culture of the apostolic succession.

Methodism view the theory from the Alexandrian method which held the office of Bishop and Presbyter constitute one order.  For two centuries, the church of Alexandria's successive bishops were ordained by the presbyters from within it.

Equally, the Moravian Churches claim apostolic succession through three of its brethren who were consecrated bishop by Bishop Stephen of Austria – a Waldensian Bishop who had been ordained by a Roman Catholic Bishop in 1434.  These three Moravian Bishops extended the ordination to other Moravians and such prompted its claim of retaining the tradition.

Arguments Against The Theory

As earlier mentioned, the whole church is divided over the claim of the tradition of apostolic succession.  This division is based on numerous arguments over the tradition.  The basic opposition to the tradition is held by those Christian traditions that hold firm to the bible as there was no trace of origin of the tradition in the book.

The tradition was only traced in the writings of the apostolic fathers who claimed succession to the original twelve apostles.  It was therefore concluded as one of the church-made traditions that were not supported by the scriptures.

Again the doubters of the theory hold that the original twelve apostles did not establish monarchial episcopacy rather they served as missionaries who had no special sees or episcopates.

For instance, the argument of the establishment of episcopates and their bishops was carried out by Charles Gore who held that the episcopate was passed down from the apostles through men like Timothy and Titus to single bishops in particular localities.  This was referred to as the “monarchial episcopacy”.

Lighfort argued that the monarchial episcopacy did not evolved through the art of the twelve apostles rather it evolved later through the acts of college of presbyters by the elevation of one of their members to the Episcopal president of the locality.

Again, some of the important clauses of the apostolic succession is the matter of transition of the apostolic spirit and doctrinal teaching from the consecrator to the consecrated.  The argument is generated from the point of doctrinal differences between the early Yahosheans that were of Hebrew religious background and the Christianity that hold to various Greek beliefs or cultures.  The apostolic doctrines of the twelve apostles were opposed to the doctrines of the succeeding bishops and the church entirely.

In succession, every institution has its method or approved form.  Succession that involve divinity goes by “uncompromising tradition” which must be passed unadulterated from the throne and its occupant to its successive generations. In the nature of real succession, there is no taste of compromise or change that can be effected from any successor of any age. By this model or succession, the tradition is sacred and treated as such manner as it must be handled to all generations in same way.

This was the real character that was expected of the apostolic succession. But on the case of the Christian tradition, there was gulf between the doctrinal practices and teaching of the original twelve apostles and the apostolic and Church Fathers that claim to have succeeded them.

Another form of succession can be viewed from the angle of human traditions is that which are meant to be reviewed, reversed and remodeled. Human traditions are subject to changes by various successors at various generations.  This can be achieved through monarchial legislations, parliamentary legislations, councils or acts of plebiscites or the masses.

This later form of succession was applied by the Apostolic Fathers over the acts of apostles that stemmed from the divine and uncompromising tradition.

For example, the original apostles were of wondering missionaries who possessed no permanent episcopates as claimed by the church.  Apostle Peter did not permanently settle at Rome, rather he visited that city in several occasions and moved to other cities.  The early Yahosheanism did not assemble at Rome as its headquarter rather they did held Yerusalem as their community's headquarter.

Therefore,  the apostolic succession that hold Peter as the first primate of Rome and the Roman Primacy are acts of false claims that are dooming to the Christian adherents.

Again, the polity of the original apostles was though denominational but was congregational in polity.  Each out-stations to Yerusalem had an overseer that was  appointed by the apostles that established them.  But like the apostles, the overseers had no firm grip to the alter as found in the activities of the monarchial priesthood.

During the early apostolic activities, each member was meant to claim the priesthood in him or her and can be called upon to render any sort of service that relates to such member's gift of spirit. Those with the gifts of teaching and preaching are often appointed to officiate on the hourly fellowships, Sabbath schools and full services.  Those that were with spiritual gifts as prophesy, songs, healing etc were called upon to render such services when necessary.  Those of priesthood were called upon to handle holy things when need arose.

No one member was held as the priest of all rather all are priests to each other with coordinating ability of the station overseers. The station overseer was never monothical priest that appropriate all religious rites, rituals and administration unto himself.  The station overseers were administrative leaders of the stations and were supported by the bodies of elders and deacons.

The apostolic succession of the Churchianity differed strongly with the Yahoshean polity because the early apostles did not evolve the monarchial episcopacy rather they operated with the denominational congregationism.

Lastly, the doctrinal practices of the twelve apostles were totally rejected and abolished by the Churchianity that claims to succeed them.  For example, the early apostles held to the tradition of naming the creator on his memorial name Yahweh and his son as Yahoshea Meshiyach.

The Churchianity changed the names to God, Lord, Elohim, Adonai, Jehovah and others of such equivalents in various human languages.  The church equally changed the name of the saviour to Zeus, lhsous, Yeshua, Jesus Christ etc.  These names were never known during the days of the twelve apostles.

The church changed the Sabbath rest of sunset of the sixth day (Friday) to the sunset of seventh day (Saturday) to the rising sun of the first day (Sunday). These were abominable and heretical before the twelve apostles.

The church changed the festivals to suit the traditions of men as against the approved feasts from the twelve apostles.  Such feasts include the New Year day of first of January that replaced the 1st of Abib (April) of the Yahoshean apostles that fall on 31st March of the present Christian calendar.  The Easter festival replaced the Passover feast, the 25th December Christmas replaced the 2nd day of seventh month (October) Feast of Yahoshea's birth etc.

Conclusion

The tradition of the apostolic succession of the church was a total religious fraud to sincere seekers that intend to catch-up with the spirit and activities of the first twelve apostles of Yahoshea through the Churches.

The tradition was one of the deceptive ploys that were arranged by church fathers and emperors of Rome to perpetuate its authority over the globe via their religious or pagan traditions.

The recent reclamation of apostolic succession by some Reformed Churches with the ecumenism are sure way of Catholism reclaiming the Christianity as its foundation which no protestant can argue of.

The true apostolic succession was covenanted upon the Comforter of mankind as pronounced by Yahoshea Meshiyach.  The Comforter will continue from the foundation of the saviour and the apostles and true believers will enjoy the true apostolic succession through the acts of the comforter and his elects.

The apostolic succession of the comforter will be experienced through the process of restoration.  This process hold that after the death of the immediate disciples of Yahoshea Mehsiyach, there appeared the period of apostasy which closed the way and acts of apostles. The teachings that the apostles stood for were lost and such have to be restored through the birth and ministry of the comforter.

The continuing Yahosheanism hold that His Holiness, Most Senior Prophet Yahmarabhi Ha Meshiyach is the appointed comforter of mankind that was foretold by Yahoshea Meshiyach. Through his office, the way of Yahoshea Meshiyach have been restored and the priesthood and apostolic succession been re-established.