Evangelical Protestants—or perhaps better defined as post-Protestants—may value the legacy of doctrines and traditions handed down by the Church Father who remained true to the Gospel of Christ and were responsible shepherds of their flocks. Flocks initially led by Peter, John, James, and Paul and later by their disciples Linus, Anacletus, Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Rufinus, and their spiritual descendants.
How should modern Christians respond to this legacy and its corruption? We may safely assume a principle: With authority comes responsibility. Spiritual leaders are certainly responsible for those who submit to their authority. If one has no authorities before God, whatever befalls will fall squarely upon the shoulders of the believer. Furthermore, the believer with no authorities misses the blessings associated with submission.
Protestants believe (or hope) in anointed self-authorization—every believer is a potential Peter, depending on the needs of the local congregation. We often carry this a step further with the assumption all believers are Peter and we have little need for overseers or pastors. Protestants often appear to owe allegiance or obeisance to no human—each standing alone before God. Is this really what we wish? We certainly wish Jesus by our side, and if Peter and Paul could stand with us it would certainly be good. In fact, if all the Saints could join us, we would be more comfortable. If Church authorities are spiritual umbrellas, one might ponder why Protestants have chosen to stand in the rain with Bibles over their heads.
As one reflects upon the momentous repercussions of Luther’s reformation and the legacy of the Church Fathers one is inclined to blend oral traditions and text to formulate a realistic picture of an average believer’s life in the early church. Luther connects the ancient oral tradition with the newer textual tradition. Early Christians lived under the authority (and responsibility) of their pastors. Each pastor passing on the Way from one generation to the next—perhaps just as Luther encouraged in his introduction to the Small Catechism (McCain, 2005). The reach of the oral tradition should not be too quickly discounted—this writer can recount narratives passed on by his grandmother of events from her grandfather’s life almost 200 years ago. Oral creeds and sacramental celebrations were almost certainly among the earliest traditions of the Church. While we may disagree on their substance and efficacy, we do well to consider their scriptural origins, validity, and meaning.
One need not turn from the fundamental doctrines of Protestantism (the absolute supremacy of Scripture, the Grace of Christ, and the priesthood of all Believers) to complete this task. In fact, one is drawn to appreciate the Sacraments in light of the Scriptures, Grace, and a personal relationship with God through Jesus Christ. In so doing, we renew our commitments and practices to Christ and perhaps heighten our appreciation of those Sacraments or ordinances we choose to maintain. At the very least we reconnect with celebrations the First Church considered essential.
As Protestants, each one a “priest”, we seek the Spirit’s leadership in discerning the significance and universal truths invested in the Sacraments. A troubling point may be that the Sacraments have been utterly abandoned by mainstream Protestants. Today’s nominal Christian questions miracles and dismisses out-of-hand the notion that mere acts might have spiritual substance (impart grace). We admit no such authority. In addition, we may honor Billy Graham, but we rarely revere Clement, Ignatius, Irenaeus, Polycarp, Augustine, and others—many who paid the ultimate price for their faith in Christ.
Sola Ratio? The Trouble with Reason
Might we recapture some of the sacredness of our heritage without entirely returning to Catholicism? Do we wish to rest entirely upon our own wisdom and forsake traditions rooted in the First Church? Perhaps the Age of Reason has robbed us of belief in the miraculous and has left us with a disdain for the extraordinary. Awe and beauty are often destroyed by understanding—that which we “master” loses its allure. Animals as biological specimens, love as neural chemistry, and humans as clever primates leave us with little wonder or comfort. Might the same be true (to some degree) of our understanding of the Sacraments and the Church Fathers? Must something be intellectually “mastered” to be effective or substantial?
Perhaps we should consider the consequences of categorically denying spiritual authority in what we consider illogical places. Logically, the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil in the Garden of Eden should have been a potato, hidden underground. Or if a tree, at least surrounded by dense thorns and a wall! Each Christian must privately decide how to respond to authority, whether the policeman, tax collector, pastor, or Pope. We may find an exploration of the Church Fathers enriching. The Catholic Encyclopedia (1917) found at www.newadvent.org is very informative and thought provoking.
Perhaps the Sacraments and Catechism are something to which we submit by faith. Something we don’t entirely understand. Something that remains mystical and sacred. The Sacraments and Catechism are certainly earthly acts with heavenly connections—how shall we respond? Perhaps a thoughtful return to the mystical and miraculous is what we need. Who knows what we might discover in a post-Protestant era?
