True2Ourselves
Already a member? login
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
Divider
  
+
Register FAQ A-Z directory Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

True2Ourselves Forums   > Community Topics > Theology  > The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-29-2014, 01:53 PM
Linsinbigler's Avatar
Representative Clergy
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,150
Default The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

The following is an article written by a dedicated Protestant who wished to express his views on the topic of ecclesiology (theology on the church), the original found here: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology | Daniel B. Wallace

The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology
Posted by Daniel B. Wallace on 18 March 2012

I am unashamedly a Protestant. I believe in sola scriptura, sola fidei, solus Christus, and the rest. I am convinced that Luther was on to something when he articulated his view of justification succinctly: simul iustus et peccator (“simultaneously justified and a sinner”).

But with the birth of Protestantism there necessarily came a rift within the western church. By ‘necessarily’ I mean that Protestants made it necessary by splitting from Rome. Jaroslav Pelikan had it right when he said that the Reformation was a tragic necessity. Protestants felt truth was to be prized over unity, but the follow-through was devastating. This same mindset began to infect all Protestant churches so that they continued to splinter off from each other. Today there are hundreds and hundreds of Protestant denominations. One doesn’t see this level of fracturing in either Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Not even close.

“But unity in falsehood is no unity at all,” some will protest. To a degree that is true. If the unity of the church meant that we would all deny the bodily resurrection of the theanthropic person, then that would be unity against an essential of the Christian faith. But there is no thinking Christian who agrees lock, stock, and barrel with what his pastor teaches. Yet, he is a part of that church. In this respect, he has prized unity over truth. We all have to do this. If we didn’t, each Christian would be his or her own church. The fellowship would be awfully predictable and quite boring!

Several evangelical scholars have noted that the problem with Protestant ecclesiology is that there is no Protestant ecclesiology. In many denominations—and especially in non-denominational churches—there is no hierarchy of churches responsible to a central head, no accountability beyond the local congregation, no fellowship beyond the local assembly, no missional emphasis that gains support from hundreds of congregations, and no superiors to whom a local pastor must submit for doctrinal or ethical fidelity.

Three events have especially caused me to reflect on my own ecclesiological situation and long for something different.

First, I have spent a lot of time with Greek Orthodox folks. It doesn’t matter what Orthodox church or monastery I visit, I get the same message, the same liturgy, the same sense of the ‘holy other’ in our fellowship with the Triune God. The liturgy is precisely what bothers so many Protestants since their churches often try very hard to mute the voices from the past. “It’s just me and my Bible” is the motto of millions of evangelicals. They often intentionally forget the past two millennia and the possibility that the Spirit of God was working in the church during that time. Church history for all too many evangelicals does not start until Luther pounded that impressive parchment on the Schlosskirche door.

In Protestantism, one really doesn’t know what he or she will experience from church to church. Even churches of the same denomination are widely divergent. Some have a rock-solid proclamation of the Word, while others play games and woo sinners to join their ranks without even the slightest suggestion that they should repent of anything. Too many Protestant churches look like social clubs where the offense of the gospel has been diluted to feel-good psycho-theology. And the problem is only getting worse with mega-churches with their mini-theology. This ought not to be.

Second, a man whom I mentored years ago became a pastor of a non-denominational church. Recently and tragically, he denied the full deity of Christ and proclaimed that the Church had gotten it wrong since Nicea. He got in with a group of heretics who were very persuasive. The elders of the church had no recourse to any governing authority over the local church; they were the governing authority and they were not equipped to handle his heterodox teaching. It smelled wrong to them and they consulted me and another evangelical teacher for help. It took some time before they could show the pastor the door, and they were bewildered and troubled during the process. The congregation wasn’t sure which way was up. Doubts about the cornerstone of orthodoxy—the deity of Christ—arose. This cancer could have been cut out more swiftly and cleanly if the church was subordinate to a hierarchy that maintained true doctrine in its churches. And the damage would have been less severe and less traumatic for the church.

Third, a book by David Dungan called Constantine’s Bible makes an astounding point about the shape of the canon in the ancient church. Dungan discusses the passage in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History (6.12) when this church father famously spoke of four categories of literary candidates for the canon—homolegoumena, antilegomena, apocrypha, and pseudepigrapha. Dungan mentions that for Eusebius to speak of any books as homolegoumena—those twenty books that had universal consent in his day as canonical—he was speaking of an unbroken chain of bishops, from the first century to the fourth, who affirmed authorship and authenticity of such books. What is significant is that for the ancient church, canonicity was intrinsically linked to ecclesiology. It was the bishops rather than the congregations that gave their opinion of a book’s credentials. Not just any bishops, but bishops of the major sees of the ancient church. Dungan went on to say that Eusebius must have looked up the records in the church annals and could speak thus only on the basis of such records. If Dungan is right, then the issue of the authorship of certain books (most notably the seven disputed letters of Paul) is settled. And it’s settled by appeal to an ecclesiological structure that is other than what Protestants embrace. The irony is that today evangelicals especially argue for authenticity of the disputed letters of Paul, yet they are arguing with one hand tied behind their back. And it has been long noted that the weakest link in an evangelical bibliology is canonicity.

So, how do we deal with these matters? I once wrote a blogpost at Parchment & Pen called “The Ideal Church.” In it I said, “The ideal church can’t exist. And a large part of the reason it can’t is because we’ve made a terrible mess of things.”

I’m not sure of the solution, or even if there is one. But we can take steps toward a solution even if we will never get there in this world. First of all, we Protestants can be more sensitive about the deficiencies in our own ecclesiology rather than think that we’ve got a corner on truth. We need to humbly recognize that the two other branches of Christendom have done a better job in this area. Second, we can be more sensitive to the need for doctrinal and ethical accountability, fellowship beyond our local church, and ministry with others whose essentials but not necessarily particulars don’t line up with ours. Third, we can begin to listen again to the voice of the Spirit speaking through church fathers and embrace some of the liturgy that has been used for centuries. Obviously, it must all be subject to biblical authority, but we dare not neglect the last twenty centuries unless we think that the Spirit has been sleeping all that time.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-29-2014, 02:23 PM
AHJE's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 3,014
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

Interesting post Linsinbigler. I appreciated his honesty.
__________________
_______________________________


"... There is nothing more beautiful than to be surprised by the Gospel, by the encounter with Christ. There is nothing more beautiful than to know Him and to speak to others of our friendship with Him." (Pope Benedict XVI) [Homily of His Holiness, Sunday, April 24th 2005]

GOD MADE MARY
NE - CES - SARY.


When Jesus, the Living Bread, says IS He means IS.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-02-2014, 03:27 AM
xenic101's Avatar
Knight of the Forum
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 1,341
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

The first two of these are things that have always struck me as odd about protestantism. I'd expand them in the my experience many protestants don't see a Church history past themselves...nor doctrine, I've known a number of people who've moved to a new area and spent a while before finding a church that taught what they believed.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-02-2014, 10:42 AM
eschator83's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 382
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

What a tragedy it is that we can make very few accurate statements about the whole of protestantism, nor of Christianity, for that matter, because doctrines are scattered and many people have no significant church allegiance at all.
I see no consolation that Jesus foresaw the problem and counselled against it; I think it behooves us to do all we can to seek the unity Jesus instructed, and to refuse to acknowledge those as Christians who are clearly not.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-02-2014, 02:08 PM
Lookinforacity's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,797
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

Quote:
Originally Posted by eschator83 View Post
What a tragedy it is that we can make very few accurate statements about the whole of protestantism, nor of Christianity, for that matter, because doctrines are scattered and many people have no significant church allegiance at all.
I see no consolation that Jesus foresaw the problem and counselled against it; I think it behooves us to do all we can to seek the unity Jesus instructed, and to refuse to acknowledge those as Christians who are clearly not.
.

That is a really good idea, but which Doctrines do we decide to follow in Unity. who would do this deciding for the whole of Christendom?
The Catholic Church,
The Orthodox Church
The Protestant Church

As long as one feels superior to the others, for what ever reason, there will be no Unity.
Superiority being, you must come to believe my Doctrines as I do.
Are you actually willing to give up your heart felt Doctrines for mine, for the sake of this Unity?

Do you believe it possible for these three, to get together and compromise their Beliefs, and Doctrines for Unity?
There are points of Doctrine of the others, which we may not in good conscience, be able to adhere to.
If they haven't up to this point in history come together in Unity, what would make you think, it would take place now?


JIM

.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-02-2014, 03:46 PM
eschator83's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 382
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

The protestant church? There is no such thing--you deceive yourself. Somebody counted 30 000, and didn't even try to include single-location storefronts. Which ones would you say are Christian?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-02-2014, 05:14 PM
Lookinforacity's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,797
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

Quote:
Originally Posted by eschator83 View Post
The protestant church? There is no such thing--you deceive yourself. Somebody counted 30 000, and didn't even try to include single-location storefronts. Which ones would you say are Christian?


.

The word Protestant only refers to those which Protested against the teachings of the Catholic Church, not against Jesus Christ.

I would include, all of those 30,000 + Churches, which profess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, they are those which constitute the Protestant Church.
I call myself a Christian, Born again, A Child of God.
Because I do not belong to the Catholic Church, do you exclude me as a Brother in Christ?

I personally would not be so high minded, as to assume to exclude any Body of Believers, because of three basic reasons.

1) Mat. 18:20
For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.

2) Mat. 13:29
But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.

3) Rom. 14:4
Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.

God does not look at The Hierarchy of the Organization, and the Grandeur of the Cathedral, or at the Humbleness of the lone Preacher in his low cost Storefront, what HE is concerned with is, "The Condition of the Hearts of the People Involved in either place."

If you do not exclude me as a Brother in Christ, then it does not make a wit of difference, whether I attend a Gilded Cathedral, or a small nondescript Storefront.


JIM

.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-27-2014, 12:24 AM
Narrowpath's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 3
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

greetings:
Great post I have been looking at these problems that Mr.Wallace was talking about. In my context in the centrality of authority in these splinters found in the Protestant branch of the church. i am still reading church history before the protesting started and weighting what 'I' ought to do.
I keep reading, listening and asking questions. Even among my AOG brethren. What ought we to do? How should we address these issues in our context?What we have been doing is exploring the OC church and watching vids online. Asking for guidance from the founder and finisher of our faith .

Narrow path
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-27-2014, 04:18 PM
StanJ
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linsinbigler View Post
The following is an article written by a dedicated Protestant who wished to express his views on the topic of ecclesiology (theology on the church), the original found here: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology | Daniel B. Wallace

The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology
Posted by Daniel B. Wallace on 18 March 2012

I am unashamedly a Protestant. I believe in sola scriptura, sola fidei, solus Christus, and the rest. I am convinced that Luther was on to something when he articulated his view of justification succinctly: simul iustus et peccator (“simultaneously justified and a sinner”).

But with the birth of Protestantism there necessarily came a rift within the western church. By ‘necessarily’ I mean that Protestants made it necessary by splitting from Rome. Jaroslav Pelikan had it right when he said that the Reformation was a tragic necessity. Protestants felt truth was to be prized over unity, but the follow-through was devastating. This same mindset began to infect all Protestant churches so that they continued to splinter off from each other. Today there are hundreds and hundreds of Protestant denominations. One doesn’t see this level of fracturing in either Eastern Orthodoxy or Roman Catholicism. Not even close.

“But unity in falsehood is no unity at all,” some will protest. To a degree that is true. If the unity of the church meant that we would all deny the bodily resurrection of the theanthropic person, then that would be unity against an essential of the Christian faith. But there is no thinking Christian who agrees lock, stock, and barrel with what his pastor teaches. Yet, he is a part of that church. In this respect, he has prized unity over truth. We all have to do this. If we didn’t, each Christian would be his or her own church. The fellowship would be awfully predictable and quite boring!

Several evangelical scholars have noted that the problem with Protestant ecclesiology is that there is no Protestant ecclesiology. In many denominations—and especially in non-denominational churches—there is no hierarchy of churches responsible to a central head, no accountability beyond the local congregation, no fellowship beyond the local assembly, no missional emphasis that gains support from hundreds of congregations, and no superiors to whom a local pastor must submit for doctrinal or ethical fidelity.

Three events have especially caused me to reflect on my own ecclesiological situation and long for something different.

First, I have spent a lot of time with Greek Orthodox folks. It doesn’t matter what Orthodox church or monastery I visit, I get the same message, the same liturgy, the same sense of the ‘holy other’ in our fellowship with the Triune God. The liturgy is precisely what bothers so many Protestants since their churches often try very hard to mute the voices from the past. “It’s just me and my Bible” is the motto of millions of evangelicals. They often intentionally forget the past two millennia and the possibility that the Spirit of God was working in the church during that time. Church history for all too many evangelicals does not start until Luther pounded that impressive parchment on the Schlosskirche door.

In Protestantism, one really doesn’t know what he or she will experience from church to church. Even churches of the same denomination are widely divergent. Some have a rock-solid proclamation of the Word, while others play games and woo sinners to join their ranks without even the slightest suggestion that they should repent of anything. Too many Protestant churches look like social clubs where the offense of the gospel has been diluted to feel-good psycho-theology. And the problem is only getting worse with mega-churches with their mini-theology. This ought not to be.

Second, a man whom I mentored years ago became a pastor of a non-denominational church. Recently and tragically, he denied the full deity of Christ and proclaimed that the Church had gotten it wrong since Nicea. He got in with a group of heretics who were very persuasive. The elders of the church had no recourse to any governing authority over the local church; they were the governing authority and they were not equipped to handle his heterodox teaching. It smelled wrong to them and they consulted me and another evangelical teacher for help. It took some time before they could show the pastor the door, and they were bewildered and troubled during the process. The congregation wasn’t sure which way was up. Doubts about the cornerstone of orthodoxy—the deity of Christ—arose. This cancer could have been cut out more swiftly and cleanly if the church was subordinate to a hierarchy that maintained true doctrine in its churches. And the damage would have been less severe and less traumatic for the church.

Third, a book by David Dungan called Constantine’s Bible makes an astounding point about the shape of the canon in the ancient church. Dungan discusses the passage in Eusebius’s Ecclesiastical History (6.12) when this church father famously spoke of four categories of literary candidates for the canon—homolegoumena, antilegomena, apocrypha, and pseudepigrapha. Dungan mentions that for Eusebius to speak of any books as homolegoumena—those twenty books that had universal consent in his day as canonical—he was speaking of an unbroken chain of bishops, from the first century to the fourth, who affirmed authorship and authenticity of such books. What is significant is that for the ancient church, canonicity was intrinsically linked to ecclesiology. It was the bishops rather than the congregations that gave their opinion of a book’s credentials. Not just any bishops, but bishops of the major sees of the ancient church. Dungan went on to say that Eusebius must have looked up the records in the church annals and could speak thus only on the basis of such records. If Dungan is right, then the issue of the authorship of certain books (most notably the seven disputed letters of Paul) is settled. And it’s settled by appeal to an ecclesiological structure that is other than what Protestants embrace. The irony is that today evangelicals especially argue for authenticity of the disputed letters of Paul, yet they are arguing with one hand tied behind their back. And it has been long noted that the weakest link in an evangelical bibliology is canonicity.

So, how do we deal with these matters? I once wrote a blogpost at Parchment & Pen called “The Ideal Church.” In it I said, “The ideal church can’t exist. And a large part of the reason it can’t is because we’ve made a terrible mess of things.”

I’m not sure of the solution, or even if there is one. But we can take steps toward a solution even if we will never get there in this world. First of all, we Protestants can be more sensitive about the deficiencies in our own ecclesiology rather than think that we’ve got a corner on truth. We need to humbly recognize that the two other branches of Christendom have done a better job in this area. Second, we can be more sensitive to the need for doctrinal and ethical accountability, fellowship beyond our local church, and ministry with others whose essentials but not necessarily particulars don’t line up with ours. Third, we can begin to listen again to the voice of the Spirit speaking through church fathers and embrace some of the liturgy that has been used for centuries. Obviously, it must all be subject to biblical authority, but we dare not neglect the last twenty centuries unless we think that the Spirit has been sleeping all that time.
Along with the Mounce's and Moo, this guy is among my most preferred Greek expositors.
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-19-2014, 06:21 AM
pryz's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 1,353
Default Re: The Problem with Protestant Ecclesiology

Interesting Fr.H. Thank you for posting some of these grossly ignored points like, ""It’s just me and my Bible"" motto.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linsinbigler View Post
"fellowship would be awfully predictable and quite boring!"

"Too many Protestant churches, , has been diluted to feel-good psycho-theology."
In the day-to-day, how can the use of either of these not help but to damage the otherwise responsible with these error-strapped stereotypes? They exist, yet are assumed upon where they need not. As in this, some of DW's threads are lightly scattered with sectioning-off comments of his own too, seen in these variations on falsehood to variations of respective church discipline shows an ambiguous and un-obtainable unity. How of course, that hard reach back to the unity of dialog.

Quote:
“I said, “The ideal church can’t exist. And a large part of the reason it can’t is because we’ve made a terrible mess of things.”, , "I’m not sure of the solution, or even if there is one."
My goodness! What a terrible and faithless statement, , even with the "we can" proposals, even if this is used as a wake-up if that is the mentality what we have to deal with, in my mind, detrimental (Heb 11:6). What is it we are held back or bound by anyhow that we have choose to represent lack rather than abundance from God?

Quote:
"But we can take steps toward a solution even if we will never get there in this world.

First of all, we Protestants can be more sensitive about the deficiencies in our own ecclesiology rather than think that we’ve got a corner on truth. We need to humbly recognize that the two other branches of Christendom have done a better job in this area.

Second, we can be more sensitive to the need for doctrinal and ethical accountability, fellowship beyond our local church, and ministry with others whose essentials but not necessarily particulars don’t line up with ours.

Third, we can begin to listen again to the voice of the Spirit speaking through church fathers and embrace some of the liturgy that has been used for centuries. Obviously, it must all be subject to biblical authority, but we dare not neglect the last twenty centuries unless we think that the Spirit has been sleeping all that time."
Again, interesting. As long as the "we can", doesn't continue to be akin to a defeated use of, 'must'. To me, would remark much stronger (in His rest) if in the spirit and reassurance of - 'should'. Is that a strain beyond reasonable use? Apparently not, seeing that the spiritual wrinkle to evaporate unity has been infinitely successful. But rather a unity over agreed falsehood to come out to be the same new lump, yet re-establish where they left off, to settle previous bannishments. I say it's time for unity to come out of the closet and enlarge the wrinkle-free table of communion.

Or are some willing to maintain what is, is all the unity we need or could ever hope to achieve?
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
GOD HAS CHOSEN: Catholic Over Protestant DrFrank Ministries/Outreach Discussion 20 11-07-2012 09:16 PM
Protestant? Sid General Discussions 33 11-29-2011 07:49 AM
Protestant Is As Protestant Does saintmichaeldefendthem Theology 112 11-18-2010 08:28 AM
Catholic-Protestant-other? sojourner General Discussions 50 07-16-2010 06:18 PM
Difference between Protestant and Protestant RollingThunder General Discussions 103 11-13-2009 08:10 AM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:14 AM.


true2ourselves
 
 
 

Flashcoms

You need to upgrade your Flash Player.

Version 8 or higher is required.

download from http://www.adobe.com/go/getflashplayer

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29