(Before reading this post, it might be helpful to first read: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3)

Shaping an Understanding of the Church

A Church That Inflates

Beyond ‘one, holy, catholic and apostolic,’ what can be said about the Church?  Will a defining proposition contain enough expression to encompass all that the Church is?  What about the revelatory biblical explanations of the church in Scripture–shouldn’t we just be comfortable with those?  How can we be sure we will get it right?  While these are pertinent questions, they may be misdirected.  With everything we have been discovering in our investigation of the Church, the one theme I hope you have picked up on is the diversity of shape the Church has taken throughout the ages.  At Pentecost (Acts 2) it was a whole lot easier to point to a specific group and say, “look, there’s the Church!” than it is today.  Because of the 2000 years of history we have between Pentecost and today, a rock-solid definition that includes a locus and genetic group is very difficult to accurately express.  I would like to express a non-propositional, fluid understanding of the Christian Church today.

If we authentically trust God as Christians, then we must trust that through the person of the Holy Spirit, God has been forming and guiding the Church for the last 2000+ years.  This gives us the confidence as believers to assert that the Church today is exactly what and where it should be.

 

What

The church is comprised of two encompassing elements: transcendent and experiential.  These two groups are different and distinct from Israel (both current and historical Israel) and all other groups God has chosen and/or ordained throughout the known history of humanity.  The transcendent church represents all who have authentically been born from above (or regenerated) by the Spirit of God (John 3) throughout the whole of time.  These people are said to have been justified by God’s grace through faith in Christ Jesus alone.  The experiential church represents these Christians (real Jesus followers) who are alive today and publically gather together (manifesto) to devote themselves to the apostles’ teaching (and the whole of the Holy Scriptures), to fellowship, to the breaking of bread, and to prayers (Acts 2:42).

These Christians are united in community (common-unity) by the Holy Spirit to the entire body of Christ through their geographic church expression.  To be authentic, these Christians must truly believe in the second person of the Trinity—Jesus Christ—and seek to observe His commands (Matt. 28:20).  Within their geographic church expression, they must practice both ordinances that the Lord Jesus mandated: Baptism and the Lord’s Supper.  This devotion to Jesus as Lord should yield to an ever increasing growth in holiness (sanctification). 

Where

Today, the church is observable in geographic gatherings of people.  Most often, but not always, these gatherings occur in predefined buildings or spaces suited for the gathering of people.  Most, but not all churches are part of larger networks of other like-minded churches.  These networks (denominations) are normatively united around theological expressions that encompass the convictions of the leadership and people who adhere to that expression.  Usually, these theological expression statements can be traced back to an historical offshoot of the main East/West church split in 1054 AD.  As long as the fundamental ‘roots’ of any given church align to the historically orthodox one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church, then that local gathering can be said to be an authentic Christian church.   

The ‘Whatabouts’

Whatabout…

Usually, at this point in the discussion, people who are seeking self justification offer the conjecture, “well, whatabout such-and-such a theological conviction,” or, “whatabout so-and-so’s teachings?”  To this, I will say that along the ever-present proverbial spectrum there are good Christian folks who will want more clarity, and ones who will be comfortable with less clarity.  To this I will attest that we all believe some truths the same as God has articulated them.  Contrastively, we all are misguided to some extent about the truths that God has articulated.  No one person has gotten everything right and conversely, no one person has gotten everything wrong.  Here I am reminded of the Scripture which tells of God’s unfathomable grace in how He deals with us, “He has not dealt with us as our sins deserve or repaid us according to our offenses (Psalm 103:10).”

In Conclusion

To conclude, we can see there are definitely some things that the church is not.  Of course there are some terms and word-pictures in the Bible that describe the church.  Also, the church has a history which lead to the discovery of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.  Lastly, we can trust that through the person of the Holy Spirit, God has been forming and guiding the Church for the last 2000 plus years.  This gives us the confidence as believers to assert that the Church, both now and in the future, is exactly what and where it should be.

Grace and peace to you,

Sean~~

Tags: 4, blog, Church, define, four, is, not, part, series, three, what

...open the doors and see all the people...

This is part 3 of a 4 part blog series that is wrestling with the big question, “What is the church?”

In part 1 I dealt with what the church is not. In part 2, I discussed the words and word pictures that we see in the Scriptures that can help us describe the church. Here in part 3, I will walk through a brief and selected history of the Christian church with the end goal of discovering this one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

For the purposes of this series, I will be dissecting my brief and selected church history into five time periods—although this could be done many other ways. These time chunks are not meant to be an exhaustive representation of the church during this time period, merely a selection to give us guidance in our study here. I have also decided to briefly highlight historical figures during these time blocks that I hope will give our historical viewpoint some aspect of personality.

After his messianic confession, Jesus told Peter, “on this rock I will build My church, and the forces of Hades will not overpower it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth is already bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth is already loosed in heaven (Matt 16:18-19).” Jesus here was appointing Peter to a special office within the Church that 10 of his other disciples would take part in along with Matthias in Acts 1:26 and Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:8-11. This was an exclusive office that would be closed upon their earthly death. This was the apostolic office of the New Testament Church. This leads us to our first time chunk: The Apostolic Period.

The Apostolic Period was a short time period within church history. It begins at Pentecost in AD 4 when the church began (Acts 1:7-8; 2). During this period the foundations of the Church were being laid. Authoritative doctrines were being set forth and early converts were being instructed in the ways of the faith. This time period would close with the deaths of the original apostles. If the apostle John did indeed die in AD 95 than with him, so did the Apostolic Period.

The Apostle Paul

For this time period I would like to highlight the apostle Paul. Most of us know the story of the Jewish Pharisee Saul of Tarsus and his amazing conversion to Christianity, how Jesus changed his name to Paul and appointed him to an apostolic ministry—if you aren’t familiar with the story, check out Acts 22:1-21 and Galatians 1:11-24. Paul was instrumental during this time period of the church. Inspired and superintended by the Holy Spirit, Paul wrote much of the New Testament that would set forth the doctrines of the church for years to come. Paul had great sin (1 Tim 1:15), but God used him in great ways to grow the church.

We can see the early creedal character of the church during the Apostolic Period through the statements the church professed during this time. Fantastically, these statements have been faithfully preserved for us in the Scriptures and we can find them in: John 1; Romans 1:1-4; 1 Corinthians 15:1-5; Philippians 2:5-11; Colossians 1:15-20; 1 Timothy 3:16.

After the apostles became absent from their bodies and were present with the Lord, the church moved into the Antique Period. In this period, the church had to adopt a process for confirming second and third generation leadership. Of utmost importance to the leaders of the church during this time was the preservation of the apostolic teaching. Passing on the faith and entrusting it to faithful men who would be able to continue this cycle (2 Tim 2:2) was the main focus of this expanding early church. During the Antique Period (approx. AD 100-300) the church underwent much persecution. This had the effect of strengthening the church. Now tested and hardened by fire, the church could continue strong and bold into its next transition period.

Polycarp was burned at the stake for his faith in Christ Jesus.

During the Antique Period I find it appropriate to highlight the life of Polycarp. As the bishop of Smyrna, Polycarp had great influence in the early church. He was also a quasi celebrity having sat at the feet of the apostle John learning from him. Eventually, about AD 155, Polycarp would be burned alive at the stake for his un-renouncing faith in Jesus Christ. His death only helped the Christian cause in this era.

Continuing with the creedal theme, out of this period we get the Apostle’s Creed. We also begin to see the same collection of New Testament letters being read in the churches throughout this period. The first church worship manual would appear at Antioch (Didache) and the antique church experienced enormous growth during intense persecution.

The Antediluvian Period of the church would be primarily influenced through an onslaught of developing epistemologies. Looking into this period we see a development of: ascetic monasticism (monks and monasteries), institutionalism (within the Roman church), scholasticism (with the rise of the universities), humanism (in the renaissance), and mysticism (individual spirituality as a reaction to other ways of thinking). These alternative ideologies would have a divisive affect on the church. And so we see in AD 1054 the eastern (Greek) church splitting from the western (Roman) church.

One could argue that the church shifted its focus from being Christian (following Jesus) to being right (following epistemologies that are seeking truth) during this period. While truth seeking inherently is not a bad endeavor (John 8:32), we can see an extreme paradigm shift that led to many problems in the church during this time. The church was aching and groaning for the Reformation by the time we would get there in the 1500’s.

John Cassian and his awesome blue monk garb.

There are many key figures that one could highlight during this time period. To keep things on a positive note, I would like to highlight two ‘John’ figure heads which represent the opening and closing of the Antediluvian period.

John Cassian was a cenobium desert monk in Egypt who lived at the beginning of the Antediluvian Period around AD 400. John’s life could be classified as one who was seeking to balance the Egyptian monastic order with biblical methods. Primary of John’s works are: The Institutes (1100 years before Calvin’s institutes—and much more helpful I might add) and The Conferences. The importance of John’s work cannot be underestimated.

Yes, John Calvin is a bobblehead doll.

Our second figure brings us to the close of this time period with the ‘Institutes’ work of John Calvin. When John Calvin published his Institutio Christianae Religionis (Institutes of the Christian Religion) in 1536 the Protestant Reformation was in full swing. There is arguably no other figure that has influenced Protestant British and therefore British North American Christianity than John Calvin. Charles Haddon Spurgeon said of John Calvin, “Among all those who have been born of women, there has not risen a greater than John Calvin; no age before him ever produced his equal, and no age afterwards has seen his rival. In theology, he stands alone, shining like a bright fixed star, while other leaders and teachers can only circle round him, at a great distance — as comets go streaming through space — with nothing like his glory or his permanence.” While this is quite a statement about anybody, it reflects the prominence that Calvin’s theology had coming out of this period. While the 5 points of Calvinism (T: total depravity, U: unconditional election, L: limited atonement, I: irresistible grace, P: perseverance of the saints) don’t faithfully represent John’s holistic view, but, were written by his students later, they do show to us the historic tenets of this theological position.

The reformation birthed the Modern period of the church which gave rise to rationalistic epistemology. While positively rationalism gave us the sense that what we know to be true can be trusted, ideologically, I am reflecting the position that it had a negative impact on people of faith.

Rationalism replaces biblical truths with rationalistic truths and has the tendency to be reductionistic. Let me also point out that following the reformation, the authority of church tradition, as it was understood at that time, was tossed to the side. Martin Luther’s reforming words dug in deeply and became a resounding cry of the modern period, “Unless I am convinced by proofs from Scriptures or by plain and clear reasons and arguments, I can and will not retract, for it is neither safe nor wise to do anything against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me.” Rationalistic thinkers have the tendency to focus on proofs from plain and clear reasons and forget to consult the true authorities which are: the Scriptures and God’s help. This convincing via sheer reason would unfortunately become a stumbling block for people of faith.

"I AM" renee descartes

Also affecting this period and connected to rationalism would be the beginning of the enlightenment. As French philosopher Renee Descartes so confidently spoke during this era, “I think, therefore I am.” Many of the scientific disciplines were birthed during the modern period and knowing things through empiricism and the organization of ideas through categories became the accepted epistemology of this time.

Kan you? No you Kant!

In the west, a great example of the product of modernism would be the theology of Immanuel Kant. Categorical Imperatives as Kantianism expresses them, would eventually mature and give rise to the ultimate expressions of modernism: the quest for the historical Jesus, the Jesus seminar, and the “Mega-church” among other products of this way of thinking.

The rejection of Modernity gave rise to the Postmodern era which started in North America about the 1960’s and continues to today. Postmodernism influences every new wave of Christian thought in the church today and manifests itself in a passive rather than active sense.

Because of its freshness on the scene of the timeline, Post-modernity is widely misunderstood and often attacked by modernists. This polemic is understandable as differing epistemologies often create friction. The list of modernists that have made the claim that, “Postmodernism is a rejection of truth!” is too long to even begin to list here. This claim is blatantly false and Postmodernism is not a rejection of any kind of truth whatsoever. If you need proof of this just ask anyone who is under the age of 50 if they believe that there are things that are true and things that are false. You will most often receive a affirmative answer. John Franke, a fantastic theologian and postmodern thinker, says that postmodernism can affect general philosophical beliefs, attitudes and intellectual tendencies related to such matters as epistemology, language, and the nature of reality. Ultimately, these thoughts will express themselves in truths, they probably will not land in the categorical ‘boxes’ that modernists have adopted and therefore create misunderstanding and disagreement among modernists—hence the polemic.

Whether you like it or not, we are all affected in some way, shape, or form by both modernity and post-modernity—this is simply where we find ourselves in the timeline. Therefore, YOU represent a great example of personality in this era. Right now, you are helping to shape the ideals of the church in this age. Might I suggest that we orient ourselves to the historic, confessional Christian faith that was passed on by the apostles. A historic expression is found in the profession of the Christian community as the one, holy, catholic and apostolic church.

Let’s break this church down—
One: Authentic Christians are meant to be baptized by water and the Holy Spirit into the community (common-unity) of the faith which rests in Christ Jesus alone and can be tangibly experienced through the practice of the Lord’s Supper. Simply, we’re all in this together.

Holy: As God’s elect people, the Church is to be distinct from the operative functions of the world. Simply, set apart to God.

Catholic: A participation of all Christian churches in the transcending belief ideals which unify us. Simply, that which has been believed everywhere, always and by all.

Apostolic: An adoption of the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints through the teachings of the apostles as seen in the Scriptures. Simply, the Bible tells me so.

So far, in part 1, we looked at what the church is not. Then, in part 2, we made some etymological discoveries about terms and word-pictures that describe the church. Next, in part 3, we walked through a selected history of the church and broke down the historical discovery of this one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.

Next, in part 4 I will come to a conclusion on the question, “What is the Church?” I  hope you will find my conclusion to be biblically sound, theologically accurate, historically consistent and reasonably viable.

Grace and peace to you,
Sean~~

–
Resources:

Franke, John R., The Character of Theology: An Introduction to its Nature, Task, and Purpose, Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.

Revell, Fleming H., The Autobiography of Charles H. Spurgeon, Compiled from His Diaries, Letters, and Records by His Wife and His Private Secretary, London: Passmore and Alabaster, Paternoster Buildings, E.C. 1898.

St. Vincent of Lerins, Commonitorium (AD 434)

Svigel, Michael J. “Unpublished class notes for ST105: Sanctification and Ecclesiology.” Dallas, Texas: Dallas Theological Seminary, Fall 2010.

Wikipedia contributors, “Immanuel Kant”, Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant (accessed March 14, 2011).

Tags: 3, 4, blog, Church, define, four, is, not, part, series, three, what