When Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses on the door of the Wittenburg church, he had no idea that his act would result in the greatest division the church has ever seen. He never intended to leave his church or start another one. He was simply attempting to open up a discussion on what he saw as discrepancies between what the Bible said about salvation and what the church practiced. He thought that once these theses were discussed, biblical truth would become plain and necessary changes would occur. The door of the church was the place where public notices were placed informing the townspeople of any events. So, in effect, he was only posting a notice of a hearing. In obedience to scripture, he attempted to engage other priests in a discussion and what resulted was a division of untold proportion.
Not long after, several men got together to discuss a practice not found in scripture but still practiced in both Catholic and Protestant churches: infant baptism. In a very real sense, the initial division wasn’t enough for these men….it wasn’t radical enough. But this time, nothing was posted publicly. One night, these 3 men simply baptized each other again….re-baptizers….Anabaptists.
As a result of these two responses to biblical truth, wave after wave of persecution descended upon untold thousands of believers. In fact, between the fall of the Roman Empire and the dawn of the 20th century, the major culprit of persecution was the established church. Why? To destroy heresy. To weed out heretical teachers. To eliminate false prophets. Today, it seems that the only thing we lack are their instruments of torture. We have all the zeal, determination and God-given mandate that the historical church had. While we don’t burn heretics at the stake like the Medieval Church, we roast brethren in the name of concern and sharing prayer requests. We don’t torture anyone on a rack until they recant like the Spanish Inquisitors did, but we torture people’s minds and hearts until those who are uncertain join us or quit their pursuit of anything different. Like the Pilgrims who branded Quakers thinking they were strange, we brand certain varieties of Christians because of their strange ways. If we’re honest, the church has a sordid history of its dealings with those who believed differently or questioned church practice…all in the name of weeding out heresy. Do we really have the audacity to believe we are different? The reason history repeats itself is because each generation believes themselves to be wiser than the previous one. Are we really any wiser? Will we ever learn from the church’s mistakes in the past?
It would be nice to have a modern-day Wittenburg door…a place to suggest a hearing to discuss openly the things that some see as discrepancies between Scripture and church practice. But, I imagine, it may not resolve things any better than in Luther’s day. It would be nice if some could pursue what they believe the Bible teaches without harassment, interference and criticism from others. But, I’m not certain that would happen any more than it did during Grebel’s day. We continue our assault against each other in the name of truth…and all the while Satan laughs and the world dismisses us.
Why can’t brethren in Christ meet together and discuss their differences? Why can’t we have mutual respect for each other? Must we agree? Must one necessarily be the heretic or false prophet and the other true to the Word? Why can’t one question the possibility of discrepancies between His word and our accepted practices? Must our walks all look similar? If they don’t, does it necessarily mean that only one is following Christ and the other is following a false prophet? If truth is our goal….if biblical integrity is our desire, then we would welcome discussion. Only if we are intent on being right or preserving our way of doing things is that discussion a threat.
I realize that differing from church tradition does not equal truth. We must never crucify biblical principles to question or preserve church practice. But, we must have the humility to consider that we may be wrong….that what we have practiced for so long may not be biblical. That was the mistake the historical church made. We must determine to not repeat their mistakes.
Martin Luther read a scripture that told him that salvation can be neither earned nor bought and realized that the church practiced the opposite. The established church attempted to shut him down. Conrad Grebel and others read nowhere in Scripture of the church’s practice of infant baptism, only of believer’s baptism. The church persecuted them. Today, many believers in western churches are reading in their Bibles of a church and personal life far different from what they see around them. They are reading of a church empowered by the Holy Spirit complete with manifestations of His Presence, gifts, signs and wonders. But, they see their own lives and churches devoid of that. And, they either openly question it or quietly pursue it. Will we shut them down or persecute them? Or will we learn from history? Will established church of today respond any differently than the established church of history?