Description

A personal blog. I am an: Award-winning writer. Non-profit entrepreneur. Activist. Religious professional. Foodie. Musician. All around curious soul and Renaissance man.


Wednesday, July 2, 2008

The Ancient Council

One of the most important aspects of Christianity that endured for a thousand years is virtually unknown to most of us today. Yet, it could be the key to the future.

Even educated people often see early Christian history this way: There was Jesus, then came the early Christian communities. Eventually they gained the support of Rome and the empire took over with a firm top-down hierarchy until the Protestant Reformation.

That's not how it went down.

The whole of Christianity was concentrated around five cities: Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Rome. These cities had churches set up from the time of the apostles, and they governed the regions around them. They had a degree of autonomy in judicial matters, faith practices and even theology. However, when a crisis of faith arose, they convened an "Ecumenical Council" in hopes to settle it. It was believed the council had authority--the Body of Christ coming together to "flesh" something out. Authority wasn't about individuals making pronouncements, but rather the product of whatever happened when the descendants of the 12 gathered once again in his name.

Due to a number of historical reasons, this system broke down. Three of the cities fell to Islamic influence, leaving only Rome and Constantinople. The once-crumbling western portion of Christianity started to rise again, asserting itself as the seat of Peter and Paul and claiming authority for the Pope from that. Rome also decided to independently modify the Nicene Creed. This didn't go over so well in the East, and for this and a number of other reasons, the Great Schism occurred a thousand years after Christ. Suddenly we have the Catholic and Orthodox Churches of the west and east.

The rise of papal power continued to be a cause of concern in the west, as reform movements started appearing. The Waldesians and Cathars were put down as heretics. Other movements were absorbed back into the Church, such as the Franciscans, Dominicans and various mystics. Eventually, the Protestant Reformation occurred which split the western church again.

This comes from Hans Küng's The Catholic Church: A Short History. Maybe I've been reading too much Küng, but its hard to disagree that the rise of papal power is directly related to breakaway movements and internal friction within the Church. As time went on, power became centralized with the pope and less and less with the body of bishops and the community of Christ. It became less an organic, living body but rather an instrument of oppression as the hierarchy expected everyone to get in line--you either conform or you break away. Had the Church maintained a "council" approach, what would Christianity be like today?

It also makes me wonder what Christianity could be like in the not-so-distant future. There is a growing ecumenism. If you look at academic scholarship, peace & justice movements and progressive theology movements, these are not tied to a denomination. They are influenced by faith traditions in terms of culture, charism and values, but certainly not limited to their dogmas. People have individual opinions about matters of theology and do not convert over them. For many people, it doesn't make sense to formally covert to another denomination these days, since a lateral move from one denomination to another only solves some problems to generate others. Yes, we are in a post-denominational era. Most of us are wise enough not to throw away the faith traditions we have inherited, either, but the future is going to be different, no two ways about it.

Would Christians be open to recognizing authority outside their particular denomination? We would all have to give up something. Catholics would need to give up the idea that their pope is supreme liaison to God. I think we can do that, since we've had that view before (and many of us do right now). Protestants would need to give up their urge to breakaway. The Orthodox feel left out, since everyone broke away from them. Catholics who see themselves as the "One True Church" need a history lesson.

Few Americans know much about the Orthodox. We tend to think in terms of Protestants vs. Catholics, but that is only the scene in western Christianity. The Orthodox are not populous in the Americas, and they've been struggling of late since their region had been under the oppression of the atheist Soviet Union, but the Orthodox are still out there. Until the rise of modern Evangelical movements, the Orthodox were second in number only to Catholics, with Protestants combined as a distant third. I say this not to diminish Protestantism, but to emphasize just how significant the Eastern tradition is.

I imagine a day when these various denominations sit down together at a table not just for polite discussion but as the Body of Christ coming together again for the first time in 1,000 years. What would that be like? What kind of family reunion would that be? Loving embraces or cautious distance--would it matter? In the ancient tradition, there was room for autonomy of the different branches, but also a respect for the authority of the Body of Christ as a whole. Can we do it again?

Thanks the Berard Marthaler's The Creed for the primary thesis here.

8 comments:

  1. To me, this is where theology gets exciting, because it helps us see possibilities for growth and renewal.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'd like to see more a cohesive group myself...

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think that it is possible that a lot of Protestant traditions that traditionally traced their lineage to Luther, Calvin, or some other reformation leader are starting to see a breaking down of those barriers between them and maybe the old traditions don't mean as much. Maybe. I admit that I am one of those people who doesn't know much about Orthodox Christianity. I think that its historical differences with the West on the Trinity are somewhat interesting on a philosophical level, but I'm not sure I fully grasp them.

    Do you really see the Vatican giving up its sole claim to legitimacy, though?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Do you really see the Vatican giving up its sole claim to legitimacy, though?

    I know that it wants to reconcile with the Orthodox, because there is no good reason for the Churches to be out of communion with each other. A lot of people thought that would have happened by now.

    The real dividing line is that the East isn't going to recognize the pope as a sole monarch over Christianity. And neither will Protestants. To me, that's the real legitimacy that the Catholic Church is claiming over other churches.

    I am hopeful for the future. The Church existed with the authoritative body being a council of people rather than a monarchy. We did it before, we can do it again. It may be a while, but when the current method fails, there is a model from the past that may be just what the doctor ordered.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Maybe we need some Jedi Knights to bring down the monarchy of the Pope(since the Pope's visage bears a striking resemblence to Emperor Palpatine). =)

    ReplyDelete
  6. ... and restore the integrity of the ancient council!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Just found this blog. Anxious to check it out. Looks interesting. Jack

    ReplyDelete
  8. Hey Jack, thanks for checking it out!

    ReplyDelete