Home » Posts tagged 'utopianism'
Tag Archives: utopianism
Local Only Ecclesiology and Historical Theology
My graduate school required a large amount of theology, which included the branch of historical theology. Before I took the class, I must admit, I had not thought much about the category. I know men introduced historical theology to me at different times and varied manners in other classes, but it became important to me at that time between the ages of 22 and 25 years. Now when I listen to a presentation of a position, I want to hear its history for good and biblical reasons.
I know I’m writing on this subject because of an article I read today (as I first write this), called, “Five Reasons Historical Theology Is Necessary for the Local Church.” The man who wrote it is not local church. I would point out to you, if someone uses “local church” language, he may believe in two churches, universal and local, rather than the biblical one church, which is local only. However, churches need historical theology. They need to know that churches always believed what they believed, because it is the truth. Caleb Lenard in the article gives good reasons.
Examples for Historical Theology
A strong argument for perfect preservation of scripture in the original languages comes from historical theology. Christians believed this doctrine, as read in historical confessions of faith. In a theological way, no one has yet upended that position on preservation. Since this is what Christians have believed, you could call a change, heresy. A new position on the preservation of scripture diverges off the already established belief.
Sometimes I hear the language, “the reformed doctrine of justification.” Did the doctrine of justification originate with the Protestant Reformation? I don’t believe that. Maybe they dusted it off or took it out of the trash bin, but men kept believing it or else no one was saved not long after the advent of the Roman Catholic Church.
Is local only ecclesiology also historical theology? Christians do not have to prove that a majority of believers received and propagated local only ecclesiology. If it is true, scriptural doctrine, then believers should reveal its history, tell the historical story of local only ecclesiology. It is also helpful to show how that other ecclesiology diverged from the path of truth, if local only ecclesiology is true.
Historical Ecclesiology
I would like those with a different ecclesiology to consider the historical problem of a catholic ecclesiology and the bad consequences too. Roman Catholicism affected corrupt thinking on the doctrine of justification and many other doctrines. That did not disconnect with Roman Catholic ecclesiology. Correcting justification and not rectifying the other corrupted doctrines still leaves churches with much bad doctrine. This dishonors God and hurts many people.
Men often will not say, perhaps because they don’t know, that their doctrine is Roman Catholic. They don’t teach the false gospel of Roman Catholicism, but they teach other false doctrines. Those false doctrines lead back to a false gospel. One Roman Catholic doctrine accepted is the Roman Catholic doctrine of the church. Catholic church is universal church. That ecclesiology, a false one, spread in a widespread way to Christians.
Some of you reading right now are nodding your head, “no.” Back and forth, maybe smirking, rolling the eyes. Maybe. Just think about it though. Did you get your ecclesiology from Roman Catholicism? What kind of effect does that have for your life, others’ lives, and for all the other doctrines?
On the other hand, did I get my ecclesiology from mid 19th century landmarkists (see this series, and this one)? Everyone had believed in catholic ecclesiology (just like they denied justification before) up to that point. Local only ecclesiology then arose as a knee jerk reaction from J. R. Graves and Baptists in America. They didn’t like the ecumenism spreading among Southern Baptists, so they invented the local only position to combat it. Is that what happened instead? What is it about Baptists that made them in particular prey in a widespread way to a teaching that the church was only local, never universal?
Catholic Ecclesiology
I wouldn’t believe the local only position if I thought it originated among 19th century Baptists in America. Instead, I believe that looking in the Bible and also tracing history of doctrine supports something different. The universal church view grew from seeds of neo-platonism previous to Constantine and took hold as the predominant ecclesiology only with the state church in the 4th century. The Catholic Church persecuted churches separate from the state church. Those churches existed and they believed the church was local, not universal.
A platonic system of theology, Origen’s allegorical or spiritualizing system, affected everything in the Roman Catholic Church. Sprinkling of infants proceeded from this. A corrupt human priesthood arose. Amillennialism, the view that the kingdom was the Roman Catholic Church, took hold. Hierarchical church government became the norm. Tradition took prominence. The Pope. Transubstantiation.
Roman Catholicism and universal ecclesiology led to the dark ages. It caused regression or glacially slow progress in measurements of living standards. Most people stayed stupid for a long time because of Roman Catholic ecclesiology now embraced by many professing Christians. Satan used it greatly. The Protestant Reformation did not correct all that Roman Catholicism ruined. It embraced or absorbed Roman Catholic ecclesiology and eschatology with few exceptions.
Consequential Regression
Byproduct of Roman Catholic Ecclesiology
Even if there is notable minute progress to which someone might point in correct thinking about issues of life, it is an exception. It is usually a few bright spots mixed into still astounding darkness. Useful scientific discovery overall, subduing and having dominion, came to a stop for over a thousand years because of Roman Catholicism. Wherever it spread, such as Central and South America, left its destructive nature.
Everywhere the Roman Catholic Church took hold still continues a worse place to live because of its influence. It is a byproduct of Roman Catholic ecclesiology, that can’t be separated from its system of interpretation. As I say that, anticipating this argument, I understand that forms of paganism like animism also left the culture in ruins. It wasn’t much worse than Roman Catholicism, and I compare the consequences to biblical Christianity in contrast.
Still today people think “Christian” means Roman Catholic. Evangelicalism is a branch off a Catholic root in the mind of the general population. Every Christian then becomes responsible for the crusades, the inquisition, the conquistadores, feudalism, a flat earth, religious wars, and widespread poverty.
Once the hold of Roman Catholicism was broken, including Catholic state church ideology, the freedom brought astounding progress. People don’t trace that to ecclesiology or even talk about it in history classes, but it is true. When Warren Buffet says that John Rockefeller did not live as well as Buffet’s middle class neighbors, this relates to progress arising from the downfall of a state church.
Wreaking Havoc
The ecclesiology of Roman Catholicism, however, still continues, reeking its havoc everywhere. Globalism itself and its damage comes from Roman Catholic ecclesiology. It is a utopian, universalist concept, that first existed in Roman Catholicism. It stems from the mystical, spiritualistic, and allegorical system of Roman Catholicism.
A religious grounding from the system of Roman Catholicism continues in leftist thinking, which spreads utopian thinking, exerting power over individuals. It has the capacity to return the world to neo-feudalism and another dark age. None of this is true. The trajectory of the American colonies and the first one hundred fifty years of American history changed the world by overturning the influence of universal church doctrine. A nation begins to suffer as it welcomes it back.
I have written about the founding of catholic ecclesiology, the universal church doctrine, many times here (here, here, here, here, and here among other places). I have also written about the history and biblical doctrine of local only ecclesiology, offering that position (here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and see these two on English separatism–here and here).
Because of the dominance of a universal church through history through the Roman Catholic Church, in comparison not much local only material exists. The winners told the story. They could destroy anything that countered their viewpoint. You hopefully know the same practice occurs today in almost every institution. Some call the falsehoods, fake news. It is revisionist history based on a system of interpretation similar to what hatched Roman Catholicism.
More to Come
King Arthur and the Reality Of and Belief In the Supernatural: A Paradigm for Bifurcation of Truth
Part One
The Story of King Arthur
If you were like me, you heard the story of King Arthur and his Round Table as a child. The archaeologist Nowell Myers wrote: “No figure on the borderline of history and mythology has wasted more of the historian’s time.” I understand someone using his life to chase down this story. In the United States, journalists and historians both speak of the Kennedy era as Camelot. It insinuates a metaphor of utopianism.
When I read, heard, or saw the tale of King Arthur, I wondered if he was real. I wouldn’t have agreed the fanciful aspects of the Arthur story were true. Was he a true character though or just legend like Paul Bunyan and Babe the Blue Ox? The extraordinary figures, like Merlin, and magical qualities did not extinguish the wonder, rather enhanced it.
How does someone leap from the imaginations of the supernatural and yet inquire of the historical? The two seem to contradict. Do they? Supernatural and historical?
I would speculate that the Arthur saga disappears without human vulnerability to paranormal intervention. Normal doesn’t explain a planet hanging in space with the beauty and complexity of earth. The imagination of the human mind takes a trajectory into the supernatural. Man knows God. This is his default position.
Carlisle Castle
My wife and I have lived for a few months in the Northern England city of Carlisle. Saturday we walked around and through Carlisle Castle. We left the castle to return on foot to our flat, a small studio apartment, but we stopped along the way into the lobby of Tullie House Museum.
During the English Civil War, royalists occupied Carlisle Castle under the command of Sir Thomas Glemham. From October 1644 to June 1645, the Scots besieged the castle under Major General Sir David Leslie. The battles fought in the Civil War included Scottish Covenanters. Isaac Tully was in Carlisle the whole time and he wrote in his diary a journal of the siege now possessed by the British Museum in what are called the Harley Manuscripts. Isaac Tully’s family, who built the Tullie House in Carlisle, was a member of the merchant guild.
Carlisle Castle and Tullie House Museum dovetail at this siege during the English Civil War. Hundreds of years later my wife and I walked into both. As we passed through the lobby of Tullie House, we noticed an exhibition beginning there on February 4 on the The Legend of King Arthur. My mind raced back to my childhood.
Arthur at Tullie House
Apparently, one tale in the King Arthur story relates to Sir Gawain and the Carle of Carlisle, a Middle English rhyme written about 1400. Middle English is the very difficult English of Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales, written at a similar time. This early English poem features Sir Gawain, the apparent nephew of King Arthur and an English knight of the Round Table. This permits the city of Carlisle to claim King Arthur as its own and motivates it to feature an exhibition with his name.
The main museum leadership stood in the lobby last Saturday at about 4:30pm. I asked the two older men and woman whether Arthur originated in Carlisle. A conversation ensued for five to ten minutes. One of the men smiled and said several English towns or cities claim King Arthur. I asked, “Is he real?” All three laughed, while knowingly looking to each other. The other man said, “Come to the exhibition!” The woman answered, that was a difficult explanation.
Supernatural
I told the three museum employees that I thought it was interesting that some or many think about a historical derivation to the story and yet it includes the supernatural in it. All three of them just stood and stared in silence. No. Comment. What turned them from very talkative and engaged to frozen incapability to reply? I said the one word, “Supernatural.” They smiled in silence and I smiled back with a small laugh. I laughed because I knew why they said nothing in reply.
Continuing, I said something like the following: “The instinct for the supernatural in these stories complements the understanding of the supernatural in the world that they see. They know all this, as complex as it is, didn’t take place by accident. It is not a natural only world.” The three still just stood and smiled with no comment. It is a government funded museum and exhibit.
If the three museum workers showed agreement even by nodding “yes,” then as government employees, they use their positions to confirm the supernatural. Nothing supernatural can be a fact. I would enjoy even a minimal philosophical agreement that, even if not themselves, others enjoy the supernatural element of the King Arthur narrative, mirroring what they accept in the real world.
Two Other Examples of Shunning the Spiritual, Supernatural, Religious, or Biblical
York
This experience reminded me of a trip my wife and I took to York earlier, where we walked into a shop in the Shambles there. Something on a sign in the shop mentioned ghosts. The two young ladies said the shop was haunted and talked of a few experiences of validation. So I asked them, “So you believe in the supernatural?” I continued, “This is not just a physical world. There are spiritual beings. It is more than just a natural world.” I stood waiting for an answer, and they stood staring at me.
Castle Gift Shop
Before we walked home from the castle, passing through the lobby of the Tullie house, my wife and I stopped one more time into the castle shop. It is an English Heritage site and has a large assortment of items to purchase. In one of the two rooms, bottles of alcoholic beverage filled several shelves to buy. On a small table, three bottles sat and a young man said that today they offered some for a sample. Two were alcoholic. One was not.
My wife and I sampled the non-alcoholic beverage, a Ginger flavored one. Though non-alcoholic, it was intended, he informed us, to give the same kind of initial kick that alcohol gives. He said that the company started during the days of the temperance movement in England, which continued today selling these non-alcoholic type drinks. I mentioned to him that the United States had a period of prohibition of alcohol. He knew about it.
I began explaining to him why the prohibition movement started in the United States and referred him to the Ken Burns three part documentary on the Prohibition. He wrote it down. I told him that in part the prohibition occurred for biblical reasons. Before he answered me, he put his hand over the English Heritage Site logo on his shirt, warned us that this was not the opinion of his employers, and then he commented on the temperance movement in the United Kingdom. He felt the pressure to offer a disclaimer that was nothing more than a historical observation, because of its thread-like proximity to something scriptural.
Bifurcation of Truth
What I am illustrating is the real-life bifurcation of truth in the world. People segregate the spiritual from the physical. They divide the natural from the supernatural. They treat the Bible and anything religious as distant from facts and even history. Few to none will make mention of it.
I would expect little different in the United States to what I’m describing in England. A vast majority of people relegate the truth, if it is in the Bible or if it is moral or even religious, to a different category of information. They would not call it knowledge. They see it as a matter of faith, which is relativistic, individual, private, and subjective.
Employees in public institutions in a widespread manner, almost exclusively, will not talk about anything even related to the supernatural in a public setting. I will often mention the Bible. I did not even do that in this instance. That alone brought total silence.
Post Enlightenment Dualism
Previous to the Enlightenment, no divide existed between the natural and the spiritual, a rebellious invention of human derivation. Both proceeded from a single mind, consolidated in a unified whole. Man reflected the image of God, which also fulfilled his purpose. This is also the truth about man. He is not the product of an accident of nature.
Modern science arose from believers in God, who saw His invisible hand in all matter and space. The arrangement of the parts with mathematical precision turned to a conception of a machine with its varied innerworkings, contraptions, and mechanisms. The body functioned according to scientific laws with the mind regarded as operating as an independent entity. The concession to man as mere device gave way to everything no longer the design of a Creator.
The recalculation of man as outgrowth of natural causes did not occur solely by rationalistic determinations. Man wants what he wants. To get it, he eliminates God, a final judge, to stop him from getting what he wants or judging him for wanting it. What I describe, however, is the means by which people discarded God for their own lust. His inclusion in a conversation interrupts their self-approval and personal autonomy and violates their conscience. As a feature of their fallenness, they avoid that conversation with its awkwardness, painfulness, anxiety, or anger.
Recent Comments