A Brief History of the Church

I have been asked many times how the church began. A common question asked by RCs is what church did the Apostles found? They look expectantly in your eyes hoping that you would say "The RC church of course!" but that would be a dreadful untruth. Many RCs are under the misconception that because Protestantism only came about in the Middle Ages, the Protestant church couldn't have been founded by the Apostles.

What they fail to understand is that to the Apostles, it's the teachings that are important. St Paul writes that he who comes to you with a different gospel and different teachings from what are taught by the Apostles, let him be accursed.

What then did the Apostles teach? What better way to look at the Apostles' teachings than to look at what they wrote.

In a Christian forum, I happened to write a short history of the church. Scriptural quotations came from my memory but they are relatively accurate. I thought it best to reproduce what I wrote in this blog so that I can refer future inquirers here. Here it is:



Jesus' first disciples started house churches. They met in homes and carried out the teachings of Jesus and His Apostles. The manner of worship, the doctrines and practices were all clearly written and detailed for us in the New Testament.

The churches flourished. They were not referred to as a single church under a single man. They were called churches. That is why addresses were made to the Seven Churches, etc (as in the Book of Revelation). But the churches were under severe persecution by some Roman emperors. The early christians in these churches stood firm to their ground and many were martyred.

It is difficult to say that there were no departures from apostolic teaching in the early church. Even Paul made it clear that there were threats from various quarters that were preaching a different gospel.

Then came the conversion of the Roman emperor. It was a mixed blessing. On the one hand, persecution stopped. But all temple priests converted immediately and many joined the ranks of churches formed under Roman rule. You can't blame them. They had no vocation apart from religion and since the official religion had changed, they became overnight "Christians". Anyway, this was a common occurrence in the ancient world.

Even before the conversion of the Emperor, there were seeds of heretical teachings. These can be seen in the non-canonical works - writings that were not accepted as divinely inspired because they did not meet the criteria for the canon - they may not have met the "rule of faith", were of dubious apostolic origin or were not accepted by the people of God as genuine. One thread of the "wrong" teachings are the natural human need of a motherly figure. Most religions have goddesses. Christianity is starkly patriarchical. One of the Marys could have been chosen: Mary the mother of Jesus or Mary Magdalen. Naturally, Mary the mother of Jesus could evoke stronger emotions. She was there at his cross and she was, after all, the mother.

A sign that even before the conversion of the Roman emperor, this need for a mother had germinated to the practice of venerating her can be seen in the non-canonical/heretical gospel called the Gospel of James. The Gospel of James is the only book in which Mary was elevated to a height totally unknown in the canonical books and venerated. Some people today try not to draw attention to the fact that the Gospel of James is as heretical as the Gospel of Thomas, etc by calling it the Protoevangelion of James. But make no mistake about it - it was called the Gospel of James since the earliest times. But all are agreed that this book is non-canonical.

The NT books on the other hand are very un-Marian in a sense. The epistles did not breathe a word about Mary. The only mere mention of Mary appears in the Gospels and for good reason: she was bearing Christ. In other parts of the Gospels where she makes an appearance, it's usually to show how misguided she was. Examples are:

1. The temple scene. Mary and Joseph cannot find the 12-year-old Jesus and finally finds him discoursing with the Temple Priests. When Mary remonstrates, Jesus retorts, "Do you not know that I must be about my Father's business?"

2. The gospels say that Jesus' family - including his brothers want him to go home to presumably Galilee because many even think he has gone mad. On one occasion, his Disciples tell Jesus that His mother is at the door asking to see Him. Jesus replies, "Who is my mother? Who are my brothers?" Then turning to his disciples, Jesus says, "Those who listen to me are my mother, my brothers and sisters".

3. A woman in the crowd shouts out to Jesus, "Blessed are the breasts that gave thee suckle and the womb that gave thee birth." Jesus replies, "Rather, blessed are those who do the will of God". This appears in Luke's gospel.

The cult of Mary was a natural progression of our human need for a soft motherly touch to our otherwise patriarchical faith. But it cannot be considered even remotely apostolic.

It was easy after Rome had converted for this cult of Mary to flourish. And flourished it did. First she Mary became "Mother of God" or the Theotokos. That was OK because presumably, the thrust of the whole idea was to stress on the divine nature of Jesus. Any objection to the name for Mary is countered with the emotional assertion that Jesus is God and anyone who refuses to call Mary the Mother of God is in fact denying divinity to Jesus. Century after century sees the slow departure of the church from the original teachings of the Apostles. Mary is soon crowned the Queen of Heaven. She becomes co-redeemer with Christ because didn't she bear Jesus in the first place. She becomes sinless (as Christ is). She is declared not to have been tainted with the original sin. As if that's not enough, she is bodily assumed into heaven (that's what Assumption means) and suffers no death.

There are many other departures from apostolic teachings by the church and I've only named one. The selling of indulgences to enrich the coffers of the church is one. Of course with the Reformation, these departures are highlighted and a call is made for Christians to return to apostolic teachings.

Some will say, "But Jesus promises that the gates of Hades will not prevail against the church".

That verse if correctly interpreted simply means "Death will have no power over Christians". Gates of Hades is the common phrase that means death. The church in the NT always refers to Christians and never church officials.

But even if we take the church to be church officials and the Gates of Hades to be the powers of the Devil, that promise has still been fulfilled. That promise does not mean that Christians will never be deceived by false teachings. The epistles of Paul show us that there were many false teachings floating about then and by important figures too. It does not mean that the church (ie Christians) can never be deceived and for any length of time. But if that interpretation is to be taken, it does mean that ultimately, the truth of God will prevail and not the powers of the Devil. As we have seen in history, that promise is fulfilled with the Reformation and the attention of the whole of Christendom is turned to the original teachings of Christ and the Apostles and the importance of reading the NT by the common people is emphasised when it was once forbidden or discouraged.

That is a brief summary of the history of the church by the beamishboy.