• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Featured Should Christian Anarchists attempt to hold a house church meeting?

Discussion in 'Controversial Christian Theology' started by Norman70, Dec 20, 2018.

  1. Norman70

    Norman70 Active Member

    307
    +183
    Barbados
    Christian
    Married
    Many thanks to all who have responded to this thread, in the Name of Jesus I pray.

    As I said in my OP I do not consider myself a Christian Anarchist, it is just that I am interested. Politically I have been an armchair anarchist since my early days (1966) of school-teaching in the UK, and as a science teacher I picked up on epistemological anarchism of the Paul Feyerabend variety, non-violent and he considered himself to be a Dadaist, that movement in art in the 1920's which was a reaction to the horrors of WW1.

    My spiritual development is also a long story, but after a very personal experience in 1972, I discovered C. S. Lewis had had a similar experience when he came to accept the reality of God (his choosing of Christianity came later, as an intellectual development, again similar to my own movement towards becoming a Christian, which is still going on!). Continuing my interest in anarchy I then discovered some of the work of Leo Tolstoy, and as I have already mentioned, his influence on Mahatma Ghandi and others. As I try to become a more mature Christian I am exploring all theological interpretations of the Bible.

    Both my wife and myself were then baptised into the Seventh Day Adventist Church, but after a few years we stopped going on the Sabbath. I intend to post about that on the "Church House & Cell Group" forum here in CF. I am impressed with many of the posts there, which brought me here to open this thread under the advice of the moderators.

    I will give one quotation from Tolstoy to show my interest in Christian Anarchy, which he wrote in an essay on anarchy:

    "But it will be instituted only by there being more and more people who do not require the protection of governmental power ... There can be only one permanent revolution—a moral one: the regeneration of the inner man."

    I think the moral revolution to which he is referring is a spiritual one, and many of the posts here encourage me in my spiritual search. My search is nothing else. I have no intention to proselytize, and a discussion on Christian Anarchy is already underway in the Christian only forum here entitled "Discussion and Debate", sub-forum "General Politics".

    Attending a house church, or holding one in our own home is something my wife and myself might do. We did attend one a year or two ago, but when I attempted to involve the Sunday meeting members in open discussion, as I had been trained as a school teacher (it's called circle time now I think in primary schools), the self-appointed leader turned down my efforts. All he did was hold the front of his meeting to give a sermon. I had a similar experience in the SDA Sabbath School, even though it was encouraged by their own Quarterly. I was just laughed at!!

    I will try to address each response above individually, and any more if they arrive. C. S. Lewis spent his last years in quite severe illness, but continued to answer all correspondence personally with hand-written letters. I wonder how he would have used the Internet!? I am also interested in the writings of Teilhard de Chardin, and the suggestion now that the Internet is a God-given tool to promote the next step in Teilhard's evolutionary ideas, from geosphere to biosphere to a noosphere, which would be the final step in evolution culminating in the Second Coming of Jesus.
     
  2. Francis Drake

    Francis Drake Returning adventurer.

    +1,061
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Married
    UK-Independence-Party
    Reminds me of the sign I saw posted on the notice board at college.-

    PLEASE NOTE THAT THE FIRST MEETING OF THE
    APATHY SOCIETY HAS BEEN CANCELLED DUE TO LACK OF INTEREST
     
  3. Francis Drake

    Francis Drake Returning adventurer.

    +1,061
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Married
    UK-Independence-Party
    The problem is that for better or for worse, "anarchy" is a very loaded word, and in both society and the church's ears, loaded with evil.
    Given that we are told to avoid all appearance of evil, maybe Christian anarchy is not a very helpful name to use.

    I suggest you need to do a rebranding exercise if you want to take the subject further!

    You also seem to be drawing on loads of dry uninspiring boring intellectual stuff to support your narrative when scripture alone would support much of it!

    A few days ago I made several posts covering this topic on this thread-
    Fellowship - Nicolaitan doctrines (teachings) which Jesus hated info' for spirit filled believers .

    I would also recommend the following book
    Pagan Christianity by Frank Viola Author and George Barna

    Starting in the mid 80s, the Lord has taken me on a journey of understanding, both through scripture and elsewhere. He showed me that the whole church hierarchy is not from the Lord at all. In fact Satan created the hierarchical institutions that we call church in order to imprison Christians and prevent them doing the work of the Lord.
     
  4. bbbbbbb

    bbbbbbb Well-Known Member

    +9,560
    Non-Denom
    That is not true in China. In China there are no "running costs" for house churches which primarily meet in homes. The only "running cost" which they have is paying the pastor (a Western Christian occupation which is considered essential to the existence of a Chinese church).
     
  5. NeedyFollower

    NeedyFollower Well-Known Member

    955
    +392
    Anabaptist
    Celibate
    I chose the title anabaptist although I do not attend a "church" nor do I hold to any other group system since that will by definition become an " us verses them " situation . I have attended "plain" christian meetings ( think conservative Mennonite ) and I think many have a good spirit . ( Humility and meekness ) I believe what you are describing is a situation where Paul says " I would that you all would prophecy . " The problem with " The Sermon " is it is most often delivered by an individual who has a different reality than someone who is " not clergy" . It would be like the hand always telling the rest of the body how easy it is to screw in a light bulb or the eye discussing seeing with the feet . Every member of the body of Christ is going through their own and unique sufferings , stumblings , disobedience , misunderstanding God's will and sometimes ( by God's grace ) getting it right so that the whole body is edified . But we are not benefiting from everyone's experience . There should be an " order keeper/pastor/president " so that everything is done decently and in order ( submitting yourselves to one another in the fear of God ) but they should by no means become the "Sermon Bringer " . When an organism becomes an organization , it is lifeless . It usually starts with the building of a building ...I personally knew of a dear fellowship many years ago ..very simple ..music all A Capella ...full of love and fruits of the spirit . 30 years later ..they have a magnificent building , projectors to display worship songs , a large congregation and no warmth or love . Sad ..maybe tragic . Also ...I wonder at the use of so much humor ...It is just eternal damnation for many whom we love to get this wrong ...does that not denote some sobriety and seriousness ?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Optimistic Optimistic x 1
    • List
  6. yeshuaslavejeff

    yeshuaslavejeff simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua

    +8,688
    Anabaptist
    Wondering why Romans 13 needs reconciled ?
     
  7. Norman70

    Norman70 Active Member

    307
    +183
    Barbados
    Christian
    Married
    @Francis Drake. I fully agree with you over the use of the word anarchy, having experienced the problem throughout my teaching career. I often called the approach to my work progressive and was therefore left alone.
    Thank you for your post and I have thoroughly enjoyed reading the complete thread given by your link to the Fellowship forum. Directing me to the Scriptures makes sense also, showing that there is so much in the Bible supporting the idea that the devil is in control in all human heirarchy.
    The metaphor of the universal church of Christ to His body is superb, I am sure Tolstoy saw this too in his reference to a moral revolution. Meanwhile the laity remain asleep.
     
  8. JesusYeshuaisLord

    JesusYeshuaisLord Member

    151
    +77
    New Zealand
    Christian
    In Relationship
    The name of the 'movement' just doesn't make sense. It's like a christian that would say 'man that sermon was wicked!' When he means that it was great. The name of the movement is completely reflective of the times we live in. It's like it's trying to attract people by being outrageous and hip. Also reflects how this society loves to change meaning of words like gender. The point of a word is to define what one thing is. If you define one thing with the incorrect word then you've just used the wrong word...
    Jesus was not an anarchist, he came (among other things ) to set the record straight about what is true worship. It's probably only because of our fallen nature that we tend to accept statements like 'he was a revolutionary' 'he was counter curtural' 'he rebelled against the jewish people' etc...Jesus was putting things back in order not out of order. His thoughts are not our thoughts.
     
    Last edited: Dec 21, 2018
  9. chilehed

    chilehed Veteran

    +672
    Catholic
    Married
    Your position is self-contradictory. Jesus established His Church with a hierarchical teaching authority to which all believers are bound to submit.
     
  10. (° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ)

    (° ͡ ͜ ͡ʖ ͡ °) (ᵔᴥᵔʋ) Well-Known Member Supporter

    +2,716
    United States
    Non-Denom
    Married
    Because, by definition, anarchy is in direct contradiction and violation to Romans 13. Jesus even said Himself, "Render unto Cesar what is Cesar's". Mark 12:17. So my question is how does a "Christian Anarchist" try to reconcile this problem?
     
  11. Just Another User

    Just Another User Member

    169
    +122
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Single
    I'm incredibly sympathetic to the Christian Anarchist movement and I think it's very biblical and historical. I can't say I agree with everything in the movement but I do believe it says many truths that I hold to.

    To those wanting a basis in the movement, I suggest reading Leo Tolstoy's work the "Kingdom of God is Within You" which supports a lifestyle of poverty, non-violence and anarchism to name a few key strands.

    It appears most criticisms are based on the name itself which if I do dare say so myself is very ignorant of the position and you choose to criticise the name rather than the values it holds.

    Probably the biggest shocker to most Christians is that the early Christians lived quite the "anarcho" lifestyle to put it crudely.

    Acts 4:32-35

    "All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of their possessions was their own, but they shared everything they had. With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And God’s grace was so powerfully at work in them all that there were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned land or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to anyone who had need."

    If anyone claims this was only the Jerusalem church

    The Didache (c 90 AD)

    "You shall not turn away from him that is in need, but you shall share all things with your brother and shall not say that they are your own. For if you share what is immortal, how much more things which are temporary."

    Epistle of Diognetus ( First half of the 2nd century)

    "On the contrary, the one who is an imitator of God is he who takes upon himself the burden of his neighbor; who, in whatever ways he may be superior, is ready to benefit another who is deficient; who, whatever things he has received from God, he distributes to the needy and thus becomes a god to those who receive from him"

    Justin Martyr (mid 2nd century)

    "We who valued above all things the acquisition of wealth and possessions now bring what we have into a common stock and share with every one in need."

    Irenaeus ( c 180 AD)

    " (The Lord) instead of the law enjoining the giving of tithes commanded us to share all our possessions with the poor."
     
  12. Just Another User

    Just Another User Member

    169
    +122
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Single
    I guess it presupposes that a Christian Anarchist's main goal is to overthrow the state and replaces it with a anarchistic theocracy. A Christian Anarchist certainly doesn't advocate for some vanguard movement like the Bolsheviks and the forceful construction of some Marxist state. In the same way that with the ability of free speech you can hold a contrary position to those in authority (e.g anti war during the Iraq war)., someone under the ideals of Christian anarchism can hold to anarchistic lifestyle and follow it within a capitalism model for example. This is exactly what the early Christians did in respects to their lifestyle which was against the economic and social system of the Roman Empire.

    Furthermore, as what the desert Fathers did in the 4th century on wards, a Christian Anarchist thus has the ability to leave society if he has the will to do so. No longer being under a system of government, he can therefore implement his desires about the human condition without going against the state's wishes.

    Giving to Caesar what is Caesars may not be applicable if we give everything to God ( going into extreme poverty for him) and be reconciled if we do what many anarchists in this movement do and live below the tax threshold. If someone gives to Caesar, some would say, they can no longer give to God because you can only serve one master ; God or money. Nevertheless, many Christian anarchists are still fine with paying taxes and tax resistance may be a minority view but again I will not make that claim. Let us not forget about giving God as well which many Christian anarchists would argue is best achieved though the system that they support.

    Furthermore, Romans 13 only applies if it doesn't contradict with Christ's law. If for example, taxes were raised, Christians should not ignore this, however if someone does contradict God's law we have the ability to go against it. This would range from Anarchists in the movement and I won't be the arbiter of what they believe in this regard.
     
  13. Norman70

    Norman70 Active Member

    307
    +183
    Barbados
    Christian
    Married
    As far as I understand it (which may not be very far!) Christian Anarchists (I am going to stop referring to them as such - it's too problematic) interprete (not reconcile) Romans 13 to mean that we should live peaceably with civil governments, obey all laws unless they contravene God's Law, pay taxes (or live below the tax threshold), and try to turn the other cheek if our human rights are denied. They do not attend any established church, they certainly would not pay tithes, they prefer to home-school their children.
    They do not vote unless compelled to do so by law, and refuse to do military service. Imprisonment is an option acceptable to some, even martyrdom in a supreme case. Death is the ultimate sacrifice.
    They live a life like many atheists do, good works are not the sole prerogative of Christians. However, unlike many atheists, they believe we all have a spiritual side to our nature, and they believe in an after-life with Jesus. Amen!
     
  14. DamianWarS

    DamianWarS Follower of Isa Al Masih Supporter

    +1,644
    Christian
    Private
    have house church, it's a great model but there are organizations you can become a part of even under a house church model to keep yourself accountable and to allow others to have a sense of understanding of where you stand (including yourself) and of course plug into forums like the one on CF for house churches to get support and direction on how to do it well.

    Why create a house church? to fight the polluted system? to have an excuse not to give a tithe? to revolt against the big players? Absolutely not! never start the work of God under a revolting agenda for other Christians, but rather start a house church to give glory to God and don't use it as a platform to put down the organized church structure. We are all part of God's team, even if people don't accept it as easily as others, but our goals are God's goals and he is our lead so others Christians are not our adversaries but rather partners and always look at it like this. Paul writes to the Philippians in a similar context saying

    Phi 1:15-18
    It is true that some preach Christ out of envy and rivalry, but others out of goodwill. The latter do so out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel. The former preach Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely, supposing that they can stir up trouble for me while I am in chains. But what does it matter? The important thing is that in every way, whether from false motives or true, Christ is preached. And because of this I rejoice.


    People preach with the wrong motives... don't be one of them and also don't get caught up in their game. Who cares... the gospel is being preach and let them answer their own sins when the time comes. Don't lead by condemning others, your position will be self-apparent enough but it should be conducted with love and respect for your fellow Christians (even the guys that are just there waiting for their next cruise). Lead by example, not an in your face "this is how you do it" style but by studying the word, being dedicated to following Christ in all things you do, encouraging and uplifting the body of Christ, and being slaves to your mission.

    The house church model if done right is an explosive way of spreading the gospel but too often it is a place to harbour disgruntled Christians that have left the church and no longer have a place for it. These people can be cancerous in a house church and watch out for them. they will come but if expectations are laid down from the onset they will get that this is not a place to gossip about the many failings of the organized church model but a place to worship God and uplift and encourages brother and sisters in Christ so that God may be glorified and his gospel may spread.
     
  15. Francis Drake

    Francis Drake Returning adventurer.

    +1,061
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Married
    UK-Independence-Party
    I disagree completely.
    Jesus expressly rejected any hierarchy in the church for the simple reason it is invariably driven by the flesh, as scripture shows.

    The following relates an early attempt at power grabbing by the disciples, who were obviously looking to be at the top of the pile when Jesus was crowned.
    In this story, the mother of James and John quietly comes to see Jesus.
    Matthew20v21And he said unto her, What wilt thou? She saith unto him, Grant that these my two sons may sit, the one on thy right hand, and the other on the left, in thy kingdom. 22...………………………..

    But when they others hear, they are jealous because James and John got there first!
    24And when the ten heard it, they were moved with indignation against the two brethren.

    Now Jesus has got their attention, he dissects the issue.
    25But Jesus called them unto him, and said, Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them.
    Yup, the disciples' thinking was perfectly normal in any society. To run the show, you need power and position!

    But the kingdom of Jesus Christ is not just any society and He immediately slaps down their ideas of hierarchy!
    26But it shall not be so among you: Grrrgghh! (My emphasis added just so you take note!)
    This little phrase is probably the most ignored in scripture, but not just ignored, but entirely reversed by the church.

    ...........but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your servant;
    Pastors are hailed as servants. But anyone bothering to fact check the average church will immediately know these pastors are the boss, not servants.

    27And whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your slave:
    Yes, it actually does say "slave" in there!
    If the pastor is a slave why do people have to ask his permission before doing anything?

    28Even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many.

    The whole of this passage reveals Jesus's complete rejection of the antichrist hierarchical system that all churches have been built on since the early days.

    Until the saints reject the headship of other men over them, they will never truly experience the headship of Christ.
     
  16. Francis Drake

    Francis Drake Returning adventurer.

    +1,061
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Married
    UK-Independence-Party
    As shown in the text, Romans13 is about the secular world authorities, not the church.
    Therefore there is no issue to reconcile.
     
  17. Francis Drake

    Francis Drake Returning adventurer.

    +1,061
    United Kingdom
    Christian
    Married
    UK-Independence-Party
    You have just illustrated the why and how of where hierarchies come from!
    The false hierarchy is fed and watered every time you put your house church under the covering of a Christian organisation (itself a hierarchy), or yourself under the covering of another man.
    The notion of spiritual "covering", although well taught throughout the church system, is in fact a doctrine of demons and must be repudiated at all costs.
    The people within the organised church structure belong to the Lord, but the organisation belongs to Satan, and I will always make that clear to any Christian who will listen. As far as I am concerned, the institution is a Christian prison that does immense damage, and prevents Christians doing the work of the Lord.
    Yes, God is our theoretical lead, but in practice it is the church which dictates the direction Christians should go, not God.
    My motive is to set the captive saints free, so they can truly appreciate the headship of Christ alone, rather than some pastor figure.
    If you put another man over your head, you cannot have Christ as your head.
     
  18. chilehed

    chilehed Veteran

    +672
    Catholic
    Married
    Warnings against the abuse of hierarchical authority constitute a rejection of hierarchical authority? I find that to be totally unconvincing. The Kingdom of God is, in fact, a kingdom.

    "Remember your leaders who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith… Obey your leaders and defer to them, for they keep watch over you and will have to give an account, that they may fulfill their task with joy and not with sorrow, for that would be of no advantage to you." Hebrews 13:7, 13

    “I repeat the request I made of you when I was on my way to Macedonia, that you stay in Ephesus to instruct certain people not to teach false doctrines” 1 Tim 1:3

    "This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you; through them by way of reminder I am trying to stir up your sincere disposition, to recall the words previously spoken by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and savior through your apostles." Pet. 3:2

    “Whoever listens to you listens to me. Whoever rejects you rejects me. And whoever rejects me rejects the one who sent me." Luke 10:16

    If you think that the faithful were free to ignore the Apostles that Christ set in authority, or free to ignore the men who they in turn set in authority over us, then that's your business. But don't pretend that you think it because of what the Bible says.

    Still less can you blame what the immediate successors of the Apostles wrote. So when some self-appointed clowns show up fifteen hundred years and more later and start spouting a lot of nonsense that contradicts both Scripture and what all of the earliest Christians believed, I'm sure not gonna trust them.
    Clement of Rome, 3rd Bishop of Rome, probable hearer of the Apostle Peter.
    “Christ, therefore, is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ…Throught the countryside they preached; and they appointed their earliest converts, testing them by the spirit, to be the bishops and deacons of future believers…Our Apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife for the office of bishop. For this reason, therefore, having received perfect knowledge, they appointed those who have already been mentioned, and afterward added the provision that, if they should die, other approved men should succeed to their ministry…Shameful, beloved, extremely shameful and unworthy of your training in Christ, is the report that on account of one or two persons the well-established and ancient Church of the Corinthians is in revolt against the presbyters. And this report has come not only to us, but even to those professing other faiths than ours, so that by your folly you heap blasphemies on the name of the Lord, and create a danger to yourselves…If anyone disobey the things which have been said by Him through us, let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. We, however, shall be innocent of this sin…” Letter to the Corinthians (AD 80)​
    Ignatius, 3rd Bishop of Antioch, hearer of the Apostle John.
    “It is necessary, therefore, -and such is your practice, -that you do nothing without the bishop, and that you be subject also to the presbytery, as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ our hope…In like manner let everyone respect the deacons as they would respect Jesus Christ, and just as they respect the bishop as a type of the Father, and the presbyters as the council of God and the college of Apostles. Without these, it cannot be called a Church…anyone who acts without the bishop and the presbytery and the deacons does not have a clean conscience.” Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Trallians (AD 110) [/font]

    “For Jesus Christ, our inseparable life, is the will of the Father, just as the Bishops, who have been appointed throughout the world, are the will of Jesus Christ. It is fitting, therefore, that you should live in harmony with the will of the Bishop - as indeed you do…Let us be careful, then, if we would be submissive to God, not to oppose the Bishop. Furthermore, the more anyone observes that a Bishop remains silent, the more he should stand in fear of him. For anyone whom the master of the house sends to manage his business ought to be received by us as we would receive him by whom he was sent. It is clear, then, that we must look upon the Bishop as the Lord Himself…” Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Ephesians (AD 110)

    “You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the Apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the church without the bishop.” Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Smyrneans (AD 100)

    “I exhort you to be careful to do all things in the unity of God, since the bishop sits in the place of God, and the presbyters in the place of the synod of the Apostles, and the deacons, who are most dear to me, have been entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the world began, and was manifested in the end…Be diligent, therefore, to be confirmed in the doctrine of the Lord and of his Apostles, that ye may be prosperous in all things, whatsoever ye do, both in flesh and spirit, in faith and love, in the Son and the Father and the Spirit, in the beginning and the end, together with your most worthily-distinguished bishop, and the nobly woven spiritual crown of your presbytery, and of your deacons, who walk according to God. Submit yourselves to your bishop and to each other, as Jesus Christ to his Father according to the flesh, and the Apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit; that there may be a union both fleshly and spiritual.” Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Magnesians (AD 110)

    “Abstain from evil herbage, which Jesus Christ doth not cultivate, because it is not the planting of the Father. Not that I have found division among you, but thorough purity. I cried while I was among you, and spake with a loud voice, saying, Give heed unto the bishop, and to the presbyters, and to the deacons. But they suspected that I spake these things because I knew beforehand the division of certain of them; but he, for whose name I am in bonds, is witness unto me that I knew not these things through the flesh of man. But the spirit preached, saying these things: Do nothing apart from the bishop; keep your flesh as the temple of God; love unity, avoid divisions; be imitators of Jesus Christ, even as he is of his Father.” Ignatius of Antioch, Letter to the Philadelphians (AD 100)
    Irenaeus, 2nd Bishop of Lyons
    “It is possiblem then, for everyone in every Church, who may wish to know the truth, to contemplate the tradition of the Apostles whcih has been known throughout the whole world. And we are in a position to enumerate those who were instituted bishops by the Apostles, and their successors to our own times: men who neither knew nor taught anything like these heretics rave about. For if the Apostles had known hidden mysteries which they taught to the elite secretly and apart from the rest, they would have handed them down especially to those very ones to whom they were committing the self-same Churches. For surely they wished all those and their successors to be perfect and without reproach, to whom they handed on their authority…It is necessary to obey those who are the presbyters of the Church, those who, as we have shown, have succession from the Apostles; those who have received, with the succession of the epicopate, the sure charism of truth according to the good pleasure of the Father. But the rest, who have no part in the primitive succession and assemble wheresoever they will, must be held in suspicion…For all of these [heretics] are of much later date than are the bishops to whom the Apostles handed over the Churches…” Againt Heresies (inter AD 180/199)

    “Since, however, it would be very tedious, in such a volume as this, to reckon up the successions of all the Churches, we do put to confusion all those who, in whatever manner, whether by an evil self-pleasing, by vainglory, or by blindness and perverse opinion, assemble in unauthorized meetings; by indicating that tradition derived from the apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul; as also the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops. For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its pre- eminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those who exist everywhere. The blessed apostles, then, having founded and built up the Church, committed into the hands of Linus the office of the episcopate. Of this Linus, Paul makes mention in the Epistles to Timothy. To him succeeded Anacletus; and after him, in the third place from the apostles, Clement was allotted the bishopric. This man, as he had seen the blessed apostles, and had been conversant with them, might be said to have the preaching of the apostles still echoing [in his ears], and their traditions before his eyes. Nor was he alone [in this], for there were many still remaining who had received instructions from the apostles. In the time of this Clement, no small dissension having occurred among the brethren at Corinth, the Church in Rome despatched a most powerful letter to the Corinthians, exhorting them to peace, renewing their faith, and declaring the tradition which it had lately received from the apostles, proclaiming the one God, omnipotent, the Maker of heaven and earth, the Creator of man, who brought on the deluge, and called Abraham, who led the people from the land of Egypt, spake with Moses, set forth the law, sent the prophets, and who has prepared fire for the devil and his angels. From this document, whosoever chooses to do so, may learn that He, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, was preached by the Churches, and may also understand the apostolical tradition of the Church,” Againt Heresies (inter AD 180/199)​
     
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2018
  19. mark kennedy

    mark kennedy Natura non facit saltum Supporter

    +7,241
    Calvinist
    Single
    US-Democrat
    I imagine they could have meetings but none of them can lead it, that would annoy the rest.
     
  20. Norman70

    Norman70 Active Member

    307
    +183
    Barbados
    Christian
    Married
    Very interesting reading, chilehed, the non-Scriptural pieces being superb examples of the protestations of ordinary mortal human beings already steeped in their belief in heirarchy emanating from the sin in all of us.
    The Scriptures you quote also affirm, for me, the authority of the Apostles, as of authorship, but not of their leadership, which they would very much prefer not to have anyway, though they are referred to as leaders in the text.
    Paul would likely use the word leader rather than another word like Apostle as the ignorant (no disrespect there) listeners would hear a word which made more appeal to them, as when God told Samuel to give His people a king. They wanted that sort of authority, authority with power and able to wield force - they could not trust God to protect them.
     
Loading...