The importance of church history, pt. 2
The continuation of last week's convo with Jarrett Vandiver, feat. Spongebob and other ancient sources of wisdom
Today, I’m excited to share the second half of last week’s conversation about church history with one of my good friends, Jarrett Vandiver. (PS: If you haven’t read last week’s article yet, catch up here.)
Jarrett had a lot more to share, so I’m going to get straight to it. Here’s part 2 of our conversation:
Q: In your opinion, what role does (or should) church history play for the modern church?
A: I would begin by offering three ways:
1. Christian history reminds us of God’s promises to preserve the church. In Matthew 16:13-20, Jesus responds to Peter’s confession of Jesus as “the Christ” by promising Peter that he would build the church and preserve it from every attack from the Devil. Commenting on this truth, 20th century Christian writer Hilaire Belloc would often say that the proof of Christ’s divinity is this: “That no other human institution led by such sinfulness and foolishness would have lasted for two weeks.”
When you learn about church history, you will find that the church has also been preserved even when people within the church are deeply sinful and have less than good intentions. In the two-thousand years of Christian history, the church has existed through periods of faithfulness and through periods of sinfulness. Jesus has preserved the church both when it was full of obedient missionaries and when it was full of corrupt leaders. Still, the corruption in the church for 2,000 years is a reminder that Christ will protect the church and the gospel despite human failure.
“No other human institution led by such sinfulness and foolishness would have lasted for two weeks.”
— Hilaire Belloc
2. The history of Christianity is full of examples of faith, hope, and love, which modern readers can learn from and imitate. While there has always been a great deal of sin within the church, this should not overshadow the fact that the church has produced some of the most influential and heroic figures in world history.
Early Christians were threatened with death by the Roman Empire to give up their faith in Jesus, but they stood firm and attracted thousands of converts to Christianity through their witness for Christ. They won not by fighting back, but by taking up their cross. As Tertullian quipped, “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church.”
In the fourth century, we meet Athanasius, who was sent into exile five times by the empire because he would not change his belief in Jesus’ divinity.
In the 14th century, we meet Julian of Norwich, an English nun whose writings powerfully reminded Christians of the love of God and God’s promise of healing even during the Black Plague in the 1300s.
In the 16th century, John Calvin was exiled from France and used his experience to minister to other exiles and refugees while writing some of the most influential theology in the Protestant Reformation.
In the 18th century, John Wesley had a radical experience with Jesus Christ and preached practical sermons to thousands of people while also organizing churchgoers into small groups.
In the 20th century, we meet Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who made the ultimate sacrifice when he refused to deny Jesus Christ in Nazi Germany. Christians can learn from all of these examples and more how to love God and neighbor more deeply.
3. Church history will help you read the Bible and will increase your humility about what you know. In the 19th century, the Baptist preacher Charles Spurgeon responded to those in his day who objected to learning about church history. These people claimed to have the Holy Spirit and that they had no need to learn from anyone else. They could simply read the Bible for themselves. Spurgeon replied: “It seems odd, that certain men who talk so much of what the Holy Spirit reveals to themselves, should think so little of what he has revealed to others.”
Spurgeon’s response reminds us that the Holy Spirit is not only an individual gift. The Spirit has, is, and will continue to inspire and indwell Christians in all ages of the church. This means that if we value how God is working today, we should also value and learn from how God has worked with our Christian family in the past. To do so, we need to grow in our humility as Christians and acknowledge that we do not have all the answers in our 21st century context. Our culture has many blind spots that can be corrected if we are willing to listen to the voices from our Christian family.
In Christian history, we learn that even our reading of the Bible is a family event. When we read Scripture today, we are not only interpreting the Bible on the basis of what people have said in the past (whether we know it or not), but we can also gain enormous insight in our from the voices of the past.
In Christian history, we learn that even our reading of the Bible is a family event.
Have you ever been a part of a Bible study and a person in your small group points out something about the Bible that you had never thought of before? Has a friend or your pastor ever shown you something about a verse that you never would have noticed if you had just read the passage by yourself? In many ways, learning the history of Christianity is like being a part of an enormous Bible study with your entire family in Christ. While Christians can know God through reading Scripture for themselves, it is also wise to ask for help.
Christians in the past are members of your family Bible study who are willing to give you thousands of insights on the Bible while also helping you learn what is most important in the Christian faith. This is because through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the Bible was written by a community and to a community: the church.
Q: Why does it matter what Augustine, Aquinas, or any of those other old guys said?
I learned on an old episode of Spongebob that “Old people rule!” As I have learned from the wisdom of more mature Christians in my own life and from those who came centuries before me, I realize that there must be some spiritual truth in Spongebob’s statement.
If you are like me, you grew up in a cultural context that prizes “freedom,” individuality, and self-expression. Since the Bible is clear to all, the only reasonable response is to interpret spiritual truths for yourself and live on your own terms. It isn’t very often that American Christians will change anything about their life based on what someone else told them Scripture says. Rather, most will simply find a new church when their individuality is challenged. This is why those awkward passages about “church discipline” don’t mean much to most of us anymore. It is in this way that we insist on not only a political libertarianism in our culture, but a spiritual one as well.
The voice that challenged my spiritual libertarianism was G.K. Chesterton. When I read his book Orthodoxy, I began to realize that if I really believed in any type of democracy at all, it actually demanded “tradition.” Chesterton writes, “It is obvious that tradition is only democracy extended through time. It is trusting to a consensus of common human voices rather than to some isolated or arbitrary record…Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors.”1
As I have studied church history, particularly Augustine and Aquinas (who are some of the best old guys you can read), I have come to more fully appreciate the Christian doctrine of the communion of the saints. God is the God of the living, and the city in which we vote is a heavenly one. Karl Barth wrote that “in order to serve the community of today, theology itself must be rooted in the community of yesterday.”
To be rooted in that ancient theology is not to merely parrot what those of old have said, but to learn for ourselves without merely thinking by ourselves. It is more like standing on the shoulders of giants, looking over their shoulders and appreciating their work as master craftsmen. When we learn to imitate the craft of holiness—Christlikeness in thought and deed—from the saints before us, we are better prepared to apply their craft to our particular situations today. Old guys rule.
Q: Anything else at all you think people need to know about church history?
Everyone should know that Christianity has and always will be the bane of our sinful world’s existence. It has always seemed strange, being mocked by its earliest critics as the superstition of “women and slaves.” But it is this commitment to the cross—the stumbling block to the world—that transforms the world for the good.
Study the craft of our Christian family and be willing to be different, even if it causes you to “lose” earthly battles. Influence the world by fighting like Christ, not like the political powers of our world. J.R.R. Tolkien says, “I am a Christian, so that I do not expect ‘history’ to be anything but a ‘long defeat’—though it contains some samples or glimpses of final victory.” The great saints of our tradition have always shown us that we win by taking up the cross of Jesus and allowing him to have the final victory.
I’d like to extend a special thanks to Jarrett for contributing enough information for not one, but two phenomenal Q&As.
Now, LMK:
Did this Q&A change the way you think about the history of the church at all? If so, how? I want to hear your thoughts!
And a couple recommendations:
In addition to Dr. Ryan Reeves’ church history videos, Jarrett recommended checking out Mark Noll’s book Turning Points: Decisive Moments in the History of Christianity.
The full excerpt, from Chesterton’s “The Ethics of Elfland,” is as follows: “I have never been able to understand where people got the idea that democracy was in some way opposed to tradition. It is obvious that tradition is only democracy extended through time. It is trusting to a consensus of common human voices rather than to some isolated or arbitrary record…Tradition means giving votes to the most obscure of all classes, our ancestors. It is the democracy of the dead. Tradition refuses to submit to the small arrogant oligarchy of those who merely happen to be walking about. All democrats object to men being disqualified by the accident of birth; tradition objects to their being disqualified by the accident of death. Democracy tells us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our groom; tradition asks us not to neglect a good man’s opinion, even if he is our father. I, at any rate, cannot separate the two ideas of democracy and tradition; it seems evident to me that they are the same idea. We will have the dead at our councils. The ancient Greeks voted by stones; these shall vote by tombstones.”