On the Ordination of the Apostles #
New-Ritualist: The example you’ve provided from the Gospels about the apostles’ disbelief doesn’t justify either you or the priestless sect, but rather, it justifies our Orthodox Church. The Church teaches that while it was founded by Christ on the cross through His blood, it did not have bishops until the day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended upon the apostles and ordained them as bishops. Therefore, when the apostles fell into disbelief in Christ’s resurrection, they were not yet bishops. Thus, the example of the apostles’ disbelief does not prove that all bishops can fall into error; instead, it actually affirms the teaching of our Orthodox Church that they cannot err.
Priestless: If, as you say, the Church existed without bishops from the time of our Lord Jesus Christ’s crucifixion until the descent of the Holy Spirit, the question is: was it salvific during that time or not?
New-Ritualist: Certainly, it was salvific.
Priestless: May Christ save you for this truth. If the Church was true and salvific without any hierarchical clergy and was even founded by Christ in that very form, then this means our church is the true and salvific one, as it preserves exactly the same structure Christ gave it—that is, it exists without a clergy or sacraments.
New-Ritualist: But that is a direct path to Protestantism! Protestants teach that Christ founded the Church without a hierarchy, and that’s outright heresy.
Old Ritualist: Indeed, that’s heresy. And it’s this very heresy that Protestants, the priestless sect, and you, New-Ritualists, hold. To believe that God created His Church without hierarchy, without priests or bishops, is to believe that God created an imperfect Church. If priests and bishops appeared in the Church only after its founding, then it was not Christ but someone else who established them within the Church, and thus bishops and priests would not be an institution established by Christ. Your teaching that Christ founded the Church, but someone else established the bishops within it, is indeed a dangerous and destructive error that leads to the denial of the priesthood and hierarchy in the Church.
However, Christ established the hierarchy within the Church even before Pentecost, even before His crucifixion. The Gospels tell us that He chose the apostles (Luke 6:13, reading 23) before His suffering and crucifixion, and they were given the right and authority to perform the sacraments of baptism (John 3:22, reading 11) and anointing (Mark 6:13, reading 23). And these sacraments belong solely to bishops and priests; only they have the authority to administer the Church’s sacraments. Thus, the apostles held the rank of priesthood and episcopacy even before Christ’s suffering and the formal founding of His New Covenant Church. Therefore, when all the apostles fell into disbelief in Christ’s resurrection, they were already bishops; and though the Church at that time had no believing bishop or apostle, it remained undefeated by the gates of hell. Accordingly, the Old Ritualist Church, even when it had no truly believing bishop, remained the indomitable Church.
New-Ritualist: Although the Gospels do mention that the apostles had the authority to perform sacraments even before Christ’s suffering, our Orthodox Church teaches that they were still laymen at that time. They received the rank of priesthood only on Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit descended upon them. In the preface to the eight questions submitted to you Old Ritualists in 1863, it states: “The Church of Christ must contain hierarchy (the priesthood), which Jesus Christ Himself, being the eternal High Priest (Heb. 7:24, reading 316), established on Pentecost by sending down the Holy Spirit upon His apostles in the form of fiery tongues (Acts 2:3, reading 3), In Whom He promised to abide in the Church forever (John 14:16, reading 48).” This is when, according to our Church, hierarchy first appeared—not during Christ’s lifetime.
Priestless: You have now completely justified us. You said that the apostles were laymen before the descent of the Holy Spirit and yet had the authority to perform sacraments. This means that our “teachers,” though laymen, also have the authority to perform church sacraments. If the apostles did not err in performing sacraments while still laymen, then our teachers likewise do not err in performing sacraments as laymen. If performing sacraments as laymen is an error, then the apostles erred too. Furthermore, as you yourself claim, Christ granted the right and authority to perform sacraments specifically to laymen, as the apostles were then, rather than to priests and bishops. And to whom He gave it, it belongs. Therefore, the authority to perform sacraments belongs to laymen, not to bishops or priests.
New Ritualist: Have mercy! This teaching leads to the complete denial of the priesthood and leads directly to the abyss of Protestantism, Molokanism, and even worse.
Old Ritualist: It is true that this teaching leads to the abyss of destruction. But you yourself said that your church teaches that the apostles were laymen up until the day of Pentecost and performed the sacraments. The priestless sect took up this teaching and applied it to themselves, and then you saw into what abyss of impiety it leads. Therefore, you must either remain with your church’s teaching that the apostles were laymen until Pentecost and performed sacraments, thus agreeing with the priestless sect that laypeople have full authority to perform sacraments and thereby justify not only the priestless sect but also Protestants; or you must entirely reject the above-mentioned teaching of your church that the apostles were laymen until the Holy Spirit descended upon them on Pentecost.
New Ritualist: But how else is this to be understood? Tell me, what is your view on when Christ established in His Church the hierarchy of bishops, priests, and deacons?
Old Ritualist: Answer the following question: Is a priest above a deacon?
New Ritualist: Certainly, above.
Old Ritualist: What ranks of the priesthood does he bear?
New Ritualist: Two: the diaconate and the presbyterate.
Old Ritualist: Good. And is a bishop above a priest?
New Ritualist: Above.
Old Ritualist: What degrees of priesthood does he bear?
New Ritualist: Three degrees: deacon, priest, and bishop.
Old Ritualist: Are the apostles above bishops?
New Ritualist: Undoubtedly, above.
Old Ritualist: And did they bear in themselves all other degrees of hierarchy: deacon, priest, and bishop?
New Ritualist: Of course, they did.
Old Ritualist: And when did Christ make them apostles—before the descent of the Holy Spirit, or after?
New Ritualist: Before the descent of the Holy Spirit; even before His sufferings on the cross.
Old Ritualist: Indeed. This is written in the Gospel of Luke: “And it came to pass in those days, that he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God. And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles; Simon, whom he also named Peter, and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor” (Luke 6:12-16). Here is when the Lord chose, revealed, and sent some of His disciples. He set these chosen ones apart from His other disciples and gave them a special name: “whom also he named apostles.” This selection, naming, and appointment of apostles Christ did not undertake lightly, but after prolonged prayer: “continued all night in prayer to God.” This was not a simple choice, like one made by people when choosing friends and acquaintances, but a special, prayerful selection with a specific designation and title for those chosen. Before this selection and appointment, they were simply called disciples, but afterward, they were known as apostles, distinct from the other disciples of Christ who were not granted this title. Indeed, in the Sunday Gospel, in the commentary on the Savior’s words, “O faithless generation, etc.,” it is written: “For this reason, Christ grieves, being falsely accused by the holy apostles and disciples; for the apostles received the word of sacred preaching, and they were ordained as teachers of the world, and shone everywhere as the light of true divine wisdom to those who rightly believed and followed well, and heeded their teaching, who would not be despised even from the beginning” (Gospel Commentary, 4th week of Lent, folio 72). Saint John Chrysostom writes: “Then (Jesus) said to His disciples: ‘The harvest truly is great, but the laborers are few; pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth laborers into his harvest.’ And he called unto him his twelve disciples, and gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease. Now the names of the twelve apostles are these; etc.” (Commentary). Saying, “pray ye the Lord of the harvest,” without their request or petition, (Christ) Himself immediately ordains and appoints them to this office (Homilies of Chrysostom on Matthew, Homily 32). In the book The Truly Ancient and Truly Orthodox Church, by Gregory, Metropolitan of St. Petersburg, we read: “Saint Cyprian the martyr, in his letter to the lapsed (writes): ‘Our Lord, establishing the dignity of a bishop, and the pattern of His Church, said to Peter in the Gospel: ‘Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ From that time onward, the ordination of bishops continues in succession” (Part 1, Chapter 10).
New Ritualist: But didn’t you say that Christ founded His Church on the cross with His blood? And now you’re saying that He chose the apostles before His sufferings on the cross.
Old Ritualist: Christ indeed founded the Church on the cross. But its foundation was laid at the beginning of His Gospel ministry, from the time of His baptism. Even before His suffering, He established nearly all the sacraments of the Church. At least, the institution of the most important ones is directly mentioned in the Gospel: the institution of baptism (John 3:22, reading 11), communion (Luke 22:19-20, reading 108), and anointing with oil (Mark 6:13, reading 23). Thus, even before His crucifixion, the Savior established the sacred sacraments—certainly within the Church. And as proof that Christ’s Church already existed on earth before His sufferings, though not yet fully redeemed by His blood, I will read from the theology of your own church, by Metropolitan Macarius:
The desire to establish a single community from among His followers was expressed by the Savior repeatedly. For example:
After the Apostle Peter, speaking for all the apostles, confessed Him as the Son of God: ‘Upon this rock (i.e., the confession),’ said our Lord, ‘I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it’ (Matthew 16:18);
In the parable of the Good Shepherd, He said: ‘I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine… And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd’ (John 10:14-16);
In His prayer to the Heavenly Father: ‘That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us’ (John 17:21). With the thought of establishing His grace-filled kingdom on earth, He began His first preaching to people, as the evangelist Matthew recounts: ‘From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand’ (Matthew 4:17). With this very message, the Lord sent His disciples throughout Judea: ‘Go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand’ (Matthew 10:6-8). And how often He spoke to the people about this kingdom of God, both in parables and plainly (Matthew 13:24, 44-47; 22:2; 25:1; Luke 9:11; 10:11; 17:21, 31, and others).
But what Christ desired, He also accomplished. He Himself laid the foundation for His Church when He chose for Himself the first twelve disciples, who, believing in Him and remaining under His authority, formed a single community under a single head (John 17:13); and when, on the other hand, He established everything needed for forming a distinct society from among His followers. Specifically:
He instituted the rank of teachers who would spread His faith among the nations (Ephesians 4:11-12);
He established the sacrament of baptism for admitting all who believe in Him into this community (Matthew 28:19; John 3:3; 4:1; Mark 16:15);
The sacrament of the Eucharist for the closest union of the members of the community with each other and with Him as their Head (Matthew 26:26-28; Mark 14:22-24; Luke 22:19-20; 1 Corinthians 12:23-26);
The sacrament of repentance for reconciling and renewing the union of those members with Him and the Church who transgress His laws and statutes (Matthew 28:18; John 20:23); as well as all other sacraments (Matthew 18:18; 28:19; 19:4-6; Mark 6:13, and others). Therefore, even during His public ministry, the Lord spoke of His Church as already existing (Matthew 18:17). But Christ actually founded or established His Church only on the cross, where, in the words of the Apostle, He purchased it with His own blood (Acts 20:28) (Theology of Macarius, Vol. 2, § 167).
New Ritualist: Yes, now I see as well that indeed Christ chose His apostles, and with this choosing laid the foundation of His new grace-filled Church, which He later redeemed with His blood on the cross, so that neither the Church followed the apostles, nor the apostles followed the Church, but both appeared together. This refutes both the error of the priestless sect and the error of the Protestants, showing that the apostles, when they performed the sacraments, were not laymen but were chosen, appointed, and authorized for this, and that Christ’s Church was founded together with the apostles, or the priestly hierarchy.
Priestless: But didn’t you say that your church teaches that the apostles were laymen until the day of Pentecost and that only on that day did they receive the rank of priesthood? You even cited evidence for this from the Eight Questions posed to the Old Believers. And now you’re saying something different.
New Ritualist: No; our Orthodox Church teaches that the apostles had the rank of episcopacy even before the day of Pentecost. What was written in the preface to the Eight Questions is the opinion of certain individuals, not the teaching of our entire Church. The Orthodox Church itself teaches differently on this matter. Let me read from a book titled Conversation with the Old Believers on the Founding of Christ’s Church, which took place in the Nikolskoe Edinoverie Monastery in Moscow at a missionary gathering on September 9, 1886. In it, it is written:
Father Xenophon demanded an answer from the priestless sect member to his question—to show where the Church founded by the Lord exists. The priestless sect member said he would show where the Church exists, as long as he was told whether a community that does not have a bishop can be considered the Church of Christ or not.
Father Xenophon, wishing to respond to this question with an answer from the Psalmist, said: “such a community, according to the word of the prophet David, is a church of the deceitful.”
This was exactly what the priestless sect member wanted, to shift the conversation from the unresolvable question posed by Father Xenophon to another question, more favorable to him.
He immediately asked: “Was the community of those who believed in Christ before the day of Pentecost considered the Church of Christ or not?”
Father Xenophon answered affirmatively.
Priestless Old Believer: There was no bishop in that Church, yet you yourself say it was the Church of Christ.
Father Xenophon: In it, Christ Himself was the Shepherd and Bishop.
Priestless Old Believer: Christ was visibly with this Church until the day of His Ascension; but who was the bishop of that Church from the Ascension until Pentecost? Tell me.
Father Xenophon paused to consider his response; and the priestless sect member, thinking he had put him in a hopeless situation, triumphantly said: “Here you have named the Church without a bishop as the church of the deceitful, yet this was precisely the condition of Christ’s Church from the day of Ascension until Pentecost! So, by that same reasoning, our Church, existing without a bishop, is the Church of Christ, not the church of the deceitful. I suggest you retract your statement that a church without a bishop is a church of the deceitful.” The priestless member spoke this with great solemnity.
Father Xenophon replied: I will not retract it.
Priestless: Why?
Father Xenophon: During the period from the Lord’s Ascension until Pentecost, the Church was still in a state of establishment; but you exist not in that time, but after the establishment of the Church.
Priestless: The time may be different, but the condition is the same. And yet you dared to call the Church in this state the church of the deceitful!
Father Xenophon: I did not call the Church in that early state the church of the deceitful, but rather your church, in your condition. And the state of that early Church is not comparable to yours. Therefore, you unjustly apply my words to that apostolic Church. Tell me—who were the apostles? What rank did they hold?
Priestless: The apostles!
Father Xenophon: And did they hold the rank of bishop?
Priestless: They did not; they were simply messengers.
Father Xenophon: According to you, then, they were laymen? - Priestless: Yes, but only as messengers of God.
Father Xenophon: The Lord said to the Apostle Peter at the Sea of Galilee: “Feed my sheep.” With these words, the Lord entrusted him with the flock, and he was already a shepherd of the sheep, not a mere sheep himself. And this was before the day of Ascension.
Priestless: It is not stated in the Gospel that Christ made him a shepherd.
Father Xenophon: When Christ entrusted Peter, along with the other apostles, to feed the sheep, it already meant that the Lord made them shepherds. But your leaders have no commission from Christ to feed the sheep; thus, the condition of your church does not correspond to the condition in which Christ’s Church existed from the Lord’s Ascension until Pentecost.
At this point, two other missionaries present joined the discussion: Father Vasily Travin from Simbirsk and Father Tryphon Prokopyev from Vladimir. One of them said: “On the evening of the first day after the Resurrection, the Savior, appearing to the apostles, said, `As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.’ And having said this, He breathed on them and said, ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.’ Thus, the apostles received the power to forgive sins at that time; this is a power that belongs only to bishops and those priests ordained by them. How then, after receiving such authority, can they be called laymen and compared to your unordained teachers? Isn’t this a dishonor to the holy apostles and to Christ Himself?!”
The member of the priestless sect, ignoring the missionaries’ arguments, remained steadfast in his opinion. Although the priestless sect member left the discussion, not renouncing his view that the Church of Christ had no bishops from the day of the Lord’s Ascension until Pentecost, claiming that the apostles only received the dignity and authority of the episcopacy on that day, and that the Church’s hierarchy supposedly began only from that day, the conversation was nonetheless useful for dispelling this erroneous opinion. The missionaries presented Scriptural evidence that the apostles received the power to perform acts belonging to bishops even before Pentecost (Conversation with the Old Believers on the Founding of Christ’s Church, pp. 11-12).
Let me read further from another book on this subject:
After presenting the teaching on Christ’s Church and its holy sacraments, the missionary Matveyev once again turned to the priestless Old Believers with a question: ‘Without having among you the divinely established three-tiered hierarchy, and with it the seven holy sacraments, can you attain salvation?’ Timofeev (a priestless Old Believer) responded, `To your question I answer thus: before the day of Pentecost, there was neither priesthood nor sacraments in Christ’s Church, as is the case with us now. The state of the Church before Pentecost was salvific; therefore, we, too, will be saved. That is my answer to your question!’
Matveyev replied, ‘It is unjust to claim that neither priesthood nor sacraments existed in Christ’s Church before Pentecost, and it is equally inappropriate to compare the unfortunate state of your community with the condition of the Church before Pentecost. Jesus Christ, during His earthly life, chose twelve from among His disciples and called them apostles, as the evangelist Luke recounts: “And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles” (Luke 6:13). The word “apostle” means not only “one who is sent” but also a “steward of mysteries,” as the Apostle Paul explains in 1 Corinthians: “Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Corinthians 4:1). The word “apostle” also signifies “bishop,” as is confirmed by the words of the blessed Theodoret: “As I have said, those whom we now call presbyters and bishops were once called apostles. But in time, the term ‘apostle’ was reserved for the actual apostles, while the title of `bishop’ was given to those whom they ordained” (Commentary of Theodoret on 1 Corinthians 3:1).
From the General Epistle of James (5:14), it is evident that only ordained persons, no less than presbyters, can perform the sacrament of anointing with oil, for it is written: “Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord, and the Lord shall raise him up.” This sacrament was already being performed by the apostles during Jesus’ earthly life, as the evangelist Mark attests: “And they anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them” (Mark 6:13, reading 23). Victor, a presbyter of Antioch in the fifth century, commenting on this passage—‘And they anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them’—observes: `What the Apostle James speaks of in his canonical letter does not differ from this; for he writes: Is any sick among you?’ (Dogmatic Theology of Macarius, Vol. 4). Clearly, the apostles were vested with the authority of bishops and presbyters during the earthly life of Jesus Christ, and they performed the sacraments. This was before the day of Pentecost.
At the Last Supper, Jesus Christ authorized the apostles to perform the sacrament of the Eucharist, as seen in the Gospel: “This do in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19, reading 108). This, too, was before the day of Pentecost. After His resurrection, Jesus appeared to His disciples behind closed doors and, standing in their midst, said: “Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.” And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and said unto them, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained” (John 20:21-23, reading 65). It is evident that with these words Jesus Christ empowered the apostles to perform the sacrament of penance. This, too, was before the day of Pentecost.
After His resurrection, our Lord Jesus Christ commanded the apostles to perform the sacrament of baptism. “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost” (Matthew 28:19, reading 116). This, too, was before the day of Pentecost. All these scriptural references, concluded Matveyev, clearly testify that the apostles were already stewards of the mysteries before Pentecost. Therefore, it is in vain that the priestless Old Believers, who are laymen without the divinely instituted church hierarchy, attempt to equate their community with the state of the Church before Pentecost; to think of the apostles as the priestless Old Believers do is to disbelieve the word of God.
Timofeev (the priestless Old Believer) said, ‘You’ve only given us your personal interpretation, naming the apostles as bishops before Pentecost. Can you point out where exactly in the Holy Scripture it says that the apostles were called bishops before Pentecost? I can show you from the canons of the Sixth Ecumenical Council that neither bishops, presbyters, nor deacons existed before Pentecost. Here is what is stated in Canon 16 of that council: “Explaining this, the teacher of the Church, John Chrysostom, speaks thus: ‘It is indeed remarkable how the people did not become divided in their choice of men, nor did they reject the apostles. But it is essential to know what status these men held and what ordination they received: was it the rank of deacons? But there were none in the Church at that time; was it the office of presbyters? But there was no bishop yet—there were only apostles. Hence, I think that neither the name of deacons nor presbyters was known or in use.’” Now you see,’ Timofeev said triumphantly, `that there were no bishops before Pentecost. This means you’ve been misleading us with your supposed evidence.’
Matveyev replied, `It is incorrect for you to say that I was giving my own interpretations regarding the existence of the hierarchy in the Church before Pentecost, or that the apostles were called bishops and authorized by the Lord to perform the sacraments. It is clear to all listeners that I did not introduce any of my own ideas in this matter but proved everything based on Holy Scripture. As for the 16th canon of the Sixth Ecumenical Council that you cited to support your claim that there were no bishops before Pentecost, I think it’s necessary to first ask you: what do you believe—were there bishops after Pentecost or not?’
Timofeev: `Yes, we do not deny that there were bishops after Pentecost; we firmly assert that the apostles received ordination on the very day of Pentecost.’
Matveyev: `Then listen to the purpose of Saint John Chrysostom’s words cited in Canon 16 of the Sixth Ecumenical Council, which you just read. The Fathers of the Council of Neo-Caesarea, by Canon 15, forbade there to be more than seven deacons even in a large city, basing this rule on the Acts of the Apostles, where the selection of seven deacons is mentioned. The commentator of that canon, speaking on behalf of the Sixth Council, states: “The Fathers of the Council of Neo-Caesarea misunderstood this, and we compared the meaning of the Fathers of that council with the book of Acts and found that it was not concerning men serving the sacraments but serving at the tables,” referencing the book of Acts (Kormchaia, folio 56 verso and 182). Thus, the seven deacons mentioned in Acts chapter 6 were appointed to serve at tables long after Pentecost. If we interpret Saint John Chrysostom’s words as you do, it would imply that even after Pentecost there were no bishops; yet you yourself said that episcopacy was established on the day of Pentecost.
From this, I think it is clear to you that Saint John Chrysostom’s words mean that the name ‘bishop’ was not yet in use, not that the office of bishop did not exist or that the apostles were not authorized to perform sacraments. And that these words of Chrysostom should indeed be understood in this way is affirmed by the blessed Theodoret, whose testimony I cited earlier. As for your question, asking where exactly the apostles are literally called bishops, listen to what is written in the Acts of the Apostles, where the Apostle Peter quotes the prophetic words concerning Judas’s demise: “For it is written in the book of Psalms, ‘Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein,’ and ‘his bishopric let another take’” (Acts 1:20). Here Judas’s ministry is called a “bishopric,” and later, when speaking of choosing an apostle to take Judas’s place, the same ministry is called “apostleship” (verse 25). Commenting on this prophetic passage about Judas’s fall, the blessed Theodoret states: “And this prophecy was fulfilled because Judas, in his despair, died by hanging, and Matthias was appointed to fill the number of apostles” (Psalm 108:8, Commentary of Theodoret).
I think it necessary to also present further evidence from Scripture, which clearly demonstrates that episcopacy was established by Jesus Christ during His earthly life. Saint John Chrysostom, in his homily on the Epistle of the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians, 15:7, says that James, the brother of the Lord, was ordained as the bishop of Jerusalem by Christ Himself. Elsewhere in Chrysostom’s works, we read (Vol. 1, Miscellaneous, p. 330): “Episcopacy was instituted by Christ Himself.” In the Prologue of October 23, we read: “James, the brother of the Lord, was consecrated as the bishop of Jerusalem by Christ Himself.” In the book On Faith (folio 24), we find: “Another James, the brother of the Lord according to the flesh, the first bishop of Jerusalem, was appointed by Christ Himself and was slain by the malice of the Jews.” In the Book of Kyrill (folio 77), it reads: “The Aaronic priesthood, as temporary, ceased, but Christ’s eternal priesthood arose, He who, rising from the dead, consecrated His apostles by ordination, that is, by the laying on of hands”.
From the testimonies presented, it becomes very clear that bishops existed even before Pentecost. Therefore, my interlocutor Timofeev’s criticism of me for supposedly fabricating evidence regarding this issue is baseless. (Vladimir Eparchial News, 1889, No. 10, p. 274-277, unofficial section, article “Conversation of the Orthodox with the Old Believers in the Village of Borisovo,” and separate reprint, p. 5 and onward).
This is how the Orthodox Church teaches about the establishment of the hierarchy and sacraments in the Church: bishops were established during the earthly life of Jesus Christ, when He chose and named them apostles; they were entrusted to perform the sacraments even before Christ’s suffering. The notion that the Church lacked bishops before Pentecost is a teaching of the priestless sect, erroneous and false.
It would be foolish to believe that they were ordained as bishops by receiving the Holy Spirit on Pentecost. For on that day, not only the apostles but also others—indeed, not only men but also women, the myrrh-bearers, and the Mother of God—received the Spirit (Acts, reading 2). Therefore, if the Holy Spirit ordained those who received Him as bishops, then that would mean even the myrrh-bearing women were ordained to this rank.
Generally speaking, regarding the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles, it should be understood that He did not perform new sacraments upon them, but only fulfilled with His grace the sacraments they had already received, beginning with baptism. As Christ Himself said to them before His ascension: “For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence” (Acts 1:5, reading 1), even though they had already received baptism with water. Saint John Chrysostom, in his commentary on this, says: “Why does Christ say, ‘ye shall be baptized,’ when there was no water in the upper room? Because the most important part (of baptism) is the Holy Spirit, through whom the water also operates. Nevertheless, we see that they were baptized both with water and (baptized) at different times. For us, both (baptisms, that is, by water and the Spirit) occur together, but back then they were separate. Initially, they were baptized by John” (Homily 1 on Acts). So, the apostles were baptized with water before the descent of the Holy Spirit, who only completed this sacrament within them. The same must be said concerning ordination. Otherwise, if one understands that the Holy Spirit performed both baptism and ordination upon them without any visible actions—without water and without laying on of hands—then it must be acknowledged that these sacraments can be received without any visible actions today, which would lead us into extreme Protestantism and eventually into godlessness.
Old Ritualist: The holy Apostle Paul writes, “But as God is true, our word toward you was not yea and nay” (2 Corinthians 1:18, reading 169). The apostles of Christ never taught or acted in such a way that they would say “yes” at one time and “no” at another. But your New Ritualist church regards the same teaching as true and salvific at one time, and then considers it erroneous, false, and destructive at another; at one time it presents it as Church doctrine, and at another as merely the opinion of individuals.
This is by the way; the main point is that you have beautifully proven that the apostles had the rank of bishop even before the resurrection of Christ. But when He rose again, none of them believed in the resurrection, despite the fact that trustworthy witnesses proclaimed this unbreakable truth to them—they did not believe until Christ Himself appeared to them and reproached their unbelief and hardness of heart, for they did not believe those who had seen Him after He was risen (Mark 16:14, reading 71). This is clear evidence that all bishops are capable of falling into error, and that the Church may for some time be left without a single true-believing, truly Orthodox bishop, and yet remain the unassailable true Church.
New Ritualist: Still, I am not convinced. At the time when the apostles did not believe in Christ’s resurrection, He was visibly on earth, as this was before His ascension. Therefore, this example cannot serve as proof that all bishops can fall into error.
Old Ritualist: If, even then, when the Lord Himself was visibly on earth, all the apostles could fall into unbelief, then it is all the more likely that bishops can fall into error when He has ascended to heaven. So, your argument only further confirms that bishops can indeed fall into error.
It should also be noted that even after His ascension into heaven, Christ remains with all believers, with His entire Church, though invisibly, as He Himself promised (Matthew 28:20, reading 116), especially when, due to persecutions, there are no church teachers or bishops, as Saint Kyrill of Alexandria writes in his commentary on the words of the Psalm: “They shall not be ashamed in the evil time, and in the days of famine they shall be satisfied” (Psalm 36:19). “The hunger of holy teachings has befallen those who have sinned—not those who are diligent in the divine commandments. The latter, when teachers are absent due to persecution, the Lord Himself will feed as those who believe in Him, by His Spirit” (Explanatory Psalter, Evphimiy Zigaben, commentary on Psalm 36, v. 19, p. 224, in note). Therefore, just as when all the apostles remained in unbelief, Christ was in the Church, so too now, when all bishops may be in error, He has not abandoned His Church with His continual saving presence.