|| Previous || Next || Romans 13 || e-mail || V&FT ||
The history of institutions is as much ignored as it is important. In the PATRIARCHY Studyletter we are trying to suggest the origin and destiny of non-Family institutions.
We have seen in previous papers the origin of the State in the rebellions against a Godly Patriarchal social order, rebellions led by such as Cain and Nimrod.
We have also seen that IF one can identify an institution called the "church," it would be difficult to distinguish in from a civil institution in Israel, which we might call a "State." Difficult, that is, if one seeks to find such institutions in the post-Pentecost world. Are modern "church elders" to find their origin in the Elders of Exodus and Deuteronomy? But these Elders were clearly "civil" in many of their functions.
Where does the modern "church" find its origin?
Let us suggest -- very briefly -- an answer.
What are the most important functions of the institutional "church"? Is it not the realm of "religion"? The officers of the institutional "church" are not to execute capital criminals, nor engage in other "civil functions," we are told. What do they do?
The answer is "religious things." More specifically, in the history of the institutional church it has been liturgy that has occupied the attention of the institutional church officers. In another paper we have explored the meaning of the word "liturgy" as it might be found in the Bible, and we see that "liturgy" cannot Biblically be restricted to an "ordained" elite of priests. Further, we found that the joining of "liturgy" and priests was the error of the Pharisees as they mis-read the Old Testament.
But we can go further. Think about the historical and "scriptural" justifications given for practicing religious "liturgies" in our day. They inevitably trace back to Old Testament practices. More specifically, they trace back to the so-called "ceremonial law." All the rituals prescribed by the Law for a people "under age" (Galatians 4) were but shadows of a future reality. The advent of that Reality makes such ceremonies superfluous (at best).
We have also seen, however, that the Pharisees deliberately took the Ceremonial Law and perverted its intent and meaning, thus establishing the organized, institutional "church." Practical dominion in day-to-day life was replaced by impractical rituals on "special" days alone. The importance of these "special" days was continually increased, and the value of days "in general" continually decreased, thus making the work of the liturgist increasingly more important.
What possible justification is there for continued liturgy in our day? What future realities does it symbolize? How does it differ from Pharisaism?
And without the need for "special" religious observances, what is there that the institutional church does that cannot be conducted in "house-churches," on a voluntary basis?
Without liturgical throwbacks to the ceremonial law, the institutional church would have no purpose, and no justification for continued perpetuation.
|
|
|
|
|
Vine & Fig Tree
12314 Palm Dr. #107
Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240
[e-mail to V&FT]
[V&FT Home Page]