Archive for the Category » church history «

August 31st, 2008 | Author:


Birth of Anna B. [Bartlett] Warner, New England hymnwriter, on Long Island, New York. Daughter of a prominent New York Lawyer, she never married, but made her home with her older sister Susan and their father near the U.S. Military Academy at West Point.

During her lifetime (she died at the age of 95) she published two collections of verse. She wrote a verse in 1860 within the pages of a novel she coauthored with her sister: Say and Seal, which has long since gone out of print. But her poem has become one of the most beloved of all children’s hymns in the church: Jesus Loves Me, This I Know.

[Note: This is part of a series on tidbits of church history, taken from An Almanac of the Christian Church by William D. Blake. Click here to see the whole series.]

Share
August 27th, 2008 | Author:

Books by John Milton (1608-74) were ordered burned in London because of his attacks on the English monarchy. His indictment revolved around his theology, his advocating presbyterian (elder ruled) rather than episcopal (bishop ruled) church government. With the restoration of the monarchy to England in 1660, Milton was punished with a fine and a short term in prison for supporting the Parliament. Afterward, he lived in retirement and wrote his greatest work, Paradise Lost (1667).

But Jesus called them to Himself, and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great men exercise authority over them. It is not so among you, but whoever wishes to become great among you shall be your servant, and whoever wishes to be first among you shall be your slave; just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” Matthew 20:25-28

[Note: This is the second in a series on tidbits of church history, taken from An Almanac of the Christian Church by William D. Blake. Click here to see the whole series.]

Share
August 24th, 2008 | Author:

I recently unearthed a copy of An Almanac of the Christian Church by William D. Blake. As our American history is relatively short, and we do tend to be self-focused, I thought sharing occasional tidbits of church history might give us a broader perspective. Here’s today’s morsel. (Click on the picture for wikipedia details.)

St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre.
During the night in Paris and throughout France, over 10,000 Huguenots (French Protestants) were murdered by the troops of Catherine de Medici, the Queen mother, and for 30 years the real ruler of France. The St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre precipitated the Fourth Huguenot War and quickened the spirit of French Protestant religious emigration soon after.

How precious is our freedom to worship God as we choose.

Share
Category: church history  | 4 Comments
July 15th, 2008 | Author:

Over the past few years, I’ve done a lot of reading about Christianity, from several different viewpoints. Last winter, I did some deliberate research on the history of Christian denominations. I’m not a historian or a scholar, but in my search for truth, some things have become obvious, even to me.

No person, church, or denomination has all the truth

Even though most every church proclaims they have “the truth” that other churches do not, I don’t believe any of them. Even those that claim they base everything on the Bible, and can show you the scripture to back it up, in practice they actually base their doctrines on someone else’s beliefs.

You’ve probably heard a version of this story before, but here’s what I remember. Some people are blindfolded and trying to identify what’s before them, using only their hands. One person declares it’s a tree, with very rough bark. Another says, no, it’s a huge wall that stretches forever. A third says it’s some kind of large snake. In reality, they are each touching a different part of an elephant.

The conclusion I draw is that all their conclusions were wrong. It was not a tree or a wall or a snake. They did better, however, when they described what they learned about the elephant, without trying to draw a conclusion. The elephant is rough skinned and huge and snake-like.

I think we should approach our knowledge of God with this lesson in mind. We can probably describe some of His attributes with a degree of accuracy, through the Bible and the revelation of the Holy Spirit, but we can’t say definitively: This is God, and all of God, and only God. Individually and collectively, we only know of God what He has chosen to reveal to us.

I think this applies to denominations, as well. When God reveals “His trunk” to one person and “His leg” to someone else, why must they argue and create a new exclusive doctrine involving their revealed truth? Typically, they declare that all Christians who don’t know about “His leg” are apostate, and create a new “true” denomination.

I did some additional reading about the classic Arminianism vs. Calvinism debate, and this is what I concluded. The Arminians took half the Bible and created a doctrine. The Calvinists took the other half of the Bible and created a conflicting doctrine. Both are based on scripture, but both are based on only some scripture, not the whole.

Paul tells us that now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known. (I Cor 13:12.) If we humbly accepted this, and gratefully thanked God for the knowledge He gives us, instead of playing one-upmanship games, I think we would all look more like Christ.

I just finished reading a1970 edition of The Spirit Bade Me Go by David J. DuPlessis, and this passage jumped out at me (p. 41-42):

The first forty years of my life I spent in Africa. I saw that most of the missionaries tried to make “foreigners” instead of Christians out of Africans. They took great pains to make them Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Calvinists, and Methodists … My whole being rebelled against this kind of mission … Our Pentecostal missions flourished because we did not have books of creeds or catechisms to teach the Africans. We gave them the Bible and told them to believe what is there, and the missionary lived the life that only the Holy Spirit can cause men to live … The Holy Spirit create[d] these churches.

This concept rings with truth, and the only thing that has changed in the fifty years since DuPlessis wrote it, is that now even the Pentecostals have creeds and doctrines. Many Christians, I think, are still fleshly, and try to “create” new Christians in their own image, instead of the image of Christ.

And I, brethren, could not speak to you as to spiritual men, but as to men of flesh, as to babes in Christ. I gave you milk to drink, not solid food; for you were not yet able to receive it. Indeed, even now you are not yet able, for you are still fleshly. For since there is jealousy and strife among you, are you not fleshly, and are you not walking like mere men? For when one says, “I am of Paul,” and another, “I am of Apollos,” are you not mere men? What then is Apollos? And what is Paul? Servants through whom you believed, even as the Lord gave opportunity to each one. I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth. So then neither the one who plants nor the one who waters is anything, but God who causes the growth. (1 Cor 3:1-7)

This can be quite easily updated to current terminology: “I am Catholic” or “I am Pentecostal” or “I am Calvinist.” Is this jealousy and pride of any value to Christ? I think not.

[This topic will be continued, as my fibromyalgia allows. In the meantime, your comments are most welcome.]

Share
May 30th, 2008 | Author:

Here are links to the latest edition of the debate that continues to rage on, lo these many centuries:

Dictionary for Calvinists
(written by an Arminian)

Dictionary of Arminian Terms
(written by a Calvinist)

If you happened to read my sermon on The Church, you know that I have a problem with both traditions, so this sarcastic “humor” is not a surprise.

To my mind, the Arminians took one half of the Bible and built a doctrine on it. The Calvinists took the other half to build a contrary doctrine. Both have dug their heels in and declared that real Christianity is routed in their tradition. But you know what Jesus said about tradition, don’tcha?

“Neglecting the commandment of God, you hold to the tradition of men.” He was also saying to them, “You nicely set aside the commandment of God in order to keep your tradition.” Mark 7:8-9

So my suggestion is that we throw out all the tradition and the creeds and doctrinal statements. I know this is a radical idea, but if we actually let “The Holy Scriptures be our only rule of faith and practice”, as almost every church proclaims they do, I have the faith that the Holy Spirit is quite capable of guiding us – even untrained and uneducated people like me … and Peter and John. (Acts 4:13)

In fact, I think we’d all be better off if we just completely did away with denominations. As He did in the letters to the churches in Revelation, I believe Jesus speaks directly to a given church in a given location – no national or regional headquarters needed to filter the information.

If the local church doesn’t rely on Jesus Christ to guide them, does it even qualify as Christianity?

For I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole purpose of God.
Acts 20:27

There. Now I’ve got everybody mad at me.

Share