Anyone looking at Martin Luther's work at this time would have to agree that among the many reformers of the time, he was at the forefront of the move towards the reformation of Theology. However, he also had some unbalanced views of some things thus making him entirely human. In the main, his writing about the church at the time was an unleashing of much sarcasm, constructive critique and passion. It appears that he had little care for those who wanted a nice liturgical responses and polite rhetoric. To those who were conditioned by the Roman Catholic sanctimony, he was downright rude!
Today, us Protestants need to remember that someone had to get in the faces of the Roman Catholic hierarchies and tell it as it is. Luther actually got to speak to the Pope who could have had him put to death! Today Protestants appear to have forgotten their roots! If Luther type criticism was to be vented today most would either call it the devil or shoot the messenger! In his day people listened because even the catholics could not disagree Luther's perspective, it was irrefutable. What he had was an illumination on what God's word says, in a Christian world that had gone mad. Its true that we don't follow Luther, we follow his reforms. But without his approach, attitude and backbone we would all be sat fiddling with rosary beads and worshipping Mary.
To affect a system and structure Luther needed God's intervention. However, for some reason God chose him with all his bad manners and quirks. Let me hazard a guess as to why....
Martin Luther was not the first to be faced with a system and structure that had arisen from the hands of Man. Jesus was born into something that caused him to pioneer the belligerent attitude. The 613 Laws God gave to the Israelites had been added to throughout time as the elders brought in additional rules to stop people breaking the Law of God. So, thousands of new man made rules came into being in order to stop people inadvertently displeasing God and bringing a curse on the nation. Over time another set of rules were instituted to protect the first set! These 'fence' rules, entirely man made, became more sacred than the Law of God!
An example of 'man made' versus 'God given' was seen when Jesus walked through a field on the Sabbath. The problem was that maybe a grain would get in the footwear of the walker and grind the grain thus breaking the Sabbath Law and incurring God's wrath! Jesus blatantly, publicly and hysterically broke the traditions of the Elders and led his disciples to do the same. During this time Jesus had been doing miracles and demonstrating he was the Messiah. If the religious officials witnessed a 'miracle,' a complex set of testing came into being. This included official meetings, waiting times, questioning the one healed and so on. Jesus was doing many miracles every day so the religious officials were run ragged.
Jesus provoked, pressed their buttons, wound them up- on purpose! He didn't do it because he was bitter, hurt, angry, demonised, bored or rebellious. He did it because he was called to stand for God's truth in a world that had gone nuts! Anyone could have said Jesus was ministering out of all of the above, especially those who dragged him out of his synagogue to the edge of a cliff!
To escape man's systems and structures we need someone to be more concerned for our freedom than our feelings.
Gary Ward
6 comments:
I've heard it said that "church" translates the Greek word "ekklesia" which, among other interpretations, means "those called out" and derives from the Greek where it is used to describe a public assembly: Its use in the New Testament presupposes, on a number of occasions, that the meeting is public (James 2:2, 1 Corinthians 14:22). Acts 20:20 declares this explicitly "You know that I have not hesitated to preach anything that would be helpful to you but have taught you publicly AND from house to house."
Thanks Delta! The greek word 'ekklesia' also has the connotations to a legal group also. I would make a distinction between what was the 'ekklesia' gathering and a teaching/lecture style group. Based on paul and jesus' 'do this' command, I would offer the thought that ekklesia is distinct from any other christian meet up ie 1 Cor 14:26f "when you come together..." in context - for this meal based (ch11) distinct gathering. Other gatherings with other purposes are separate from this one.
I'm not smart enough to argue the 'truest' implications of the word 'ekklesia', but given your admission that there are "other gatherings with other purposes" clearly recorded in scripture (James 2:2, 1 Cor 14:22) what significance do they have today?
Good point Delta, and the inference with the scriptures you cite is that there are public meetings. There is absolutely no doubt that the Christians did things, organised things, in public places. The teaching and preaching would have been in public places and these were vital to their presence in the city. The meeting in the home was distinct from a public meeting as it had the concerns of believers at the heart. Paul's admonishment of the Corinthians was about Christians meeting together but not excluding the fact that someone may invite a non-believer. In the early church they were accused of secret meetings, orgies, cannibalism when they met together! Today we see the public meeting being called "church" and home based gatherings as an afterthought.
Agreed, but again the question is posed, what were and more importantly, what ARE the significance of these public meetings today? I refer again to Acts 20:20 - "You know that I have not hesitated to preach anything that would be helpful to you but have taught you publicly AND from house to house." What then are the implications surrounding the establishment and effectiveness of these 'public meetings'? and can we really have one without the other...
Well the establishment and society sees the public meeting and specifically teaching/preaching as 'church.' The fact that church is not this- in scripture, doesn't decrease the importance of the gifted Teacher being able to set up public teaching and preaching. Its just that the coming together in Paul's direction in 1 Cor changes the nature of the church and the Christian. Its not just about what we do but what we do affects the whole dynamic.
Post a Comment