¶ … Forgiveness of Sins in the Early Church: Doctrine Salvation 3rd Century and 5th Century Christianity Christianity in the 3rd century was mainly the era when Ante-Nicene Fathers wrote after the Apostolic Fathers. Also, the Roman Empire was had its height and experienced the Crisis of the Third Century. It was a time when the emperor Decius endorsed measures that were intended to reestablish unity and stability. However, in the 5th century in Christianity, there were many developments going which led to more fracturing of the State church of the Roman Empire. However, it was the worse time for Christians because a came a time of heavy persecution. With that being said, forgiveness of sins in the early church from 3rd -- the 5th century became very important in the faith.

With two or three exceptions, the orthodox church of Tertullian's day had this belief that post-baptismal sins would not be able to be forgiven. There was this difference among which postbaptismal sins would be able to be forgiven and which could not. For example, they believed that if a person lost their temper, they would be able to be forgiven. They also believed that if a person was saying evil things of another person or even if they were speaking curse words against them, they could be forgiven. Even if they decided to tell a lie that they are allowed to be forgiven. All of these sins during the 3rd century and 5-century Christianity, were looked at as being light sins.[footnoteRef:1] The reason is that if they could not be pardon for these, how else would they be able to make it into heaven? [1: Brattson, David. 2012. "The Forgiveness of PostBaptismal Sin in Ancient." Accessed September 23, 2015....

http://biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/churchman/105-04_332.pdf.]
However, there were sins that were not forgivable. For instance, if a person decided they wanted to go kill somebody, rather it be on purpose or by accident, they could not be forgiven. Even if that individual committed idolatry, there would be no pardon for them. Also, getting involved with fraud could not be atoned. Apostasy was something that was not tolerated at all, so there was no forgiveness here as well. However, the worse one of them all was blasphemy. All of these sins were looked at as being incapable of pardon.

As for the method of reuniting a repentant Christian to the church, according to Chapter I of On Modesty makes the point that the early church's procedure for forgiving post- baptismal sins comprised of 'dooming them to pour forth tears barren of peace. This was done so that they would be able to come back into the church without being disgraced. However, Tertullian appears to state a view held in common by the orthodox church that involved a few exceptions. They believed that every sin is dischargeable either by forgiveness or else by punishment: by absolution as the result of discipline, by penalty as the result of disapproval.[footnoteRef:2] Also, during the 3rd century and 5-century Christianity, the person had to go through some steps to actually be forgiven. For instance, they had to do what was called, "sue for mercy." This meant that when they were out of repentance they had to weep and fast. This was done because they had to offer their self- suffering to God. However, this was the Catholic practice. [2: ibid]

During the 3rd century and 5-century Christianity, there was a…