One True Church
by Steve Bastin
Maybe
I am right. Maybe I am wrong.
But I can be neither right nor wrong unless there is some absolute
standard by which I am measured. Otherwise
I can only be different, neither right nor wrong.
Is
that confusing? Many are saying that
there are no absolutes (except the one, “there are no absolutes).
Right and wrong are only what you “feel in your heart.”
In
the column to your right you will see a scripture quotation.
That scripture contains several absolutes.
People are ignorant. In their
ignorance, sin has been committed. God
declares that everyone needs to repent. There
will be a righteous judgment. Jesus
will be the judge. Jesus has been
raised to prove that God’s judgment will take place.
Your
feelings will not be considered in the day of judgment.
The question is not “do you feel right, but are you right?”
God’s absolute standard will be applied to all.
If
I say that there is “one true church,” that is upsetting to many people.
It is popular to believe that “church” does not matter.
Many believe that it does not make any difference to God whether you
belong to any church. Or, if you do,
it does not matter which one.
Of
course, that is a popular view. If
it does not matter then I am all right. If
it does matter then I need to be concerned that I am in the right church.
It
has not been long ago that the Roman Catholic Church proclaimed that it was the
one true church and there was no salvation outside that church.
I agree with the “one church” part, but never agreed that the Roman
Catholic Church was the one true church.
Now
there are many within the Roman Catholic Church who agree with the popular view
that church membership does not matter. Society
has imposed its view. Those who once
understood the Scriptures to clearly indicate that God has a preference in
churches have now decided that God has no preference. They have now decided that
one church is as good as another.
It
does not take a theologian to read the Bible and reach the conclusion that there
is but one true church there. Consider
the following passages. “I also
say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and
the gates of Hades will not overpower it.”
(That is from Jesus.) “There
is one body.” (The church is often
described in the Bible as a body. See
for example Paul’s first letter to the church at Corinth, chapter 12.)
“For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or
Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”
“And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were
being saved.” (Since the Lord adds
to the church, and the Lord built but one church, then there can never be but
one.)
At
this point, some are tempted to say, “But aren’t all the different churches
just different branches of the one true church?”
That sounds good and many good people start down that road.
Yet
there are some who would say, “All are part of the one true church except the
Mormons.” Others would reply,
“All are part except the Jehovah’s Witnesses.”
Others would reply excepting some other church, such as the Unification
Church. (That is an interesting
concept. We can all be united if we
just accept the “Reverend” Moon.) Everyone
seems to have their own idea about who is, or is not, a part of the “one true
church.”
If
there is one group that is not a part of the one true church, then there may be
two. And, if there are two there may
be three. In fact, if I start
excluding anyone, then I may have to exclude everyone, including the church of
which I am a part.
No
one seems to want to consider the possibility that they may be wrong.
It is far easier and more comforting to just believe that everyone is all
right. If everyone is right, then I
am right and the matter may be closed. If
only one church is wrong, then that might be the church of which I am a member
and now I have problem.
If
no one is wrong then there is no problem for me.
Hallelujah! Praise God!
I’m on my way to heaven (even when I act like I really do not want to
go).
The
roots of this problem (concerning which church is right) lie in the nature of
people. People (some at least) love
to argue. Arguments tend to get out
of hand. Someone becomes angry and
what began as an interesting discussion ends up in a nasty fight.
(I know this because it used to happen between me and my brother.)
There
were arguments in the early church. Meetings
were held to “settle” the disputes. (See
the Jerusalem meeting described in Acts 15.)
The problem was that nothing got really settled because there are always
people who would rather argue than see things settled.
Several of Paul’s letters deal with matters that were “settled” in
Jerusalem.
Jesus
established a system for settling disputes.
He chose 12 men as apostles and later added Paul to that number.
The church was built on the foundation of their teachings.
(See, for example, Acts 1 and Ephesians 2)
This
explains why the writings of the apostles (and those whom they used to convey
their teachings) were accepted by the church of the first and second century as
Scripture. The writings of the
apostles were considered of supreme importance in the life of the early church.
There
were divisions in those early years. At
the root of every division was the idea that the 27 books of the New Testament
were not the foundation for what was taught.
An early division was created by a man named “Marcion.”
He rejected much of the New Testament and led off people as his
followers.
As
time passed, the nature of the church changed.
It was no longer an assembly of equals, but men had usurped authority and
considered themselves as “successors” to the apostles, although they did not
call themselves apostles, but bishops.
The
New Testament was no longer the final authority in the church, but rather the
decisions of these bishops. When
people disagreed, gatherings of these bishops were called and their decisions
were accepted as binding. On the
basis of their decisions, some were accepted and others were cast out of their
“church.”
The
church drifted further and further from the teachings of the apostles as
decision upon decision was made without a basis in the New Testament teachings.
Eventually
there was a revolt resulting in the Protestant movement.
Luther took the position that only Scripture could be considered
authoritative for God’s people. Yet
in practice he retained much of what he had learned as a Catholic priest and
only applied his “Scripture only” to certain practices that he found
objectionable.
As
time passed churches multiplied as men used the same powers of reasoning to
develop ever new teachings and from a position of power in their group, handed
down their teachings to others. Only
occasionally could be heard a voice crying out for a return to the New
Testament.
It
was often concluded that the New Testament was not reliable as a basis for the
church. The Bible was
accused of being “confusing.” There
must be someone to tell us what the Bible really means.
The common people could not be trusted to understand the Bible.
Their understanding must be supported by the “doctors” of theology.
So,
today, we have those who reject the New Testament teaching that there is but one
church. They claim that there is no
such thing as “one true church.” There
is, and the New Testament will help us find our way through the “forest” of
competing ideas to the simple plan of God. We
will have more to say on identifying the one church, of which God approves, next
month.