The Nature of Two Apostolic Churches

Introduction

H. Richard Hiebuhr in The Social Sources of Denominationalism conducted an intriguing and completely insightful study on the sources that lead to denominationalism in Christianity. In this study, he concluded that Christian denominationalism is inherently evil and immoral. His findings can be summarized in the following statement found on page 6,

Denominationalism in the Christian church is such an unacknowledged hypocrisy. It is a compromise, made far too lightly, between Christianity and the world. Yet it often regards itself as a Christian achievement and glorifies its martyrs as bearers of the Cross. It represents the accommodation of Christianity to the caste-system of human society. It carries over into the organization of the Christian principle of brotherhood the prides and prejudices, the privilege and prestige, as well as the humiliations and abasements, the injustices and inequalities of that specious order of high and low wherein men find the satisfaction of their craving for vainglory. The division of the churches closely follows the division of men into the castes of national, race, and economic groups. It draws the color line in the church of God; it fosters the misunderstandings, the self exaltations, the hatreds of jingoistic nationalism by continuing in the body of Christ the spurious differences of provincial loyalties; it seats the rich and poor apart at the table of the Lord, where the fortunate may enjoy the bounty they have provided while the others feed upon the crusts their poverty affords.

While denominations give the impression that they are forwarding some spiritual cause, they are truly founded upon faulty premise that can never lead to unity, but rather furthers the division that exists outside Christian communities. Denominationalism which was designed to keep the world outside the church is simply another way of bringing the world further into the church. Furthermore, such divisions are antithetical to the gospel and the work of Christians.

This destructive work is what has led to tonight’s study. Tonight we will strive to look into the nature of the apostolic church, how it has evolved, and how the apostolic church serves as the best solution towards what Hiebuhr calls the ethical failure of the divided [denominated] church.

There are several forms of apostolic churches whose origins are not directly tied to the apostolic church of the first century. For this reason, I decipher between the existence of the biblical apostolic church and the traditional apostolic church. The traditional apostolic church is the church that has evolved from the biblical apostolic church into the modern apostolic expressions we currently have in today’s world. The biblical apostolic church is the church that began in the first century and is rarely seen in today’s world. This is mainly due to a critical mistake modern apostolic churches have made in their attempt to be the biblical apostolic church.

Second century followers of Jesus and the apostles sought to authenticate their authority and perspective of Christianity, which, they thought should be perpetuated throughout generations. Consequently, Due to the universal nature of the church, these apostolic churches take on different flavors and brands, which are all harmful to the existence of the biblical church as Christ desired her. Therefore, there’s the:

Armenian Apostolic Church for the oriental people

Apostolic Christian Church for the American and Anabaptist

Catholic Apostolic Church for those in Germany, England, and Scotland

Apostolic churches of Wale, Nigeria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, and even those of America, which have visual distinctions that are apparent and obvious

These churches, in their good intentions, plan to duplicate the church rather than replicate . However, there was only one first century church, and this is so because of the timing in which it existed. Rather than duplicating, the idea is to replicate within our own time by developing principles from their example.