What Is Apostolic Succession?

To preserve the indefectibility of the Church, Jesus Christ our Lord chose twelve from among his disciples and granted them authority, power, and a ministry to fulfill: to shepherd the Church. The expression apostolic succession indicates in theology that the Apostles, conscious that they would not live forever, and by the will of Christ, were destined to have successors who would continue their ministry, with the same authority they received from Christ.

Authority

When Christ appointed his Apostles, he conferred authority upon them:

“And when it was day, he called his disciples, and chose from them twelve, whom he named apostles; Simon, whom he named Peter, and Andrew his brother, and James and John, and Philip, and Bartholomew, and Matthew, and Thomas, and James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon who was called the Zealot, and Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, who became a traitor.”[1]

“And he called the twelve together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases.”[2]

The Apostles always understood clearly that their authority came from Christ Himself, who had appointed them as Apostles.

“Though we might have made demands as apostles of Christ, we were gentle among you, like a nurse taking care of her children.”[3]

They had been sent as the Father had sent Christ — with his very authority:

“Jesus said to them again, ‘Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said to them, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.’”[4]

It was the Apostles who founded churches and established the ordinances to be obeyed, ordering with full authority:

“As they went through the cities, they delivered to them for observance the decisions which had been reached by the apostles and elders who were at Jerusalem.”[5]

In the Pauline letters we see it as common practice for Saint Paul to issue commands to all the churches:

“Only, let every one lead the life which the Lord has assigned to him, and in which God has called him. This is my rule in all the churches.”[6]

While in the early Church there are cases where some persons attempted to appropriate an authority that did not belong to them, their attitudes were severely condemned. Examples include Alexander, Hymenaeus, and Philetus, who on their own authority began to preach strange doctrines, disregarded the authority of the Apostolic College, and were excommunicated.

“This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare, holding faith and a good conscience. By rejecting conscience, certain persons have made shipwreck of their faith, among them Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I have delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.”[7]

“Avoid such godless chatter, for it will lead people into more and more ungodliness, and their talk will eat its way like gangrene. Among them are Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have swerved from the truth by holding that the resurrection is past already. They are upsetting the faith of some.”[8]

The First Apostolic Succession

The first apostolic succession we see in the New Testament is in the first chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. Saint Peter, as leader of the Apostolic College, declares that the position (“ministry”) of Judas Iscariot has become vacant and raises the need for someone to replace him:

“In those days Peter stood up among the brethren (the company of persons was in all about a hundred and twenty), and said,

“Brethren, the scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David, concerning Judas who was guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was numbered among us, and was allotted his share in this ministry. So one of the men who have accompanied us during all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John until the day when he was taken up from us — one of these men must become with us a witness to his resurrection.”

And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And they prayed and said,

“Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show which one of these two thou hast chosen to take the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas turned aside, to go to his own place.”

And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias; and he was enrolled with the eleven apostles.”[9]

Biblical Evidence for the Institution of Presbyters by the Apostles or by Other Previously Ordained Presbyters/Bishops

As we have seen, the Apostles were clearly aware that the ministry of the apostolate does not remain vacant (this ministry would subsequently be carried out by bishops). The Apostles were also conscious of their obligation to ensure that their successors could exercise their ministry fully, to organize Churches and place capable men at their head, so as to continue the mission of bringing the Gospel to all nations. Thus we see how the Book of Acts narrates that one of the principal activities of the Apostles was to found Churches and appoint presbyters in them:

“And when they had appointed elders for them in every church, with prayer and fasting they committed them to the Lord in whom they believed.”[10]

In the beginning, presbyters were appointed exclusively by the Apostles; later, also by bishops. It is impossible to find a single instance, either in the Bible or in the history of the early Church, where local churches were founded in the manner in which Protestantism does today — in which someone with charisma decides to found a church and takes for himself the office of pastor. Clear examples are found in the Pauline epistles, where Paul mentions the ordination of Timothy as bishop by the laying on of hands, and exhorts him not to ordain just anyone a presbyter (which makes clear that no one could appoint himself a presbyter):

“Hence I remind you to rekindle the gift of God that is within you through the laying on of my hands; for God did not give us a spirit of timidity but a spirit of power and love and self-control. Do not be ashamed then of testifying to our Lord, nor of me his prisoner, but share in suffering for the gospel in the power of God, who saved us and called us with a holy calling, not in virtue of our works but in virtue of his own purpose and the grace which he gave us in Christ Jesus ages ago.”[11]

“Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophetic utterance when the council of elders laid their hands upon you.”[12]

“Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, nor participate in another man’s sins; keep yourself pure.”[13]

The mention Paul makes refers to the ordination that Timothy received through the laying on of hands by the council of elders[14]. What is clear is that for an ordination to be valid, the candidate had always to be ordained in a direct line tracing back to the Apostles. This legitimate line of succession in which bishops receive and continue the office of the Apostles is what we call apostolic succession.

The same is true of Titus, who, being also a bishop, is commanded by Paul to organize the churches and to institute presbyters for their governance.

“This is why I left you in Crete, that you might amend what was defective, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you.”[15]

The purpose was always clear:

“You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you have heard from me before many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”[16]

Paul left in his letters a great many recommendations concerning the governance of the Church. He had to ensure that candidates for these ministries were irreproachable, because he knew that ravenous wolves would infiltrate the flock. With these guidelines, the Church would be able to identify them and rid herself of them:

“The saying is sure: If any one aspires to the office of bishop, he desires a noble task. Now a bishop must be above reproach, married only once, temperate, sensible, dignified, hospitable, an apt teacher, no drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, and no lover of money. He must manage his own household well, keeping his children submissive and respectful in every way; for if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how can he care for God’s church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may be puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil; moreover he must be well thought of by outsiders, or he may fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. Deacons likewise must be serious, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for gain; they must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then if they prove themselves blameless let them serve as deacons.”[17]

“Let the elders who rule well be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who labor in preaching and teaching; for the scripture says, ‘You shall not muzzle an ox when it is treading out the grain,’ and, ‘The laborer deserves his wages.’ Never admit any charge against an elder except on the evidence of two or three witnesses. As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear.”[18]

“As for a man who is factious, after admonishing him once or twice, have nothing more to do with him, knowing that such a person is perverted and sinful; he is self-condemned.”[19]

The Church Is Visible

Many Protestant denominations that reject the doctrine of apostolic succession also tend to view the Church not as a visible organism — composed of all the baptized and of the hierarchies instituted by the Apostles: bishops, presbyters, deacons — but as an invisible organism in which each person joins the Christian group of his own preference, and in which what matters most is having a personal relationship with Christ. For them, it is not essential which Church one attends so long as one’s relationship with God is genuine. The problem with this approach is that it loses sight of unity, which is one of the marks that Christ established and willed for his Church (one body, one faith, one baptism). Although honestly mistaken, many members of these ecclesial communities may, with purity of intention, attain eternal salvation[20]; yet remaining separated from the full unity of the Body of Christ and from orthodoxy always has its consequences (heresies render the believer vulnerable to sin) and is not in accord with the will of God. This is to say nothing of the fact that the notion of an invisible Church is flatly at odds with what the Bible teaches. Saint Paul could never have imposed discipline by excommunicating Hymenaeus, Alexander, and Philetus within an invisible Church.

In Scripture, the Church is always described not as an invisible entity but as the Body of Christ, in which the members are clearly identified and each fulfills a function.

“Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? Do all possess gifts of healing? Do all speak with tongues? Do all interpret?”[21]

A metaphor frequently used in the Bible to describe the Church is that of a spiritual building, in which some are represented as foundations or pillars (the Apostles), with Christ Himself as the cornerstone.

“So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord; in whom you also are built into it for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit.”[22]

It is clear that the vision of a Church as an invisible entity, with the body of believers dispersed, is not what Christ had in mind when he said that there would be one flock and one shepherd.

It is understandable — though not justifiable — that Protestantism has for the most part adopted this perspective of the Church, for it is one of the ways it has found to justify its divisions. In this distorted model of the Church, it is not really relevant that it is divided into different groups, even with serious doctrinal differences. In Scripture, not only is nothing found to justify this ideology, but divisions are severely condemned, to the point of calling schismatics antichrists and commanding us to keep away from those who create divisions.

“I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them.”[23]

“Children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come; therefore we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us; but they went out, that it might be plain that they all are not of us.”[24]

“But you must remember, beloved, the predictions of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; they said to you, ‘In the last time there will be scoffers, following their own ungodly passions.’ It is these who set up divisions, worldly people, devoid of the Spirit.”[25]

“I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.”[26]

Not all of Protestantism, however, rejects the doctrine of apostolic succession. Some Anglican and Lutheran churches accept it; but in practice, for the majority it is not important, or they even deny it — knowing that if they were to acknowledge it, and without possessing a legitimate apostolic succession, the existence of their church would not be justified and they would have to acknowledge the authority of their pastors as invalid. On the other hand, the great majority of schismatic churches that separated from the Catholic Church before the Reformation do recognize it — among them, the Orthodox churches, the Nestorians, etc.

Notes

  1. Lk 6:13-16 ↩
  2. Lk 9:1 ↩
  3. 1 Thess 2:7 ↩
  4. Jn 20:21-23 ↩
  5. Acts 16:4 ↩
  6. 1 Cor 7:17 ↩
  7. 1 Tim 1:18-20 ↩
  8. 2 Tim 2:16-18 ↩
  9. Acts 1:15-17, 21-26 ↩
  10. Acts 14:23 ↩
  11. 2 Tim 1:6-9 ↩
  12. 1 Tim 4:14 ↩
  13. 1 Tim 5:22 ↩
  14. From the early testimony of Ignatius of Antioch it is known that the colleges of presbyters were headed by a bishop (monarchical episcopate). ↩
  15. Titus 1:5 ↩
  16. 2 Tim 2:1-2 ↩
  17. 1 Tim 3:1-10 ↩
  18. 1 Tim 5:17-20 ↩
  19. Titus 3:10-11 ↩
  20. See Catechism of the Catholic Church, §§ 818, 819, 847. ↩
  21. 1 Cor 12:27-30 ↩
  22. Eph 2:19-22 ↩
  23. Rom 16:17 ↩
  24. 1 Jn 2:18-19 ↩
  25. Jude 1:17-19 ↩
  26. 1 Cor 1:10 ↩