Articles
What Led to the Formation of the Catholic Church?
Jesus said, “I will build My church; and the gates of Hades will not overpower it” (Matt. 16:18). Even before the establishment of the one true church, Jesus warned that there would be false prophets who would arise and lead many down the wrong path (cf. Matt. 7:15; 24:11). The apostle Paul echoed the Savior’s words by saying that wolves would come upon the flock, or arise within, and many who were once faithful would fall away (Acts. 20:28ff). Moreover, there are numerous passages that predicted those who were once obedient would distort the truth and succumb to the darkness once again (cf. 1 Tim. 4:1ff; 2 Tim. 4:3f; 2 Pet. 2:20ff). Sadly, there are now thousands of different groups that label themselves as being part of the church. The question one must ask is: Do these individuals and their beliefs align with what Scripture says? In this article, the focus will be to highlight the main reasons which brought about the largest division and false teaching the world has ever known.
Organizational Breakdown of the Leadership
In the second century, shortly after the apostles had all died, there came a differing view on how the church should be structured. It is important to note that the New Testament was complete by this time. That particular fact did not prevent men from developing their own ideas and seeing them as the best way for the church to function. A man named Ignatius, of Antioch, advocated for hierarchy within the eldership (F.W. Mattox, The Eternal Kingdom: A History of the Church, 59-60). His belief was that a congregation needed a central authority figure or “bishop” to maintain unity within a body of believers. Ignatius still thought that the church needed elders, but he felt that one person should be chief or chairman of the elders, and that person would be the “Bishop.” Since the term bishop and elder in Scripture are equivalent, Ignatius was the first to create a distinction between the two.
Following the reasoning of Ignatius, but proceeding further in the departure from church organization, was Cyprian of Carthage (Mattox, 111). He agreed with Ignatius that a bishop was vital to a church and without one then there was no unity and therefore no congregation. Moreover, Cyprian was the primary proponent of distinguishing clergy and laity. A clergyman was a member of the hierarchy (i.e. bishop, priest, or deacon), and everyone else was considered a layperson. Eventually, his notion of church organization began to be seen throughout congregations.
As the idea of a principal bishop grew, so did the power of the office. In time the so-called “Bishop”, began to expand his territory (Mattox, 109). These “Bishops” would be of a larger city and help start congregations and those groups would then look to these individuals for their spiritual guidance. They were deemed as the successors to the Apostles.
Originally, when the “Bishop” was installed, they were the only ones that could administer the Lord’s Supper and perform baptisms (Mattox, 150). When the office grew in power, it became necessary for the “Bishop” to grant the “lesser” elders the authority to perform these tasks. By this change in the manner of worship, the New Testament model had reverted to a pattern of the Jewish priesthood. “The bishop took the position of High Priest, the presbytery priests, and the deacons Levites” (Mattox, 111). No longer was each person of the church considered part of the royal priesthood (cf. 1 Pet. 2:9). The Catholic Church today might claim differently, but their teachings and practices do not match up with the New Testament model of the one true church.
Further Digression
In the latter half of the second century, there arose ecclesiastical councils. “This custom first arose among the Greeks…and changed nearly the whole form of the Church” (J.W. Shepherd, The Church, the Falling Away, and the Restoration, 56). What came about from these meetings was the elevation of the “bishops” that attended and the diminishing status of “regular” congregants. These various councils or synods produced laws that the members of the churches would need to be obedient toward. As a result of these councils, there came a time where people were told: 1) what to believe; and 2) personal study of the Bible was unnecessary and futile (Mattox, 55f). The eventual outgrowth of these councils would be the papacy (Shepherd, 57).
Further deterioration from the New Testament pattern occurred at one particular ecclesiastical council. In 325 at the Council of Nicaea, Roman Emperor Constantine sat as chairman over the proceedings (Mattox, 128). Having Constantine preside over such an affair introduced the church becoming involved in matters that were never to be interfered with by state government. As a result of this council, what developed were “positions equaling the lower offices in the imperial administration” (Mattox, 138). In other words, the church started to appear more like Roman government. This meeting produced the well-known “Nicaean Creed,” which focused on the relationship of Christ to the Father and His divinity and eternality. Other issues addressed at this council were: mandatory Easter observance (contra Rom. 14:5), and creation of the office of “Metropolitan,” or “Patriarch.” This propelled the influence of certain area bishops. With this initial human creed at Nicaea, certain area “bishops” (i.e. Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria) began to be elevated in stature (Mattox, 136).
Other councils were held following Nicaea, such as one at Constantinople in 381. The main issues addressed were: reaffirming the Nicaean Creed, clarifying the role of the Holy Spirit, and decreeing that Christ was human and divine (Mattox, 143). Discussion of Christ’s humanity and divinity continued at the Council of Ephesus. After this particular meeting, Mary the mother of Jesus, came to be known as the “mother of God” (Mattox, 143f). Initially it was not to venerate her, but as time passed and additional councils were held, the exaltation of Mary was accepted (Mattox, 144f). Continual discussions were held on the nature of Christ at further councils. Icons, like the crucifix and biblical art, became prevalent after initial attention brought at a second council at Nicaea in 787 (Mattox, 146). These decrees without a doubt brought about much confusion within the people/laity, who felt that they had no right to challenge the authority of the church.
Other Contributing Factors
Over time the misuse of Matt. 16:18 made people view Rome as central because the viewpoint was that Peter was chief of the Apostles or the first “Pope.” For a period, Rome’s authority was challenged by the church in Constantinople, which was the main established territory in the east. This was a result of the decision of the Council of Chalcedon, which gave equal authority to the bishops of Rome and Constantinople (Mattox, 144f). Rome came to be seen as the seat of authority due to its connection to apostolic authority (i.e. Peter as the one given the keys to the kingdom and credited as the founder of the Roman church), which Constantinople could not make that assertion (Mattox, 138ff). Ultimately, the power and influence of Rome became supreme by the seventh century.
There were a number of other elements which brought about Catholicism. The use of holy water, which reverts back to Jewish law and tradition, became part of sanctification. Days were set aside for fasting. Multiple fasts exist, but none came to prominence more than the practice known as Lent. Additionally, in the second century, infant baptism was introduced, and in the following century pouring water over the sick, which eventually led to sprinkling instead of immersion. Further developments included confessing and seeking absolution of sins through the priesthood, because they were seen as the intermediaries between man and God (contra 1 Tim. 2). Many other unbiblical digressions gained acceptance such as: transubstantiation (i.e. that during the Lord’s Supper the elements became the real body and blood of Christ through a miracle from God administered by the priest officiating); worship of saints; practice of unction (i.e. anointing of the dying or dead bodies for forgiveness of their sins); and possibly the most disturbing matter occurred in 1870 when the Pope was declared infallible. Note this decree:
"That apostolic primacy which the Roman pontiff possesses as successor of Peter, the prince of the apostles, includes also the supreme power of teaching. This holy see has always maintained this, the constant custom of the church demonstrates it, and the ecumenical councils, particularly those in which East and West met in the union of faith and charity, have declared it....Indeed, their apostolic teaching was embraced by all the venerable fathers and reverenced and followed by all the holy orthodox doctors, for they knew very well that this see of St. Peter always remains unblemished by any error, in accordance with the divine promise of our Lord and Saviour to the prince of his disciples...." [Vatican I, 1870].*
The Catholic Church should have looked to where Peter was rebuked by Paul for his hypocrisy (Gal. 2:11ff). This begs the question: "If Peter was NOT 'unblemished by any error', then by whose authority does the Catholic Church actually authorize this decree?"
The word “catholic” is not an evil word as “its primary meaning is ‘universal’” (Mattox, 149). There is no denying that the true body of believers, or the one true church, is universal. It always has been. Unfortunately, in everyday language, when the word “catholic” is used, there is a connotation of one that espouses a particular set of beliefs. This heretical split from the church has captivated billions and still does to this day. Paul wrote, “See to it that no one takes you captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men, according to the elementary principles of the world, rather than according to Christ” (Col. 2:8). People need to remember the words of Christ, “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven will enter. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?’ And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness’ (Matt. 7:21-23).
*(http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVanswers/2006/10-02a.htm, http://lavistachurchofchrist.org/LVanswers/2004/2004-04-01.htm)
