Podcasts about donatist

Bro. Mark Smith

Ty Paul Monroe, an associate professor of Theology at Assumption University, joins the podcast to discuss his new book, “Putting on Christ: Augustine's Early Theology of Salvation and the Sacraments” (CUA Press, 2022). With his deep, theological approach to a reading of Augustine, his work fits right in with our host's own academic work. Join us as we interrogate the connection between Augustine's early understanding of central Christian beliefs and Donatist and Neo-Platonist lines of thinking.

Today we look at Early Christianity: a Brief History and how the Early Church reacted to Donatism, a controversy involving the people that handed over Scripture to the Roman authorities, which often resulted in torture and execution of Christians in the area. Lynch, Joseph H. Early Christianity: A Brief History. Oxford University Press, 2010. 

“You have made us for thyself, O Lord. And our hearts are restless until they find rest in you.” This beautiful thought can be found on the very first page of Augustine's Confessions, and the timeless gems for forming our interior life continue every page thereafter. Dr. Paul Thigpen joins Conor Gallagher to discuss how exactly Augustine's Confessions hold a mirror up to ourselves, even sixteen centuries later. Discover why this act of full transparency was so courageous, particularly during the time of the Donatist heresy. And consider why Augustine's title of “Confessions” does not merely refer to his admissions of sin and guilt.LEARN MORE - USE COUPON CODE MASTERS25 FOR 25% OFFThe Confessions (New Translation from Anthony Esolen Coming Oct. 2023)The Roots of Western Civilization: https://bit.ly/3oP9HGvSt. Monica: Model of Christian Mothers: https://bit.ly/3L7J4nLFor updates about new episodes, special guests, and exclusive deals for The Spiritual Masters listeners, sign up at https://SpiritualMastersPodcast.com.And for more great ways to deepen your faith, check out all the spiritual resources available at https://TANBooks.com and use Coupon Code MASTERS25 for 25% Off your next order.

This class elaborates on my essay on the Donatist movement, in which I explain points of resemblance between modern Wokeness and the new brand of orthodox Christianity we associate with Constantine, the Council of Nicea and the Donatist Crisis of the fourth century.

Separate studios for us today so Fr. Sam's cold doesn't infect Paola! We'll hear all about Paola's recent retreat with the Sisters of Life, talk about God's abundant gifts to us, and more! SHOW NOTES Sisters of Life You can watch "The Chosen" over at formed.org - make your free account today! That re-baptism controversy we were talking about? Going back to St. Cyprian of Carthage (martyr) and Pope Stephen in the 200s, and continuing to the Donatist heresy in the fourth and fifth centuries, it was a big deal. But from this controversy, the Church was able to articulate the theological idea of ex opere operato, that the grace of the sacraments do not depend on the worthiness of the one administering the sacraments, as well as highlight the enduring grace of baptism even when marred by sin!

0:00:00 My Introduction0:4:00- Craig's Introduction0:11:20 - Why should we care about the early church?0:21:00 - What are some of the biggest differences between the Antenicene Church and the Post-Constantinian Church?0:28:00 - Did Constantine change the church overnight, or was he just watering the seeds latent in the church?0:38:10 - What is the Donatist Controversy and how does it inform our discussion of empire, orthodoxy, and ecumenicism?0:49:45 - Are the Donatists or the Post-Constantinians the true/best representation of the true church?0:56:15 - How do we know what orthodoxy is and what aspects of the faith handed down to us is the winners writing orthodoxy/history? 1:09:00 - What did disputes in the church look like prior to having access to the sword of the state?1:013:45 - How has the power of the sword influenced our world today? What might the world look like today if Christians didn't bear the sword? 1:24:20 - Closing thoughts: The church changed, but empire remained the same. A huge thanks to Seth White for the awesome music! Thanks to Palmtoptiger17 for the beautiful logo: https://www.instagram.com/palmtoptiger17/ Facebook Page: https://www.facebook.com/thewayfourth/?modal=admin_todo_tour YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCTd3KlRte86eG9U40ncZ4XA?view_as=subscriber Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/theway4th/  Kingdom Outpost: https://kingdomoutpost.org/ My Reading List Goodreads: https://www.goodreads.com/author/show/21940220.J_G_Elliot My Reading List Google Docs: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10h_yL0vO8-Ja_sxUJFclff11nwUONOG6/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=103262818858083924733&rtpof=true&sd=true Video Interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eS8QdMGShJU&list=PLNrd6lQRh0iZzSxgMo_zhz69clqkD0W9J&index=11 Craig's Website: https://crucifiedpeace.wordpress.com/christianpacifists/ Christian Attitudes to War, Peace, and Revolution: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/4465311-christian-attitudes-to-war-peace-and-revolution?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_26 Constantine Revisited: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/18185002-constantine-revisited?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_22 The Early Church on Killing: https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/13789120-the-early-church-on-killing?ref=nav_sb_ss_1_23 ★ Support this podcast on Patreon ★

"I advise you not to be too deeply disturbed by these scandals, because their coming was foretold so that, when they came, we might remember that they had been foretold and might not be greatly troubled by them." ”Augustine's correspondence, the mark and expression of the influential personality and apostolic zeal of the author, is rich in historical, philosophical, theological, exegetical, spiritual, literary, and autobiographical content” (Agostino Trapè). In this letter (Letter 208), he exhorts a Christian woman not to be scandalized by the faults of Christians and their pastors, and to remain within the unity of the Church despite the sins of its members. The extant correspondence of St. Augustine includes more than 270 letters, including well over 200 written by him. Those numbered 124-231 span the period from the conference between Catholic and Donatist bishops held in 411, and the rise of the Pelagian heresy, until Augustine's death in 430. Links Letter to the Lady Felicia (Letter 208) full text: https://verbum.com/product/120439/saint-augustine-letters-vol-v Alternate translation freely available at Catholic Culture: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3133##  Go to http://www.catholicculture.org/getaudio to register for FREE access to the full archive of audiobooks beyond the most recent 15 episodes. Donate at: http://www.catholicculture.org/donate/audio Theme music: 2 Part Invention, composed by Mark Christopher Brandt, performed by Thomas Mirus. ©️2019 Heart of the Lion Publishing Co./BMI. All rights reserved.

The Donatist controversy divides the church over how or if the lapsed should be restored.

The Donatist controversy divides the church over how or if the lapsed should be restored.

It's Good to Be a Weird Family. In this episode, we continue our discussion about the Benda family in Live Not by Lies. Why is it important to raise weird children? What is the long-term impact of raising children to be Christian dissidents? How can we strengthen children to withstand worldly pressures to conform to normalcy? — SHOW NOTES: Live Not by Lies: A Manual for Christian Dissidents by Rod Dreher https://amzn.to/2Wpmm4W  Baptist minister and a father of American Folk Art Howard Finster https://www.1517.org/podcasts/the-christian-history-almanac/2021-12-02  Donatist https://www.britannica.com/topic/Donatists  Quartet for the End of Time https://www.britannica.com/topic/Quartet-for-the-End-of-Time    CONTACT and FOLLOW BannedBooks@1517.org Facebook Twitter Telegram Telegram Chat SUBSCRIBE YouTube Rumble Odysee Apple Podcasts Spotify Stitcher Overcast Google Play TuneIn Radio iHeartRadio SUPPORT Gillespie Coffee (gillespie.coffee) Gillespie Media (gillespie.media) Donavon Riley The Warrior Priest Podcast 1517 Podcast Network Support the work of 1517

To support this ministry financially, visit: https://www.oneplace.com/donate/581/29 This week's Podcast Wednesday offering is Theology on the Go, as Jonathan Master and James Dolezal are face-to-face today broadcasting from the West Coast and discussing the Donatist Controversy. In the early fourth century, the Roman emperor authorized a final wave of persecution of the Church that caused some bishops and pastors to leave their churches, while some gave in to pressure from Rome. When Constantine became emperor and stopped the persecution, the bishops who fled returned to duty and encountered their replacements. And here we have the crux of the issue. Were these returning pastors and bishops legitimate? What about those that gave in to Rome? Is the efficacy of the sacraments dependent upon the holiness of the bishop? Were the sacraments invalid if performed by an illegitimate bishop? Are the issues raised by the Donatist Controversy still present in the Church today?

The Donatist Controversy Though they now reside thousands of miles from one another, Jonathan and James are face-to-face today, broadcasting from the West Coast and discussing the Donatist Controversy.    In the early fourth century, the Roman emperor authorized a final wave of persecution of the Church that caused some bishops and pastors to leave their churches, while some gave in to pressure from Rome. When Constantine became emperor and stopped the persecution, the bishops who fled returned to duty and encountered their replacements. And here we have the crux of the issue. Were these returning pastors and bishops legitimate? What about those that gave in to Rome? Is the efficacy of the sacraments dependent upon the holiness of the bishop? Were the sacraments invalid if performed by an “illegitimate” bishop? Are the issues raised by the Donatist Controversy still present in the Church today? Compliments of Banner of Truth, we are pleased to offer our listeners the opportunity to win a free copy of The Lord's Supper by Thomas Watson. Register!  

Ok Saint Augustine didn't say that exactly because he didn't speak English. Call that the Restless Summer Translation of Saint Augustine's anti-donatist writing. In this episode of Restless Matt and Michael do some light hearted church history that will help you think clearly about the … Continue readingR| Saint Augustine says “Don't Worry and Don't Be a Donatist” The post R| Saint Augustine says “Don't Worry and Don't Be a Donatist” appeared first on Society of Reformed Podcasters.

Ok Saint Augustine didn't say that exactly because he didn't speak English. Call that the Restless Summer Translation of Saint Augustine's anti-donatist writing. In this episode of Restless Matt and Michael do some light hearted church history that will help you think clearly about the church in our own day. Ok we are just really fascinated by church history. And during the Restless Summer we do what we want.  Please rate and review this show with Five stars. Follow us on on facebook and instagram  You get it. 

The drama of Augustine’s life hardly ended with his baptism. The years that followed included his ordination-by-mob, an attempt on his life, and wars of words with at least four major heresies. His years were breathless adventure and busyness, and yet they yielded 44 volumes of work that continues to exercise a profound influence—no only on Christian theology, but on civilization. This is the second of three episodes on his life. LINKS Saint Augustine. Works and Links (in several languages) http://www.augustinus.it/links/inglese/index.htm Augustine, On the Trinity https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3276 Augustine, The Correction of the Donatists https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3296 Augustine, Of the Morals of the Catholic Church and of the Morals of the Manichaeans https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3292 Augustine, On Christian Doctrine https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3275 Augustine, On the Grace of Christ, and on Original Sin https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3309 Erich Przywara, An Augustine Synthesis https://www.amazon.com/Augustine-Synthesis/dp/1625649363/ Vernon J. Bourke, The Essential Augustine https://www.amazon.com/Essential-Augustine-Saint-Hippo/dp/0915144077 Mike Aquilina’s website https://fathersofthechurch.com Mike Aquilina’s books https://catholicbooksdirect.com/writer/mike-aquilina/ Theme music: Gaudeamus (Introit for the Feast of All Saints), sung by Jeff Ostrowski. Courtesy of Corpus Christi Watershed http://www.ccwatershed.org Donate today! https://www.catholicculture.org/users/donate/audio

A new MP3 sermon from Old Paths Baptist Church is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Calvin Vs The Donatist & The Burning of A Heretic Speaker: Jason Cooley Broadcaster: Old Paths Baptist Church Event: Current Events Date: 5/2/2021 Length: 80 min.

In this episode, we examine Constantine's relationship with Christianity, namely the Edict of Milan and the Donatist heresy.

“Students of these revered writings should be advised not only to learn the kinds of expressions in the Holy Scriptures… but also to pray that they may understand them.” With these final chapters of Book 3, Augustine wraps up his treatment of figurative expressions. He illustrates just how tricky scriptural interpretation can be, citing instances wherein the same literary figure is employed in different—or even contrary—ways. He quotes many scriptural examples throughout these chapters, always careful to highlight the clearer instances in order to illuminate the more obscure ones. Augustine shows how the scriptural authors utilized the whole range of literary devices—including metaphor, irony, parable, and allegory—even if the authors themselves did not define those devices as such. And finally, Augustine relates a set of seven rules for scriptural interpretation—rules that were previously enumerated by a certain Donatist heretic named Tyconius, but that are here refined and repurposed within the broader context of Augustine’s work. Augustine is careful to stress, however, that these rules alone cannot be relied upon as though a key to unlock the meaning of Holy Scripture. Indeed, as he concludes Book 3, Augustine emphasizes prayer—which he describes as “chiefly and especially necessary” when it comes to understanding the Scriptures. Links Translation courtesy of Catholic University of America Press: https://verbum.com/product/120407/saint-augustine-christian-instruction-admonition-and-grace-the-christian-combat-faith-hope-and-charity Alternate Translation at CatholicCulture.org: https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=3275 Previous De Doctrina Christiana episodes: https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/audiobook_authors_titles.cfm  Go to http://www.catholicculture.org/getaudio to register for FREE access to the full archive of audiobooks beyond the most recent 15 episodes. Donate at http://catholicculture.org/donate/audio to support this podcast! Theme music: 2 Part Invention, composed by Mark Christopher Brandt, performed by Thomas Mirus. ©️2019 Heart of the Lion Publishing Co./BMI. All rights reserved.

Where did the name "Baptist" begin? Why don't we just call ourselves "Christians" and just leave it at that? Why is there a need to define who and what we are? As we dive into today's episode, take a look with me at one of the early Baptist groups known as the "Donatist's". Let's examine together the struggle and persecution they, Baptists, faced in early history. Visit our website: https://sandycreekstirrings.com/ Submit a question for our Q&A: https://sandycreekstirrings.com/contact/

After receiving a petition from north Africa, Constantine is drawn into the conflict between the Donatists and Caecilianists. The emperor attempts to end the schism and restore unity to the Church by differing the matter church councils, without much success... Music “Sons of Constantinople” by Tyler Cunningham, licensed under Pond5. HistoryoftheEarlyChurch.wordpress.com HistoryoftheEarlyChurch@gmail.com Facebook.com/EarlyChurchPodcast

In the aftermath of the Great Persecution, the Christian communities of north Africa are violently split in two by schism. Music “Sons of Constantinople” by Tyler Cunningham, licensed under Pond5. HistoryoftheEarlyChurch.wordpress.com HistoryoftheEarlyChurch@gmail.com Facebook.com/EarlyChurchPodcast

Saint Augustine labored as a devout bishop for his people, as the leader of a community of priests, monks, and nuns, for which he wrote the Rule of Saint Augustine, and as a profound theologian, writing and debating powerfully against the Manichean, Donatist, and Pelagian heretics. Music from SoundCloud.com

Session 10 of our Church History deals with groups that did not break away or were part of the Catholic Church.  These groups of Christians suffered severe persecutions.  They claimed apostolic origination.  We consider how the Donatist's influenced the Paulicians, Bogomil and Cathari.

This section deals with Christianity around the Emperor Constantine and the devastating effects of church and state merging.  We also look at the Donatist's that opposed the errors being perpetuated in many of the churches around the 300's - 400's.

How did turmoil in Cuba lead Justo Gonzalez into the strange new world of church history? How does Justo Gonzalez balance cultural insight and biblical fidelity? How did Augustine’s background affect Gonzalez’s insights into the Donatist and Pelagian controversies? What motivated the Reformers to go back to the sources to reconceive theological education? Can the past help… Download Audio

Church is more than a building. It's a people. So is social distancing a church-ending threat? Or is COVID-19 offering the church fresh opportunities for mission? Patrick (https://www.thecrossingchurch.com/staff/patrick-miller/) discuss the most important threats facing the church today. Interested in more content like this? Go back and listen to Keith's episode Are We Hypocrites? (https://www.thecrossingchurch.com/podcasts/are-we-hypocrites-learning-to-follow-jesus-luke-12-1/) Like this content? Make sure to leave us a rating and share it with others, so others can find it too. To learn more, visit our Twitter (https://twitter.com/thecrossingcomo) @TheCrossingCOMO.   Outline 0:20 - How the coronavirus impacts the church 2:40 - Barriers to entry 5:50 - A new mission field: online 8:10 - Early adopters vs. traditionalists 10:15 - The Church: Jesus's establishment ( Acts 20.28 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+20%3A28&version=NIV) ) 12:35 - Local churches vs. Mega churches ( Hebrews 13.7 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+13%3A7&version=NIV) ) 15:50 - Missional churches 16:40 - Missing the real threats to the church 20:20 - Are We Hypocrites? (https://www.thecrossingchurch.com/podcasts/are-we-hypocrites-learning-to-follow-jesus-luke-12-1/) 22:50 - Where are the serious Christians? ( Acts 6.1 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+6%3A1&version=NIV) ) 24:40 - Donatism (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Donatists) 27:10 - Is power bad? 28:50 - Division, gossip, and conflict resolution ( Proverbs 18.17 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=proverbs+18%3A17&version=ESV) ) 34:00 - Connecting Jesus and the Church 36:30 - Acts 20.29-30 (Acts%2020.29-30) 37:00 - Questions to wrestle with 39:20 - Subscribe. Rate. Share.   Social Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/TheCrossingCOMO (https://www.facebook.com/TheCrossingCOMO) Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/thecrossingcomo/ (https://www.instagram.com/thecrossingcomo/) Twitter: https://twitter.com/thecrossingcomo (https://twitter.com/thecrossingcomo)   Scripture Ephesians 5.1-2: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+5%3A1-2&version=NIV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Ephesians+5%3A1-2&version=NIV) Acts 20.28: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+20%3A28&version=NIV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+20%3A28&version=NIV) Hebrews 13.7: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+13%3A7&version=NIV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Hebrews+13%3A7&version=NIV) Acts 6.1: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+6%3A1&version=NIV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts+6%3A1&version=NIV) Philippians 4.2-3: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=philippians+4%3A2-3&version=NIV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=philippians+4%3A2-3&version=NIV) Proverbs 18.17: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=proverbs+18%3A17&version=ESV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=proverbs+18%3A17&version=ESV) Acts 20.29-30: https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+20%3A29-30&version=NIV (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts+20%3A29-30&version=NIV)   Resources Donatism ("Donatist" from Encyclopaedia Britannica): https://www.britannica.com/topic/Donatists (https://www.britannica.com/topic/Donatists)   Related Are We Hypocrites?: https://www.thecrossingchurch.com/podcasts/are-we-hypocrites-learning-to-follow-jesus-luke-12-1/ (https://www.thecrossingchurch.com/podcasts/are-we-hypocrites-learning-to-follow-jesus-luke-12-1/) Support this podcast

15 March 2020 Third Sunday in Lent NOTE: Due to the Covid19 / Coronavirus Emergency the Archdiocese of New York has cancelled all public Masses for an indefinite period. The homily attached hereto was given on 19 March 2017, the Third Sunday of Lent, Year A, using the same Readings as for today, 15 March 2020. John 4:5-42 + Homily 23 Minutes 22 Seconds Link to the Readings: http://www.usccb.org/bible/readings/031520.cfm (New American Bible, Revised Edition) From the parish bulletin of 15 March 2020: On September 10, 1919, General Pershing led his returning troops up Fifth Avenue before crowds numbering two million. In front of Saint Patrick’s Cathedral, he dismounted from his rambunctious white horse “Captain” to greet Cardinal Mercier, who had arrived in New York by ship the night before. The General made a point of expressing his esteem for the Belgian prelate. Perhaps the name Mercier means little to many today, but over the course of several weeks, he received an unprecedented series of welcomes in the United States, excelling even the welcome tour of Lafayette in 1824-1825. Cardinal Mercier had become a hero to the world for his defense of Belgium during its sufferings after the German invasion. It is edifying to read on the Internet the account of the celebrations in America recorded by Father Thomas C. Brennan. In it, he describes the prelate addressing Protestant leaders in English, rabbis in Hebrew, and academics in a Latin more fluent than their own, as they bestowed honorary laurels upon him. This archbishop led a revival in studies of Thomas Aquinas, but more than that, he was an image of moral integrity, a cardinal honored more for himself than for his title. The response to the Donatist heresy established with certainty, through the articulation of such as Saint Augustine, that the personal attributes of a cleric do not affect the legitimacy of his priestly acts: the sacraments of a weak bishop can confer the same grace as those of a saint. But the moral integrity of a cleric empowers his encouragement of souls. Weak leaders and their bromide-churning bureaucracies have scant moral influence. Cardinal Mercier had a zeal that issued from a love of doctrinal truth. In the wartime chaos of 1917, he told his priests not to tell their people to love if they could not explain the theology that justifies love. He gave a practical formula for happiness: “Every day for five minutes control your imagination and close your eyes to the things of sense and your ears to all the noises of the world, in order to enter into yourself. Then, in the sanctity of your baptized soul (which is the temple of the Holy Spirit), speak to that Divine Spirit, saying to Him: O Holy Spirit, beloved of my soul, I adore You. Enlighten me, guide me, strengthen me, console me. Tell me what I should do. Give me your orders. I promise to submit myself to all that You desire of me and accept all that You permit to happen to me. Let me only know Your Will.  If you do this, your life will flow along happily, serenely, and full of consolation, even in the midst of trials. Grace will be proportioned to the trial, giving you strength to carry it, and you will arrive at the Gate of Paradise laden with merit.”

Hey everybody and welcome back to another new episode! This week we address the Donatist Controversy. At stake here is whether the moral qualities of a priest nullify their ability to perform the sacrament.

Right Angle, with Bill Whittle, Scott Ott and Stephen Green, brings breaking news into sharp focus five times each week with time-tested conservative principles and a generous helping of humor. Whittle, Ott and Green have co-hosted a news panel show for more than a decade. To enjoy the full video archive, visit https://BillWhittle.com

In this episode of Going Deeper, Pastors Will and Donnie talk about the Lord's supper, and answer some of the questions West Hills has been asking concerning the Lord's supper. Want to know more about the Donatist controversy? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donatism

00:00 - Introduction 03:40 - Scripture Narrative (John 1:24-34) 09:48 - Free-for-All (Favorite and Least-Favorite Christmas Gift Ever) 24:19 - Main Topic (Luther's Baptismal Rite - Part 2) On episode THIRTY-EIGHT of Let the Bird Fly! the guys hold Wade off for one more episode, so that Mike and Peter can continue the discussion on Luther’s Baptismal Rite that they began with Ben on Episode 37. The guys are joined once again by Peter’s two oldest girls, as well as Mike's middle daughter. After Peter discusses how the Gospel according to St. John handles the baptism of Jesus, the girls help the guys our in the Free-for-All. Mike proves to be so-twentieth-century and Peter once again discusses his “classy” upbringing. But eventually they make it back around to Luther’s Baptismal Rite, picking up with Luther’s wonderful Flood Prayer. Mike again references volume 3 of Francis Pieper’s Christian Dogmatics. And Oliva demonstrates the Augustinian influence that has caused her to reconsider her Donatist position on baptism. If you haven’t listened to Part 1 of our discussion yet, you may want to do that first. You can find that in Episode 37. We hope the two-part discussion isn’t too much, but trust us, we reigned ourselves in (we probably could’ve made this a twenty-part discussion). As always, if you are enjoying the show, please subscribe, rate, and review us on iTunes, Stitcher, Google Play, or TuneIn Radio. You can also like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter. And, of course, share us with a friend or two! If you’d like to contact us we can be reached at podcast@LetTheBirdFly.com, or visit our website at www.LetTheBirdFly.com. Thanks for listening! Attributions for Music Used in this Episode: “The Last One” by Jahzzar is licensed under an Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 International License. “Horses to Water” by Topher Mohr and Alex Elena “Gib laut” by Dirk Becker is licensed under an Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (aka Music Sharing) 3.0 International License. “Whistling Down the Road” by Silent Partner “Not Drunk” by The Joy Drops is licensed under an Attribution 4.0 International License.

Explore the Donatist controversy. During the Great Persecution, those Christians who handed over the texts were the “traditores” or “handers over”. Those who did not were the “Confessors”. Afterward, some traditores wanted to be readmitted to the Church. Donatus was a confessor and believed that the Lapsi (those who decided to be lapse in their faith) should not be readmitted. A major issue came up. Can official acts by unworthy bishops be effectual? If not, all the acts are invalid. The true church was made up of those who suffer. Donatus advocated resistance to the government. There were two extreme deviations. One was the Circumcelions and the other was Monasticism. Augustine’s view was that the Lapsi should be readmitted to the Church. This eventually led to Augustine’s just war theory. This also led to Augustine’s views of the Sacraments. Holiness is not bound with the person enacting the Sacrament but is within the Sacrament itself. It is inherent in the Sacrament itself.

This episode of CS is provocatively titled “The Lapsed Dance.”In the 4th episode titled “Martyrs”, we examined the persecution Christians faced at the hands of the Roman authorities. We noted that persecution, while at times fierce, wasn't one, long campaign of terror that lasted for a couple centuries. It tended to be spasmodic & regional, based on the whim of the current emperor, enforced in spotty fashion by governors who either agreed or disagreed with the official policy from far-away Rome. There were a couple seasons of Empire-wide persecution in the 3rd C that proved to be the most intense.Following Trajan's more even-handed attempt to deal with the problem of the Christians in the early 2nd C, 2 Emperors followed a more rigorous campaign of persecution & pressed its application to the borders of the Empire. In the mid to late 3rd C, Decius & Diocletian considered Christianity a dangerous threat. Their reasons for opposing the Faith were several but looming large was the concern Christianity would weaken the Army, desperately needed to protect the borders being harassed by barbarians. Also, die-hard pagans claimed the old gods who'd overseen Rome's rise to greatness were angry so many of their worshippers had turned to the new Faith. They warned disaster loomed; the only way to stay it was to appease the wrath of the gods by slaking it with Christian blood.To this end, some Emperors renewed an old practice: Emperor worship. While the details of this practice varied from time to time & place to place, the basic routine went like this . . .Once every so many years, the residents of a city had to appear in the public square, where they ascended a raised platform, picked up a pinch of incense, dropped it on some hot coals and announced, “Caesar is Lord.” The exact words of the oath varied depending on who was sitting on the throne. But the point was to honor the reigning Roman Emperor as a deity, minor as that deity might be in the pagan pantheon. While pagans who already recognized a plethora of gods had no problem adding one more to the list, Christians owned a fierce repulsion to confessing anyone other than Jesus Christ as Lord. They simply couldn't do it. As the pagan left the dais after going through this little rite, he was handed a libelli – a certificate proving his loyalty. He kept that certificate as proof of loyalty, producing it whenever an authority asked him to show his compliance with Rome's decree. In this manner, the Christians were marked out; they had no libelli.Now, as can be imagined, this challenge led to some memorable martyrdoms, especially in North Africa where Christianity flourished. It also led to one of the biggest controversies the Church had yet faced.Some Christians, under the threat of death, capitulated to the pressure, burned the incense & spoke fealty to Caesar. They took the libelli and went about their business. Once the Emperor Decius was gone and persecution eased, these capitulators repented their weakness and applied for readmission to the Church. The challenge for church leaders was = What was to be done with these “lapsed” members, as they were called?Some advocated their re-admission to the felloowship pending a review of their specific case by the local elders. Others, led by a church leader named Novatian, argued vehemently for their exclusion. For Novatian and his supporters, there was no room for any kind of negotiation. The lapsed were to be barred from fellowship. The controversy between the Novatianists and the majority of churches which by that time had made the church at Rome their unofficial headquarters became so great, it seemed there was only one way to solve it. The Novatianists were declared heretical by the majority and put outside the Communion of Saints.The Novatianist controversy flared up again following the last great persecution under the Emperor Diocletian. This time it went by the name of Donatism.During the Diocletian persecution, in order to avoid becoming martyrs, some Church leaders had not only submitted to Caesar worship, they'd surrendered sacred texts to imperial authorities, and, shamefully ratted out other believers. Such lapsed leaders were called “traditores” meaning, those who surrender. One of these traditores was Caecilian, also known as Cyprian. Cyprian hadn't capitulated and worshipped Caesar, but he did go into hiding when the edict reached Carthage where he was bishop. His critics said he was no better than those who lapsed by this desertion of his post. When the persecution lifted, he wanted to returned to his position. The Church at Carthage was the lead church of all North Africa, a region with a large population of Christians. The Novatianist-leanings of the previous generation were most strong there and were renewed at this time, sparked by the re-installation of Cyprian. Those who refused to accept him, selected their own leader in an elder named Majorinus, whom they made a rival bishop to Cyprian. Majorinus died shortly after being consecrated. He was replaced by Donatus Magnus who advocated the same path of rejecting traditores from church leadership.The Donatist Controversy is important because what was at stake was the Christian concept of forgiveness and reconciliation. Was the act of saying “Caesar is Lord” while burning incense to an image of the Emperor an act of idolatry that marked one as apostate? And was such a coerced act something from which there was no repentance?Some said the betrayal by lapsed believers was a renouncing of Christ that condemned them to hell. Others said while some believers became martyrs and their faith was exemplary, those who gave in to the threat of death could not be held responsible and could be re-admitted to the fold, if they showed proper repentance. But such returned believers could not serve in any capacity of leadership in the church. Some held a view of reconciliation so far-reaching, they said even pastors who lapsed could be restored to their positions.What emerged during this debate was the importance of baptism.In the Books of Acts, baptism appears to have been used by the Apostles as the means by which believers identified their faith in Christ and their participation in the Community of Faith. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter called for new converts to be baptized immediately. Philip led the Ethiopian eunuch in immediate baptism.  Baptism at the moment of conversion seems to be the NT pattern & the practice of the Apostolic Church.But at some point, church leaders began delaying baptism, calling for converts to have a time of learning before being officially welcomed into the church. The reason for this delay is uncertain, but may have come as a result of seeing that some supposed converts didn't follow through on their commitment. They fell away after a short time. By delaying baptism and preceding it with a period of instruction, it gave the convert a time to prove the genuineness of their conversion.While conversion was a work of the Spirit in the human heart, baptism was seen as the way someone made a public profession of faith and ushered them into the Community of Christ. So baptism became a kind of definitive line in the sand. It was thought that if someone renounced Christ AFTER being baptized, they were an apostate to whom repentance was now impossible.And as might be suspected, different regions understood all this this differently. Some held that to go apostate meant that person had forfeited salvation and was destined for hell. Other's held that a seeming-apostate was able to repent & return to grace, but their renouncing of the Lord meant their being forever excluded from fellowship. So, they could be saved, but were barred from attending church & taking Communion.Another position said if someone did repent of what had earlier appeared to be a renouncing of Christ, it was evidence they hadn't really gone apostate because if they had they wouldn't repent. Therefore, repentance and the demonstration of a desire to return to God's grace were evidence of salvation and for that reason the repentant ought to be readmitted to fellowship.So à the timing of baptism became a major issue once persecution broke out in a threat of martyrdom.  Baptism was delayed even longer than it had been because of the line it was thought to have crossed.  If a Christian caved during persecution and took a libelli before they'd been baptized, returning to fellowship would be easier. But if he/she lapsed after baptism then returning was more difficult, especially among groups like the Novatians & Donatists.As we'll see later, this issue of the timing of baptism extended beyond the time of Imperial persecutions. When the Church began to invest certain sins with greater moral weight and consequence, many delayed baptism lest they commit a major sin after baptism and so incur  greater judgment.For now, let's return to the Donatist Controversy.  Donatus and his followers held the view that pastors and elders who'd lapsed during the Diocletian persecutions were forever barred from leading the Church. Maybe they could be restored to fellowship but being a leader in the Church was out of the question. The majority view was that lapsed leaders could indeed be restored. As you might imagine, the debate was fierce. Many towns were divided between Donatist and non-Donatist congregations. The Donatists were particularly strong in North Africa while the Church at Rome led the non-Donatists who prevailed in Europe.The Controversy raged for a hundred years & became one of the more contentious issues the Church had to deal with during the 3rd & 4th Cs.What made the Donatist Controversy such a particularly heated topic was the great admiration believers held for the martyrs who'd maintained their faith & confession of Christ even at the cost of their lives. The question was, how could they be held in such high regard when those who lapsed could be so easily restored to fellowship?  Were in fact the martyrs foolish to cast away their lives when a little negotiation & capitulation could have saved them?No, martyrdom was a baptism by blood considered the utmost glory a believer could attain to. A careful record of the martyrs was kept; the days of their martyrdom celebrated each year. And with each celebration, their stories grew. Their failings were edited out and their reputation embellished until they took on a decidedly “other-worldly” quality. The martyrs were quickly morphing into “saints” – Early Christian super-heroes.The idea began to develop in North Africa where there had been so many notable martyrdoms, that their exceptional courage achieved a kind of special grace from God that could be turned to other purposes; like, What? Well, how about we use it to forgive the sins of others?  Sins like those who'd lapsed. Yeah, that's it. The righteousness of the martyrs who'd died rather than recant was so great, it made a reserve of grace those who'd avoided martyrdom could draw from! How convenient.Some bishops thought this a grand idea. Others opposed it, but wanting to find some means by which the lapsed could be returned to fellowship, they devised various means and forms of penance, by which repentant lapsi could demonstrate the sincerity of their desire to return to the fold.Cyprian, the bishop of Carthage mentioned before, devised a system to allow the lapsed to be reconciled to the Church. He said that simple repentance was enough for those who'd sacrificed to the Emperor after severe torture. But those who'd caved at the mere suggestion of pain had to submit to a penance of punishments. His plan won widespread approval and the Church created a system of penance based on the severity of the guilt of the lapsed. Bishops met with repentant lapsi & prescribed their penance like spiritual doctors dispensing medicine. If and when the penitent successfully jumped thru the prescribed hoops, he/she was allowed to return to fellowship and most importantly, to partake of the Lord's Table.While this system of penance was proposed and installed in various places, other regions rejected it as contrary to the character of grace found in the NT. And while it went into general disuse when official persecution ended in the 4th C, the doctrinal foundation was laid for the later system of penance and the Treasury of Merit that would be practiced under the title of Indulgences.But all that is for a much later episode . . .Many thanks to those who've subscribed to CS and told others about the podcast.If you haven't done so yet, drop by the FB page and let us know where you live.  The CS family stretches literally around the  world.If you use iTunes as your podcast portal, please think about writing a review. That's THE most important way to get the word out about the podcast.While CS is free, we have had to include a donate feature as the costs of hosting the site have gone up.Lastly, I'm quite stoked to announce CS is now appearing in Spanish.You can fain all the information you want  to follow up on all this at the website – sanctorum.us.

This week's episode is titled, “Keeping a Record”The first 3 Cs of Church History are at times a difficult puzzle to sort out because no coherent historical narrative was being kept.Luke's account in the Books of Acts recounts a time span of about 30 yrs & roughly narrates the spread of the Faith from Jerusalem to Rome. The next narrative doesn't come till the writings of the Christian historian Eusebius in the 4th C.  What we have for a period of over 200 yrs are the writings of the Fathers whose letters give little more than a thumbnail sketch of what was happening. We have to infer & assume a lot by picking up what facts we can about what was happening. As we've seen, the work of the Church Fathers focused mainly on providing pastoral & apologetic support.  Gaining an historical framework for this period comes from merging secular accounts of history with the commentary of the Fathers. But with the work of Eusebius at the opening of the 4th C, the narrative becomes significantly clearer.Eusebius began compiling his magnum opus of Church History in the 290's. Titled Ecclesiastical History, it's an attempt to provide a narrative of the Communion of the Saints from the Apostles to his time.Eusebius was born & raised in Caesarea on the coast of Israel. He was a student of the Christian leader Pamphilas, who was himself a student of the great Apologist Origen. Eusebius became the bishop at Caesarea in 313. He played a major role in the Council of Nicaea in 325, which we'll take a closer look at in a future episode.Eusebius is a key figure in the study of Church History because his Ecclesiastical History is the first work after Luke's to attempt an historical narrative of the Faith. He's also an important figure because of his close association with the Emperor Constantine.I want to quote the opening of Eusebius' narrative because it gives us a sense of the monumental nature of his work.  He knew he was attempting to reconstruct a narrative of the Church from scant resources.In Chapter 1, which he titled, “The Plan of the Work” he writes –It is my purpose to write an account of the successions of the holy apostles, as well as of the times which have elapsed from the days of our Savior to our own; and to relate the many important events which are said to have occurred in the history of the Church; and to mention those who have governed and presided over the Church in the most prominent parishes, and those who in each generation have proclaimed the divine word either orally or in writing.It is my purpose also to give the names and number and times of those who through love of innovation have run into the greatest errors, and, proclaiming themselves discoverers of knowledge falsely so-called, have like fierce wolves unmercifully devastated the flock of Christ. …But at the outset I must crave for my work the indulgence of the wise, for I confess that it is beyond my power to produce a perfect and complete history, and since I am the first to enter upon the subject, I am attempting to traverse as it were a lonely and untrodden path. I pray that I may have God as my guide and the power of the Lord as my aid, since I am unable to find even the bare footsteps of those who have traveled the way before me, except in brief fragments, in which some in one way, others in another, have transmitted to us particular accounts of the times in which they lived. From afar they raise their voices like torches, and they cry out, as from some lofty and conspicuous watch-tower, admonishing us where to walk and how to direct the course of our work steadily and safely.Having gathered therefore from the matters mentioned here and there by them whatever we consider important for the present work, and having plucked like flowers from a meadow the appropriate passages from ancient writers, we shall endeavor to embody the whole in an historical narrative. …This work seems to me of especial importance because I know of no ecclesiastical writer who has devoted himself to this subject; and I hope that it will appear most useful to those who are fond of historical research.Eusebius was unaware of any previous attempt to provide an historical narrative of the development of the Faith from the late 1st C to his time in the early 4th, a period of a little over 200 yrs. From a modern perspective, Eusebius' account might be considered suspect, relying as it does on tradition & at best fragmentary evidence. What must be remembered is the importance of that oral tradition and the accuracy of such transmission over long periods of time. Because the ancient world didn't possess cheap and plentiful means of recording information, it was dependent on oral tradition & rote memorization.  With the advent of the printing press and more economic media, the priority of the oral tradition declined. Eusebius had both written and oral source material to draw from. His work can be considered dependable, while subject to question when it leaned toward the ancient penchant for using history as propaganda.As we return to the narrative timeline of Church history we need to pick up the story with the reign of the Diocletian who presided over the last & in many ways worst round of persecution under the Roman emperors.Though Christians remember Diocletian for that, he was in truth one of the most effective of the Roman Emperors. By the time he came to the throne, the Roman Empire was a sprawling & unwieldy beast of a realm to rule. The City of Rome was an old & decayed relic of its former glory. So Diocletian moved his headquarters eastward to Nicomedia in Asia Minor, modern Turkey.  Instead of trying to exert control over the entire empire himself & solely, Diocletian appointed Maximian as co-emperor to rule the western half of the Empire from Rome while he ruled the East.One of the persistent problems that led to so much unrest in the recent decades was the question of succession; who would rule after the current emperor? To forestall that turmoil, Diocletian appointed dual successors for both himself & Maximian.  Flavius Constantius became Maximian's successor while Diocletian took on Galerius. This established what's known as the Tetrarchy.While Diocletian had no warm & fuzzy feelings for the followers of Christ, it was really his successor Galerius that urged him to launch a campaign of persecution. Galerius was a military commander who thought Christians made poor soldiers. He knew their loyalty was supremely to their God and thought they made for unreliable troops. Galerius was also a committed pagan who believed in the Roman deities. He attributed any setback for the Army & any of the regular natural disasters that shook the realm, to their displeasure that so many of Rome's subjects were turning to the new god on the block. So it was really at Galerius' urging Diocletian approved the severe measures taken against Christians and their churches.  When Diocletian retired to his villa to raise cabbages & turned the eastern half of the Empire over to Galerius, persecution increased.Eventually, Constantius replaced Maximian in the West, just as Galerius had assumed the mantle in the East. And Diocletian's tetrarchy began to unravel. Galerius decided he wanted to be sole ruler and abducted Constantius' son, Constantine who'd been named successor to his father in the West. When Constantius fell ill, Galerius granted Constantine permission to visit him.Constantius died, & Constantine demanded Galerius recognize him as his co-emperor. No doubt Galerius would have launched a military campaign against Constantine's bid for rule of the West, but Galerius himself was stricken with a deadly illness. On his deathbed, Galerius admitted his policy of persecution of Christians hadn't worked and rescinded his policy of oppression.In the West, Constantine's claim to his father's throne was contested by Maximian's son, Maxentius. The showdown between them is known as the Battle of the Milvian Bridge. Maxentius didn't want Constantine marching his troops into Rome so he tore down the Milvian Bridge after marching his troops across it to meet Constantine. Just in case the battle went against Maxentius, he had a temporary bridge built of a string of boats across the river.At this point, the story gets confused because there's been so many who've written about what happened and the reports are varied. On the day before the battle, Constantine prayed, most likely to the sun-god. As he did, he looked toward the sun & saw a cross. Then, either he saw the words or heard them spoken, “By this sign, Conquer.” That night while he slept, Jesus appeared to him in a dream, telling him to have his soldiers place a Christian symbol on their shields. The next morning, chalk was quickly passed round & the soldiers put what's called the Chiron on their shields. Chi & Rho are the first 2 letters of the Greek word Christos, Christ. In English it looks like a P on top of an X.When the 2 forces met, Constantine's veterans bested Maxentius' less experienced troops, who retreated to their makeshift bridge. While crossing, Maxentius fell into the water & drowned. Constantine then marched victoriously into Rome.A year later, he and his new co-emperor Licinius issued what's known as the Edict of Milan, which decreed an end to all religious persecution, not just of Christians, but all faiths. For Constantine, Jesus was now his divine patron & the cross, an emblem of shame & derision for generations, became instead—a kind of charm. Instead of being a symbol of Rome's brutality in executing its enemies, the cross became a symbol of Imperial power.Bishops began to be called priests as they gained parity with their peers in pagan temples. These Christian priests were shown special favors by Constantine. It didn't take long for the pagan priests to realize which way the winds of political favor were blowing. Many converted.Now à there's been much debate over the legitimacy of Constantine's conversion. Was he genuinely born again or was he just a savvy politician who recognized a trend he could co-opt and turn to his favor? People will disagree on this and my meager offering is unlikely to convince anyone. But I think Constantine was probably a genuine Christian. He certainly did some things after his conversion that are difficult to reconcile with a sincere faith, but we have to remember the moral base he grew up in as the son of a Caesar & as a general of Roman legions was very different from the Biblical morality that's shaped Western civilization.  Also, Constantine's actions which are so decidedly non-Christian, like murdering those who threatened his power, may have been rationalized not as personal acts so much as attempts to secure the peace & safety of the empire. I know that's a stretch, but when analyzing history, we need to be careful about judging people when we don't have at our disposal all the facts they did.If we could sit down with Constantine and say, “You shouldn't have executed that guy.” He could very well say something like, “Yes, as a Christian, I shouldn't have. You're right. But I didn't execute him out of personal anger or suspicion or mere selfishness. It really bothers me that I had to off him; but I discovered he was plotting to usurp my throne and it would have thrown the empire into years of civil war & chaos.” To which we'd reply,  “Well Constance, you need to trust God more. He'll protect you. He put you on the throne, He can keep you there.” And Constantine might reply, “Yeah, I considered that & I agree. But it's a tough call. You see, in terms of my personal life, I trust God. But when it comes to my role as Emperor, I need to make tough choices others who don't wield the power I do will understand.”Let's not forget that Constantine, while being a competent general & astute politician, was at best a novice believer.I share this little made-up discussion because it points up something we're going to encounter again & again in our review of the history of the Church. We look on past ages, on what they believed and the things they did, with an attitude of moral superiority because we wouldn't do the terrible things they did, or we assume would do some things they failed to. We need to be cautious with this attitude for the simple reason that when we take the time to listen to the voices of the past and let them explain themselves, we often come to a new appreciation for the difficulty of their lives & choices. We may not agree with them, but we at least realize in their own minds & hearts, they thought they were doing what was best.You make up your own mind about the genuineness of Constantine's faith, but let me encourage you to spend a little time looking up what Eusebius wrote about him and some of the tough decisions Constantine had to make during his reign.Some of the things regarded as incompatible with a genuine conversion is that he retained his title of Pontifex Maximus as the head of the state religious cult. He conceived & hatched political plots to remove enemies. He murdered those deemed a threat to his power.On the other hand, from 312 on, his favor of Christianity was quite public. He granted the same privileges to bishops, pagan priests enjoyed. He banned crucifixion & ended the punishment of criminals by using them in gladiatorial games. He made Sunday a holiday. His personal charity built several large churches. And his private life demonstrated a pretty consistent genuine faith. His children were brought up in the Church & he practiced marital fidelity, at least, as far as we know. That of course, was certainly NOT the case with previous Emperors or even the wider Roman nobility.Critics like to point to Constantine's delay of baptism to shortly before his death as evidence of a lack of faith. I suggest that it ought to be read exactly the opposite. Remember what we learned about baptism a few episodes back. In that time, it was believed after baptism, there were certain sins that couldn't be forgiven. So people delayed baptism to as close to death as possible, leaving little chance for commission of such a sin to occur. Following his baptism, Constantine never again donned the imperial purple of his office but instead wore only his white baptismal robes. That sounds like he was concerned to enter Heaven, not a casual disregard of it.Chief among Constantine's concerns upon taking control of the Empire was unity. It was unity & strength that had moved Diocletian to establish the tetrarchy. Decades of civil war as one powerful general after another seized control and beat down his challengers had desperately weakened & impoverished the realm. Now that Constantine ruled, he hoped the Church would help bring a new era of unity based on a vital & dynamic faith. It didn't take long before he realized the very thing he hoped would bring unity was itself fractured.When the Church was battered & beaten by imperial persecution, it was forced to be one. But when that pressure was removed, the theological cracks that had been developing for a while became immediately evident. Chief among them was the Donatist Controversy we recently considered. In 314 the Donatists appealed to Constantine to settle the issue on who could ordain elders.Think about what a momentous change this was! The church appealed to the civil authority to rule on a spiritual affair! By doing so, the Church asked for imperial sponsorship.At this point we need a robot to wave its arms manically & cry “Danger! Will Robinson, Danger!”Constantine knew this was not a decision he was capable of making on his own so he gathered some church leaders in Arles in the S of France to decide the issue. The Donatist bishops were outnumbered by the non-Donatists – so you know where this is going. They decided against the Donatists.Instead of accepting the decision, the Donatists called the leaders who opposed them corrupt and labeled the Emperor their lackey.  The Church split between the Donatist churches of North Africa and the rest who now looked to Constantine as their leader.As tensions rose, the Emperor sent troops to Carthage in 317 to enforce the installation of a pro-government bishop opposed by the Donatists. For the first but far from last time, Christians persecuted Christians. Opponents of Constantine were exiled from Carthage. After 4 years, he realized his strong arm tactics weren't working and withdrew his troops.We'll pick it up and this point next time.

This episode of CS is titled “Augustine – Part 2.”Augustine wrote a work called Retractions in which he lists the many books and treatises he'd penned. Each work is given a summary and additional notes are added charting the development of his thought over time.He wrote some 113 books & treatises, close to 250 letters, some of which are treatises themselves, and 500 sermons.Here's a rundown on some of them …The best introduction to Augustine's thoughts is his Enchiridion – also known as On Faith, Hope, & Love.  The section on faith is an exposition of the Apostle's Creed. Hope is captured in the Lord's Prayer, while Love is the summary of the Commandments.On Christian Teaching is Augustine's theology of Scripture; what it teaches, how it ought to be understood, and a practical theology on how to share it. It's here he developed the foundational principle of the analogy of faith. It establishes the rule that no teaching which is contrary to the general tenor and story of the Scriptures can be developed from any particular passage. The history of heresy and pseudo-Christian cults makes clear most of them violate this basic rule of hermeneutics.On Catechizing the Uninstructed gives both a long and short form for how to deal with inquirers.Augustine's On the Good of Marriage affirms the benefits of marriage as bringing children into the world, protecting fidelity, and serves as a picture of Christ and the Church. Although, keeping with the sensibilities of the time, it made clear the superior position of celibacy.Shortly after arriving back home in Tagaste, around 389, Augustine wrote what is probably his most famous work – Confessions. The word meant more then than it typically does today. Yes, it bears his confession of sin, but Augustine also meant the word as his profession of faith and a declaration of the goodness of God. Com­pleted by 401, it lays bare his soul. He describes his life before conversion, the events leading to his conver­sion, and his path back to North Africa. The Confessions of St. Augustine is counted as one of the greatest autobiographical works of all time. It contains the oft-quoted “You have made us for Yourself, O God, and our hearts are restless until they find their rest in Thee" in the first paragraph. Scholars & students of ancient literature are moved by Augustine's remarkably candid and perceptive analysis of his struggle with sin. At one point he shares the struggle he had with lust this way. He cried out to the heavens, “Give me chas­tity and holy desire; Only—not yet.”After the Confessions, Augustine's most important work, and one he labored on for 14 years is The City of God. This is arguably the climax of Christian Latin apologetics and became the blueprint for the Middle Ages.It began as a response to the Sack of Rome by the Goths in 410. Though Rome was no longer the capital of the Empire, it remained the enduring symbol of it. Pagans loudly protested Rome was sacked because the old gods were furious they'd been forsaken; thrown over for this new deity out of the Middle East name Jesus.Augustine began the work as a reply to this damning charge. It grew into a comprehensive philosophy of history; an eloquent apologetic for what would come to be known as the Providential View of History.Augustine posited 2 cities; One of the world, the other of Heaven. These 2 cities are the result of 2 kinds of love; the love of self and the love of God. It begins with a negative and apologetic part that attacks paganism and its claims against the Faith. The next section is positive and describes Augustine's philosophy of history. He describes the origin, progress and terminus of both cities. When I say “city” think society, for that is what Augustine meant.Such a description as this, and most others may make it appear Augustine posits the 2 cities as ever distinct. That's not the case; rather, they are, at least as they are manifest in the world, always confused and mixed; yet ever at odds.In earlier works, Augustine laid out a pattern for history as progressing from . . .Before the Law,Under Law,Under Grace,& In Peace. These corresponded to the individual believer's spiritual path as well. Augustine also charted 7 periods of history based on the Creation-week. Five of them fell under the Old Testament, one in the new, and the 7th was the Millennium, which in this earlier work he described as coming after Jesus' Return.But in The City of God, Augustine's idea of history was Amillennial. He cast the 1000 years of Rev 20 as symbolic either of the Church age or the ultimate summation of history. THAT view replaced the prior, literal millennial eschatology that had been the position of the Church to that time. The Amillennial position became the dominant view in Western Christianity thru the Middle Ages and beyond.The City of God is so noble in its treatment of theology and philosophy it's endured as a classic statement of Christians' views on a wide range of topics. Augustine treats with such subjects as rape, abortion, and suicide.Many historians consider Augustine the most important and influential Christian thinker from the Apostle Paul to the Reformers Luther and Calvin who both drew heavily from his work.When he became Bishop at Hippo, the Donatists still thrived in North Africa, in some places forming the majority. Augustine supported the Roman position against them.By way of review, the Donatists argued for a pure church, one led by bishops who'd not caved to persecution, recanted their faith, or surrendered Scriptures to be burned, then, when persecution passed, were allowed to return to their post. Rome said such lapsed bishops and priests could be restored. The Donatists said they could NOT and that any service they performed was invalid. The Donatists were deeply upset that the Bishop at Rome welcomed these lapsed priests back into their positions as leaders.Augustine argued against the Donatists, saying that according to Jesus' parable of the wheat and the tares, the Church was a mixed multitude; holding both the lost and saved.Now: I have to admit I'm at a loss to see how that justified allowing apostates to regain leadership positions in the church.Let's cast that in light of a far sometimes problem today. Should a pastor who commits adultery, and is caught in it, not from which he repents before being caught; should he be allowed back into his role as a pastor just because he breaks up with his mistress?For Augustine, the issue wasn't so much that these lapsed priests and bishops were allowed back into their roles; it was the question of whether or not their religious service held any efficacy for those they were served by; things like Communion and baptism.Augustine differed with the Donatists on the validity of these baptisms and communion served by lapsed priests. Donatists claimed an apostate had lost authority to administer these rites. Augustine said the moral and spiritual standing of a priest wasn't important, only that he be aware he bestowed God's grace on others by baptizing and serving communion.While no doubt many of us would agree that it isn't the moral excellence of the officiating minister that determines the value of communion and baptism, what surely some of our listeners will find difficult is the idea that a special grace is communicated BY a priest, through these rituals.You see, this brings us right up to a much later controversy that will surface during the Reformation. Do the sacraments convey grace or are they meant to be memorials that point to a historical event we renew our faith by? Notice I did NOT say, they are MERELY memorials, for that goes too far and misrepresents the position of the radical Reformers, But that is a subject for a much later episode.Augustine's argument at this point laid the foundation for the Roman Catholic Church's doctrine that an ordained priest becomes the channel of grace to church members. Next stop on that train is Sacramentalism and Sacerdotalism.Augustine's support of the Roman church and Bishop in the Donatist controversy included the use of force to suppress rivals and coerce them to accept church policy. In another example of his misuse of Scripture, he quoted Luke 14:23, wherein the parable of the banquet the host said: “Compel them to come in.” Augustine used this to justify forcing opponents to comply. This again seems an odd application of a passage that's self-explanatory. For the servants of the host didn't go out into streets and beat people; driving them with whips into the banquet.Now: I recognize the historic weight and significance assigned to Augustine of Hippo. He was a towering intellect who made a major contribution to Christian theology. There's no denying that. But there's much in his work that seems to some, and I am one, that is inconsistent, even contradictory. For instance, a moment ago I mentioned Augustine developed the hermeneutical principle of the Analogy of Faith, a rule he shatters by justifying the use of force to compel adherence to church policy by using Luke 14:23.Following his refutation of Donatism, Augustine turned his impressive intellectual attention to the teaching of a British monk named Pelagius. Pelagianism was a Christianized form of Greek stoicism. Pelagius said humans aren't sinners by nature; that they're free moral agents who become sinners by sinning and that it was possible to live without sin apart from the empowering of the Holy Spirit. Pelagius believed Jesus's death atoned for sins but that humans possessed the power in themselves to live holy lives. Augustine's own experience with sin proved Pelagius wrong and he argued forcefully against his ideas. Augustine said the entire human race was in Adam so that when he fell, all fell with him and sin passed to everyone. Sinners, Augustine argued, are not only saved by God's grace, but they're also kept by it and can only live God-honoring lives through the power of the Holy Spirit. He taught that God chooses only some to be saved and bestows this saving grace through the church by baptism and communion.This is another example of Augustine's confusing theology. He said only those who joined the visible church receive grace, then turned around and said salvation is a private matter between God and the individual. It was the former idea that laid the Roman Church's claim to being the sole agent of bestowing grace, and the later teaching that formed the Protestant Reformation's view of salvation. One has to wonder what Augustine thought the unmerited favor of grace was if joining a church, being baptized and taking communion acquired it.He helped develop the doctrine of pur­gatory and so emphasized the value of baptism and communion as means of bestowing grace that the false doctrines of baptismal regeneration and sacramentalism were logical outcomes of his views.As Augustine neared his final days, the Vandals who'd sacked Rome, crossed the Straits of Gibraltar and swept East to lay siege to Hippo. Two months into the siege Augustine died & a year later when the city finally fell, the Vandals entered to find everyone either dying or dead from hunger. Though they destroyed most of the city, out of respect for the renowned Augustine, they left his church intact.

In this, the 70th Episode of CS , we take a look at Sacramentalism; a mindset that dominated the religious landscape of late Medieval Christianity.The question that consumed Europeans of the Middle Ages was, “How can I be saved? What must I believe and do that will preserve my soul from the torments of hell?”Rome answered that with what's called Sacramentalism.Now, let me be clear; the basic answer was, “Trust in the Lord Jesus Christ.” But the Church went on to define what that trust looked like with a set of rules and required practices. Yes, people are saved by grace through faith, but that grace is received by special acts only authorized clergy may conduct. These acts were called “sacraments” from the word “sacred” meaning holy. But there was a specific flavor to the word sacrament that carried the idea of mystery. Precisely HOW the sacraments communicated grace was unknown, while that they did was a certainty. So while salvation was by grace, one had to go to the Church to get that grace. The sacraments were channels of grace and necessary food of the soul. They accompanied human life from the cradle to the grave. An infant was ushered into the world by the sacrament of Baptism while the dying were sent on their way out by the sacrament of Extreme Unction.While all the sacraments were important, the most essential were Baptism and the Eucharist.Baptism was thought to open the door to the Kingdom of Heaven by removing the stain of original sin. But that door to glory was only opened. The baptized needed to follow up their baptism as an infant with later sacraments like Confirmation, Marriage and others. So important was baptism, in an emergency, when an infant appeared to be in distress and a bishop wasn't close enough to perform the rite, the Church allowed the nearest available pious person to baptize.The Lord's Table, Communion, or as it's referred to by some churches, the Eucharist, was the sacrament of grace by which people nourished and nurtured their spirits and progressed in sanctification.Besides these, other rites were called sacraments, but until the time of the Scholastics, there was little agreement as to the proper number. Before the Scholastics, the number of sacraments varied from four to twelve.Bernard of Clairvaux listed ten and including foot-washing and the ordaining or as it was called, “investiture” of bishops and abbots. Abelard named only five. A mystic theologian named Hugo of St. Victor also gave five but went on to suggested thirty possible means by which the Church dispensed special grace. Hugo divided the sacraments into three classes,—First were the sacraments necessary for salvation; Baptism and the Eucharist.Second were those which sanctified the worshipper and made spiritual progress possible. This includes holy water and the use of ashes on Ash Wednesday.A third class prepared the way for the other sacraments.Though Thomas Aquinas listed seven sacraments, he recognized some of the lesser rites as quasi-sacramental in character.The uncertainty concerning the number of the sacraments was a heritage from the Church Fathers. Augustine defined any sacred rite as a sacrament. In 1179, the Third Lateran Council used the term in a wide sense to include the investiture of bishops and burial. The Catholic Church today makes a distinction between certain sacred rites, called sacramentalia, and the seven sacraments. Aquinas gave as the reason for the proper number to be seven—saying that three is the number of Deity, four of creation, and seven represents union of God and man. A rather interesting “reason” for the supreme Scholastic to make since it sounds far more like the work of one of the Mystics.Following the inquisitive nature of the Scholastics however, ingenious and elaborate attempts were made to correlate the seven sacraments to all the areas of mankind's spiritual need. They were understood as undoing the Fall and its effects.Seven corresponds to the seven classic virtues. Bonaventura allegorized the sacraments to a military career. He said the sacraments furnish grace for the spiritual struggle and strengthened the warrior on the various stages of his/her conflict. Baptism equips him on entering the conflict, confirmation encourages him in its progress, extreme unction helps him at the finish, the Eucharist and penance renew his strength, ordination introduces new recruits into the ranks, and marriage prepares men to be recruits. Augustine compared the sacraments to the badges and rank conferred upon a soldier, a comparison Thomas Aquinas adopted from him.By the authority of the well-regarded Peter the Lombard and Thomas Aquinas, seven was chosen as the sacred number. The seven sacraments are Baptism, Confirmation, Penance which includes confession and absolution, Eucharist, Marriage, Ordination, and Extreme Unction; sometimes called Last Rites.Confirmation was closely connected with baptism as a kind of supplement. It was a way for someone who'd been baptized as an infant to personally appropriate the faith of his/her parents by endorsing baptism as their own choice. They “confirmed” their faith in God and His Church. In the Greek Church, Confirmation can be performed by any priest, but in the Latin church, only by a bishop.Penance was deemed necessary for sins committed after Baptism and Confirmation. The penitent confessed his/her sins to a priest, who then prescribed certain acts that were understood to mark genuine repentance, such as praying the rosary or performing some compensatory act that rectified the error. Either upon completion of the penance, or in anticipation of its completion, the priest would announce the confessor absolved of the confessed sins. Being thus morally and spiritual clean the penitent was qualified to partake of the Eucharist.Ordination is the sacrament by which priests are authorized to their office.Marriage lies at the basis of the family and society in Church and State, and the rite of marriage was jealously guarded by the Church against any and all forces that would weaken it. The Church sanctioned marriage and it was to the Church one had to appeal to have a marriage annulled.In the Middle Ages, ordination and marriage were mutually exclusive. Since priests were to be celibate, they were ordained, and since lay people weren't ordained, they were provided the sacrament of marriage. The idea back of both was the sense of divine call and fitting to the role each was to play in the plan of God.Extreme unction was first mentioned as a sacrament in the Synod of Pavia in 850. Originally it was a special prayer for someone gravely ill. It was meant to replace the use of amulets and incantations and could be applied by both laymen and priests. Later, priests alone were permitted to offer it and it was only given to those about to die.The Scholastics taught that the effectiveness of the sacraments were ex opere operato, meaning that their virtue as channels of special grace were inherent in them and independent of the moral character of the priest or recipient. The only requirement was that they be performed in the proper manner with right intent.If this sounds familiar, you may remember the Donatist controversy that so incensed Augustine. The Donatists of North Africa insisted that Baptism and Communion, the only sacraments or ordinances they recognized, were invalid if performed by a derelict priest or unqualified bishop. Augustine upheld the idea that the sacraments carried inherent virtue. His ideas shaped the theological base of Sacramentalism.Thomas Aquinas said the sacrament imparts its virtue without the operation of faith on the part of the recipient. Protestant scholars have often claimed the Scholastics ascribed a magical virtue to the sacraments that was unaffected by the attitude of the recipient. But that's not really their view. Aquinas said it was the activity of God that made the sacrament efficacious, not the rite as divorced from Him. The Scholastics maintained Christ gave the Sacraments to the Church, to give to the people as a way to convey saving and sanctifying grace. Only the duly ordained church hierarchy of Pope, Cardinals, bishops and priests, possess the power to administer the sacraments. Under Sacramentalism, salvation is by Christ alone, but through the mediation of the Church.This is why and how the Medieval Church was able to exert such tight control over the lives of the people of Europe. They were the spiritual gatekeepers of heaven, declaring who was in and who was out.To the mediaeval mind, the sacraments were essential food of the religious life, and, in building up the sacramental system, the mediaeval theologian thought he was strengthening the Church. In the authority to administer them lay the power of the priesthood to open and shut the kingdom of heaven.Duns Scotus, whose opinions were set aside by the Church for those of Thomas Aquinas, insisted that God can confer grace apart from the sacraments, and their efficacy is dependent on the will of the recipient. Scotus said the sacraments acted indirectly. They weren't supernatural vehicles of saving or sanctifying grace. They were symbols used to affect a change of heart and mind in someone so an opening could be made for God's grace.The relation the priest sustains to the sacraments is a vital one, and except in extraordinary cases his administration of the rites is essential. As already said, their effectiveness doesn't depend upon the priest's personal character; it's only important that he perform them according to proper procedure. An immoral priest can confer sacramental grace. To use the mediaeval illustration, pure water may be conveyed through a lead pipe as well as thru a silver. The priest acts in the name of the Church, and in uttering the sacramental formula gives voice to the Christ-ordained authority of the Church. That's enough for bestowing a perfect sacrament.Bonaventura said that in the event of an emergency, when a sacrament was necessary but a priest wasn't available, the ritual could be performed by laymen outside the Church, IF the recipient then re-enacted the rite within the Church as soon as possible.Three of the sacraments; baptism, confirmation, and ordination, were thought to confer an indelible mark on the soul. Once baptized, always baptized. Once confirmed, forever confirmed. Once ordained, permanently ordained. However, in extreme cases, the state these marks ushered one into could be forfeited by becoming an apostate and being excommunicated.While Sacramentalism dominated the theology and practice of the Medieval Church, the Reformers set about to dismantle it. They claimed it was based on a faulty interpretation of Scripture. Martin Luther called Sacramentalism the Church's Babylonish captivity, in which the rights and liberty of believers were fettered by the traditions of men.In our next episode we'll take a look at another theological strain that operated at this time – The Medieval Mystics.As we end, I want to once more thank those who've donated to CS to help defray the cost of maintaining the site and server. Every bit helps.

With two introductory episodes on the Creeds under our belt, sash, or whatever else you use to hold up your pants, let's move now to the Council & Creed of Nicaea.What's referred to as the Nicene Creed is the product of not one, but two councils held about 60 yrs apart. The first was held in the city of Nicaea in 325, the other in Constantinople in 381. The 2 cities are about 140 kms or 86 mls apart. The Nicene Creed may be the most famous in Church history because it addressed the issue of the Trinity; that is, how Christians worship one God Who reveals Himself in three-persons; Father, Son, And Holy Spirit. The Nicene Creed was the first to obtain the imprimatur of authority over all churches.It happened thus . . .As we covered in Season 1, about the year 318, an elder in the church of Alexandria named Arius, began teaching as fact something earlier Christians had vehemently rejected; that Jesus wasn't God. A clever & persuasive speaker, Arius said Jesus was a kind of special agent from God, but that the Father alone was fully God. Arius pointed to the limitations of Jesus' humanity as proofs He wasn't God, for according to his logic, humanity and deity simply cannot co-exist.Arius laid claim to the theology of Origen in the previous century as a basis for his views. But in a recent episode, w e saw that Origen did go off into much wide ranging speculation in his work. So pinning a doctrine as important as the identity of Christ Origen is problematic.Alexander, Arius's own bishop, that is the lead pastor of the church there in Alexandria, disagreed with his elder's teaching. And he did so with devastating logic. Alexander went ahead and used Origen's own writings to prove that even by that standard, Arius' conclusions about Jesus' nature weren't supported by Origen. Origen had said that the title “Father” is an eternal attribute of God. Since it's not possible to be a father without having a parental relationship, the fact God is eternally a father means He eternally has a son.  Then Alexander lowered the boom & pointed out that God is perfect. Perfection means the inability to change. Because if you're already perfect, any change would have to be away from perfection. So how could God change from not being a father to being a father? Arius' attempt to exalt the Father in fact denigrated him.Those old dudes were smart!Despite Alexander's annihilation of Arius' position, Arius continued to propagate his error. He was able to because his explanations of his ideas were simple and appealing while the logic of his opponents like Pastor Alex were opaque and heavy; less appealing to the common man.But Arius' arguments ended up not so much centered on Origen as it was a debate about Scripture. At places, Jesus did seem to say He was subordinate to the Father. Yet other passages made it clear Jesus claimed to be both divine and equal with the Father. The challenge these early church leaders faced was how to maintain that Christians are dedicated monotheists, that is, worshippers of one God, while at the same time saying the worship both God the Father & God the Son? That wasn't just a problem they had 2000 yrs ago, people ask it today. For reasons that we chart in Season 1 when we covered this, Arius' ideas spread rapidly and ended up co-opting a large number of church members, and a few church leaders. But as Arius' popularity rose, so too did the opposition against him. The refutation of his teaching became more sophisticated & effective. The controversy grew and threated to tear the church apart.Well, that just wasn't going to do for the new Emperor Constantine, a convert to the new and emerging Faith. The previous administration of the Roman Empire had sought to brutally eradicate the Church once and for all, but had failed miserably. In a question historians will debate forever, when Constantine became emperor, he moved to lift the official ban on Christianity. Was he a genuine convert, or was he merely a savvy political operator who read the direction the way the cultural winds were blowing and decided to make common cause with the Christians? Historians line up on both sides of that; each with supporting evidence. Whatever Constantine's personal motivations and beliefs, he was a brilliant leader who recognized the force for unity a healthy church could be. So he used his influence as Emperor to call for a meeting of all church leaders to definitively deal with the challenge presented by Arius. He convened what's called the first ecumenical, that is, fully representative, universally recognized council of the Christian church.Modern critics have a penchant for exaggerating Constantine's role in the council. They make it seem as though the Emperor acted as the main theologian & religious authority whose influence shaped the Christian Faith for centuries to come. Contrary to the sniping of scoffers, Constantine did not wave his scepter and declare Jesus God by royal fiat. He did not decide which books were in and out of the Bible.During the early 320's the Church in Spain was being troubled by the Arian Controversy. In a special conference of church leaders at Eastertime, they decided something needed to be done and charged one of their leaders, the bishop of Cordoba, to request that the Emperor convene a wider council.So in May of 325, Constantine sent out an invitation to all 1800 pastors of the Church; a thousand in the East & 800 in the West, to attend the council at Nicaea. Numbers vary but come in at around 300 who made it. The Council began on May 20th & ended on August 25th.Bishop Alexander from Alexandria along with one of his elders, Athanasius, led the Anti-Arian party at Nicaea. The Arians laid out their case, which sounded solid, until it was reviewed by the other side, which simply annihilated their position with logic and Scripture. Those church leaders who'd leaned toward Arianism realized it's numerous errors and swiftly jumped ship. When the vote was taken, only Arius and 2 bishops voted to reject Arianism. Constantine then sent the 3 into exile. Within a short time, both the other bishops were shown the fallacies of Arius' teaching and wrote letters recanting their position, asking to be reinstated as members in good standing in the Church.It behooves us to read the Nicene Creed. BTW, this is the final form of the creed as it was later finessed. I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible. And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made. Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the living and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end. And I believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets. And I believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen. The Nicene Creed reflects the Council's concern to address Arianism when it says the “Lord Jesus Christ” is “Son of God, … begotten of the Father,” & His “only-begotten.” These are all assertions drawn directly from Scripture itself. Jesus, the Creed declares is “God from God.” The Creed even includes an analogy at this point when it says Jesus is Light of Light.” How can you separate light from light?  This was a classic example in early Christian writing, which links God to the Sun & its rays. The sun can no more be separated from its rays than the Father can be separated from the Son, S-O-N. The Creed repeats that Jesus is “very God of very God.” He's neither made nor created, nor is He a product of the true God. Jesus IS the true God.Athanasius reports that up to this point in the development of the Creed, the Arians were still on board. He describes them as snickering to one another that there wasn't anything in the Creed yet that was a deal buster. It's like they had a trump card they knew they could play and hadn't heard anything that would take it from them. Since the Anti-Arians knew the Arians held to a heretical tenet, they realized more needed to be stated to draw the line, even if it wasn't directly tied to Scripture. Something was needed that would settle once and for all that the deity of Father & Son are the same. They settled on the phrase that Jesus is eternally “of one substance with the Father.” That did it. That broke the Arian claim on orthodoxy. They couldn't; hang with that and were forced to admit they deviated from standard Christian belief. The Council affirmed that the Father is not “more God” than the Son.The Council was mainly focused on parsing the language regarding the nature of Jesus, so the original creedal statement said little about the Holy Spirit. It was then upgraded by the Council of Constantinople 60 yrs later to bring in an emphasis on the deity of the Holy Spirit as well.The Nicene Creed is Trinitarian. But it doesn't elaborate on a clearly defined Trinitarian formula. That will be dealt with by later councils.Because The Nicene Creed is a part of the liturgy of many churches today, it's familiar to Christians across the globe. It captures the essence of the Gospel in a short, but packed summary. It describes a triune God, who comes to an alienated humanity in the person of Jesus, the God-man Whose atoning work restored mankind to the destiny God originally planned.In contrast to earlier creeds, the Nicene Creed delineated a doctrinal minimum of Christian belief. Church leaders had learned by unfortunate experience there were areas in the earlier “rule of faith” that left too much open to interpretative creativity that took people into aberrant realms. Arius was just one case in point. The fact that both Jesus and the Holy Spirit are as much God as the Father is a nonnegotiable part of Christianity because it's firmly rooted in the revelation of Scripture. Church leaders came to the solid conviction that God WANTS His people to know Him as one God, eternally manifest in 3 persons. As subsequent history proved, the wording of the Nicene Creed may have solved one problem, but it stirred up others later councils would address. After Nicaea, Christians may not have had to a precisely detailed Trinitarian theology to be considered saved, but they atr least needed to have the outline described by the Creed in place.Once Jesus' and the Spirit's deity were affirmed the question was, “What then is the relationship of the persons of the Godhead? And if Jesus is both God & man, how are we to understand Him in terms of His nature? Is there a percentage of God to man; a ratio? Is He 50-50, 100-100, 75-25? Or what?.It's always dicey playing “what if” with history, but then, some of my favorite novels are of the alternate history genre. If Arianism had been allowed to hijack Christianity, and Jesus ended up being regarded as some kind of lesser deity, there's a good chance The Faith would have ended up being gobbled up by the polytheistic paganism of the Empire. The work of Christ in accomplishing atonement would have been rendered inert. No One less than God the Son, Who was also fully human, could sufficiently mediate a reconciliation between God and man & redeem a fallen creation. As Athanasius later wrote, only the Creator could enter & fix a busted creation, restoring it to its original purpose. He's the one who used a word around which later controversy would swirl, when he said that the Father & Son are of one substance = the word he used in Greek was homoousios.Arianism wasn't the only thing the  Council addressed. They also handled the question of the timing of celebrating the Resurrection of Christ. They swiftly dealt with the challenge presented by an Egyptian bishop named Meletius. Meletius was pastor of the church in Lycopolis. He'd fomented a schism over the issue of how to handle lapsed Christians. I'll leave it to you to listen to the episode we did on this is Season one called The Lapsed Dance. Meletius was of the Donatist mode; He refused to serve communion to repentant Christians who'd caved under the threat of earlier persecution, though the Church at large had decided to welcome them back into fellowship.At Nicaea, Meletius was condemned and all clergy he'd ordained were instructed to secure ordination from orthodox bishops.Finally, several matters regarding how to conduct church administration were discussed and defined in 20 rulings called canons. These dealt with such issue as . . .What process the repentant-lapsed had to go through to demonstrate the sincerity of their repentance.How to restore repentant heretics and schismatics and whether or not they should or could be returned to a role in leadership.The role of deacons was discussed.As well as basic liturgical practices, like whether people ought to standing or kneel when praying.The organizational structure of the Church was discussed.And behavioral standards for clergy were settled.And à That's IT!There was no discussion about what books belong in the Bible.Constantin's role in the Council was minimal. Beside using his authority as Emperor to summon it, he had little influence in it's decisions. He paid the attendees travel expenses and provided a place for them to meet. He opened the Council with an exhortation that they strive for unanimity by addressing the issues of debate from the Scriptures.Once the Council settled the theological issues raised by Arius, Constantine used his civil authority to enforce the heretics exile.So all the hullabaloo about the Emperor's political manipulation of the Council to secure some theology that was utterly foreign to primitive Christianity is a pile of steaming compost.

This week's episode is titled, “Contra Munda”In our last episode we noted how the Emperor Constantine hoped Christianity would be a unifying influence in the far-flung & troubled Roman Empire. But as soon as he & his co-emperor Licinius passed the Edict of Milan granting religious tolerance to all the Empire's subject, the doctrinal & theological debates that had been in place for years began to surface.When the Church was being hammered by persecution prior to Constantine, Christians had a more imminent threat to deal with. But now that persecution was lifted, secondary issues moved to the foreground.As we saw at the conclusion of the last episode, the Donatists of North Africa asked the Emperor to mediate their dispute with their non-Donatist adversaries. At the Council at Arles, the Donatists lost the debate over whether or not lapsed church leaders could be reinstalled. When they refused to capitulate, Constantine sent troops to Carthage, the lead church in N Africa, to enforce his will. For the first time, the power of the State was used to enforce Church policy on other Christians.An interesting aside from the Council of Arles was the presence of 3 bishops from Britain. This gives us an idea how far the Gospel had penetrated by the beginning of the 4th C.But the Donatist Controversy wasn't the only or near the largest debate that would engulf the Church at that time. The biggest doctrinal challenge facing the Church was how to understand the person of Jesus Christ. A pastor of a church near Alexandria, Egypt named Arius became the champion for a position which said Jesus was human but not God.As we embark on this chapter in Church History, let me begin by saying it was in these early years, as church leaders wrestled with the identity of Christ and His relation to man & God, that the theological groundwork was laid for what we hold today as Orthodoxy. It took many years & several Councils before the Church Fathers worked out the right wording that captures the essence of what we now call orthodox doctrine. Getting there was no easy trip. The journey was fraught with great trouble, distress, and at times, bloodshed. It began with a debate over the nature of Christ; was He God, man, or both? If both, how are we to understand Him; did He have 2 natures or 1 hybrid nature that merged the 2? And if Jesus is God, then how do we describe God as one, yet being both Father & Son? Oh – and don't forget the Holy Spirit? How are we going to describe all this without saying something about God that's untrue?I warn you that as we carry all this into the 5th & 6th Cs, especially the discussions over how to understand the nature of Christ, we're going to see some church leaders acting in a decidedly non-Christian manner. One of the Church Councils called to settle this matter ended up in a bloody riot! So hang on because we have some fun stuff ahead.For now, realize what we're looking at in this era of our review is a big deal and will frame the course of Church life over the next nearly 300 years.How do I explain the debate as it emerged in the challenge Arius presented?Well, because of their pagan background, many people didn't believe God experienced emotions as humans experience them. Yet it's clear from the Gospels Jesus did experience such emotions. Therefore, logic seemed to dictate Jesus could not have been divine, because if He was, then God experienced human emotions. Arius' solution was that Jesus was God's first & greatest creation. Denying that Jesus was eternal, he said, “Once, the Son did not exist.” Arius wanted to get his ideas into the public mind quickly so he set his doctrine to catchy little tunes & soon, many were singing his songs.Arius' position was popular among the common people who found the Christian doctrines of the Incarnation & the Trinity difficult. How could there be 1 God eternally manifest as 3 persons? Arius' description of Jesus as a kind of divine hero beneath the 1 God fit more easily into their pagan background so they adopted his theology. While Arius' teaching spread rapidly among his pagan neighbors, those with a keener awareness of the Bible opposed his aberrant views. They composed their own chorus that today is known as the Gloria Patri – “Glory be to the Father, and to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost; As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end.”Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria, so Arius' spiritual overseer, led the opposition to Arius and called together a group of Church leaders in 320. They reviewed Arius' theology and declared it heretical.  When Arius refused to back down, they excommunicated him. Arius then went to the Empire's Eastern capital at Nicomedia & asked for the support of his friend, the bishop of the church there, a guy named Eusebius.  Not the church historian Eusebius who lived at the same time.The 2 most influential churches of the East were set in opposition to each other, Nicomedia, the political headquarters & Alexandria, the intellectual center. Because Arius had Eusebius' backing he felt emboldened to return to Alexandria. When he did, there was rioting in the streets. But then, if you know anything about ancient Alexandria, rioting was a favored past-time. They rioted like we go to a ball game; it was public sport.As the Arian Controversy spread, Emperor Constantine realized if he didn't take action, instead of the Church providing much needed unity for the Empire, it would become one of the major sources of turmoil & unrest. In 325 he called Church leaders far & wide to attend a special council at the city of Nicea in modern Turkey, at his expense. Some 300 bishops managed to make it, enough to make the Council of Nicea a remarkable representation of the whole church.  Many of those who attended bore the scars & marks of the Diocletian persecution. When they met, they found a throne set for the Emperor in the midst of the hall. He sat arrayed in richly jeweled robes befitting more an Eastern monarch than an Emperor of Rome.Constantine assumed the Arian Controversy was merely a sematic debate; a petty brueha over words & that a meeting of the minds of Christians leaders was all that was needed to settle the dispute. Yeah, let's just get every together in one place and talk it out man to man, face to face. Surely they'll reach a compromise, right?  à So, he commenced the council with a little pep talk about the importance of their task, then turned it over to them. The depth of his naivete was quickly revealed.The account of the finding of the Council reveals that while the doctrinal issue raised by Arius was quickly resolved, it was how Arius was handled by Bishop Alexander that became the main point of debate.Arianism was declared heretical. The Council affirmed both the deity & humanity of Jesus as the Son of God. Constantine urged his friend, Bishop Eusebius of Caesarea, the famous historian, to put forward his creed, his statement of faith as something the entire council could endorse as their united statement. But the Council didn't find Eusebius sufficiently clear on his belief in the deity of Jesus and went instead with a creed offered by the Bishop of the Spanish city of Cordova, a man named Hosius, another favorite of the Emperor's. Still, the Council dithered, & Constantine, with an empire to run, grew impatient & pressed the bishops to endorse what today we know as the Nicean Creed, the accepted standard of Roman & Eastern Churches.I quote the Nicean Creed in full …We believe in one God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds, God of God, Light of Light, …Then comes the lines the Council wrote to specifically deal with the Arian error –True God of True God, begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father (remember that phrase; it'll be important later) by whom all things were made; who for us men, and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and was made man, and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate. He suffered and was buried, and the third day he rose again according to the Scriptures, and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father. And he shall come again with glory to judge both the living and the dead, whose kingdom shall have no end.And we believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord and Giver of Life, who proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified, who spoke by the prophets. And we believe in only one holy, universal and apostolic Church. We acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins. And we look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.Only 2 of the 300 bishops present refused to sign the Creed. Along with Arius, they were exiled. Constantine assumed the Arian Controversy had been dealt with, so the Church would settle down and help him unite the realm. To mark the dawn of a new & glorious day of Church & State cooperation, Constantine held a huge banquet before the bishops headed home.What a sight, these men bearing the scars of the previous emperor's persecution, now the emperor's celebrated guests, eating at his sumptuous table, reclining on his own couch! Guarded by his bodyguard. One man, missing an eye put out by Diocletian, was given special honor; Constantine even kissed the eyeless cheek!But in the years that followed, some of those bishops were banished from their posts when they took umbrage at this or that imperial decision. A hierarchy grew up around Constantine, self-appointed advisors to the Emperor on the state of the Church. If they didn't like a certain fellow, they accused him of some offense, and the newly anointed enemy was exiled with his replacement being someone more amenable to the accuser. And just as often as a bishop ran afoul of Imperial favor & was banished, just that quick he could be called back when Constantine replaced one set of advisors with another. The role of Church leader became a kind of musical chairs. In today, out tomorrow, back the day after, but keep your bags packed at all times.An example of this is the career of Athanasius.Athanasius was a young advisor to Bishop Alexander of Alexandria who led the opposition to Arius. Athanasius was a short & dark-skinned deacon his enemies referred to as the Black Dwarf.  As a young man, he spent hours with his heroes, the monks in the wilderness outside Alexandria. The word monk means “alone” & they took their name from the isolation they pursued. Athanasius took it on himself to make sure they had food & supplies as they devoted themselves to God by literally fleeing the world.Athanasius had a keen mind & lived a highly-disciplined life. Even at a young age his brilliance was respected and when Alexander made the trip to Nicaea for the famous Council, he took Athanasius with him. Not long after returning from Nicaea, Alexander fell ill & asked Athanasius to replace him. But Athanasius wanted to serve, not lead. So he fled to his desert friends, the monks. They convinced him of his calling to lead the Church & he returned to Alexandrian as Bishop. He was 33.Constantine was loath to undo the findings of the Council of Nicaea, but he also knew the Arian position was still popular among many f the common folk. He thought it best that Arius be allowed to return to Alexandria as a member of the Church. Thinking that now that Alexander, the man who'd led the opposition was out of the way, Athanasius would knuckle under to Imperial authority and consent to Arius' return. He couldn't have been more wrong.Athanasius locked horns with the Emperor & refused to budge, even when Constantine threatened to banish him.  They battled for 5 yrs when finally the Emperor had enough & found Athanasius guilty of treason. In the 40 yrs Athanasius was bishop, he was banished & recalled 5 times as the winds of fortune & imperial favor shifted in the palace. At one point, he was so thoroughly out of political good will every one of his supporters deserted him.  It was during this period he wrote & spoke of his devotion & unwavering loyalty to Jesus as the King above all earthly kings, saying that nothing could weaken his resolve to love & serve God, even if it meant, “Athanasius contra munda” = Athanasius against the world.Remember just a moment ago when reading the Nicaean Creed, I mentioned to note the phrase that Jesus was of one substance with the Father. Not long after the Nicaean Council, a group of Church leaders decided to soften the Nicaean position & bring it a little toward the Arian view. They said Jesus wasn't the SAME substance as the Father but was a SIMILAR substance. In Greek, it's the difference of one letter' between homo-ousios – same substance & the new terminology they advocated – homoi-ousios – similar substance.As we'd expect, Athanasius led the classic Nicean interpretation of homo-ousios against the Quasi-Arians and their statement of homoi-ousios. While this may seem an insignificant difference to many of us, it proved to be of monumental importance. If the door was opened in even a small way to begin thinking of Jesus as somehow different in essence from the Father, it wouldn't be long before His deity would be jettisoned entirely. Then we wouldn't be following the Jesus of the Bible; the real Jesus of history. Athanasius' lonely & steadfast determination to hold fast to what the Bible said about God, rather than go along with the politically-minded doctrine-massagers of his day is one of the most important & heroic moments, not just in Church history, but in all history. This was one of those moments when it seems truth hung by a thread; a thread only as think as the letter “i”.We end this episode with this . . .One of Constantine's most important contributions to history was the relocation of his capital to Byzantium from the decayed husk of the once great but now worn-out & tired city of Rome. Byzantium was located at the geographical crossroads for the ancient world and it's a wonder no one had recognized its strategic brilliance before this.  It sits a the narrow neck of the Bosporus, linking E & W & controls the flow of maritime trade between the Black & Mediterranean Seas. Located not far from Diocletian's Eastern capital at Nicomedia it meant an easy relocation of the capital. Constantine decided to turn the hundreds year old village into a bright shining new center of civilization and made a good start on the project before his death in 337. Because it was the Eastern capital, it also became a major center & headquarters of the Church, which would eventually vie with Rome for bragging rights over which church ruled the Christian world.At Constantine's death it was as if a message was sent to the frontiers it was time for Rome's enemies to push her borders backwards.  In Central Asia, the Huns pressed westward on the Goths, who in turn pressed in on Rome's Eastern Frontier. Another group known as the Visigoths eventually made it all the way to Rome in 410 & sacked the city. Their leader was Alaric, who'd been influenced by Arianism.Over the next years, other Easterners made their way across Europe, bringing more ruin. Each successive wave was like another slap to the face of once great Rome which by that time was little more than a punch-drunk & washed up has-been. The Franks, Alans, Vandals & Ostrogoths all took a turn knocking the Romans about.The Vandals, who began their campaign of terror & pillage in the steppes of Asia, crossed the Rhine, plowed a deep furrow S into Spain, took ship to cross the Straits of Gibraltar & landed in N Africa where they heard fabulous wealth awaited. Furious that the riches they dreamed of weren't there, they went on a rampage of destruction that's bequeathed their name “Vandal” to later generations as meaning someone out to wreck wanton & pointless ruination.One of the cities they laid siege to in N Africa was Hippo, where a Bishop named Augustine served as pastor. Augustine became one of the most important theologians of church history. He died during the siege by the Vandals. When they finally conquered & destroyed the city, the Vandals so respected Augustine they took pains to preserve his church & the extensive library he'd accumulated.Augustine of Hippo is a towering influence in church history and one that we'll return to in a future episode.