Why so little sense of Church history?

[ClementofRome]

Why is there so little knowledge/sense of Church history among us? It is because we feel that the Protestant Reformation was the beat all to end all? Is it because we believe that Wesley was the beat all to end all? Is it because many of us believe that pre-critical Christianity has nothing to offer us?

I am currently teaching an adult SS class in the Apostolic Fathers and they/we are eating it up! It is amazing the reactions that are coming out of this class! We are being richly blessed with increased knowledge of Church history and are getting a real sense as to how it must have been to be a Christian in the 2nd centuryAD.

I fear that we (I could include the mass of Protestantism in this, but will reserve my concerns to the UMC's as that is what I am) have lost all sense of what has come before us. I am really beginning to appreciate Eastern Orthodoxy because of their knowledge and connection to our ancient past.

Is it just not necessary for us to know our history?

[Celticflower]

I remember one year in SS (back in 5th grade I think--looong time ago) the study was called "The Past is Always Present", and it delved into a lot of history. Was very interesting, finding out where we came from (church wise). It started with Adam, went thru the OT, NT and the lives and deaths of the Apostles, traced up thru some of the better known saints (Francis, Patrick etc), to Luther, Calvin, Wesley and the history of the UMC. It was a lot of information and, of course not really in depth (dealing with 11 yr olds remember?), but it was interesting. I've probably forgotten most of the info, but it served to whet my ongoing curiosity in the subject.

Celtie

[WesleyJohn]

.

[SandyLou]

Good point CofR!
In celebration of the 300th anniversary of Wesley's birth, our church did a series on his life and teachings. . . . and at our new member orientation, the pastors do a 20 minute history of Methodism which includes (albeit VERY brief!) relgion prior to Wesley. . .
. . . .VERY good point!

[akascottb]

perhaps it is not my place to post this, but if you are interested in the teachings of the church fathers i suggest starting with the homilies st. john chrysostom. i could give a long reading list, but chrysostom will keep a person occupied for a few moths at least.

god bless you,

daniel

[herev]

excellent topic. I was amazed when I entered seminary at how little I had ever been taught on church history. I found myself fascinated with early church history (pre-Constantine)--there is so much to learn, and I look forward to making it a hobby when I can get back to it

[ClementofRome]

Hey herev, good to see you around. Hope all is well with III and of course the rest of the family too.

I am still hoping to begin that readings in the FAthers that we discussed in the fall. I am looking for the right platform to host it. I do not want to make it a forum here for a number of reasons and the previous hosting possibility did not seem interested after all. More on that later. It should be fun.

[herev]

Hey herev, good to see you around. Hope all is well with III and of course the rest of the family too.

I am still hoping to begin that readings in the FAthers that we discussed in the fall. I am looking for the right platform to host it. I do not want to make it a forum here for a number of reasons and the previous hosting possibility did not seem interested after all. More on that later. It should be fun.

cool, I look forward to it. I graduate in 72 days, so time will be better. Looking forward to meeting you at conference. If all goes well for me at the Board of Ordained Ministry in 2 weeks, I may be looking for those babysitters we discussed at the time of commissioning.
God Bless

[ClementofRome]

cool, I look forward to it. I graduate in 72 days, so time will be better. Looking forward to meeting you at conference. If all goes well for me at the Board of Ordained Ministry in 2 weeks, I may be looking for those babysitters we discussed at the time of commissioning.
God Bless

I will give daughter #1 and #2 the heads up. I am sure that we can help out.
blessings
CofR

[ps139]

I think Church History is fascinating too. I remember the amazement I felt when I first found out that we actually have writings preserved of the disciples of the disciples. Guys who were personally taught by John, Peter, James etc. Its awesome stuff!!

[herev]

Hi Bill, (ps139), welcome to Wesley's Parish

[Velcro]

There is one study: what they said/wrote. There is another: what they did. For the huge majority, if what they did was studied, you would not want them in the church membership, and perhaps not in your church at all. Admittedly, I am not one who is at all enamoured with those early leaders after 90 c.e.

[ClementofRome]

There is one study: what they said/wrote. There is another: what they did. For the huge majority, if what they did was studied, you would not want them in the church membership, and perhaps not in your church at all. Admittedly, I am not one who is at all enamoured with those early leaders after 90 c.e.

Thanks for keeping this thread alive Velcro. Would you be so kind as to give a specific example of what you mean by the above?

[jangnim]

Great thread. We all need to understand who we are in Christ, and how we are related to our ancient bretheren.:)

[Velcro]

The short answer: some of these church leaders, for example, condemned other church leaders to death and made sure this was carried out (but, of course, in our softer, more modern histories, this may be softened significantly). Another example: the blatant (how shall I say this) lasciviousness that was overlooked in some. Another: the threats and outrageous anger against Jews that was written, heavily suggested, and carried out by some of the hearers/readers.

[ClementofRome]

The short answer: some of these church leaders, for example, condemned other church leaders to death and made sure this was carried out (but, of course, in our softer, more modern histories, this may be softened significantly). Another example: the blatant (how shall I say this) lasciviousness that was overlooked in some. Another: the threats and outrageous anger against Jews that was written, heavily suggested, and carried out by some of the hearers/readers.

I don't mean to press here, but only do so with Christian charity....those are generalizations and I was hoping for some specifics. Thanks.
CofR

[Velcro]

To name a few of the earliest to read about:

Eusebius and his teachings, some of which are considered anathema by most churches, with good reason, as well as extreme and ultimately dangerous prejudice against Jews
Justin (same as above)
Constantine

Some books that might be of benefit:

Eusebius' The History of the Church
A House Divided: The Parting of the Ways Between Synagogue and Church by Vincent Martin
Pagan Rome and the Early Christians by Stephen Benko

[WiredSpirit]

Growing up in a non-denominational church that was less than 30 years old, it seems like we spend too much time talking about our history. Personally, I don't really care about our history as long as we are focussed on making the world better today.

[jangnim]

Growing up in a non-denominational church that was less than 30 years old, it seems like we spend too much time talking about our history. Personally, I don't really care about our history as long as we are focussed on making the world better today.
I would have to disagree with this. Knowing how we got here is as much a part of our Christian life as knowing our doctrinal stances. Failure to understand the historical, is a failure to understand where we are now, and what our doctrine really says. If we Methodists spent time comprehending even the thoughts of John & Charles Wesley, we would very clearly understand how far we have come away from their initial understanding. By such knowledge it might well serve us to examine the rightness of our conference descisions. To know this is to know at least the vector we are taking, so we can see where our future will carry us. Just my 2 cents.

[ClementofRome]

To name a few of the earliest to read about:


Eusebius and his teachings, some of which are considered anathema by most churches, with good reason, as well as extreme and ultimately dangerous prejudice against Jews
Justin (same as above)
Constantine
Some books that might be of benefit:

Eusebius' The History of the Church
A House Divided: The Parting of the Ways Between Synagogue and Church by Vincent Martin
Pagan Rome and the Early Christians by Stephen Benko


Thanks Velcro....I am aware of Eusebius' issues and Justin and Constintane are hardly examples of Christian orthodoxy.

I guess that my interest is in the Apostolic Fathers and their faithfulness and piety even in the face of a "not yet complete" canon...there is much to learn from them.

Blessings
CofR

[ClementofRome]

Growing up in a non-denominational church that was less than 30 years old, it seems like we spend too much time talking about our history. Personally, I don't really care about our history as long as we are focussed on making the world better today.

One question and a comment:

Are you saying that your church that was only 30 years old was focusing on ITS immediate history? If this is the case, I agree with you. If they are concentrating on the history of the Christian church, I must respectfully disagree.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it....esp the the bad parts! :)

[Velcro]

Thanks Velcro....I am aware of Eusebius' issues and Justin and Constintane are hardly examples of Christian orthodoxy.

I guess that my interest is in the Apostolic Fathers and their faithfulness and piety even in the face of a "not yet complete" canon...there is much to learn from them.

Blessings
CofR

And can it be that by "church fathers," you intend the apostles rather than those who followed them? If so, we are in agreement. I do not consider the majority after them as "fathers" of my scriptural understanding.

[WiredSpirit]

One question and a comment:

Are you saying that your church that was only 30 years old was focusing on ITS immediate history? If this is the case, I agree with you. If they are concentrating on the history of the Christian church, I must respectfully disagree.

Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it....esp the the bad parts! :)

No, I'm saying they were concerned about where they were going and less about where they came from. Its a very successful church too, last I checked attendance was around 20,000 a week.

[ClementofRome]

And can it be that by "church fathers," you intend the apostles rather than those who followed them? If so, we are in agreement. I do not consider the majority after them as "fathers" of my scriptural understanding.

No,, by church fathers, I mean those who immediately followed the apostles. I think that we can gain MUCH scriptural understanding by reading these folks with discernment, of course. When I use the phrase "Apostolic Fathers'" this is a commonly recognized collection of Christian writings dating from approx 96AD-200AD.

[Velcro]

Wow, Clement! Do these carry more theological weight?

[ClementofRome]

Wow, Clement! Do these carry more theological weight?

ABSOLUTELY NOT! But, FYI, 1 &2 Clement were included after Revelation in some early NT collections. No, having studied these writings in depth, I do not hold them on a level with the NT. However, these men were commenting on and exegeting and applying the OT and the NT to their specific situations and I think that we can learn much from them. This is my point.....we have done ourselves a dis-service when we ignore what Christians of past generations have done, said, thought, believed. This does not mean that we agree with them, it simply means that we learn from their mistakes and enjoy the benefits of their collective wisdom.