Beyond the Preference-Driven Church: Revisiting the Marks and Works of the Church, Part 2—ORTHODOXY

In the first article of this series, I proposed a simple schematic illustrating the essential Marks and Works of a church. These essential Marks include Orthodoxy, Order, and Ordinances. And the vital Works include Evangelism, Edification, and Exultation. In this second article of the series I focus on the fundamental Mark of Orthodoxy.

Orthodoxy Revisited

What comes to mind when you hear the word orthodox? For some it conjures up icons, incense, altars, and priests rattling off ancient liturgies in Greek or Russian. Others might associate the term orthodox with their own personal doctrines. That is, their beliefs are orthodox, so everything else is heresy.

Actually, orthodox is a Greek word meaning “correct opinion.” As such, orthodox believers have always held to the essential, unchanging truths of the Christian faith—the “things” Paul instructed Timothy to “entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also” (2 Timothy 2:2). These unchanging essential truths, expressed in different language throughout history, were originally summarized in brief hymns or creedal statements that appear in the Bible (see John 1; Romans 1:1–4; 1 Corinthians 15:1–5; Philippians 2:5–11; Colossians 1:15–18; 1 Timothy 3:16). Later this same set of essential truths, usually summarized in confessional statements like the Apostles’ Creed, formed the basis for early Christian discipleship—especially preparation for baptism and admittance into the church (as is likely the case for the “elementary principles” described in Hebrews 5:12–6:5).

From an Evangelical Protestant perspective, these essential truths include, inter alia: (1) the doctrine of the Trinity—one God in three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; (2) the incarnation, virgin birth; atoning death, resurrection, ascension, and future return of Christ; (3) the creation, fall, and depravity of humanity; (4) salvation by grace through faith; and (5) the inspiration and authority of Holy Scripture. To err in matters of orthodoxy has always meant to err in matters that form the very heart and life of the Christian faith. For most of these issues, eternal life is at stake. For all of them, spiritual health is on the line. So heresy, the opposite of orthodoxy, is “damnable doctrine”—opinions held by false Christians.

Beyond these essential truths, various churches and denominations may have their own theological and doctrinal “preferences.” That is, their unique identities as churches or denominations are often driven by their preferences regarding everything from angels to end-times . . . from church governance to spiritual gifts. Now, there’s nothing wrong with having and teaching “distinctives.” But if a tradition allows its distinctives to invade the inner sanctuary of orthodoxy, then the Mark of Orthodoxy is actually weakened, not strengthened.

Catholicity Reclaimed

When I was in grade school, our teacher explained that most people in America were Christians. Then she polled the class: “How many of you consider yourselves to be Christians?”

All the students raised their hands . . . except one girl. She looked nervously around the room, spotted one of her friends raising her hand, and shouted, “Hey, Tina, put your hand down! We’re not Christians, we’re Catholics!”

For most Evangelicals the word “catholic” brings to mind Popes, statues, rosaries, and the Spanish Inquisition. But the term catholic actually comes from a Greek word meaning “universal” or “general” as opposed to local and particular. Ignatius of Antioch, around A.D. 110, was the first to use this term in reference to orthodox Christian churches. In order to strengthen the Mark of Orthodoxy and prevent heresy, Ignatius instructed the local church in Smyrna to trust the teachings of their bishop (or “head pastor”), Polycarp, who had been a personal student of the apostle John. Ignatius wrote, “Wherever the bishop appears, there let the congregation be; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the catholic church” (Ignatius, Smyrnaeans 8.2). In this original context catholic refers to the body of Christ throughout the world under the headship of Jesus Christ (not the Pope!), just as the local church in Smyrna was under the headship of their bishop, Polycarp. (I’ll address the issue of pastors, elders, bishops, deacons, and members next time when I focus on the Mark of church Order.)

Are You an Orthodox Catholic Evangelical?

Properly understood, Evangelical Christians must be orthodox. And if they are orthodox in their beliefs and practices, they are part true catholic Christianity of ages past and places present. Being orthodox and catholic means that we’re united on the essential truths that Christians have believed from the beginning. Individual churches may be “separated” by language, culture, geography, distinct traditions, and organizational preferences. But all churches that center on the ancient and enduring orthodox beliefs that have always been the warp and woof of the Christian faith are truly and properly catholic. Whether Lutheran, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian, Independent Bible, or something else, Evangelical churches share this common Mark of Orthodoxy with each other.

But here comes the warning. Sometimes our own preference-driven distinctives can be so emphasized that we lose sight of the foundational Mark of Orthodoxy. We can easily fall into the error of thinking everything we believe is fundamental, essential, and of utmost importance. And then the truly orthodox doctrines are merely assumed . . . then neglected . . . then forgotten . . . and eventually lost. In response to this preference-driven mentality, we need to reassert the Evangelical Mark of Orthodoxy. It’s not enough to bury the essential truths in a lengthy doctrinal statement at the same level as the origin of angels and the order of the end-times. More than anything else in our postmodern, post-Christian culture, Evangelical churches must clearly, unambiguously, and intentionally identify themselves with the biblical and theological core of the ancient Christian faith.

An official statement of essential truths that focuses attention on the Mark of Orthodoxy would be a good place to start. And, like the apostolic and ancient church, actually reaffirming these orthodox essentials for membership, baptism, discipleship, and discipline would be a proper function of these truths. Also, keeping our own personal theological distinctives out of that ancient and unchanging center would go a long way to promote humility and unity. Only when we restore the essential Mark of Orthodoxy to its proper place of centrality—not merely in our doctrinal statements, but also in our teaching—can we move beyond the problem of the preference-driven church.

Introductory Reading List for Second Century Christianity

In response to numerous requests for some suggestions on how to begin reading the primary sources for second century Christianity, I put together the following primary source reading list. I placed these writings in general chronological order, according to my conservative date ranges (in parentheses) and the “average” date for ordering purposes in brackets. In their corresponding footnotes I include my preferred English translation as well as the preferred original language edition—usually Greek, but sometimes Latin or other languages. Most of these texts are also available online through http://www.ccel.org/. I have hyperlinked the text to various easily-accessible public domain online resources when possible. You may also purchase more recent published translations, which I included with hyperlinks to amazon.com listings when possible.

Transition from First to Second Century:

1. The Didache (50–100 [75])— English and Greek: Michael W. Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers: Greek Texts and English Translations, 3d ed. (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2008). The standard critical text for all Apostolic Fathers is Franz Xaver Funk, et al., eds, Die Apostolischen Väter: Griechisch-Deutsche Parallelausgabe (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1992).

2. 1 Clement (95–97 [96])—English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

3. Shepherd of Hermas, Visions and Mandates (90–100 [95])—English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

4. Epistle of Barnabas (75–135 [105])— English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

B. Early Second Century:

5. Ignatius of Antioch, Ephesians, Magnesians, Trallians, Romans, Philadelphians, Smyrnaeans, Polycarp (110–117 [113])— English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

6. Polycarp, Philippians (110–117 [113])— English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

7. Shepherd of Hermas, Parables (100–150 [125])— English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

8. Gospel of Peter (125)— English and Greek: Thomas J. Kraus and Tobias Nicklas, eds., Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, vol. 1, Das Petrusevangelium und die Petrusapokalypse: Die griechischen Fragmente mit deutscher und englisher Übersetzung, Die Griechischen Christlichen Shriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte, vol. 11 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 2004), 1-77.

9. 2 Clement (100–150 [125])— English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

10. Aristides, Apology (125)— English: J. Rendel Harris, ed., The Apology of Aristides on Behalf of the Christians, ed. J. Armitage Robinson, 2d ed., Texts and Studies, vol. 1/1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1893). Greek and Syriac: Bernard Pouderon and others, Aristide: Apologie, Sources Chrétiennes (Paris: Cerf, 2003).

11. Odes of Solomon (100–150 [125])— English and Syriac: James H. Charlesworth, The Odes of Solomon: The Syriac Texts, corrected reprint ed., Texts and Translations, vol. 13 (Missoula, MT: Scholars Press, 1978).

12. Fragments of Papias (125–155 [140])—English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

13. Epistula Apostolorum (150)— English: M. R. James, ed., The Apocryphal New Testament (Oxford: Clarendon, 1924).

C. Late Second Century:

14. Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho, 1 Apology, 2 Apology (150–160 [155])— English: Thomas B. Falls, Michael Slusser, and Thomas P. Halton, eds., St. Justin Martyr: Dialogue with Trypho, Selections from the Fathers of the Church (Washington, D.C.: Catholic University of America Press, 2003); Leslie W. Barnard, ed., St. Justin Martyr: The First and Second Apologies, Ancient Christian Writers, vol. 56 (New York: Paulist, 1997). Greek: Miroslav Marcovich, ed., Apologiae pro Christianis, Dialogus cum Tryphone, ed. H. Christian Brennecke and E. Mühlenberg, Patristische Texte und Studien, vols. 38 and 47 in one vol. (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2005).

15. Martyrdom of Polycarp (155–165 [160])— English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

16. Melito of Sardis, On Pascha (160–170 [165]) [no online resource available]— English and Greek: Stuart George Hall, Melito of Sardis: On Pascha and Fragments, ed. Henry Chadwick, Oxford Early Christian Texts (Oxford: Clarendon, 1979); English: Alistair Stewart-Sykes, On Pascha: With the Fragments of Melito and other Material Related to the Quartodecimans, Popular Patristics (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 2001).

17. Tatian, Address to the Greeks (165–172 [168])— English: Molly Whittaker, Tatian: Oratio ad Graecos and Fragments, ed. Henry Chadwick, Oxford Early Christian Texts (Oxford: Clarendon, 1982). Greek: Miroslav Marcovich, ed., Tatiani Oratio ad Graecos, ed. H. Christian Brennecke and E. Mühlenberg, Patristische Texte und Studien, vol. 43 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1995).

18. Epistle to Diognetus (150–200 [175])— English and Greek: Holmes, The Apostolic Fathers.

19. Theophilus of Antioch, To Autolycus (170–185 [177])—English: Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe, eds., Fathers of the Second Century: Hermas, Tatian, Athenagoras, Theophilus, and Clement of Alexandria, 1926 American ed., The Ante-nicene Fathers, vol. 2 (New York: Scribner's, 1926). Greek: Miroslav Marcovich, ed., Theophili Antiocheni Ad Autolycum, ed. H. Christian Brennecke and E. Mühlenberg, Patristische Texte und Studien, vol. 44 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 1995).

20. Athenagoras, Embassy for the Christians, Resurrection of the Dead (177–180 [178])— English: Joseph Hugh Crehan, ed. Athenagoras, Embassy for the Christians, the Resurrection of the Dead, Ancient Christian Writers, ed. Johannes Quasten and Joseph C. Plumpe (Westminster, MD: Newman, 1956). Greek: Miroslav Marcovich, ed., Athenagoras: Legatio Pro Christianis, ed. Miroslav Marcovich, Patristische Texte und Studien, vol. 31 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1990).

21. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 1–5, Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching (180–190 [185])— English: Iain M. MacKenzie, Irenaeus's Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching: A Theological Commentary and Translation, trans. J. Armitage Robinson (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2002); Dominic J. Unger and John J. Dillon, eds., St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Adversus haeresis 1/1, Ancient Christian Writers 53 (New York: Newman, 1992); Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 1: The Apostolic Fathers, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus (Edinburgh: Christian Literature Publishing Company, 1885; reprint, New York: Scribner's, 1899). Original languages: Adelin Rousseau, ed., Irénée de Lyon, Démonstration de la prédication apostoloque, Sources chrétiennes 46 (Paris: Cerf, 1995); Adelin Rousseau and L. Doutreleau, eds., Irénée de Lyon: Contre les hérésies, Livre 1, vol. 2: Texte et traduction, Sources chrétiennes 264 (Paris: Cerf, 1979); Adelin Rousseau and L. Doutreleau, eds., Irénée de Lyon: Contre les hérésies, Livre 2, vol. 2: Texte et traduction, Sources chrétiennes 294 (Paris: Cerf, 1982); Adelin Rousseau and L. Doutreleau, eds., Irénée de Lyon: Contre les hérésies, Livre 3, vol. 2: Texte et traduction, Sources chrétiennes 211 (Paris: Cerf, 1974); Adelin Rousseau et al., eds., Irénée de Lyon: Contre les hérésies, Livre 4, vol. 2: Texte et traduction, Sources chrétiennes 100 (Paris: Cerf, 1965); Adelin Rousseau, C. Mercier, and L. Doutreleau, eds., Irénée de Lyon: Contre les hérésies, Livre 5, vol. 2: Texte et traduction, Sources chrétiennes 153 (Paris: Cerf, 1969).

Peanut Butter Christianity

One day my wife sent me to the store to buy peanut butter—specifically, natural peanut butter. In other words, no fake stuff. This seemed simple enough . . . until I arrived in the peanut butter wing of the grocery store. The options overwhelmed me—creamy, chunky, extra chucky, honey-flavored, jelly-filled, low fat, organic, and countless sizes, shapes, brands, and prices! George Washington Carver himself would have shaken his head in despair. I’m sure that managing that isle alone must be a full time job.

So there I stood, paralyzed with indecision, wanting nothing more than to just grab the cheapest jar of peanut butter and dash for the checkout. Instead, showing due diligence, I searched for “natural peanut butter” amidst the flashy brand names that virtually called out from the shelf like brochure-pushers on the Vegas Strip: “Pick me! Pick me! Don’t you remember all those commercials you saw as a kid? All those smiling faces? Those cool special effects showing golden roasted peanuts magically spread into smooth, creamy Jif [or Peter Pan . . . or Skippy]?”

Lured by the flashy labels, my eyes landed on “Skippy” paired with the keyword “Natural”! How convenient!

I snatched it off the shelf.

I felt rather victorious until I got home and took a closer look at the back label. I then discovered that “natural” peanut butter isn’t always a literal designation. Skippy’s “natural” peanut butter does include roasted peanuts, of course. But it also contains sugar, palm oil, and salt. That’s natural? Really? All those things naturally grow on a peanut plant? I guess from one perspective these ingredients are natural as opposed to, say, “supernatural.” And I couldn’t find any unpronouncable names like monosodiumtriglyceraticidipropylol! Furthermore, to be fair to Skippy, if we were to compare Skippy “Natural” to, say, that peanut butter-ish substance in a Reese’s Peanut Butter cup or a Butterfinger candy bar, Skippy looks like pure gold.

But is junk food peanut butter really the standard? When I contrast Skippy “Natural” with something like Krema Natural, I’m a little less forgiving. The ingredients list for Krema simply says, “Peanuts.” No salt, no oil, no emulsifier, no sweetener, no chemicals added to preserve freshness or enhance flavor. Just plain peanuts. Call me naïve, but to me that’s natural whether we like it or not. Shouldn’t peanut butter made of puréed peanuts serve as the standard for what constitutes “natural” peanut butter?

As I obsessed over the out-of-control peanut butter situation for the next several weeks, something struck me. This failure of most peanut butters to actually live up to the “natural” standard reminds me of the out-of-control state of too much Evangelical Christianity. If I were to liken authentic, classic Christian orthodox beliefs and practices to the truly “natural” form of undiluted, unmixed, real peanut butter, then the multiple forms of Christianity that diverge farther and farther from this standard become, well, less and less “natural.”

As Evangelicals, many of us have over the decades become increasingly accustomed to a particular form of Christianity, which, while it is still essentially Christian, has been so “enriched” by non-Christian ingredients meant to “enhance” the faith—or to make the faith more convenient or palatable or marketable—that the essential Christianity has become difficult to discern. And those who have become accustomed to this diluted form of Christianity have all but forgotten what the pure faith actually tastes like. In fact, many who are then exposed to a less adulterated faith—a form without all the unnecessary additives—find themselves disgusted by the original pure flavor, spitting it out and rejecting it as something foreign and inferior. Or at least unpleasant to the palate.

The great irony is that this purer form of Christianity is the authentic faith once for all delivered to the saints! The Gospel purely preached, the sacraments rightly administered, discipline properly maintained—nothing really fancy about these things. In fact, they are so simple to identify and maintain that churches focusing on these fundamentals and freeing themselves from the frills appear to most big-production glitz and galmmor Evangelicals like washed-out has-beens or incompetent wannabes.

To return to my peanut butter analogy, all those peanut butter products do contain peanuts, and so they can genuinely be called “peanut butter.” Similarly, to varying degrees the marks of authentic Christianity are found in most of the products that fill the shelves of the Evangelical church market. And to the degree that they retain those essential marks they are, in fact, Christian. Yet many forms of Evangelical Christianity have been so coated with sweetness . . . so mixed with artificial ingredients . . . or so drenched in candy coating that they are in danger of becoming cheap imitations that serve merely to distract from—not point to—the essential ingredients of the Christian faith. And just like additive-rich peanut butters that appeal to flavor rather than nutrition, far too many Evangelicals shop for me-centered feel-good church experiences rather than Christ-centered worship, discipleship, and authentic community. In fact, like sour faced kids who reject all-natural peanut butter, many Evangelicals turn their noses up at authentic Christianity and would rather keep playing at church than adjust their tastes to the real thing.

I believe we’ve reached a point in the Evangelical church market where it’s no longer enough to just read the front label. Now we have to focus in on the fine print and see what place is given to the true marks of classic Christianity.