Nicene and Post-Nicene Church History

   From the beginning, there seems to have been a great amount of difference between Western and Eastern Christianity.  The Eastern Church might best be described as being much more philosophical.  Deep meditation upon the new Christian truths brought forth the fruits of many diverse ideas and opinions, originating from an obvious sense of  freedom to question or to think about such things.  Such freedom of the mind allowed for the further development of  a keen discernment of spiritual thoughts.  As a result, the Eastern Church seems to be naturally more concerned with the metaphysical than the practical.

  The Western Church seems to have been much more concerned with the practical aspects of Christianity.  Due to their extreme conservatism, they clung rigidly to a much more consistent and orthodox belief.  As a result, the West had a very legalistic attitude about their Christianity, which as a result, provided much order, and clearly defined the boundaries which people generally need, especially those who are much younger in the faith.  On the other hand,  freedom to think or to speak, in contrast to what the Church taught, was very much suppressed.  The religious leaders of the Western Church considered it dangerous to have thoughts that seemed to go against the grain.  The danger of free thought might be clearly realized by the first great crisis between the East and the West, that is, the Arian Controversy, where the divinity of Christ himself was questioned.  No such doctrine ever had much chance of gaining support in the West.  In the East however, the Arian Controversy had surprisingly gained much ground. 

   Arius was a priest who arrives on the scene during the days of the emperors, Diocletian and Constantine the Great.  Arius, being ordained in Alexandria, is primarily credited with initiating one of the most major controversies that had existed throughout the early church.  Being a student of the theological school of Lucian of Antioch, he denied the full divinity of Jesus Christ.   Lucian is said to have borrowed many of his ideas from Origen.  It is Origen who originally postulates that God generates the second person of the godhood to become another being like that of his own self.  Arius did not accept Origen's notion as he considered the whole to be illogical, however, the seed remained to germinate a new idea equally as destructive.  He agreed with Origen that Christ is at some time begotten or created, but rejecting that the eternal God who had no beginning could create another like himself who had no beginning, is therefore forced into reducing Christ to a created being much as the angels are created while at the same time being spirit creatures.    Due to his heretical teachings Arius was finally exiled (A.D. 325) to Illyria.  This was by no means the end of Arianism.  Rather, it might be best referred to as a mere first sheaf of its life.  After the exile of Arian, there would be much debate over Arian's doctrine which would soon engulf the entire church. 

  Arianism as a Christian doctrine was finally outlawed (A.D. 379) throughout the Roman Empire by Emperor Theodosius I.  Although the sheaf of Arianism was cut down at this time, it would soon become evident that they had not managed to completely pull this tare out by its roots.  The doctrine continued to survive for two centuries longer among those who had been converted to Christianity by Arian bishops. 

 What was this great doctrine which threatened the early church and dared to question the divinity of Christ?  At its foundation, Arianism agreed with the mainline Christian thought  that God himself was or is unbegotten and therefore without having a beginning.  The doctrine of the Son is however the point of extreme controversy.  The Son, whom the mainline church defines as the Second Person of the Trinity, is definitely begotten.  Arian believed that the Son for this reason cannot truly be God, that is not at least in the same sense that the Father is God, for all must agree that God himself has no beginning.   Furthermore, the Son was not generated from that same divine substance.  The Father is one nature, the Son is yet another.  It is obvious according to the Arian way of thinking, that this Son of God did not exist throughout all eternity.  Being begotten suggests a point in time in the which he himself was created.  He is not made out of something or some substance which had already existed but he is created afresh, out of no known substance that had existed before, much like the angelic creatures.  Like these celestial creatures, the Son exists by the will of the Father and there was a time that he himself did not exist but the Father only.   This makes the relationship of the Son to the Father more of an adoptive relationship than that of a natural one. 

   The Arian controversy seems to be the major reason for Constantine to call together the first ecumenical council at Nicaea (A.D. 325).  Constantine evidently considered the church to be in a great state of disarray and in need of a strong iron fist to settle matters once and for all.  Constantine wanted and demanded order if  he was to allow this new religion to be the religion of imperial empire of Rome.  He assembled together 318 bishops to discuss the matter and decide what must be done.  He himself assumed a role as the Pontifus Maximus or High Priest over the whole of the Christian Church.  The results of this gathering produced the famed Nicene Creed which we have reproduced in the next chapter. 

[Go To Top]

The Nicene Creed

    (A.D. 325)

   (Found in the Acts of the Ecumenical Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon, in the Epistle of Eusebius of Coesarea to his own Church, in the Epistle of St. Athanasius Ad Jovianum Imp., in the Ecclesiastical Histories of Theodoret and Socrates, and elsewhere, The variations in the text are absolutely without importance.) 
 

The Synod at Nice set forth this Creed. The Ecthesis of the Synod at Nice.

We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, maker of all things visible and invisible; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the only-begotten of his Father, of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, being of one substance (consubstantialem) with the Father. By whom all things were made, both which be in heaven and in earth. Who for us men and for our salvation came down [from heaven] and was incarnate and was made man. He suffered and the third day he rose again, and ascended into heaven. And he shall come again to judge both the quick and the dead. And [we believe] in the Holy Ghost. And whosoever shall say that there was a time when the Son of God was not, or that before he was begotten he was not, or that he was made of things that were not, or that he is of a different substance or essence [from the Father] or that he is a creature, or subject to change or conversion - all that so say, the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematizes them. 

   We note how that the council stated that the Son of God was "begotten not made," and how he himself was also consubstantial (Greek homoousios), which is to say "of the same substance" as the Father himself.   What the council intended in their choosing of this word is further set forth by St. Athanasius. 
 

"That the Son is not only like to the Father, but that, as his image, he is the same as the Father; that he is of the Father; and that the resemblance of the Son to the Father, and his immutability, are different from ours: for in us they are something acquired, and arise from our fulfilling the divine commands. Moreover, they wished to indicate by this that his generation is different from that of human nature; that the Son is not only like to the Father, but inseparable from the substance of the Father, that he and the Father are one and the same, as the Son himself said: 'The Logos is always in the Father, and, the Father always in the Logos,' as the sun and its splendor are inseparable." 
 

  Prior to the First Ecumenical Council of Nicaea, no such creed is universally accepted by all churches.   The acceptance of the creed resulted in a world church ban against the doctrine as taught by the Arians.   The verdict of the council against Arianism could not have been stated any more clearly.  Note the five declarations against the heretical doctrine. 

(1) "Whosoever shall say that there was a time when the Son of God was not."  Such is the clarification of Christ's preexistence.  For the Arian, being begotten suggests a point in time in the which he himself was created. It is a time when Christ had not yet existed for he his brought forth into existence at such a time.  Against this doctrine of Arianism the council stands firm.

(2) "Or that before he was begotten he was not."  This statement is again aimed directly at the Arian controversy as stated above in (1).

(3) "Or that he was made of things that were not."  According to the Arian thought, the Son was not generated from that same divine substance as God is.  The Father is of one nature totally separate from that of the Son.  The Son is made out of or from yet another nature.  Being generated or created he is not made out of something or some substance which had already existed,  but he is created brand new out of some new substance that had never existed before his creation.  Again the council refutes the Arian belief that the Son was not made of the same divine nature as the Father himself consists of.  To say that the Son is of the same substance as God himself is, or that he is of the same divine nature, is to agree that he himself is equal to God the Father thereby making the Son also God.  There can be no mistake of the intent of the council as concerns the divinity of Christ.

(4) "Or that he is of a different substance or essence from the Father."  This again refers to the same argument as (3).  Arian would have us to believe that the notion that Christ was begotten of God meant to suggest that Christ is created.  If God himself had no beginning than his substance cannot be created.  Christ than must be made or consist of a different substance.  There is the glory of the terrestrial and the glory of the celestial as St. Paul argues, but the two natures are different, their substances are not the same.  Man is made of the dirt of the earth.  Angels are made of something else other than the dirt of the earth.  Christ is created much like the angels are created, out of a substance different to that of the Father who cannot be created for he is eternal.  This is the argument of Arian and this then (4) is the intent of this statement against Arian theology. 

(5) "Or that he is a creature, or subject to change or conversion."  Arian reduces the original nature or beginning of Christ from divine to angelic.  His sonship is not of divine origin but rather as through the mode of adoption.  True, he is called the Son of God, but then so are the angels in heaven referred to as the sons of God.  If the angels are sons of God but yet they are created as a different nature than God himself, then how are they to be called the sons of God except through the mode or vehicle of adoption to sonship?  Christ must surely be made a son through a similar fashion.  The council therefore unequivocally declares that Christ is not a creature or creation, neither is he made, changed, or converted into something else.  There is no strange metamorphoses from his original existence to his new existence.  His nature is not changed or transformed into something new.  Christ is God in the beginning.  God is Christ in his incarnation.  Christ is God in his resurrection.  Finally, Christ is God even now.  There has been no strange or extraordinary metamorphoses.  Christ is the same, yesterday, today, and forever. 

  So now after the churches have come together to agree as concerns this doctrine of Christ's eternal godhood, they then agree that this unified Catholic and Apostolic Church has the power to anathematize them who hold any doctrine of Christ which is different than that which is declared and set forth within the Nicene Creed.

  Now despite the complete condemnation of  the doctrine of Arianism by this infant World Council of Churches, the teachings of Arius refused to die.  After this decision was made by the council, the Greek church historian Eusebius of Caesarea, somehow influenced the Emperor Constantine I to rescind the judgment and to recall Arius from exile (A.D. 334).   Arianism would again raise its ugly head to trouble the church greater than before when the next emperor, Constantius II, would be magnetically drawn to the heretical Arian doctrine.  After this rises Eusebius of Nicomedia, the patriarch of Constantinople to prominence.  Eusebius would become a strong advocate and leader of the Arian theology.  The tables would be overturned.  As early as 359 A.D., the doctrine of  Arian had completely prevailed to become the recognized and official faith of the empire. 

  There were two powerful sects of Arainism and those two groups continued to argue against each other.  The first, known as the semi-Arians, were for the most part conservative eastern bishops.  They were in agreement with the Nicene Creed in general, but they seemed somewhat reluctant to accept or admit to the usage of the word homoousios (consubstantial) which they thought of as being totally unscriptural.   The second Arian sect, also known as the Neo-Arians, believed that the Son was of a different essence (Greek heteroousios) from the Father.  The Son therefore in his nature and substance was truly NOT  like (Greek anomoios) the Father.  There was a third group or sect which were a part of the Neo-Arians which are known as the Pneumatomachi (combatants against the Spirit).  They went one step beyond the others of the group insisting that the Holy Spirit was also a created being even as the Son was created. 

  After the death of Constantius II (A.D. 361), the new emperor, Valens, set him self against the semi-Arians by way of persecution.  He was then followed by Emperor Theodosius (A.D. 379) who being much better advised of the details, afterwards returned to the faith of Nicaea Constantinople I (A.D. 381).  He reaffirmed the decisions made by the second ecumenical council, thereby officially endorsing the downfall of Arianism. 

[Go To Top]

Eusebius of Caesarea

    (A.D. 263-339)

    Eusebius, Bishop of Caesarea, lived at a unique time in Christian history.  His days saw the church through a period of peace, which was suddenly disrupted by the terrible persecution of Diocletian.  He witnessed the end of the great persecution with the advent of the Emperor Constantine.  He himself became extremely influential throughout the church especially in the days of Constantine because above all others it was Eusebius who the emperor regarded as trustworthy and faithful to the imperial throne. 

  Eusebius was a student of Pamphilus who was an avid student of Origen's manuscripts and continued to teach according to the philosophy and doctrine of Origen.  The Origen manuscripts are said by some to be the richest library of ancient Christian writings and we have Pamphilus to thank for their preservation. We would not really be incorrect in saying that Eusebius was somewhat of a disciple of Origen because it is his writings, more so than by any other, which lay the foundation of Eusebius' own education.   In the days of Pamphilus there was a community of disciples who met in his house to study and copy these writings.  Later this community would be especially commissioned by Emperor Constantine to copy fifty copies of the entire Bible on parchment so that they might be distributed throughout the churches of Constantinople. 

  Although Eusebius arose to great prominence throughout the church in the days of Constantine, his reputation remains to this day as the great compromiser.  In the days when the council of Nicaea had been united against and opposed to the doctrines of Arian, Eusebius refused to take a stand against him or condemn his teaching.   In his latter days we find Eusebius being used as the instrument to influence Constantine I  to rescind the judgment and to recall Arius from exile (A.D. 334).  To ignore the impact that his influence concerning the heresy of Arian had upon the church would be a great mistake.   Although we might rightfully question the spirit behind his theology and compromise, we cannot deny his great importance as a historian.  It is beyond all question that God used this man to record the history of the early church from whom we have preserved a great treasure indeed.  Eusebius' ten volumes of church history span the days of the infancy of the church all the way down to Constantine's victory over Licinius (A.D. 324).  His accumulated efforts at the preservation of historical documents and information are considered to be a gold mine of church antiquity although admittedly he could have improved upon it for clarity sense. 

 Eusebius writes of a great unexpected famine accompanied by great pestilence which spread throughout the empire during the reign of Maximin.  The crisis was further complicated by a severe disease causing a great spread of ulcers over the entire body.  The disease was properly named carbuncle on account of the great fiery appearance caused by ulcer. The carbuncle plague primarily attacked the eyes and many of the men, women, and children were stricken with blindness as a result of this plague.  The terrible was so great that one measure of wheat sold for twenty-five hundred Attic drachms.  The cities reported innumerable deaths as a result of the famine and plague.  More deaths were reported throughout the country and villages.  Many others ruined their physical bodies by consuming noxious herbs and by chewing wisps of hay.  Many of the upper class women were forced to indulge in shameful practices if they might obtain even a morsel of food.  In the beginnings of the famine, many gave liberally to help to feed the indigent but eventually they began to harden their hearts in fearful expectation that the famine would soon be upon themselves as well.  In fear, they began to horde whatever food stuff remained in their possession.  Naked bodies lie dead throughout the streets for many days until the dogs ate their flesh.  Those among the more wealthy were able to escape the severe famine only to be overcome by great pestilence which swept through entire houses killing everyone who dwelled within. 

[Go To Top]
Athanasius of Alexandria 

    (A.D. 296-373)

    Athanasius was born in Alexandria, Egypt, and raised in a Christian home from his infancy.   He received a well rounded classical education before pursuing his education in theology through attendance at the famous theological school of his native city.   Following his graduation from theological school, he was ordained a deacon and served as secretary to the bishop of Alexandria. Due to Alexandria's particular prominence throughout the church world, Athanasius also gained fame for himself in the great theological struggle that culminated in the Council of Nicaea in 325 A.D.  At this council, Athanasius had strongly opposed Arius (256-336 A.D.), the Alexandrian priest who is ascribed as the author of the well known doctrine known as Arianism.  This controversy would set the stage or foundation upon which the entire rest of his life would be built.  Athanasiusis regarded as by far the most formidable antagonist of Arianism.  Out of this controversy came his formulation of  the homoousian doctrine.  Athanasiusis argued that the Son of God is and was of the same essence, or substance, as the Father.  Arius, on the other hand, insisted that the Son was of a different substance from that of the Father.  According to Arius, the Son was merely a creature, howbeit much more perfect that any other creature, who was also used by God in subsequent works of creation. 

   Athanasius was obviously strongly influenced by faithful teachers who had afterwards proved their allegiance to Christ with their lives during the persecutions of Diocletian.  He was awarded the position as Bishop of Alexandria around A.D. 328.  Just a couple years after his appointment as bishop, he found himself warring against the disciples of the priest Meletius as well as the supporters of Arius.  Although the emperor had decreed that Arius be reinstated as a priest in Alexandria, Athanasius absolutely refused despite the pressure of Arius' supporters and the injunction of the emperor himself.  Because of his stand against Arius and his heresy, the Arians forced a synod in Tyre, in the which, Athanasius was deposed as Bishop of Alexandria (A.D. 335).  The emperor responded by exiling Athanasius to Trier, this being only the first of his five such banishments.  Throughout the  forty-six years of his episcopate, Athanasius spent at least twenty of those years in exile for different stands which he had taken against heresy.  He is best known as the enemy of Arianism and the friend of monks.  This is due primarily to his major writings.  The first or foremost of these writings are in defense of the creed of Nicaea supporting the doctrine of the trinity and the unity of the godhead.  These include:  his Discourses Against the Arians, History of the Arians, Apology Against the Arians, and On the Decrees of the Nicene Synod.   The second is a biography on the Life of Anthony, a man who is credited with establishing the foundation for asceticism and the establishment of the monastery. 

[Go To Top]
Cyril of Jerusalem

    (A.D. 313-387)

     Cyril of Jerusalem has been compared to Augustine and John Chrysostom due to his contribution to the collection of baptismal catechesis.  We have preserved for us in his writings, nineteen catecheses together with five additional writings referred to as the mystagogical writings which are themselves an explanation of the sacraments of Christian initiation.   These five mystagogical writings focus upon spiritual rebirth and the Christian's escape from Satan's bondage through baptism into Christ's death, receiving of his Spirit, and the mystery of communion.  These last five, though much shorter than the other nineteen, thoroughly teach the reasons and justifications of each of the sacred rites or rituals of the church using both the Old and New Testaments.  Such sacramental typology is seen in the crossing of the Red Sea, that is the sacred rite of Christian baptism, or the manna which came down from heaven which undoubtedly represented the Eucharist. 

  Cyril was elected to the office of Bishop of Jerusalem after the death of Maximus, the bishop who had previously ordained him into the priesthood.  After he assumed the office of bishop, he found himself engaged in a controversy with the Acacius, a follower of the teaching of Arius.  This Acacius began to spread lies about Cyril, charging him with  selling sacred objects during the times of famine.  Although such stories contained no real  evidence, they were primarily intended as an attempt at tarnishing his reputation.  These were later especially used in an attempt to have him deposed and exiled.  Cyril's true witness stands or falls upon the words which have been handed down to us by way of his lectures and these words were held in great esteem by the many. 

[Go To Top]

    Basil of Caesarea was raised in a wealthy home along with his brother Gregory of Nyssa in Caesarea Mazaca (modern Kayseri, Turkey), and due to his family's great wealth, found himself the privileged recipient of a great education in Athens and Constantinople.   Due to the great persecutions of Galerius and Maximin Daia (A.D. 303-313), the family had to flee into the forests of Pontus where the Lord had provided a place of security for them to escape the threats of  their enemies.  Basil is described as an amazingly gifted man who had been greatly benefited by the education which his father was able to pass down to him.  Beyond this of course he was further educated in Caesarea and eventually was able to establish himself as an orator in Caesarea.  Although the position itself was a great achievement, Basil afterwards, by the help of his sister Macrina,  realized that this position of recognition and prominence was not really the great reward which he sought or that it truly held any real great glory or value.   After visiting a number of noted hermits throughout Egypt and Syria, he came to a major decision in his life, to give up his elevated position as orator and settled down as a hermit by the river Iris in Neo-Caesarea.   Afterwards submitting himself to baptism, he finally plunged himself into a life of monasticism at the school of Egypt and afterwards Palestine.   It is during this time of his life that he wrote much of his monastic rule of life which eventually became the basis for an order of monks (later called Basilian monks) which he also founded about 360. 

  Although Basil had been a wealthy man, he distributed his riches to the poor and afterwards was joined by Gregory of Nazianzus.  These two formed a type of partnership or covenant relationship which resulted in the composition of an anthology dedicated to Origen called, The Philocalia, which yields the meaning, I love the flowers. 

   Basil is especially famous for his composition of his two monastic rules.   Most Orthodox and some Roman Catholic monks still follow the rule of St. Basil.  He also became a noted defender of Christian doctrine against the heretical attacks of the Arians.  His writings include: Against Eunomius, three books directed against the Arian leader Eunomius; On the Holy Spirit, a doctrinal treatise; and The Moralia, an anthology of New Testament verses. He also wrote a liturgy (known as the Liturgy of St. Basil) still used in the Byzantine rite. 

[Go To Top]

    Gregory of Nyssa was the brother of the Basil, Bishop of Caesarea.  It seems that he did not originally desire  to pursue an ecclesiastical career, perhaps because at that time the abrogation of Julian's school law made it illegal for Christians to teach.  Instead, he believed that teaching rhetoric was his proper calling in life.  In A.D. 371 his life was about to change when his brother, Basil of Caesarea, had requested of him to write a treatise on Virginity.  The request was a natural for Gregory who was able to make use of his special gift and talent for rhetoric and diatribe.  That following year Basil would ordain Gregory to the position of Bishop of Nyssa. 

  Perhaps due somewhat to his inexperience or ignorance at politics, he was caught off guard by the Arians who were successful in bringing a synod against him just a few years after his appointment to the Bishopry.  Gregory was deposed on A.D. 376 but due to the death of Emperor Valens (A.D. 378), was able to triumphantly recapture his office.  Following the death of his brother Basil, he devoted much of his life to theological study and literature. 

[Go To Top]

Hilary of Poitiers

    (A.D. 315-367)

   Hilary appears in Christian history for the first time at the Council of Beziers where he is numbered as one who opposes the condemnation of Athanasius.  Because of his stand against the council at that time, he himself was exiled to Phrygia.  He is especially known for his extensive work, Treatise on the Trinity.  The work is itself a magnificent work establishing the major Christian doctrine faith, along with a solid refutation of the theses of Arius.  According to Hilary, the generation of, or the beginning of the Son of God, is outside of time itself.  Because of his generation being outside of time, the same becomes a concept totally incomprehensible to man.  The confusion in Arian's thesis thus, lies in an attempt to define or understand a concept which cannot be understood by the human mind and stated through the words of a human language.  Because of his great understanding of the current theological implications of the emperor's demands, he found himself almost forced to take a stand in opposition to the same.  In taking his stand, he refused to yield over any authority to that great Council of Nicaea, proclaiming that he himself had never even heard of the existence of such a council.  According to his own testimony, it was not until the time that he was forced into exile that he had heard of the existence of such a council.  This suggests that these councils could not have truly represented the voice of a united church but only a part of the same. 

[Go To Top]
Ambrose of Milan

    (A.D. 337-397)

   Ambrose begins his career as an advocate and later, the consular perfect of Emilia.  At that time the bishop of Milan was one Auxentius, an avowed unrepentant disciple of Arian teaching.  Because of Auxentius' continuance in his Arianistic beliefs, the Christian community had been greatly divided.  At the time of the death of the current bishop, the city had been called together to perform an election for the now vacant office of Bishopry.  At this time Ambrose was present as perfect to ensure that all things would be done properly and in order without showing partiality towards the one group or the other.  It is claimed that both Catholics and Arians alike had avowed that the perfect himself should be appointed to the sacred office of bishop, even though he had actually only been a mere catechumen himself at the time.  Accepting the peoples almost unanimous decision, he immediately received baptism and only eight days later was ordained to the office of bishop.   Afterwards, Ambrose had bestowed all of his goods to the poor and the church and began to apply himself as much as possible to the intense study of the faith which included a knowledge of the scriptures, studies in the exegesis of Philo, and especially the writings and teachings of Origen. 

  As he set himself to study so that he might better understand the Christian faith and the controversy between the two sects or teachings, he came to the conclusion that the teachings of Arian were in error.  From that time he began to intervene in the election of other bishops so that he might attempt to do his best to rid the church of Arianism altogether.  He further began to use his strong political influence upon the emperors from Valentinian I to Gratian to further combat the campaigns of Arianism.  Some of Ambrose's writings were especially written for the emperor Gratian's benefit that he might assist the emperor in his understanding of the Christian faith and the anti-Arianism throughout the church which had become a matter of great importance.  These writings undoubtedly helped the emperor to better understand the great theological debates which had been warring with each other during his time or reign. 

  Ambrose himself writes with a three fold understanding and perspective of  the scriptures as he learned from Origen and Philo.   First he points out the literal application of the scripture, following this with the obvious moral teaching intended.  Finally he offers his own allegorical or spiritual meaning  to the scriptures.  Being obviously concerned for the women of the church and the sanctification and separation of the clergy, Ambrose wrote a code of life which he entitled, The Duties of Ministers, and a special treatise On Virginity. 

[Go To Top]

Augustine the African

    (A.D. 354-430)

   Augustine lived during the fall of the Roman empire, dying himself in a city besieged by the Vandals.  He was born at Thagaste of Africa, the son of a pagan father.  His mother Monica was a Christian woman and likely had a strong influence upon him in his early years.  Upon the death of his father, Augustine returned home from Carthage, where he had been attending school, to support his family.  He taught first at Thagaste and later at Carthage and finally in Rome.  It was while he was in Rome that Augustine submitted himself to the rite of baptism (A.D. 387).  When his mother died at Ostia, Augustine took his son and left Italy to return to Thagaste where he devoted himself to an ascetic life and study of the Christian faith.  In A.D. 391 he left the monastery to live at Hippo where he sought to establish a monastery himself.  Upon his arrival at Hippo he was chosen to be ordained into the priesthood.  In A.D. 396 he succeeded the bishop of the second diocese in Africa.  Augustine remained in that office until his death.

  While holding the office of bishop in Africa, Augustine began to embrace Manichaeanism, a religious teaching that combined the teachings of Christianity, Zoroastrianism, and Gnosticism into a new dualistic philosophy.  Augustine would eventually be able to rid himself of this Manichaeanistic influence through the aid of  the teachings of Ambrose and Neoplatonism. 

  Hippo was a community largely divided between the orthodox Catholic and the Donatist teachings.  Upon Augustine's arrival it was the Donatists who made up the majority.  There had been much tension between the two groups resulting in a great amount of violence.  Augustine strove for twenty years to create a kind of peace between the two factions through his teaching emphasizing the unity of Christ, however, his efforts seemed to be of no avail.  Roman authorities finally got involved in the schism and called together a conference consisting of 286 Catholic bishops and 279 Donatist bishops to help to force a type of peace between the two factions.

  The final twenty years of Augustine life seemed to be taken up with writings primarily aimed against the popular teachings of Pelagianism throughout the church.  Pelagius, the founder of the movement which bear his name, attacked immorality violently, demanding that the church should focus their teachings more upon human freedom and will power rather than stressing the principles of grace.  In essence he was emphasizing repentance from sin and dead works rather than mere reliance upon the grace of God.  Augustine emphasized the complete depravity of man, his inability to help himself, and especially the doctrines of grace and predestination.

  The three major works written by Augustine are: the Confessions, the Treatise on the Trinity, and The City of God.   The Confessions consist largely of personal confessions of sin making of a kind of autobiography of his own experience.  The Treatise on the Trinity is not as one would think, a work to confront the teachings of Arian.  Rather, it consists of a doctrinal exposition of the trinity dogma along with a quest to discover traces of this triune God revealed in his creation.  Included in this is a look at the tripartite structure of the human being, that is to say, body, soul, and spirit.  Finally, The City of God is a meditation on the two different cities, the one of the earth, the other of heaven.  It describes the two different people, the saints of God and the lost of mankind.  It further attempts to display the role of the church in contrast to the role of the state or government.  Heaven is the real, where earth is merely the shadow or copy of the first.  Beyond these three writings there are many other works written by Augustine, many of which have unfortunately been lost, but many others are still preserved today. 

[Go To Top]

John Chrysostom

    (A.D. 349-407)

 John Chrysostom renounced his career as an advocate to devote his life to biblical exegesis and an ascetic life after receiving baptism around A.D. 368.  Three of his important works were probably written around this time of his life: Against the Adversaries of the Monastic Life, On Virginity, and To a Young Widow.  Later he would be ordained a deacon in Antioch (A.D. 381) and in preparation for his ordination into the priesthood he wrote his important work On the Priesthood, a work which has been considered as a classic throughout the church. 

  Due to his great fame which spread throughout the churches, he was called to Constantinople to become the new bishop following the death of Nectarius.  He understood his office as bishop much differently then Nectarius who had been accustomed to a life of luxury.  Instead of such luxury which could have been rightfully his, Chrysostom chose privation.  He is reckoned as a reformer of the clergy, attempting to bring true Christian morality into a a somewhat paganized society.  Because of his faithfulness to the Christian message, he suffered persecution from the Empress Eudoxia, who along with the help of Theophilus of Alexandria, was able to have him deposed from his Bishopry and sent into exile based upon false accusations.  When the people of Bithynia understood how this great spiritual leader was exiled, they strongly protested which led to a revolt.  That revolt was enough to lead to his release from his exile.  Unfortunately, his recall by popular vote was actually short lived, for in just a few short months, he was abducted during the celebration of the Easter festivities (A.D. 404), and once again sent away into exile.

   John Chrysostom has been surnamed, the "Golden Mouth" because of his great gift as an orator.  He thought it greater to reach out to the poor and needy rather than to live the ascetic life style.  One of his greatest indictments against the priests and leaders in the church during his lifetime was in their blindness to realize that the true meaning of the Eucharist was to be found in the practice of love and charity.  For most priests and leaders in the church, the Eucharist was that which was offered at the altar of the church.   For John Chrysostom, the reality of the Eucharist was the body of Christ and that true body were the people which made up the church.  To neglect the body of Christ which is made up of the members of his body was a far greater sin then to neglect the Eucharist upon the altar.  Chrysostom questioned how they could focus upon the first at almost the complete neglect of the second. 

  Chrysostom is described as being a master of biblical exegesis and has left us with an enormous collection of commentaries and homilies.  He implores not only the priests of his day, but even more so the laymen, to study the scriptures and to meditate on all that he has learned.  He admonishes every believer to carry a copy of the Bible in their hands if they are ever to truly derive any long lasting benefits from the spiritual truth they have heard.  He urges the people to seek the Word of God above all others.  He exalts the inspired Word of God over any spiritual teachers of his day.  Unlike the many teachers who magnified the mystical and superstitious, Chrysostom emphasizes the constant need of study as a much needed work and effort on the part of all Christians.  He minimizes the value of allegorizing or spiritualizing the biblical teachings.  What is of far greater value according to Chrysostom is the true and almost simple literal and historical truth.  These then are the things that all Christians need to set their hearts to meditate upon. 

[Go To Top]

Jerome of Stridon

    (A.D. 347-420)

    Jerome was born in Stridon, of a somewhat wealthy family able to provide him with an equally wealthy education in Rome.  Early on in his life he had translated the works of Origen to whom he would be eternally indebted, although he would later find himself attacking Origen as a person.   After Jerome became the confidant of the octogenarian pope Damasus, he began his revision of the Latin text of each of the four Gospels.  Following the death of Damasus, a hostile clergy forced Jerome to flee from Rome, in the which he was accompanied by many wealthy matrons of whom he had earlier filled with great enthusiasm for biblical studies.  Finally, he ended his journey at Bethlehem.  The great wealth of the ladies who accompanied him would supply the necessary funding he would later need to finance his further studies and works.

  Jerome abandoned the scriptures for a season so that he might translate the writings of Eusebius, which would give him the necessary tools for his work entitled, the Chronicles, and the Onomasticon (a dictionary of biblical sites).  His own book entitled Illustrious Men was merely a rewriting of Origen's Church History. 

  The greatest works of Jerome would be the efforts he engaged in to translate the Old and New Testaments into the Vulgate Latin, a translation that many today would describe today as especially often less than accurate.  In his later life, he devoted his efforts to writing commentaries beginning with the epistles of Paul.  In these works he comments upon Paul's words verse by verse.  After he finished with Paul's epistles he went on to write commentaries on the Old Testament books, especially the writings of both the major and minor prophets.  These works were considered by some to be somewhat of an exegetical masterpiece.  His method of exegesis was first a literal translation, followed by a literal commentary, and finally ending with a spiritual application or commentary. 

[Go To Top]

Emergence of The Roman Church

    It is Constantine who established the second Rome at Byzantium thinking to better shift the balance of wealth, power, and population to the eastern parts of the empire.  The new headquarters or capital of Rome was named Constantinople.    With the removal of the capital from Rome to Constantinople, the Roman Bishop would eventually become without question the most politically influential man in the western portion of the empire. 

  Because of the marriage of Rome to her new "Christian" religion,  the entire Western Church began to act as one unified organism, while the Eastern Church continued to resist the new primal Papal authority.  As a result, the Eastern Church continued to be plagued with various and strange off shoots of Christianity, being somewhat tossed to and fro by every sort of strange or new doctrine.  The establishment of the organized Western Church, having its sanction by the emperor himself, stood as a pillar of  Orthodox Christianity retaining a much more conservative Christianity.  In all appearances, the threat of heresy in the West had been removed with the appearance of political control.  Many churches in the East also looked to Rome as the guardian of that apostolic truth that had once been delivered to the Church. 

  Although handed the imperial scepter by Constantine, the Roman Pontiff had acquired his great power slowly as the rest of the Church found themselves willfully submitting to and acknowledging the Roman Bishopry as being somehow supreme.  His power continuously grew over the years, with each year adding to the previous.  Whenever local Church descension or disputes had arisen, whether throughout the West or the East,  the Roman Bishop was called upon to settle such disputes.  In this way, the Bishop of Rome began to exercise certain powers originally exercised by the emperor alone. 

   Although the seat of the emperor had been removed from Rome to the East, the people throughout the western portion of the empire continued to look to Rome for leadership.  With the continual threat of attacks by barbarian forces, the Bishop of Rome began to assume command of the imperial militia throughout the Western world, always acting as the arm of  the emperor for the supposed good of the empire.  The various emperors continued to allow the Bishop of Rome to exercise a certain amount of authority in both civil and military situations, in exchange for his assistance in helping to support and to keep the empire intact.  The marriage between the Church and State had helped to allow both kingdoms, political and ecclesiastical, to enjoy the fruits of their combined rulership. 

[Go To Top]

Leo the Great

    (A.D. 440-461) 

    Leo the Great, also known as Saint Leo I, was pope from A.D. 440-461.  Some say that Leo was perhaps  the greatest administrator of the ancient church. His greatest accomplishment from a Roman perspective was in his ability to join ecclesiastical procedures and papal primacy together with Roman law.  It is this same Leo who is usually accredited with establishing the doctrine of the apostolic primacy of the bishop of Rome.  This doctrine suggests that the bishop of Rome is to be regarded as the supreme bishop who God in his sovereign has elevated to a position of authority over all other bishops. 

   Pope Leo was most likely born in Tuscany.  Although being active as a cleric in Rome, it was not until September 29, 440 that he was consecrated to the prestigious office of bishop of Rome succeeding the office of Sixtus III (A.D. 432-40).   Leo assumes his office as bishop of Rome during a time of great political disintegration throughout the West.  Due to the threat of heresy, Leo's concentrated efforts were upon establishing a strong central government throughout the church.  Pope Leo's influence throughout the church was powerful as is apparent in his confinement of  Bishop Hilary of Arles (401-449 A.D.) to his diocese by imperial decree when the same had challenged the Pope.  Leo was also strong politically throughout the world as he is known to have persuaded Attila the Hun not to invade Rome (452 A.D.), and further influenced Gaiseric the Vandal not to ravage  the city (455 A.D.).

   Although not nearly as influential throughout the East, Leo did manage to summon together the Council of Chalcedon (451 A.D.), in which he had successfully condemned the heresy Eutychianism as advocated by the Byzantine monk Eutyches..  That heresy was a form of Monophysitism, which taught that  Christ possessed only the divine nature alone, rather than the "two natures" (divine and human).  This doctrine of the two natures of Christ was clearly elaborated upon in Leo's doctrinal letter to the patriarch of Constantinople, "Christ in his Tome" (449 A.D.), and was afterwards endorsed by the council along with the famous words "Peter has spoken through Leo."    Pope Leo has left us with ninety-six sermons primarily having to do with the liturgical festivals along with some 123 letters of correspondence. 

[Go To Top]

St. Benedict and Monasticism

    (A.D. 529) 

    Secularization and materialism eventually began to flourish within the Church, to the extent that the early Church fathers of the third century had written writings deploring such corruption and decay of Christendom as a whole.  The only way to escape such corruption to the ideal place of sacred Puritanism, often in excess, and that of spiritual growth, seemed to be the choosing of the monastic lifestyle.   Such a lifestyle often encompassed a life of asceticism, including both fasting and celibacy, and originally had been advocated by the most eminent of the early Fathers.   Monasticism might therefore be best understood as an early attempt at reforming the Church.  It was as if the Church had gone from being the pure bride of Christ, to the adulterous mistress of Satan.  Those who embraced monasticism consisted largely of those who sought to return to a simple or more pure apostolic Christianity. 

  Among the many monastic orders, the rule of St. Benedict (A.D. 529) was received and accepted by the mainstream of the Church as being that which was most recommended.  The Benedictine order made each monastery a highly independent group, each having no common head.  If it were not for this order, we would not have the famous compilation and preservation of the writings of the Church Fathers.  These monks were considered to be made up of laity rather than clergy.   It has been suggested that monasticism probably ranks second, only to the establishment of the Papacy, as regards the historical preservation of Christianity. 

  The Spirit of Prophecy, from the days of the Old Testament prophets, such as Jeremiah and Isaiah, has always insisted without apology, that this world should take heed and turn to God in true repentance, as every man is to stand under severe judgment for the evil and wicked works that they have done.  For such reason does the mighty wrath of God fall upon this entire earth, to consume it with fire in the last days.   With the entrance of monasticism, the prophetic ministry is now able to influence the Church again, through the various monasteries that were now flourishing.  Once again there seemed to be too much risk in simply allowing these great variety of monasteries to coexist.  One order had to be selected over all others.  By selecting the order of St. Benedict over all others, Rome was once again influencing order and control over the prophetic voice.  Such control was considered to be far better than simply allowing such great divergence and disparity of religious teachings to coexist throughout the Church.  According to Rome, reason had dictated that such a notion as religious freedom would only promote further disunity and increased disloyalty to the recognized central head of the Church.  Such measures therefore had to be taken if  the Pontiff  was to guarantee the preservation of Roman Christianity.  So it is that Rome, rather than the Holy Spirit, must become the preserver of the truth which God himself could not preserve.  False teachers could not be and therefore would no longer be tolerated.  False teaching is of course defined as anything that contradicts the Roman Church's doctrine. 

   The validity of the Monastic system has been highly questioned as to its being founded upon a Christian or Biblical foundation.  The value of these various orders to the Church historically, and to the preservation of the sacred treasures of ancient literature is indisputably immense.  It may be questioned whether a necessary compliance with the rigid rules of any given Monastic order was ever biblical or justified.  On the other hand, had it not have been for the monasteries, how would the sacred learning and teachings, acquired by the Church down through history have been preserved for us today?  It was these monks who had patiently continued in their laboring by making hand copies of the ancient books and writings.  It is directly because of them that we even have these writings available to us today?  If not for the monks, who would have been the preserver of these teachings, or who would have been the educator or teacher?   Monasticism is also often credited with the feeding of the hungry, caring for the sick, entertaining of the traveler, and becoming in essence an asylum for any of the misfortunate.  Throughout the dark ages of ignorance, it is the monastery that kept the learning and arts of civilization alive.   It is the monk who kept and  preserved the like for a future generations to come.  There is no true way to evaluate the riches which monasticism has preserved for modern man.  The tree must ultimately be judged according to the fruit that it has produced.  Upon considering the whole, the results of our fruit inspection suggests that the whole of monasticism must be considered as a work and grace of  the Holy Spirit. 

  As for the Roman Catholic Church, how heavily they valued the monastic orders is common knowledge.  The Pope himself would usually have come forth out of a monastery somewhere.   Gregory the Great is the first monk to be elected as Pope.     Although many may challenge the Papacy,  suggesting that the monastic orders were not founded upon any biblical basis, others seem to find a parallel between the Old Testament School of the Prophets and the various monastic orders of the Church.  It has been proposed that the secular clergy might be likened to the Levitical priesthood, while the monastic orders find their foundation in the ministry of the Old Testament prophets such as Elijah and Elisha. 

  When considering the entire history of the Christian Church, it seems fair to conclude that emphasis has been upon the need for order and structure, at the expense of  limiting  the prophetic office.  Regardless of what Church leaders might stress as the need in the Church today, it is an undisputed fact that the founder of Christianity, that is Christ himself, stood in the office of a prophet.  As a prophet, he called for a repentance from dead works and continually sought to transform the world systems by turning them inside out and upside down.  Order through human government despises the ministry of the prophet, for his message always contradicts those foundations upon which they stand, thereby making their lives uncomfortable.  When the Church and her leaders are comfortable, that Church begins to slowly die from the inside out.  It is the voice of the prophet that keeps the Church alive.  Where the voice of the prophet is refused, the branch is severed from the vine.  If this situation should happen, the Church becomes merely just another social organization belonging to the secular world. 

  There are those who have suggested that Christianity is merely an off shoot from the religion of the Essenes of Qumran.  Although there seems to be some similarity between their Teacher of Righteousness and Christ himself,  in reality, the leader of the Essene religion was more of a political leader who opposed the religious leadership of the Maccabees.  While it cannot be denied that there are common characteristics between the two systems,  showing what we would be willing to concede as an obvious Essenic influence upon Christianity,  the differences are indeed much greater than any such similarities. 

   The monasticism that flourished throughout Church history, although apparently wide spread throughout the Essenes, cannot be said to have had its origin among this religious sect.  The same ascetic behavior might easily be traced to such men as John the Baptist, Elijah, Elisha, or the men who made up the School of the Prophets.  While some have supposed a life of deliberate separation to be entirely foreign to the biblical revelation, this seems to be a judgment made in haste without careful meditation or observation.  Jesus himself would classify as one leading a monastic lifestyle, which is probably why we have no record of his life after the age of twelve; that is until he first appears within the scriptures at the age of thirty.  It seems quite probable that he might have spent much of his life in a state of ascetic withdrawal, at least for specified periods of time as he saw such need.   The temporary vow of the nazarite might certainly have been characteristic throughout his early life, at least in some form.  His forty day separation into the wilderness, along with short periods of withdrawal to solitude for prayer and meditation, is more characteristic of one accustomed to a continuing ascetic lifestyle.   Considering that he at no time sought to turn away from this life of celibacy, while further encouraging others (Mat. 19:12 KJV) to do likewise,  suggests that Christ himself gives the monastic lifestyle his stamp or seal of approval. 

[Go To Top]

Gregory The Great

    (A.D. 540-604) 

    Gregory the Great was born of a senatorial family.  After becoming prefect of Rome, he was later ordained a deacon and later as an ambassador of the pope, was sent to Constantinople.  Being elected pope in A.D. 590, his gift to the world was that of church government.  It is Pope Gregory who first attempts to impose his papal authority over the entire Christian world.  To help facilitate his cause in England, he sent the monk Augustine as a missionary to help lay the ground work and establish the foundation.  He found the teachings of Cyprian to be especially beneficial to his own understanding of the Christian faith.  Augustine was the primary influence on the church in that day and especially upon Gregory himself.  Gregory has left us various writings, a large part of which are letters of correspondence.  His major work, The Pastoral Rule, sometimes referred to as "the priest's bedside book", was perhaps one of the most copied books throughout the Middle Ages and would likely be found in any respectable library during those days.    

  After Pope Gregory I, also called Gregory the Great, had become Pope (A.D. 590-604), he issued a formal declaration of independence from the empire, and further assumed complete jurisdiction over the entire Western world.    It is Gregory who is said to have merged the office of Roman Emperor and that of the Christian Bishop into one.  Although considering the Roman Church as independent from the authority of the imperial throne,  Gregory sought to unite the kingdom again as one imperial kingdom and one Christian Church.  As such, he willingly submitted himself to imperial authority, even when the desires of the imperial throne had conflicted with his own.  Gregory envisioned a unified and purified Christian Church, together with one imperial government encompassing the entire earth.   As Gregory the Great ended his remarkable career as Pope, the Papacy now very much resembled the original Roman Empire.  The laity would no longer have right to exercise any authority within the Church.  Election of clergy would no longer be democratic, but now became an aristocratic process.  Due to his own great superstitious beliefs in miracles, ghosts, supernatural manifestations, and the supernatural power of relics, the practice of such superstitions greatly increased throughout the Church.  Worship of the saints became wide spread, along with the use of images and pictures throughout the Church.  Finally, the Virgin Mary was exalted to a position of divinity and as such, the outward worship of her not only increased throughout the Church, but was now very much encouraged. 
 

  In the days of Gregory the Great, England had become saturated with paganism by the invasion of the conquering Saxons and Angles.  It is Gregory the Great who is credited with bringing spiritual life and truth to England.   In those days it was the Pope's modus operandi to attempt to christianize the heathen world by not pushing too forcibly against the heathen, or making excessive demands upon them to succumb too stringently to the Roman ideals and philosophies.  In short, whatever could be found among the pagan people to be somewhat beneficial should somehow be adopted after being reshaped and transformed into what might afterwards be referred to as a christianized custom.   The general philosophy that promoted  this notion was that these conquered people would naturally be more resistant to replacing their old customs in place of  the new.  Through the careful christianizing of such common practices however, the new might now be perceived to the heathen as merely the old under a new name.  This would seem much more palatable and therefore easier for the heathen to swallow.  Through a careful and selective process of purposeful syncretism, the Roman Church had hoped to christianize the world. 
 

  The doctrines of Christianity by the time of Augustine's arrival had consisted of many differing and often opposing views.  Viewed as unacceptable and undesirable to Rome, the prophetic voice must be silenced altogether.  If the tare that caused so much religious confusion is to be pulled out from among the wheat,  it becomes unfortunate yet necessary that some of that wheat must also be yanked out along with it.  Such was the preferred method employed by Roman Christianity.  At its very foundation there must be one voice and only one voice, unchallenged and unrivaled throughout the entire realm of Christianity;  that one voice must be Rome and none other.

  Although Augustine had hoped to christianize England under the submission of the Roman Pontiff, the British Christians would not willingly accept the Roman Bishop, and refused to submit themselves under the yoke of Rome.  The struggle between Celtic and Roman Christianity would become inevitable.   The two churches it seems were of two entirely different folds.   The Celts permitted the clergy to marry, used a Latin bible different from the Vulgate translation,  and maintained the observance of the seventh day Sabbath rest according to the scriptures, which was in itself completely anticatholic.  Augustine is credited with the massacre of many adherents of the Celtic Church who stood in opposition to the doctrine of the Roman Holy See. 

   The inevitable submission to the Roman yoke would ultimately result in the loss of some of the greater precious Christian truths, which possibly have been lost forever due to the gross spiritual ignorance and superstitious teachings of Rome.  As the Celtic Church began to lose their hold on British soil, they instead turned their focus upon the many churches founded by their own missionaries in Northern Germany.  The same struggle would soon arise between the Celtic Church and the Roman Church in Germany, with Rome once again becoming the victor.

  It has been argued by some whether the Church could really have survived without the unifying government of the Church of Rome, for without Rome, it seems that the Church might only have consisted of an ever increasing number of splinter groups thereby dividing the Church even more.  What ever the case would have been otherwise, the Roman influence did cause the Christian Religion to flourish throughout the world.  

  England would eventually begin to gradually grow weaker, as men began to seek the "spiritual world" rather than focusing upon the "natural world".   Soon, there was too little emphasis upon military strength.  As a result, England became a country of little defense against the more aggressive forces that patiently awaited their opportunity from outside the camp.   First the Dane, and afterwards the Norman, would be used to awaken England to her obvious state of her gross inability to defend herself.   These new threats might have been an act of God for good, for soon they must ultimately be confronted by the even greater armies from the Muslim world.  Mohammadism would threaten the very existence of the Church herself. 

  As Pontifex Maximus, the emperor maintained the power to elect whosoever he chose to sit in the chair of the Pope.   He could also at any time for any reason depose the current Pope and even excommunicate him from the Church.  This power possessed by the Roman Emperor has been exercised repeatedly down throughout history.  Pope Gregory outwardly acknowledged the supremacy of the emperor's temporal power, and openly stated that God himself had awarded the emperor the right and authority to rule, not only over the empire as the civil governor, but to exercise dominion over the priesthood as well. 

[Go To Top]

Mohammad and The New Religion

    (A.D. 569) 

    One might easily argue that it was absolutely necessary for the Roman Church to exist at the time when she began to ascend to such great power and influence.  The Church of England being the obvious example, it is quite probable that Christianity might never have survived against the threat of annihilation by the growing Kingdom of Islam.  The Roman Church, being united under its one head, the Vicar of Christ,  became somewhat of a shield of protection for the whole of Christianity.     The Kingdom of Islam was made up of various warring factions of the offspring of Ishmael.  Being almost miraculously unified by the prophet Mohammad, these various splintered groups would now become united.  Soon there arose a great and mighty Islamic Kingdom.  It may just be divine providence that allowed the Roman Church to be prepared to meet such a worthy opponent.  This powerful enemy would begin to challenge her right to sit upon the throne of the whole earth.  

  Born between A.D. 569 to 570 at Mecca, the boy was nobody special, being born of a poor family, although belonging to one of the most noblest of tribes; for the Koreishites were known to be the sacred guardians of the Kaaba; the Holy temple of the Arab people for centuries before Mohammad had himself been born.  In his young adult years, Mohammad finds himself privileged to have visited many countries and has experienced many diverse faiths.  As for the Church during his time, Mohammad is regarded as the  Son of Satan and an Image of Antichrist; but for the Muslim, he is that holy prophet whom Moses spoke of.  False prophet or true, the results of the religion brought forth by Mohammad continues to spread throughout the entire globe, having what appears to be the undeniable blessings of God, whether that God be the creator who sits above in heaven,  or the other who pretends to reign in hell beneath.
 
  Mohammed was a man who had been deeply concerned about the great moral depravity and spiritual degradation of his people.  Among his fellow Arabian brothers, there had existed a great idolatry along with an extremely notable departure from the God of Abraham; for surely the worship of the true God could not have been originally delivered to Abraham's son Ishmael in such an apostate form.   Mohammad was able to somehow clearly perceive that his people were a people continually warring against each other, primarily  because they had lacked a realization of their common origin and faith.  How better to unify his brothers than by calling them to reject their damnable idolatry and return to the God who had originally revealed himself to their father Abraham.   If the Church was truly the descendants of Abraham as they now claimed,  would they not be following a prophet like unto Moses?  But these Christian prophets appear to be more akin to the prophetess of Babylon.  

  The Church had claimed to be the sons of God and the ambassadors from heaven, but their leaders were becoming exceedingly sinful.  Paganism and superstition began to become common place in the Church.  No longer was there a call to true biblical holiness throughout her ranks, but a number of sects each desiring to entertain and promulgate every false doctrine.  Islam has been perceived by some to be the rightful executioner raised up by God himself, akin to the avenging angel sent forth to enter into every house that bears the mark of idolatry throughout the world, thereby calling them again to repentance.  God had tried grace and patience, but such a gospel proved to be powerless to truly convert the world from such gross idolatry and superstition, to a living practical holiness.  God would now be forced to rely upon brute force to convert the world.  That strong arm of God must be none other than Mohammad himself.    

  If the Church is typified by Israel, perhaps Islam is the Assyrian who chastises the people of the one true God, that is until they shall finally repent from their sin altogether.  As the Church weakens historically, the Muslim Kingdom continues to claim the spoils of war.  Such success  threatens the very existence of not only the Church, but every other religion on the globe.  While the Church of that time consists of a people consumed with sinful self indulgence and pleasure seeking, the Arab tribes possess a military might surprisingly unexpected and unknown to the Western world.  The Arab people appear upon the scene suddenly, appearing as a mighty people accustomed to and skilled in the arts of war for centuries.   How could the Islam armies have conquered so many lands and taken captive almost the total number of those souls within their borders, and that with the Church having had at least a six hundred year jump on them?

  In the East, the two main powers of the world (A.D. 610-641), the Byzantine and Persian Empires,  had critically weakened each other so much so that the unified Muslim tribes were able to conquer both without too much effort.  Soon Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria each would fall easily under the yoke of  the new Islam Empire.  After the Persian Empire ceases to exist, North Africa is subdued (A.D. 665-709), followed by the Kingdom of the Goths (711).  The Western world seems to have been miraculously spared their inescapable annihilation by the grace of God, when the crushing defeat of the Hammer (Charles Martel A.D. 732) had been able to force a halt to the Muslim aggression, at least for a season.   It might be argued that had it not have been for the Christian Knights under the directions of Charles Martel, Islam would have overtaken Christianity completely.  Charles Martel therefore becomes extremely important in the plan of God and the preservation of Christianity.  

[Go To Top]

The Apostate Church

    (A.D. 325-754) 

    To promote the transition from paganism to Christianity, much leniency had been authorized by Rome to allow the continuance of such festivals by transforming the most ancient or firmly rooted of such pagan customs to a new christianized form.  In doing so, pagan wells for instance, which had once been considered as being especially sacred, were now taught to be divinely protected by a Christian saint.  The aspects of the lives of such saints were in some cases extremely exaggerated to promote these ideas among the people, and often times such accounts had been completely fabricated, to the extent that some of the saints had never really existed at all, their very lives being completely fictional.  Such saints were claimed by many, to perform great miraculous healings at their shrines or sacred wells.  As for the activities associated with the pagan ritual, in many cases all remained unchanged except for the name of the demigod, now called by the surname "Saint",  who was said to be being honored by such rituals of superstition.  Such powers as granting bountiful rains or fruitful harvests were transferred from the mythical pagan deity to their new mythical Christian saint.  While it may be true that in many such cases,  the transference of  the worship of a pagan deity might have been initially promulgated by a devoted worshipper among the populace rather than the organized Church, eventually the Church found itself being forced to compromise by accepting the false claims of the devotees of such saints, rather than attempt to fight that which stubbornly refused to be uprooted.  On the whole, the evidence suggests that such pagan myths and rituals remained along side Christianity, and continued to be practiced by those who claimed themselves to be Christian. 

  As early as the fourth century, reports began to be heard throughout the Christian world of miracles being performed or received at the tomb sites of the Christian martyrs.  After these reports, others also began to flood the earth reporting equally great miracles being associated with certain relics belonging to these saints, even such miracles as that of raising the dead.  As miraculous stories of such martyrs and the relics associated with them continued to increase, graves were opened so that the bodies of the now dead martyrs might be dismembered.  Their bones, clothing, or any other relic being in their possession at the time of their death might now be distributed throughout the empire and beyond.  Churches were often erected upon the grave or tomb of a martyr or his bones.  Such saints would then become the special guardian of that particular Church body, town or city.  Soon the ancient practice of lighting candles or lamps before the shrines of saints was spread throughout the world.  Although many within the Church complained that such activity and worshipping of these saints was no different then pagan idolatry, the majority had readily accepted God's sanction of these rituals being evidenced by the manifestations of such glorious powers that had accompanied the many saints and their 
relics.  As more unconverted pagans ushered into the churches, many concessions were granted to allow their feast days and holy festivals to be maintained or continued by attributing and transferring them to one of the holy saints.  Already by the fourth century such christianized pagan festivals were openly celebrated accompanied by the same pagan behaviors including: revelry, dancing, and drunkenness.  St. Augustine openly admits that in his day a certain amount of compromise with paganism was considered as essential for the conversion of the rest of the world.  In the days to come, these Christian saints would come to be regarded as patron gods and heroes of various towns and countries just as the pagan gods and heroes of old had been honored and worshipped of times before Christianity had penetrated the towns and countries.  Although the whole of the world was slowly becoming Christian, such conversion was in mouth only as external behavior, superstition, and acts of pagan worship and practice had hardly changed at all, except of course in name and even in some cases the name remained the same, only the hero and the mythology associated with him was now said to have been canonized by the Church. 

  Pagan superstition had also been transferred over to Christianity along with its ritual and  practices of magic.  The masses of people were becoming consumed with a passion for obtaining various relics that were once possessed by any of  these newly christianized saints.  People everywhere worshipped the several different shrines that had been set up to honor these individual saints, and the people fully expected the same miraculous benefits to follow their worship, much as they had been accustomed to expect from their pagan counterparts.  The common household deities of  the old dispensation had now simply become the household saints of the new.  For all practical purposes, the people stubbornly refused to let go of their personal gods or idols; and the Church, often while admittedly not always, had  merely accepted such practices, rather than expending the great effort that it would have taken to attempt to outwardly oppose and condemn these abominable idolatries. 

  The worship of the Virgin began to spread throughout both the Eastern and Western parts of the Church.  Such worship of the Virgin seems to extend from as early as the end of the fourth century.   Persons of strong influence and reputation even claimed that St. Mary herself had appeared to them in a vision.  Ildefonsus, Bishop of Toledo, had not only claimed such a visitation by the Virgin, but had further claimed that she had give him a particular vestment to wear while performing a Mass in honor of  her festival.  Four of the main festivals being practiced by the sixth century in honor of the Virgin were: the Annunciation,  the Falling Asleep also called the Assumption, and the Nativity.   Another festival that occurs around the eighth century was the Feast of the Conception of the Virgin.  Most of these festivals in honor of the Virgin appear to have had their origin in the East rather than the West although they were readily accepted and practiced in the West as well.  One of the major new testament apocryphal works is the Protevangelium, a book claiming to have been authored by James.   Being written possibly as early as the second century, it tells the miraculous birth of Mary through one who had been otherwise barren.  It also proclaims the steadfast dedication and loyalty of Mary, and the gift of perpetual virginity while yet giving birth to Jesus.  It was further taught that Mary's own birth was not only miraculous but also virginal and immaculate.  It was held by many that Mary was also born sinless and continued throughout her life to be preserved sinless, so that she might also not bear the original sin passed down to all mankind through the first man, Adam. 

  With the worship of the perpetual Virgin now being recognized and practiced throughout the Church, the pagans would easily perceive her as their own virgin goddess of heaven of whom they had worshipped under various names of old.  The power of the mediatrix was now easily transferred to this new virgin goddess of Christianity, as she was awarded the same pagan title, Divine Mediatrix.  The power and acceptance of this virgin goddess cult was great throughout the world Church.  In A.D. 754 the Council of Constantinople  declared that all of mankind who refused to acknowledge her supreme power, by merely refusing to seek her intercession on their behalf, would now be anathematized. 
 

[Go To Top]

The Iconoclasts

    (A.D. 726-842) 

    Another issue of major controversy was the doctrines of celibacy and marriage of the clergy,  Rome of course demanding that the clergy must be married to the Church alone.  The greatest controversy seems to have been the Iconoclastic dispute.  The issue of image worship however was not truly an East and West dispute, for history shows that there was a greater love for image worship in the East then in the West.  It would seem that the greatest burden of responsibility for allowing image worship rests upon the Roman Pontiff.  Twice the Eastern Church had been thoroughly cleansed from image worship.  Had Rome have followed suite, the use of such images would have likely been banned from the Christian Church forever.  Image worship seems to have evolved in three different phases.  At first only the cross was used as an emblem of Christ.  Afterwards, other emblems and symbols began to appear.  Finally, portraits were allowed which eventually gave birth to images for worship.  Soon the outward worship of saints and martyrs, and the sacred relics that were somehow associated with them.  Eventually, these objects themselves were reverently worshipped with kisses, bows, and prostrations made before them.  Candles and lamps were now set before them so that they might be illuminated, and incense soon ascended before them.  These abominations were running rampant throughout the Church as early as the sixth century.   Opposition against the use of images in worship began as early as A.D. 167, with Irenaeus denouncing the practice.   Tertullian and Clement of Alexandria also denounced these practices as sinful on the basis of the Ten commandments.  Others as well throughout the early years of the Church had repeatedly warned of the great danger and continued to denounce the practice. 

  Perhaps more than anyone else, Leo III, called Leo the Isaurian, helped to cause a great tear between the Western and Eastern Church over the controversy of image or icon worship.  Being somewhat familiar with the Muslim hatred of religious images and idols, Leo had come to his own conclusion that it was the prophet Mohammad and not the Pope who was right concerning the abuses of images in worship.  The Christian Church was headed on a continual path of increased idolatry, and he supposed that a forced reformation within the Church was now absolutely necessary.   The Church had embraced the use of images within their worship.  Although Leo III declared such religious practices to be in great violation of the second commandment, the Church had now become married to her images and their use would not easily vanish away.    Although some within the Eastern Church agreed with Leo, that a thorough cleansing was necessary, many others clung to their images as if they had fallen in love with them.   As for the Western Church, the Pope could envision no harm whatsoever in allowing the continued use of these religious images, and as such, he absolutely refused to agree with Leo's desire to reform the Christian Church. 

 When Emperor Leo, believing himself called of God to purify the Church (A.D. 726), had  issued his edict against images, the Pope responded in condemnation of the Iconoclastic heresy, and further cautioned him that such doctrines of the Church were not to be the concern or business of the emperor, but of  the bishops.  He further threatened Leo with the military power of the West, being at his command.  In A.D. 730, Leo issued another edict demanding the complete abolition of all image worship throughout the empire.  The Pope responded by declaring that all Iconoclasts would be excommunicated if they persisted in this activity.  Leo responded with armies resulting in the capturing of  papal territories in Greece and Italy.    After Leo's attempts at reasoning had failed (A.D. 726), he finally demanded upon the threat of great physical punishment that the Eastern Church obey him by disposing of all their religious images.  The greatest resistance to his new law came from the monks.   As a result of this great controversy between the Eastern and Western Church,  the Pope ultimately excommunicated Leo from the Church (A.D. 731). 

  When Leo was succeeded by his son Constantine Copronymus (A.D. 741), the cleansing continued with an even greater voice, and transgressors were now being brutally punished.   He called together the Seventh Council of Constantinople (A.D. 754), which consisted of 338 Bishops from throughout the Eastern Church.  These unanimously agreed with the prohibition against the usage of religious icons and images.  Those who would continue to use religious images would now be tortured in a variety of different ways.  Such punishments ranged from scourging, imprisonment, and exile, to such unimaginable cruelties such as the blinding of the eyes or the mutilation of the flesh.  Eventually, the Eastern Church had been almost completely purged of image worship.     

  The abolition of images would not last for long in the Eastern Church.  Through the efforts of the Empress Irene (A.D. 787), the Second Council of Nicaea now would completely overturn the previous decision made by the Council of 754.  The Roman Pontiff stood in agreement with the Council of Frankfurt (A.D. 794), expressing condemnation upon the Second Nicene Council for their stand against image usage throughout the Eastern Church.  The images would once again be seen throughout the Eastern Church until Leo of Armenian (A.D. 813-820) would violently oppose their usage once again, but his efforts were again overturned through the efforts of  the widow of an Iconoclast Emperor named Theodora around (A.D. 842). 

[Go To Top]

St. Boniface and the Revived Roman Empire

    (A.D. 752-800) 

    Continual invasions of barbarian forces served to strengthen the political power and independence of the Roman Church.  At first these forces had just about destroyed the Imperial Kingdom from England to Constantinople.   Once the Teuton barbarians had finally been converted to Roman Christianity, they became staunch supporters of the Holy See.  It was largely the Germans who had enabled the Pope to gain his great power and to enforce his prerogatives over the entire Western world.  Eventually, the Pope grew powerful enough to declare the Roman Church free and independent from the Byzantine court.   The conversion of the Teutons is largely attributed to Arianism, which is ironically regarded today as cultic teachings such as that taught by the Jehovah Witness.   Arius taught that God is unbegotten and without beginning.  The Son, the Second Person of the Trinity, therefore, because he is begotten, cannot be God in the same sense that the Father is.  The Son was not generated from the divine substance of the Father;  neither did He exist from all eternity, but He was created out of nothing like all other creatures, and exists by the will of the Father.  In other words, the relationship between the Son and the Father is not natural, but one of adoption. 
 

  The Roman Kingdom began to crumble away both from the inside as well as the outside.  The image and dream remained however for many years afterwards, with a belief by some that the theocratic Roman-Christian government would return, eventually encompassing the entire world.  Rome was not powerful enough to oppose the Lombards who threatened her very existence, and on A.D. 752,  Boniface, the Archbishop of Mentz, made a significant gesture that would pave the way for the realization of this Revived Roman Empire.  Under the authority of the Roman Pontiff, Boniface declared Pepin the son of Charles Martel to be the rightful King of the Franks