Ignatius of Antioch (c.35 ?– c.108)
While not having the same authority of the Holy Scripture it is nonetheless instructive and sometimes clarifying referring to the so called Church Fathers (no book after the closing of the N. T. is inspired. While there are thousands of wonderful and inspiring books none matches the Bible.) Ignatius, the second or the third bishop of Antioch, being a disciple of Peter, Paul or John, or of all three (the story is not so clear) lived very close to (and for a while in) the apostolic age.
From his seven letters he strongly encourages submission to the bishop (one of the elders in the church) as to Christ. Was he right in affirming this? Was he wrong? My point is to show that submission to authority in the church was not a Chinese invention influenced by its tradition or by Mao.
In any case Ignatius has not a good reputation in the Lord's Recovery. Actually, as a martyred he was praised by Watchman Nee. For what he wrote in his seven letters he is criticized by W. Lee and in less degree by W. Nee (and maybe by Protestant in general, I don't know). Let's start by quoting Lee,
“...Ignatius wrongly interpreted the words in Acts 20:17-28. There the apostle clearly said that the overseers were elders. Elder denotes the person, and overseer denotes the service; these two terms are two designations for the same person. Ignatius, however, thought that the overseers, spoken of in Acts 20:17-28, were higher than the elders; he taught that elders were for a locality but that overseers were not limited to one locality...”
(The Testimony and the Ground of the Church, Chapter 14, Section 1, at www.lsm.org)
“Ignatius was a dear brother, but he made a big mistake in teaching that an overseer, a bishop, was higher than an elder. This shows us that we must be careful in interpreting the Bible. An overseer or bishop according to Ignatius controls the elders in the churches. This may have seemed like a small mistake, but this was the opening of the door for the hierarchy in today’s Christendom.”
(Elders' Training, Book 04: Other Crucial Matters Concerning the Practice of the Lord's Recovery, Chapter 8, Section 1, at www.lsm.org)
“Ignatius was able to make such a big mistake because he was not clear about the Body, the one new man. His erroneous teaching gave the ground to rank within the church and brought hierarchy into the church.”
(The History of the Church and the Local Churches, Chapter 1, Section 2, at www.lsm.org)
W. Lee accuses Ignatius of wrongly interpreting the words in Acts 20:17-28, and by doing so to have introduced hierarchy in the church. If anyone actually reads the seven letters of Ignatius he will see that W. Lee deduction is wrong. How did he know that Ignatius was interpreting that passage? He was not teaching at all! There were already bishops “ruling” the church! He did not introduce a new teaching!
A very young W. Nee is more clear on this point,
“Twelve years after John wrote Revelation, one "father" of that time, Ignatius, also wrote to the church in Ephesus. From that letter we can see that by then the church had left the system established by Christ and the apostles. Originally, overseers and elders were the same group of people. There was no such thing as one man ruling one church or many churches. We have mentioned this point before. However, the Nicolaitans were raised up. They changed the Lord's system, gave special authority to the workers, and established a sect. Ignatius did not stop this. On the contrary, he encouraged this from the side. In chapter six of his book, it was mentioned, "Hence, it is very obvious that as we honor the Lord Himself, we should also honor the bishop." Notice the word bishop here is singular. This shows us the beginning of the one-man-rule. This is not only true with Ephesus; all the churches of that day were under this snare. Hence, when Ignatius wrote to the Manicheans, he said, "As the Lord would not do anything apart from the Father, in the same way, you [the elders, deacons, or the members] should not do anything apart from the bishop."”
(Collected Works of Watchman Nee, The (Set 1) Vol. 04: The Christian (2), Chapter 3, Section 12, at www.lsm.org)
Nee complaint about Ignatius is that he didn't stop the situation (the situation was already there) that “gave special authority to the workers”. He didn't blame Ignatius for misinterpretation or for a new teaching. This difference in understanding of a simple fact of history as this (between Lee and Nee) makes me wonder how, and how much really Lee got from Nee when allegedly Nee told Lee about all the best things of 1900 years of Christianity.