St. Peter's Basilica, Rome
Too many of our discussions about the Church suffer from a failing that I pointed out in an earlier post about heroes. We tend to lionize the Early Church far beyond what the Bible itself, nay Jesus Himself, says about the Church. Mind you, as an Eastern Orthodox priest, I am sold on the Church. I love her; I honor her; she is my Mother; she is worthy of respect. But, she is not yet perfect.
In fact, did you ever think that Church structure is set up the way it is precisely because our Lord was quite aware that the Church is yet imperfect? Ephesians 4:11-16 says:
“And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in the cunning craftiness of deceitful plotting, but, speaking the truth in love, may grow up in all things into Him who is the head—Christ— from whom the whole body, joined and knit together by what every joint supplies, according to the effective working by which every part does its share, causes growth of the body for the edifying of itself in love.”
Now look at those verses a little closer. No, closer yet. Look at the assumptions behind these verses. “. . . till we all come to the unity of the faith. . .” in other words, as St. Paul is writing, the Church is not yet united. Let’s go on. Keep reading down that verse. We are not yet perfect; we are not yet up to the stature of Christ; we are not yet adults; we are able to be tricked; we can be deceitful. What a description of us!
And, so, it says that God gifted some to especially be our leaders. Mind you, it does not say that those leaders are perfect. It simply says that those leaders are specially gifted by God to be our leaders because we desperately need the training. What an image of us! And yet, Jesus says that the gates of Hell will not prevail against us. Sometimes, I think that it should be worded that the gates of Hell will not prevail in spite of us.
And, so, I am ever so grateful for the ministry of the Holy Spirit working within us and within the leaders He has appointed for us. Can you imagine what we would be like if God were not for us?
the question though becomes, what do you do when the “leaders” of the church are guilty of simony, and have left the foundation of the prophets and the apostles with Christ as the cornerstone? I sort of like Prague’s answer with defenestration, but have yet to employ it in my church body.
Lutheran’s also see reason for church governance, and leadership, remembering that even Peter had to be rebuked by Paul on the basis of God’s word. All men are fallible, the Word of God is not.
“…what would it be like if God were not for us?”
Look at the Muslim world. That’s a pretty good picture of a god who is not for those poor lost people.
Uhm, you throw shoes at those leaders? GRIN.
To me the Radical Protestant answer (note I did NOT say the Reformers), is akin to a suicide bombing. Not only did it destroy the Church, it effectively destroyed Protestantism. The Reformation answer was, uhm, to return to the Early Church Fathers. Luther’s arguments were not simply Scriptural, both he and Calvin could and would quote the Church Fathers, as well, to show that the Roman Catholic Church had deserted the faith.
I would argue that the later Lutherans (i.e. Melanchthon, etc.) pushed in a direction that was not fully healthy. In passing, Bror, I read Table Talk. I was both impressed and laughed a lot.
Steve, though the Muslim claim is that God is merciful and compassionate, that does not seem to be demonstrated in many of today’s Muslims.
Father Ernesto,
I think mercy and compassion are exhibited in far more of Muslims than it is in Islam.
There is no mercy and campassion in Islam. That book is a handbook for rape and murder.
Mohammed made up that stuff with the help of the devil and it is of course anti-Christ.
There are lots of fine Muslim people…and then the question is…so what?
Glad you read Table Talk,
I have actually yet to read that one, but I have seen bits and pieces and it is good for a laugh, though it can be serious also. You are right, Luther and Calvin could and would quote church fathers in support of their arguments but always made the argument from scripture. Well Calvin less so. The more I read of Calvin the less respect I have for him. He tends to rely much more on an illogical use of logic when it comes to the scriptures.
Bror, Calvin was fully logical for his time. However, he relied too much on a now discredited philosophy called Nominalism. The Roman Church relied too much on Aristotelianism while the Eastern Church toyed with neo-Platonism. However, in theology one uses the tools one has not the tools one wishes to have had. (Sound familiar? LOL)