The argument
Catholic apologists point to early Christian leaders and their records of succession as evidence that the Church Christ founded continued after the apostles. The argument is substantial. If Clement and Irenaeus preserve a public line of Christian leadership and teaching, the claim that Christianity simply vanished after the apostles is untenable. They also challenge the idea that the early generations had no structure for transmitting ministry.
Latter-day Saints believe God continued to reach people through those centuries and that Christians preserved much truth. The Church teaches that God withdrew priesthood authority to direct the Church and administer its ordinances. The Catholic argument challenges that specific claim. Catholic Answers, “Mormon Prophet vs. Catholic Pope” · Preach My Gospel, lesson 1
What Clement says
In 1 Clement 42, the author says the apostles appointed tested men as bishops and deacons in the communities they established. In chapter 44, he says the apostles instructed that, when those ministers died, other approved men should succeed to their ministry. He uses this succession to argue that Corinth was wrong to remove ministers who had served faithfully. This is direct evidence that Christians near the end of the first century appealed to an orderly, continuing ministry and expected successors. 1 Clement 42–44
Dennis Knapp notes that the letter is often dated around AD 96, potentially during the apostle John’s lifetime. That makes an early origin for the practice plausible and challenges a story in which bishops invented succession only after the apostles died. The letter defends succession to a ministry already in place at Corinth. Its argument does not specify how a vacancy in the apostles’ own governing body would be filled. Dennis Knapp, “Theological Assumptions Vs. The Historical Record”
What Irenaeus adds
Around the late second century, Irenaeus argued that churches could publicly trace bishops appointed by the apostles and their successors. He names the Roman succession from Linus through Clement and appeals to the public teaching handed down in these churches against groups claiming secret apostolic knowledge. This is a strong witness to institutional continuity and the public transmission of Christian teaching in his day. It also shows that Christians themselves treated succession as evidence in disputes over doctrine. Irenaeus, Against Heresies III.3
The Catholic case draws a further conclusion. Catholic teaching says bishops succeed the apostles in their teaching authority and that apostolic preaching is preserved through this succession. A bishop need not be an original eyewitness to succeed to an apostolic office. That is the Catholic doctrinal claim, grounded in its reading of early sources and Church authority, and should be represented accurately. Catechism of the Catholic Church §§75–79
What authority passed on?
Compare Clement’s account with Acts 1. The disciples fill Judas’s vacancy among the Twelve by seeking the Lord’s choice of a witness to Christ’s Resurrection. Clement defends approved successors to church ministers. Both describe continuity, but they identify different offices. The Catholic case goes further. Vatican II teaches that Christ willed the bishops as a body, in communion with its head, to carry on the apostles’ mission and authority. The early sources support a claim of succession. Christ’s grant of that specific authority and its permanence are the points to test. Acts 1:15–26 · Lumen Gentium §§20–22
The Catholic argument draws on Christ’s promise that His Church would endure. Latter-day Saints read that promise alongside warnings of falling away. A dispute in Corinth or Ephesus can show that a church faced real trouble. It takes more evidence to establish that apostolic authority was withdrawn everywhere. The Latter-day Saint claim of restored authority can be examined on its own terms. Doctrine and Covenants 27 identifies Peter, James, and John as the apostles who ordained Joseph Smith and Oliver Cowdery. Matthew 16:18–19 · Acts 20:28–30 · Doctrine and Covenants 27:12–13
A fair reply
“Clement and Irenaeus give real evidence of early Christian ministry and a public claim of continuity, and I take that seriously. The LDS claim does not require pretending those Christians or their truths never existed. It says that apostolic authority to direct Christ’s Church and administer its ordinances was eventually lost. The early succession evidence is relevant, but does it establish that the later bishops retained the same commission and keys Christ gave the apostles? Let’s look at what the sources say and what each tradition means by succession.”
For the historical case, compare the accounts of the priesthood restoration.
Sources and limits
- 1 Clement 42–44 directly records a first-century Christian argument for appointed ministers and succession in ministry. The text does not use modern LDS categories such as priesthood keys.
- Irenaeus, Against Heresies III.3 argues that public episcopal succession preserves apostolic teaching. This is a late-second-century witness to his argument and the succession list he reports; the text alone does not independently verify every earlier appointment.
- The Catholic Catechism states the Catholic interpretation of apostolic succession. It establishes what Catholicism teaches, while its truth remains part of the dispute.
- The Church’s Gospel Topics essay on apostasy states the LDS position about the withdrawal and Restoration of authority.
- Dennis Knapp’s 2026 essay and Catholic Answers’ comparison of Catholic and LDS authority are examples of contemporary Catholic arguments. Their conclusions should be distinguished from the primary texts they interpret.