Freedom from Religion

Overview

Early in the history of the church the bishops began to presume that the church is a visible institution, a worldly kingdom. As time progressed, their ever-increasing rule over the laity and over secular world rulers resulted in Christendom. In recent history they lost their grasp over the secular world but the strong clergy-laity divide remains in Catholic and Orthodox Christianity.

I believe this meddling by the church into the realm of secular political rulership was never intended by Jesus and is a misconception of the proper role of bishops and church leaders.

Featured article: Early Church Fathers | Related article: Church History

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Historical Setting

Christianity was born in a time of Roman rule in which the state had absolute authority over secular matters. Certain harmless religions such as Judaism were tolerated and freedom of religion was the norm; adherents of these religions could worship as they pleased.

Christianity at first made no attempt to interfere with this state of affairs. For example, there was no Christian civil rights movement to free the slaves. Christians were to obey the civil government (even though it was corrupt and unrighteous) and to be good citizens.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Old Testament Israel

The Old Testament nation of Israel was founded by God to be a visible worldly nation — this is clear from the Pentateuch. God inaugurated a priesthood which ruled over secular affairs. In a later development, the people chose to have a secular king who had authority similar to the Catholic Pope.

The question is whether or not God intended these aspects of the nation of Israel to be retained by the church. If he did, we should expect there to be a clear indication of this in the New Testament and in the apostolic church, but there is none.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

The Church as the "New Israel"

The New Testament church is a spiritual nation.

And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. (Acts 28:23)

There is no mention that the church is to be a temporal kingdom as Israel was. The Old Testament was used for the purpose of demonstrating that there would be a Messiah who would redeem Israel and the world.

For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. (Romans 14:17)

Notice that the kingdom of God is spiritual. The question is whether there is also a temporal aspect.

Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. (Matthew 21:43)

This is the only reference in the New Testament to the church being a nation of the kind that Israel was. In this verse the phrase "kingdom of God" is used of the nation of Israel which clearly was established as a secuar (and religious) nation. We should expect mention of the church also being a temporal nation if it was to be since the nation of Israel was clearly defined this way.

The Old Testament nation of Israel was founded by God to be a visible worldly nation — this is clear from the Pentateuch. But of the founding of Christianity Jesus says nothing of the sort as evidenced in the gospels and neither do the apostles claim this in the other New Testament writings of the apostles.

The question was whether or not the Church should be a secular nation as Israel was. The early bishops decided that it should be and established a priesthood, monarchical bishops, division of clergy and laity, and the usurpation of secular rule when possible. But neither the New Testament nor the early church provide any evidence for this.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Results of Christendom

The results of Christendom are not particularly good. Once Christianity became a state-sanctioned religion under Constantine many people of dubious faith converted. But the reality of lukewarm Christians began long before that, in the late 100's A.D. when the bishops began to establish the strong division between clergy and laity. The original zeal and enthusiasm of Christianity was dampened when there stopped being prophets and when bishops began to rule the churches.

These trends got worse as the bishops began to become secular rulers in their own right. Bishops who focused on secular concerns neglected the spiritual concerns of the Christians at large. Aristocratic bishops practiced simony and other corruptions. They began expensive building projects paid for by the peasants who could not afford it.

I think the pastor-elder model of many Protestant churches better matches the New Testament and apostolic church and avoids the problems inherent in Christendom.

In addition, in Christendom, it is a crime to not be a Christian. This violates the innate human rights of people in a society.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Protestant Reformation

The problems I noted of Christendom were not on the list of things the Protestant Reformers attempted to reform. The Lutherans wanted the state to rule the church. Calvin expanded on this and created a police state in Geneva. There was certainly no freedom of religion in the early centuries after the Protestant Reformation. The Peace of Ausburg allowed each prince to determine whether everyone in his domain would be Catholic or Lutheran. People had to either convert or leave.

Luther's authority in the Lutheran Church was thought to be similar to the pope's authority in the Catholic world. We certainly don't see much evidence of a reform in this area. But over the centuries as the principles of the enlightenment began to become prominent, the Protestant Churches adapted. I have been to some single-race Baptist churches that seem to have a strong authoritarian culture similar to the Catholic Church, but in general, Protestant churches have conformed to the modern view of human freedoms.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Modern Enlightenment

The old world had unrighteous beliefs and practices. Examples:

• Prominence of murder before Noah. God had to destroy most of the human the race to eradicate this.
• In medieval times torture was used to extract a confession. What an absurd system!
• The church had torturers in the inquisition.
• The treatment of dissidents was brutal including burning at the stake and other cruel forms of execution.
• Slavery was allowed in the New Testament.

It seems that the church did not lift itself out of the culture of the day but retained unrighteous practices. However, as a result of "enlightened" modern thinking, we have now realized that humans should have certain rights and should be treated with dignity. This involves such concepts as:

• Self-rule (democracy)
• Freedom from discrimination and persecution
• Laws against stealing, extortion, monopolies, etc.
• Freedom to practice the religion of one's choice
• State interference only when the rights of others are violated

This has a side-effect of the state imposing its moral views on all citizens.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Development of Doctrine

The church claims that doctrine has developed and that such doctrines as monarchical bishops, apostolic succession, and the papacy are true developments. I don't believe these were valid developments.

The Catholic Church should accept modern views of human dignity, human rights, and human freedom and incorporate these into the teachings. Certainly Vatican II attempted to modernize the church but it still retained the old-world views about human society and insisted that the church is a visible institution which controls its members.

There is a Catholic movement to modernize the church which includes such issues as women priests, married priests, more rights for the laity; but it doesn't address the heart of the issue — it doesn't root out the monarchical bishops nor apostolic succession nor the papacy.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Protestant Churches

Some Protestant churches of today have a tendency to think that the clergy rules over the laity, but in general they have adopted the modern views. Unfortunately, a few churches seem to expect their members to obey the church leaders no matter what; these churches are a mini-society in their own right.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

Development of My Views

For years I have felt that the Catholic and Orthodox concept of monarchical bishops is flawed but I couldn't put my finger on the core objection. This morning it occurred to me that our modern concept of freedom of religion is superior to the old view of Christendom which was such a promonent feature of European history. Jesus and the apostles taught the modern view but the bishops forgot about it after a short while.

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page

The Proper Role of the Church

The proper role in society of the church (or any religion for that matter) — in a free and equitable society there should be:

• Separation of church and state
• Freedom from exploitation by religions

The early days of the church from the time that monarchical bishops first appeared until the end of Christendom do not fit this model. However, the modern churches and the New Testament and apostolic churches do. We should return to our roots.

Article originally written August 11, 2011.

Statement of Faith | About the author

One Apostolic Church | North Forest Home | Top of page