The Baby in the Bathwater

One of the key points of the Reformation was sola scriptura -- the position that the Bible is the sole authority in matters of faith and practice. This position was taken over against the three-fold authority that the Roman Catholic Church recognized (and still does): 1) The Bible, 2) The Church, and 3) Tradition.

A lot of non-Catholics have worked hard at tossing the baby out with the bath water. In their mad rush to catapult anything that resembles "Catholic" (including the word "catholic"), it seems that we have been ejecting things of value. The easiest one of these is the word "catholic," which simply means "universal." There is surely a "universal church" comprised of all Christians everywhere. Non-Catholics have difficulty realizing that the "catholic Church" is not the same as the "Roman Catholic Church." So when they hear in the Apostles' Creed, "I believe in ... the holy catholic Church," they squirm, not realizing that it's simply a reference to the Church Universal and not a tacit nod to Rome.

The one that I am having difficulty with is Church history. For some reason, there is a sense today that the history of the Church -- "Orthodoxy" -- has little value. Ignore creeds. Don't even pay attention to Jonathan Edwards, Calvin, Luther, Aquinas, Augustine, or any of those old dead guys. We need to ignore all that stuff and just use the Word. On the face of it, it's not very bright. I mean, if there were people in the past who had depth, why shouldn't we benefit from it? But when I look at it further, it seems more than "not very bright." It seems dangerous.

Jesus, speaking of sending the Holy Spirit, said, "When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all truth" (John 16:13). The Spirit of truth came at Pentecost. That means that the Holy Spirit has been at work in believers since Pentecost directing them to the truth. And that means that the truth has been available since Pentecost. It seems to me, then, that I should be able to track whatever doctrine I choose from today all the way back through Church history to the Bible and find it confirmed by true believers throughout. I know; maybe it gets dim at times. I know that there were dark times when the true Church was hard to find. I know that there are times when not much was written. But it seems to me that there should be a continuous set of points throughout documented Church history that confirms the basic truths that we call "Christianity."

So here we are in the 21st century and we are quite comfortable, for the most part, with tossing that baby out with the Roman Catholic bathwater. Who cares what history tells us? What does it matter what other men of God believed in times past? For example, so what if Darby was the first one in over 1800 years of Church history to suggest that the Rapture would occur at the beginning of the Great Tribulation? Of what consequence is it that no one prior to the 20th century figured out that Paul did not mean that women shouldn't be pastors? Well, it bothers me. It bothers me to think that we have figured things out some 2000 years after Christ that those closer to His time couldn't see. It bothers me to think that the Spirit seemed either incapable or unwilling to lead them into all truth, but waited for our day. I don't know ... it just seems rather arrogant of us to say, "Well, sure, they believed all that stuff ... but we know better now."

Don't misunderstand. It's not all your beliefs I'm pointing at. It's not like you are the problem -- not me. I recognize, for instance, that the concept of Infant Baptism was a given in Church history until fairly recently. I know that today's largely symbolic Communion was much more real in Church history. I understand that baptism was much more significant for them than it is to us today. So I struggle with this stuff myself. What makes me think that my positions which differ from historic positions are right when they were all wrong? It makes me uncomfortable.

We live in a time when a lot of Christians are tossing out things that we shouldn't be willing to so easily lose. There is rampant anti-intellectualism. "Don't think; just feel." Never trust scholars. That kind of thing. We cannot afford to toss out our minds. There is the "No creed but Christ" crowd which, oh, by the way, is a creedal statement. We shouldn't be so willing to jettison the hard work and wisdom of men of God in times past who distilled doctrines we desperately need today into clear statements of what we believe. Then there are those who argue that Church history is irrelevant. I can't help but wonder what was preventing the Holy Spirit from doing what Christ promised He would if that is the case. I'm not arguing in favor of the three-fold system of authority that the Roman Catholic Church holds. I'm simply suggesting that much of it has value, and discarding it is unwise. And I'm wondering how far I am willing to go to hold a position counter to the wise and godly men and women who have gone before me. It just kind of bothers me.