Knox and the Succession of the Apostolic Church

As Knox continues with Tyrie’s letter he exposes the Roman Church's view of due "Succession" or "Apostolic Succession". The Church of Rome in Knox's day taught that their legitimacy, and therefore their authority, rests in their ability to connect themselves directly to the Apostles through a line of successors of Bishops going back to the Apostle Peter. Their tradition teaches that he went to Rome and served the Church there until his death.

Further, the Roman Church claims that they teach the doctrine of the Apostles. And so the Jesuit Tyrie challenges his Protestant brother, David to show this "new" Scottish Kirk's succession to the Apostolic authority and doctrine.

Knox reveals the faulty logic of Tyrie by showing the Church's call to submit to Christ, not to the Apostolic Sea (seat of authority). I was reminded of that passage found in Eph 4, which speaks of Gifts that Christ has given to the Church:

Eph 4:7ff But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. 8 Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. ... 11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; 12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying
of the body of Christ: &c.

The Roman Church's view is that the Church is given to the Clergy as a gift, but the Scriptures teach that these officers are gifts to the Church, and are to serve the Church. Here Tyrie is trying to claim that the people are bound to submit to the True Church by which he means the True Ministry which has True Authority. But Knox is saying that the people are bound to follow the Ministry so far as they follow Christ, which was the teaching of the Apostle Paul (1 Cor 11:1).

And on the other hand, we see nowhere in all of the Scriptures any declaration or command that upholds a direct Apostolic Succession. And yet Knox will go further and give the Protestant Church's proof that it does "directly and lawfully" flow from the Apostles; just look at our Doctrine, Rites and Ceremonies, they are all authorized from their writings.

Again we see that Regulative Principle applied by this Reformer. The Reformation Churches were not about innovation as they were accused of, but maintained because there was Scriptural warrant; and that not explicitly commanded was implicitly forbidden. Ironically, there was much innovation in the Roman Church, and most of it embraced to by the authority of tradition; which brings us to our next major point.

Tyrie claims that there is a succession of Apostolic doctrine found in all of the writings of the "ancient writers" as well as the visible establishment of the Roman Catholic Church in all the world; which testimony the Protestant Church lacks.

Knox contests the authority of the Ancient Writers or Church Fathers as being equal with the Scriptures when he says,

We are not bound to credit whatsoever the Fathers have spoken: but our faith, (as is before said), is builded upon the sure Rock, Jesus Christ, and upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets. (Eph. 2) So far as any Fathers agree therewith, we reverently do embrace it; but if the Fathers have affirmed anything without the warrant of the written word of the Eternal our God, to whose only voice the sheep of his pasture are bound, it is as lawful to us to reject that which proceedeth from man and not from God, as it is easy to them to affirm it.

These men are subordinate to the Scriptures (and even then they do not individually speak with the kind of authority that a court does). However, Mr. Tyrie fails to demonstrate where these Church Fathers (let alone the very Word of God) teach peculiar points of doctrine, such as: the Mass containing saving grace, the Pope being the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and many other errors that the Roman Church espouses.

Yet Knox's contending does not cease here, but he further refutes Tyrie by exposing his further contrary teaching with the Apostle's Creed. Knox instructs us that by Tyrie's mention of the world-wide Roman Catholic establishment, he implies a denial of any Church that has not been visibly observable by the eyes of men.

With plain reason Knox rebukes Tyrie's assertion:

If Master Tyrie recant not this assertion, he must correct his creed. And where universally before we used to say, Credo sanctam Ecclesiam, &c., he must say Video sanctam Ecclesiam. [That is, as before we used to say, "I believe in the holy Church," he must say, "I see the holy Church."] For if there be no Kirk upon the face of the earth, but that which is visible, and that which may be shown first by certain notes external, then superfluous and vain it were to us to say, I believe the holy Kirk universal; but confidently we might affirm, I see the holy Kirk.

Tyrie is forced to deny his assertion or deny the Confession of the "Apostolic and Ancient" Church. This kind of contending causes all those of the True Church to cheer for this apologetic argument, for this is the defense of the Church on the Wilderness.

Consider Noah, who alone spared from a global flood with wasted all that breathed, along with that which was redeemed in the Ark.

Consider Elijah, despairing in the desert, tempted to doubt God. Yet when he says to God, "I'm all that's left, and they want to kill me!" God replies that He reserved 7,000 faithful that did not bow the knee to Baal.

Consider so many examples in the Bible where there was only a remnant preserved, while the larger visible representation of the Church was in a scandalous state and maintained a nominal profession.

Knox concludes:

… oftentimes it is that the Kirk militant is so afflicted, yea, the beauty thereof is so obscured to the most part of the world, that the synagogue of Satan usurps the title of the true Kirk, and Babylon is preferred to Jerusalem; so that the elect are compelled to complain, and say, "We see not our own signs, now is there no prophet any more amongst us." (Psalm 71)

Bearing in mind then that we observe a great city on a Hill, Jerusalem, with the established true religion protected and promoted in all her majesty and prosperity.

We also see at times the Church in the Wilderness, wandering, and pursuing their promised dwelling place.

And sometimes we do not see but know that there are 7,000 faithful, who have not bowed the knee to false gods.

We ought to consider, What makes the Church more or less visible? I may deal with this in my next paper.