When Is A Church Not A Church?

The good blogger at PrincipiumUnitatis recently put these questions to me. They were so thought-stimulating, I thought he wouldn't mind if I reposted them here for public consideration. This was in the context of discussing Christ possessing the "sacramental magisterial authority, for all authority had been given to Him by the Father (cf. Matt 28:18, and John 17:2)."

He continued, "Throughout the two-thousand year history of the Church, various sects have claimed that the Church had become so corrupted that it was no longer the Church, and that the true Church continued with them. So claimed the Montanists, the Novatians, and the Donatists. Other schismatics (e.g. Albigensians) made the same sort of claim. Often they called themselves Carthari (or "Puritans") to contrast themselves from the Catholic Church, which they considered impure and corrupt."

"(1) If in actuality you are presently in schism from the Church Christ founded, how would your experience be any different than it is right now?"

It is interesting that the visible Church and heretics have not been readily distinguishable if measured by size, the fervor of adherents, or the like. Another good blogger recently wrote to me along these lines. He noted the devotion to the Faith that is found in NEW churches, and how it tends to dissolve with age. Mormons tend to be extremely devout. Young Presbyterian denominations are conservative relative to their older forebears. The rate of weekly church attendance for PCA members is likely much higher than for Catholic members. Many ancient heresies still romp around (Modalism, Monophysitism, etc.), so age is no gauge. I dare say that one being in schism from the Church Christ founded may very well not realize it. (But, you shall know a tree by its fruit, Christ tells us!)

"(2) How are you not making the same error made by the Donatists?"

For clarity, CARM says that "Donatism was the error taught by Donatus, bishop of Casae Nigrae that the effectiveness of the sacraments depends on the moral character of the minister. In other words, if a minister who was involved in a serious enough sin were to baptize a person, that baptism would be considered invalid." They practiced rebaptism and taught that the Catholic Church was no longer "true".

I dare say that many Christian groups are making the same error made by the Donatists. (But the Reformation was concerned not with individual immoral priests or bishops, but with a whole structure endorsing immorality!)

"(3) If on account of corruption you have turned away from the Church Christ founded, then to whom have you turned, and what authority do they have to speak for Christ and His Church?"

Protestants have turned to some combined notion of democratic authority and Scriptural authority. I understand that Lutherans originally saw ordination and teaching authority to derive from the faithful allowing a teacher to speak. In a Calvinistic view, the authority to speak for Christ extends only as far as the teacher speaks in conformity to Authoritative Scriptures.

"(4) If they do not have the authoritative interpretation of Scripture, then how do you know that you are rightly interpreting OT passages as teaching that the hierarchical structures of the Church can be corrupted to the point of total apostasy?"

A bit philosophical, this bit. I am generally quite sympathetic to the notion that we need some normative (authoritative?) standard by which we interpret the Scriptures. But I don't think that in every instance our faculties of reason and common sense (not to mention conscience) are insufficient. For instance, "Thou shalt not murder" is a truthful command, the interpretation of which all Christians would be in agreement. To be fair though, I suppose some would be pacifists because of it, while others would feel comfortable joining the service (Go Navy!), some won't kill spiders, others try only to avoid killing another human in hate. Now that I think of it, I guess I follow a Matthew 5:28 type of rationale, and try to avoid 'murdering' in my heart through hateful thoughts (like when I drive!). I dare say we do need something (like the Holy Spirit) to lead us into a right and normative interpretation of the Scriptures.