CHS 501; 2 Credit Hours

Dr. M. James Sawyer, Professor

mjsawyer@aol.com

This course will examine the historical and theological development of the people of God from the church's beginning through the Reformation. Special attention will be devoted to the theological controversies of the period as well as biographical examinations of key leaders.

Augustine or Bainton, Roland	The Confessions of St. Augustine Here I Stand: A Life of Martin Luther
Bettenson, Henry	Documents of the Christian Church
Gonzalez, Justo	The Story of Christianity, Volumes 1 & 2
Sawyer, M. James	Church History Lecture Notes (download from website)
Ware, Timothy or Cahill, Thomas	The Orthodox Church How the Irish Saved Civilization

3. To use historical understanding to guard against repetition of past errors and to stimulate more accurate theological reflection.
4. The Student will come to appreciate the historical contexts out of which the Church’s theological heritage emerged and the historical reasons for the form in which theological discussions were framed.

1. The Student will be able to think his/her way through the history of the church from its beginnings through the Reformation.
2. The Student will be able to identify the major eras of the history of the church and the major figures influencing each era.
1. The Student will be able to articulate the continuing significance of selected events movements and persons for the ongoing life and theology of the church.

• EXAMINATIONS: (8 Hours)

• READING (20 Hours)

• Online Discussion (2 hours)

WEEK	TOPIC	ASSIGNMENT DUE
Week 1: 7-Sep	Introduction to the Course
	"The Founding of a Faith"	Gonzalez,	Chapts. 1-6
Week 2: 21-Sep	"Church & Empire"	Recommended: Augustine	Begin Confessions
		Gonzalez	Chapts. 7-12
	"The Glory of Byzantium"	Recommended: Augustine	Continue Confessions
		Gonzalez	Chapts. 13-19
Week 3: 5-Oct	"The Faith that Conquers"	Recommended: Augustine	Complete Confessions
		Gonzalez	Chapts. 20-25
		Recommended:	Begin The Orthodox Church
	The Crusades and the High Middle Ages	Gonzalez	Chapts. 26-27
		Recommended:	Continue The Orthodox Church
		Gonzalez	Chapts. 28-30
	Film: Becket	Recommended:	Complete The Orthodox Church Cahill, How the Irish Saved Civilization Autobiography of St Patrick
		Take Home Mid-term Exam Distributed
Week 4: 19-Oct	The German Reformation Film: Martin Luther	Mid-term Exam Due Gonzalez Recommended: Martin Luther:	Chapts. 31-33 "Freedom of the Christian Man;" "Address to the German Nobility"
		Recommended Bainton	Here I Stand
		Gonzalez Recommended	Chapts. 34-36 Recommended: Bainton: Erasmus of Christendom
		McGrath	Reformation Thought: An Introduction
Week 5: 2-Nov	The Swiss Reformation	Recommended	T.H.L. Parker: John Calvin; A. McGrath: John Calvin, a Life
	The Swiss Reformation (Cont.)
Week 6: 30-November		Final Exam Distributed
	The English Reformation	Gonzalez	Vol. 2, chapt 1-7 Vol. 2, chapt 8-13
			Documents of the Christian Church
		Final Exam Due December 7	Recommended: A Man for All Seasons, Ann of a Thousand Days, Elizabeth Assignments Due

What is the function of historical theology? Since many of you students are not sold on the value of studying history, to say the least, we need to know at the very outset why it is important for theological students to study the history of the church.

We probably ought not call this course of study simply history, since the basic purpose of this department is not merely that you may learn more history but that you may grow theologically. That is why the department is called the department of historical theology rather than the department of church history. The basic courses, to be sure, are church history. All departments of a seminary ought to be theological. The purpose of this presentation is to make clear how studying church history functions as part of your training in theology, and thus in your development as individuals who will impart the theological life of the church to others. The important question is: "What contribution to a developing theologian does the study of the church's theology, historically considered, and an understanding of the development of ecclesiastical institutions play in the overall development of a theologian?"

The first function of historical theology is that it plays a role in "building up one another." As brothers in the faith we build up one another theologically not only when we are spatially proximate but also when we cross the span of time as we turn back the pages of history. H. Richard Niebuhr put it well when he wrote:

A negative aspect of this function ought also to be emphasized. To exclude large sections of the panorama of God's people from our theological reflection is to expose ourselves to the danger of becoming provincial. Through conversation with the past we gain a more complete understanding of the expression of our faith. An obvious example of this is Martin Luther. In his early years, when he still accepted what he had been taught and when he was struggling to understand the Gospel, he took up the study of church history and found Augustine's more profound grasp of the meaning of the grace of God. He also discovered that the papacy, as he knew it, had developed after the time of Gregory I and had no basis in the New Testament. Only through this study was he able to clear away the last of the "blinders" that had prevented his grasping the full gospel.

We study the church's past to be judged rather than to judge. We do not uncover what Christians of the past did and said simply in order to condemn them but rather to listen to them--to hear them out. We humbly listen to them as they expound the Gospel, and we watch them attempt to live it out, and then ask ourselves what we can learn from their strengths and weaknesses and how we can be helped in expressing our own theology and life.

To rid us of false sectarian pride is another contribution that historical theology can make. Carl S. Meyer suggests that a development "in critical thinking" through the study of history must lead to humility and caution. He is referring primarily to methodology, but it is precisely this methodology--this critical and informed thinking--that forces us to evaluate continually the assumption that "our present way of doing it" is the only correct one or that the patterns of our church life have been normative for all other generations. We can think of historical theology as that discipline which pulls back the veil and brings into view "the great cloud of witnesses" who have journeyed in the faith before us (Heb. 12:1ff).

The study of the past helps destroy fetishes, false ideas, and incorrect concepts that often stand in the way of meaningful theological conversation with others. We think, for example, of the popular notion that the early church was a sort of "Garden of Eden" where everything was perfect until Christians began to read Greek philosophy and corrupted theology because of this contact.

Another opinion that often clouds theological discussion is the assumption that there was a time when the historic church was one. It is frequently suggested that we must return to "the ancient undivided Church." An analysis of the early church's life shows that there never was an "undivided Church," empirically speaking. The early records show that the church was engulfed in schism and error already in the first century. This cautions us against speaking of a unity of doctrine and life that existed for only a very brief period in the apostolic church.

Another common misconception is that before the Reformation everything was Roman Catholic. The study of church history helps us analyze the various factors that go into the makeup of the concepts and actualities of "Catholic" and "Roman Catholic" as distinct from the various brands of Evangelical and Protestant thought. To rid ourselves of this view of religious conditions before Luther is most helpful to sound and relevant theology in the 20th century. The area of worship and liturgy can serve as an example. How often the distinction Catholic vs. Protestant clouds the debate where these labels actually do not apply or perhaps apply in reverse. This is closely related to another abuse, that of insisting upon an ancient pattern of worship on the assumption that there was uniformity in the early church in this area.

Church history also corrects the false idea that the apostles wrote the Apostles' Creed verse by verse. This myth occurs at least as early as Rufinus in the late fourth century and held sway in the church for many centuries. The truth of the matter is that the Apostles' Creed more than likely actually acquired the form we have during the eighth or ninth century in southern Gaul or northern Spain.

Closely related to this point is the fact that the discipline of historical theology is the only approach to issues that have become very complicated and confused with the passage of time. There are some questions that simply must be apprehended in great part historically.

It is obvious of course, that 10 centuries have intervened between the New Testament era and our own situation. We no longer live in an agricultural society but rather in an industrial one. We no longer live in an age when travel was often difficult; in our day we see mobility on every side. "The parish" is no longer what it was in the first and second centuries. The problems arising from these changes are very obvious. We shall be able to adapt ourselves and our church life to new situations if we remember that what we know today as "church" is in part a product of historical development. Cicero said, "Not to know what took place before you were born is to remain forever a child." In the area of theology we run the risk of remaining "theological children" if we neglect to study the past.

When Livy attempted to describe what it takes to make a man Roman, he did it by relating the story of the Roman people. Can one understand the nature and character of a people without a knowledge of their past? What is an American? What makes an American an American? This question is answered best by tracing how the American Will Herberg wrote recently, "nothing can be really understood about man and his enterprises unless it is understood historically."

Since Christianity began with a unique act of God among men, we speak of it as beginning in history. Unlike other religions that originate as products of that human mind or from patterns in nature and can therefore be discussed as a series of propositions, Christianity is something that happened and must be described. Christianity cannot be divorced from history. The attempt to understand its nature apart from history leads to a misunderstanding of it.

If this is true of the origin, it is certainly true of the various structures that go into the makeup of the church today. Take the papacy as an example. Since the papacy as we know it is a combination of various powers and responsibilities that originated in different periods in the church's life, there is no way to understand the nature of the modern papacy except through a study of its historical development.

Only through the techniques of historical methodology are we able furthermore to analyze the influences of the church on society and the influences of society on the church. Both in the area of values and in the more obvious area of structures Christianity has had a profound influence on our Western society. Recall the contributions that the papacy and monasticism made to the preservation of classical materials during the period of Germanic migrations, especially after the fifth century. The influence of Christianity on legal structures after Constantine, on attitudes toward the unfortunates, on music and philosophy, especially in the later Middle Ages, is a stimulating story.

But the church has also been affected by her surroundings. Emil Brunner writes:

There are situations confronting every Christian today that are best understood through a knowledge of their historical background. The schism between the Eastern Orthodox churches and the Roman Catholic Church is an obvious example. It involves more than the knowledge of certain Biblical tests or an examination of the Filioque, since the causes of the schism are more complex. They lie in rival claims, in cultural and linguistic differences, in competition for mission territory, in personalities. All these factors must be traced over lengthy periods of history. Any attempt at understanding this situation, and certainly any effort toward healing it, must begin with the study of its history.

The necessity of knowing something about history is particularly apparent for those who face the prospect of ministering in another country. The modern missionary faces a situation today that is quite distinct from that encountered by the missionary two centuries ago. The emerging nations in Africa and Asia confront him with a set of biases that he must understand if he is to succeed. Mission boards do not refer to these areas as "mission fields" any longer but rather as "younger churches." The feeling of inferiority that was engendered in these countries by the methods of the past is now forcing a change of approach and even of vocabulary.

Finally, we engage in the study of historical theology to give us perspective. As a result of what we learn of the past we are better able both to face the troubles and to appreciate the blessings of the church.

When theological difficulties arise in the church we may become so disturbed as to think that the church is on the verge of shipwreck. The study of the history of Christian theology will show, however, that the church has always faced problems and that God's purposes have not been thwarted. Errors in theology, heresy, inadequate statements of faith, have often been made to lead to a deeper appreciation of the Gospel and to a better understanding of God's revelation in Holy Scripture.

Church history also teaches us that the settlement of disputes takes time. It took something like 100 years of debate for the church to come to definite conclusions concerning the correct Trinitarian formulation. In the second century Trinitarian theology was rather inadequate, to say the least. Neither modalism nor adoptionism, nor the Logos Theology of the Apologists, was an adequate definition. But in the midst of these unsatisfactory formulations certain basic positions were hammered out: the Logos is distinct from the Father, the Logos is not subsequent to the Father in time, the Logos is uncreated, and so forth. Arius used the expression of second-century theology to deny the essential equality of Son to Father in the fourth century. His error was rejected by the church in the statement of Nicea in AD. 325. The inadequacies of this statement lead to further discussion resulting in the clear proclamation of the "three person" doctrine at Constantinople and the drafting of the Nicene Creed. A similar process may be observed with regard to the doctrine of our Lord's true humanity. Because the church fathers were forced to examine the statements of Scripture on this subject vigorously, a greater clarity emerged from this controversy. Wise theological formulations cannot be hammered out overnight.

We are not suggesting that controversy is good for the church. We should be speaking to the world rather than debating with one another. Nor do we mean to imply that error is beneficial. Rather we suggest that we learn to see how God uses even these darker pages in the history of His church when its people strove most ardently to uphold the teachings of Holy Scripture.

In the perspective of history we see not only that the individual Christian is simul justus et peccator but also that the historic church partakes of this dual nature. The historic church leaves a record which suggests that there have been many times when it has backed away from the full implications of the Gospel. That is, we stand accused of not having met the obligations of God's people among men. Simultaneously with this, however, is the obvious fact that God has sustained His church through it all. He promised that He would build His church, and history confirms that He has done it.

Sometimes one hears the expression that it would be good to go back and to begin all over again with the days of the New Testament of with the Reformation. Aside from the fact that this is impossible, it is quite likely that the results of such a reverse of time would prove unsatisfactory to the people who desire it. Perhaps the individuals who suggest it do not understand that God has a purpose in history. We must work in and with the church as God has given it to us at this point in the 20th century. Now admittedly there are things we can do to improve the church, and I certainly hope that you will do those things rather than degrade it. But you cannot go back and start over as if the Holy Spirit has accomplished nothing! Our Lord promised His disciples, "When the Spirit of truth comes, He will guide you into all the truth: for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak" (John 16:13 RSV). The history of the church is the record of God's fulfillment of this promise.

Concordia Theological Monthly xxxiv,

7 July, 1963. Abridged