Introduction
Spanish philosopher George Santayana
gave us the now famous quote: “Those who fail to learn from history are doomed
to repeat it.” Unfortunately, historical truth is not highly esteemed in our
public schools. Instead, history is most often deconstructed, reinterpreted and
rewritten in order to support a premeditated historical bias. The danger of
this practice is not always immediately obvious. However, an honest assessment
looking back over the years reveals that mistakes are oft unnecessarily
repeated with the same pain and destruction. It seems clear that if the lessons
of history had merely been consulted honestly, so much personal and corporate grief
and suffering could have been avoided.
Last week I came across a news story
by the Associated Press about a New Jersey “beachfront villa” for Philadelphia
priests slated for auction. Seriously, anytime “priest/pastor/minister/clergy,”
etc. and “beachfront villa” appear in the same headline, I’m hooked! The
Archdiocese of Philadelphia was auctioning off the 10,000 square-foot Villa St.
John in order to offset a $17 million deficit as they try to untangle
themselves from the criminal trials and lawsuits resulting from clergy abuse
charges. The property was used as a vacation home for retired priests. The
Archbishop, who was selling his home also owned by the church, said it was no
different than families whose expenses are greater than their income (just like
families except for the sexual abuse charges and massive lawsuits). The
Archbishop said that “Holding on to the properties at this time would be inconsistent with the mission of our Church”
(so does that mean there was a time when owning a 10,000 square foot beachfront
villa for priests was consistent with the mission of the Church?). Finally, the
Archbishop confessed that the decision was made only after careful
consideration and prayer to ensure the future financial stability of the
archdiocese (I can’t help but wonder if that’s code for: “This sex abuse mess
is gonna cost us a fortune!”).
Too cynical? Well don’t assume I’m
only picking on the Catholic church. This tendency toward allowing the
“operation” of a church or para-church ministry to become the tail that wags
the dog does not discriminate between denominations. Losing sight of the fact
that God’s focus is and always has been to be in relationship with “people” knows
no bounds. Massive Protestant churches run like well-oiled manufacturing
plants. Programming, production, implementation and quantifiable results (i.e.
people and profits) in order to expand the church “operation” which restarts
the cycle of programming, production, implementation and quantifiable results.
The “operation” expands with the addition of more people and profits. An
expanded “operation” then adds more people and profits which require an expansion
of the “operation” and more programming, production, implementation and
quantifiable results. Perhaps you’re beginning to see a fairly circular pattern
here. But do you see what’s missing? That’s right—a focus on relationships with
people and transformed lives! This is what irritated Jesus so much about the
religious leaders of his day. They became so meticulous about their religious
“operation” that they lost sight of God’s purpose for them—teach the people how
to be in relationship with God and lead transformed lives! Again, we must be
willing to learn the lessons of history in order to avoid making the same
mistakes. I know some of you dread the idea of a history lesson but I implore
you to consider that we must first know where we’ve been in order to chart a
clear course for were we should be going.
Critical Mistakes
From its humble yet impressive beginnings under the
leadership of the Apostles and Early Church Fathers, the Church was intent on
keeping God at its cultural and theological center. That reality found its
formalization under Charlemagne and the creation of “Christendom” – the
unification of Church and State in the early ninth century. While Church and
State appeared to work together in harmony, there was a “constant struggle one
with the other for the mastery.”[1]
The papacy would reach its pinnacle of power by the middle of the thirteenth
century under the leadership of Pope Innocent III. Nevertheless, the Church was
on a headlong collision course with the Protestant Reformation. The growing
influence of Nationalism, the developments within Scholasticism and the
ever-increasing immorality of the papacy and its clerics were the primary
forces behind the Church’s decline by the time of the Reformation.
Fundamentally, the Church lacked the long range
planning required to meet the needs of a massive and diverse empire. The Church
mistakenly assumed that all would simply submit to what had historically been
the crushing authority of the papacy. However, “Man is not governed without his
consent or cooperation”[2]
and the papacy was out of touch with the needs of its distant constituents. Many
regions lacked the regular oversight of papal representation, and nobilities
who understood the dynamics of their respective citizenry increasingly assumed
leadership roles. The Church failed to recognize humanity’s natural desire to
belong to something bigger than itself. If that desire is not directed to find
its answer in spirituality, it will turn elsewhere to find it. Since the Church
was sorely lacking in spirituality by the fifteenth century, which I will
develop more fully later, people satisfied their need to belong through
Nationalism. Under separate nation states, people could now “relate” to the
person who was in authority over them. In part, because these new national
leaders where in relative close proximity to their constituents as compared to
the Pope in distant Rome, but mostly because the leadership understood the
cultural forces affecting its people.
Perhaps a good modern day example may be General
Electric’s attempted takeover of Honeywell-Europe. After Honeywell’s rejection
of General Electric’s multi-billion dollar takeover proposal, General
Electric’s CEO admitted that he was completely surprised by the attitude and
demands of the European Workers Union. Obviously, he probably has a firm grasp
on the dynamics of American union workers since General Electric employs
thousands of them. However, his lack of understanding of the cultural makeup of
the European union severely undermined General Electric’s takeover bid.
The natural course of the Empire’s growth demanded
the divestiture of some of the papacy’s authority away from Rome. This is
imminently clear with the forced relocation of the papacy to Avignon, France
known as The Babylonian Captivity from 1309-1377 A. D. Rome, in its usual
arrogance, refused to recognize that the empire was too big for a centralized
office of absolute authority. Consequently, Rome instated its own Pope and
created “The Great Schism” whereby the Church was then under the reign of two
Popes. In his book The Decline of the Medieval Church, Alexander Flick
writes; “Christendom looked upon the scandal helpless and depressed, and yet
impotent to remove it. With two sections of Christendom each declaring the
other lost, each cursing and denouncing the other, men soberly asked who was
saved.”[3]
In 1409 a Council deposed both Popes and elected a third Pope. If two Popes
were not bad enough, now there were three since none recognized the authority
of the other. The Church’s attempt to reform itself came in the form of The
Counciliar Movement from 1408-1448 A. D. Although historically successful,
formal Councils proved to be an obstacle to reform. The Counciliar Movement
reinforced the prevailing nationalistic attitude by allowing lay
representatives to participate in a democratic process instituted to elect a
new Pope. The voice of the people insisted on being heard. Advocates of the new
democratic process insisted that; “An ignorant king or bishop is no better than
a crowned ass.”[4]
The absolute control the papacy so desperately tried to maintain was
systematically being dismantled by the nations it was trying to control. While
Nationalism undermined the papacy’s governing authority, Scholasticism would
eventually develop theologians that would undermine the papacy’s theological
authority.
Leading up the fourteenth century, Scholasticism
attempted to reconcile all Christian doctrine, as endorsed by the papacy, with
“reason” and develop all Church teaching into an orderly system of Canon Law.
This would be the Church’s attempt to legislate all aspects of the Christian
life. For centuries the papacy was content in telling Christians what to
believe and what to think theologically. Now, under the watchful eye of the
papacy, it made a grave miscalculation when it sanctioned men to think for
themselves. Under Scholasticism came the rise of Universities. Although
originally designed to educate the clergy, it ultimately educated the children
of nobilities and left its clergy largely ignorant. In his book History of
the Christian Church—Modern Christianity, Philip Schaff writes that;
“Charlstadt, the older colleague of Luther, confessed that he had been a doctor
of divinity before he had seen a complete copy of the Bible.”[5]
The primary method of teaching at Universities was via debate between master
and student. Charismatic teachers or masters would attract a substantive
following. Ironically, the papacy’s approved teaching method would be used by
its opponents to defend their new theological principles—in contradiction to
the papacy. Obviously, the papacy did not consider the possibility that
scholars might reach conclusions contradicting the papacy’s official doctrines.
The development of new ideas is an inevitable
outcome when men are allowed to think for themselves as opposed to being told
what to think. This, however, was not necessarily the Church’s miscalculation.
The error, I believe, was not considering appropriate new ideas as a method of
ongoing doctrine and organizational reform. The papacy’s rejection of new ideas
on the basis of its supreme authority over all truth was not a “logical”
argument for those trained in the discipline of “wars of logic.”[6]
Like adult interaction with a maturing child, the Church’s arrogant position of,
“because I said so,” was no longer acceptable. Although Scholasticism as a
movement did not last, in large part because of the rise of Nominalism, its
developments, specifically the Universities, would be the seedbed of the “new
learning”[7]
of the Renaissance. Williston Walker writes; “It seems as if the human mind,
having reached a certain stage of development, opened to new thoughts and
conceptions of the world as a plant bursts into a flower.”[8]
By sanctioning what was in essence free thought, the papacy managed to impale
itself on its own sword. It allowed those who were part of the powerful ruling
class to think for themselves while leaving its own clergy largely ignorant and
incapable of defending itself intellectually against rising dissatisfaction
with the papacy. Thereafter, the period of The Renaissance Papacy would clearly
expose the Achilles’ Heel of the Church – corruption.
In his book, The History of the Christian
Church—The Middle Ages, David Schaff writes, “With Boniface VIII began the
decline of the papacy. He found it at the height of its power. He died leaving
it humbled and in subjection to France. He sought to rule in the proud,
dominating spirit of Gregory VII and Innocent III, but he was arrogant without
being strong, bold without being sagacious, high-spirited without possessing
the wisdom to discern the signs of the times. The times had changed.”[9]
In truth, Boniface could actually have been the poster child for his
successors. Dante, in his Divina Commedia, pronounces Boniface a
usurper, “Who turned the Vatican hill into a common sewer of corruption.”[10]
The papacy’s downfall was caused, in large part, by its complete lack of
credibility due to its pervasive corruption and gross immorality. Personal
papal wealth was shameful. Following Boniface, Pope John XXII was said to have
amassed $2,000,000 in personal wealth by the time of his death although others
estimate the amount to be as high as $60,000,000.[11]
Corruption and abuses were not new to the Church and its reform was the goal of
The Counciliar Movement at Pisa, Constance and Basel. However the Church was
now gripped by secularism and selfish tyranny. Simony, the buying and selling
of Church offices, and nepotism were practiced regularly. Pluralism, the
holding of more than one office at a time while drawing a stipend from each
office, was common. P. Schaff writes that, “Celibacy was a foul fountain of
unchastity and uncleanness.”[12]
In his book The Reformation, J. A. Babington writes that; “Pastors are
the first to enter, and the last to leave the tavern, and are always stout
fellows at the drinking bout. In their drunken orgies they often blurt out the
secrets of the Confessional.”[13]
Remission of sins was had for a price. Indulgences were peddled like drugs by
modern day drug dealers with the Pope as the Kingpin. Attempts at reform from
within were useless. The Church’s momentum would now send it crashing into the
coming Protestant Reformation.
In the end, many forces were at work that would
eventually lead to the Reformation.
Interestingly, there are two ways to look at the events that transpired
during the period from 1300-1500 A. D.
In his book Church History In Plain Language, Bruce Shelley
writes, “Human systems rise and thrive and then fall because the processes of
time have their own built-in ‘judgment.’ Institutions, which at first glance
seem to be quite worthy, eventually crumble to ruins because the centuries
themselves bring out the flaws. What is ‘judged,’ of course, is not this man or
that but the system itself. At bottom it is the inadequacy in human nature that
comes under judgment, for in the course of time it is human nature that turns a
good thing into an abuse.”[14]
Alternatively, Walker states that; “The Reformation was not a beginning but the
culminating stage of a great movement, of which the new political life of
Europe, the unlocking of strange continents, and the revival of learning were
all equally part.”[15]
The Church failed to recognize the immense strength
of the changing Nationalistic culture. Additionally, it sanctioned learning yet
refused to educate itself. Ultimately, however, The Church no longer reflected
the glory of God through its behavior. Instead, it magnified man’s utter
depravity. Nevertheless, Walker writes; “The medieval Church, by its
uniformity, its discipline, and its corporate moulding power, did a work for
the crude social life that grew up on the ruins of the Roman empire or among
the new peoples outside the bounds to which Roman conquest had once extended
that no freer conception of Christianity could have accomplished.”[16]
For all its obvious faults, out of the ruins of the Medieval Church can be seen
a faded and worn picture of a once glorious Holy Roman Empire that paved the
way for much of today’s Christianity.
Final Thoughts
Of course as Protestants (evangelicals
in particular) we read this history and wag our fingers or shake our heads in
righteous indignation at the Catholic church’s behavior. However, let me warn
you that one Protestant Reformation does not preclude the need for a universal
Christian Reformation. Let me repeat Shelley’s earlier warning: “In the course
of time it is human nature that turns a good thing into an abuse.” Many of us
are familiar with massive Protestant/evangelical churches with huge budgets and
bureaucracies that might rival the United States federal government! Most, if
not all, of them are laudable in their efforts to be faithful to the mandates
of the Scriptures. However, many have grown so massive that managing the
“operation” of the church constantly takes on a greater significance as the
church grows and expands. Eventually, managing the “operation” of the church
becomes the mission of the church as an unconscious shift away from a
people-oriented organism to a business-oriented organism begins to reshape the
fabric of the church. Of course, failure to be a people-oriented church isn’t
limited to large churches. There are countless small churches and medium size
churches that are focused on the ministry efforts of a few key individuals
within the church. It’s all about them and the role they play while everyone
else has been assigned the role of spectator. It could be an Elder or a Worship
Pastor or perhaps even a prominent financial contributor. In any event, church
becomes a venue to facilitate their desire for recognition and adulation. When
church becomes a business-oriented church or a church where a few people can
receive their earthly rewards for being “giants of the faith,” when people are more
interested in hearing the voice of the person they see on the stage on Sundays
then they are in hearing the voice of the Creator of the universe, when being
entertained on Sundays replaces genuinely holy and transformed lives, then a
good thing has turned into an abuse and we are again guilty of Ignoring The Lessons Of History!
[1]
Williston Walker, The Reformation, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1900), p. 6
[2] H.
Richard Niebuhr, Christ And Culture, (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc., 1951) p.
134
[3]
Alexander Clarence Flick, The Decline of the Medieval Church, (New
York: Burt Franklin, 1930), vol. 1, p.
293
[4] Ibid.,
vol. 2, p. 56
[5] Philip
Schaff, History of the Christian Church, (Charles Scribner’s Sons,
1910), vol. VII, p. 10
[6] Class
Notes, The Development of Scholasticism, p. 1
[7] Walker, The Reformation, p. 27
[8] Ibid.,
p. 27
[9] David S.
Schaff, D. D., History of the Christian Church, (Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1910), vol. VI, p. 11
[10] Ibid.,
p. 11
[11] Ibid.,
p. 70
[12] P.
Schaff, History of the Christian Church, p. 9
[13] J. A.
Babington, The Reformation, (Post Washington, N. Y./London, Kennikat Press,
1901), p. 6
[14] Bruce
Shelley, Church History In Plain Language, (Dallas, TX: Word Publishing, 1982, 1995), p. 224
[15] Walker,
The Reformation, p. 2
[16] Ibid.,
p. 4-5
No comments:
Post a Comment