This post comes from various discussions I have had, so there isn't one specific question.
How denominations develop is a tricky issue, and not modern. There have been denominations since the Apostles, though they did not go by that term. The church, especially in the US, needs to remember that there are churches that existed for over 1400 years before a Christian ever set foot in America. The way we do things is not the standard, nor is it automatically correct.
Early churches often had an Apostle, or other teacher, that they preferred. In most cities the "church" was much closer to our idea of small groups, Bible study groups, etc. A handful of people met in someone's home to worship, study scripture, and generally do the church thing. Regardless of how many of these house groups were in a city, they were all included when someone spoke of the Church in that city, or the Church in this city.
One city or church did not usually have authority over another. The early exception was the Jerusalem Church which was headed by Jesus' brother James and considered something of a mother church. It didn't exercise absolute authority over other churches, but the recommendations from Jerusalem were given serious weight. This is why the question of whether or not gentiles had to follow Jewish customs was taken to the Jerusalem church for debate. In most cases, churches worked by consensus guided by the principles in scripture and Jesus’ teaching, rather than decree from above.
Over the centuries the churches became better organized. The early work was out of necessity for survival, the later work was largely due to Constantine. As the church grew in influence, the other religions in the empire declined. The church took over the old religious positions and power bases within Roman culture. Sacred sites were Christianized as best as possible. This did lead to the occasional non-Christian practice entering the church. Much of the ceremony and imagery around catholic (and other) priests is very reminiscent of Roman priests. As has happened many times over the years, the church was used as a secondary bureaucracy by the government.
After the Roman decline, some sections of the church made massive power grabs. Eventually the Eastern churches and the western churches had a fight. As with most of these fights the whole thing is couched in religious language, but it was primarily political.
The Eastern churches spoke Greek and lived in the Byzantine sphere of influence. They were more of a confederacy than a group under a single authority. Their head is the First Among Equals. The First doesn't have the absolute authority of the Pope when it comes to churches in the eastern tradition. The western churches spoke Latin and were in Rome's sphere of influence. The bishop of Rome, the Pope, had been slowly consolidating authority over the western churches.
In 1054 the Pope and the First Among Equals mutually excommunicated each other. The eastern church became the Orthodox Church, and the western church became the Catholic church. The sides remained fairly stable, but churches in different regions have crossed over this gap from one side to the other over the last thousand years.
Fast forward to Luther. Luther and the protestant reformation were the culmination of two centuries of religious and political upheaval within the Catholic Church. Many people felt that the Catholic church was abusing it’s authority and following unbiblical practices, and there was a growing trend toward translating the bible into the language of the people rather than keeping it in Latin. The Catholic church opposed this practice. Latin as the language of the church had adopted theological importance despite having no true biblical precedent.
After Luther opened the floodgates many other people began to drift away from Rome. Some of these were over legitimate theological differences, but the majority were political. If the local church was not subject to Rome, then the Pope had no authority to exercise over the ruler in the area. These days denominations are still as likely to form due to secular reasons as religious ones.
Missionary work adds a different angle. There are several instances where missionaries from more than one denomination have gone to a mission field and taught only to have the church in that country become its own entity that is a hybrid of the various missionary messages with the local culture.
There is a kernel of core belief that all Christian denominations share. They still agree on the core tenets of scripture, the Trinity, the work of Christ, etc., and can as such be considered the church even if some of their theology needs to be reexamined. Various practices and doctrines are added to this kernel by each denomination. Some of these practices are harmless, others are problematic and risk turning congregants in the wrong direction.
Sadly the influx of denominations also opens the door for non-Christian fringe groups to claim that they are part of the church. The most common trait among these groups is a denial of the Trinity and divinity of Christ, followed by modified or additional scripture. These groups try to adopt the outward appearance of Christianity while undermining its teachings with their own creations.
About the Author:
Stephen Mayo lives in Montana with his wife, daughter, corgi, and three cats.
You can keep in touch with him on Facebook and Twitter. Find more on his podcast A Side of Mayo. If you enjoyed reading this consider buying him a coffee or supporting him on Patreon.
Kommentare