"The insistence upon externals and forms is the best weapon for the destruction of the congregation of God, and what the foe cannot do by the means of outward force and persecution, he succeeds in doing by such sly artifices, whereby one runs after a shadow and fights about words and loses substance."
~Froehlich~
I found that quote to be a powerful reminder in light of our church today. Let's keep our eyes on Jesus brothers and sisters!
Thanksgiving and the start of Christmas things
26 minutes ago
31 comments:
Good reminder Luke
Brooke: I was blessed by it also.
Froelich's mindset was very much shaped by the experiences he had. Much of what he wrote centered around the religion he saw around him.
A common theme in his writings is commenting on what he saw as legalism, dead formalism, disunity over forms, and misplaced human authority. At the root of most division, as the quote implies, is making something into something it shouldn't be.
The ACC has been definately shaped by Froehlich's views to some extent, although I think in some ways it has at least partially become something he may have never even approved of.
Here are a couple of other quotes that may be interesting to read.
"The priests of the high places give their own fiction, legends, fables, and inventions, precedence over the Word of God, and the people accept these spurious, man-made commandments blindly and implicitly, as if they came from God. At first an addition was made to the divine commandment, and in the course of the time the man-made commandment was raised above the divine order, and the sacredness of the latter was transfered to the former."
"By such hierachial power and pretension the religious ceremony has been impressed with the stamp of the anti-Christ who in the course of time has not only grown much richer in such inventions and new commandments, but has also been by far more despotic than even the old Pharisees and scribes, by being able to confer on his decrees the respect due to divine authority, as it is customary up to this very day."
I wonder if Froehlich ever envisioned being quoted on a blog? ;)
God bless,
~Mark
Mark,
Thanks for what you said in addition to the post. We just had a Bible study on tradition, and it prompted a lot of thoughts, I may post a larger passage on my blog soon, after I run it by our Elder, but in the meantime, I think this aligns with Froehlich and the Biblical purpose of traditions:
Traditions are important to preserve the unity of this Biblical brotherhood and even more so to keep us from sin, but never to reduce Christianity to a set of rules that form and define our relationship with the Father. Instead, we must establish a relationship with the Creator-Father and seek Him first and foremost. Live for Him and you will then desire to live out a truly Biblical life including traditions and all around Godly integrity.
Problems with tradition only arise when the people of a church group begin to focus on a said tradition instead of first seeking out Christ and living for Him out of love for what He's given them, salvation based upon their FAITH.
the doors,
I agree that traditions are necessary (every one has some sort of traditions, even if they think they don't). They can also be a great blessing.
However, I just want to add that I don't agree that traditions preserve unity or keep us from sin. The only thing, in my mind, that can preserve unity is brotherly love and the operation of the Holy Spirit. And the only thing, in my mind, that can keep us from sin is love for God, walking in the truth, and the regeneration of our hearts and the operation of the Holy Spirit.
Traditions may appear to give us unity, but if that is what causes our unity, we are in trouble (though on the surface thigns may seem fine). Same with sin, tradition can not be a crutch to keep us from sin. Because it is not powerful enough to do that and will never succeeding in keeping us from what evil desires want (sin) anyways.
I don't want to detract from your points, they are very good. I just wanted to response to the first sentence in the middle paragraph to hopefully clarify things a bit.
If Samuel Froelich was alive today, he would probably start a new church. Parts of the Apostolic Christian Church of America have become very legalistic. The previous post shows the control the elders have over the lay people. The one individual even mentioned seeking the elders approval. From what I have read and studied, there is no hierarchy in Christ. Froelich was not an apostle, and part of his theology never left Catholocism. Some of our churches have a modern day high priest who act no different then the past popes in history. They forbid bible studies and their traditions have taken priority over the scripture themselves. Our young people need to wake up and study the bible alone. We don't have to go through a man, a tradition, or a church name to find Christ. He is our ONLY intecessor. Even though I enjoy the culture of the Apostolic Christian Churches, we are not exclusive. Only Jesus is. Only His pure blood, mercy, and the gift of the Holy Spirit will keep us from sin. Nothing else. If we trust in our traditions, we are no better off then the Roman Catholics in the middle ages. Read the writings of Wycliff who lived before Martin Luther and Froelich. They spent their lives revealing the false teachings of their high priests who elevated themselves above the common believer.
"If we trust in our traditions, we are no better off then the Roman Catholics in the middle ages."
Being like "the Roman Catholics" may be a good thing and indeed I believe it is. As a Catholic, may I tell you why?
Have you taken some hours to roll up your sleeves and deeply study Ignatius of Antioch 30-115 A.D., Clement of Rome (101 A.D.), Irenaeus of Lyons, Clement of Alexandria (150 A.D.), Basil the Great and John Chrysostom (300s A.D), St. Jerome who actually translated the original language texts for us (in 320 A.D.)?
The Christian Church did not start with Luther or Calvin or Zwingli but with Christ. The model that some persons seem to adopt is more fiction than reality. It goes something like this: Jesus founded His Church and promised that He would be with it until He comes again but still it got so bad that it soon experienced the exit of the Holy Spirit. So, for about a thousand years a few "Bible" Christians lived in hiding while the Church which Jesus abandoned lived in apostasy and heresy until the Reformers came, smashed statues, allowed the Bible to be read and now we are able to be "believers". We can interpret the Bible alone and it is our sole rule of faith. But to me it seems like many people wish to exercise more power than the Pope Himself who has only spoken two times in history "ex cathedra" from his authoritative chair to clarify a doctrine. He relies on Tradition (Bible and Lived Tradition) and is its servant as "Pope" (meaning daddy).
Here is another narrative: Jesus never would leave the Church He founded. The Apostles ordained Bishops who ordained Bishops who provided a direct, unbroken line all the way back from today to Jesus Christ. The Church was one for the first thousand years and experienced the sadness of its first split in 1041 when the Eastern, Greek-speaking Church in Constantinople broke off from the West, mostly due to cultural and political and not dogmatic and doctrinal factors. In Europe the corruption and sin of the Catholic Church did not extinguish the beauty it gave in establishing the university system, hospitals, libraries, educational systems and libraries (not to mention beginning the printing press to allow the first printed Bibles long before Guttenburg). More importantly, it produced saints.
The Reformers had political, economic as well as spiritual motives and each one had a different set of goals and circumstances. Sad to say we have inherited a Christian Body which is fractured and broken to this day.
The Catholic tradition holds that where the Bible is and where there is Baptism in the Name of the Trinity, there are Christians and so we accept and love our brothers, even ones who insult and misunderstand us, thinking we are heretics. Love is stronger than ignorance and even death.
However, we believe that Protestant Churches can more or less approximate the shape of the Early Church and I maintain that as Protestant Churches go, the traditional AC Church looks closer like Catholicism than the latest "McChurches" which spring up like mushrooms and continually subdivide at the rate of over 40 new "denominations a week" in the U.S. It is sad to see this continual splintering and arguing over hymns, ties, beards, committees, music, Bible translations and all the rest. The devil wants this because he hates unity and love but prefers hatred and discord.
As a person who is frankly saddened by the conflicts within the AC community, I would ask you to consider the possibility that Christianity is lived within a holy river of Tradition: Scripture, Sacraments, Prayer, Moral Living in Holiness.
I suggest: don't be too quick to toss out Tradition or you may end up standing alone with a Bible and your opinions. The Church Fathers of the first seven centuries of Christianity saw themselves (and gave their lives at times) oriented toward the organic and lived "Tradition" of Christianity which wells up out of the heart of God and slowly ebbs through time into Eternity.
Small "t" traditions may change (whether to kneel or stand, what language to worship in, whether to cover the head, fashions, hymns), the big "T" of tradition does not change in the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church which is the Bride of Christ.
It is not worth arguing that tradition does or does not matter.
Tradition in its fullest sense not only matters, but is is the lived expression of Sacred Scripture. No one in the early Church would have dreamed of placing Tradition in conflict with Scripture. Both are permeated by the Holy Spirit and emerge as the "deposit of faith".They are like hydrogen and oxygen in the river of water called Sacred Tradition.
One of the most beautiful parts of the "AC" congregation (in my opinion) is that it has resisted the trends happening in most Protestant congregations and denominations which seek to make the Christian into a hyper-individualized consumer of religious feeling and experiences verus someone who is humble, self-donating and who participates in the Passion and Resurrection of Christ in faith and who is a witness in a world which is darkening by the day. Christ did not call us to form men's movements and Bible studies. I believe He called us to live just as He did and to oblate ourselves like incense, to serve and to adore Him in authentic faith which transforms every act of our being and our lives.
The four marks of the Church from its beginning are (in a few Greek words): Koinonia (communion in the Trinity), Leitourgia (pure and holy worship, Liturgy),Diakonia (service to the poor) and Kerygma, faithful proclamation of the Word.
The early Church consisted of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, not youth ministers, ministers of music and all the rest.
Tradition is basically the "presence of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Church". Finally, I might suggest that you take a look at the way the Bible came to be, at the Bishops' Ecumenical Councils starting with Nicea in 325 and Ephesus in 441 and work slowly through the first five hundred years of the Church.
You may also want to explore the lives of the early martyrs of the first several persecutions. During this period families would often creep on Sundays through the pre-dawn darkness within the regions of the Roman Empires as a family, risking their lives just to gather, listen to the Scriptures and to nourish with the Holy Eucharist. If a citizen would ask, "art thou a Christian" it would mean death to the whole family. They were killed by the thousands simply for being Christians and for going to the Eucharist.
It might seem silly to you that a Catholic would enter your blog and actually defend the AC Church because it strives to maintain a sense of Tradition and while I do not agree with the entirety of their dogma and doctrine (or I would be AC), I do interact with many members who are sincere, dedicated, loving and committed Christians who are not willing to see their Church turned into a consumer-oriented, feel-good coffee house or gathering place for emotional displays and for the newest novelties gaining attention in the American culture. They wish to hold fast in simplicity to their sincere practices.
Can legalism creep in? Sure, it creeps into every group but the legalism needs to be softened and humanized by the Holy Spirit which I believe does not definitively respect "Church lines" and blows where He wills (although I have to say He is alive and well in the Ancient Church called the Catholic one-even though we do have our share of sinners like me).
Will you even post this? I'll be back to check :)
to all the anonymous posters, i would love to know who you are. especially anonymous #1: sounds like you are headed in the right direction and i'd love to talk more if you'd be willing to contact me.
to the roman catholic anonymous...you clearly do not understand the distinction between the heretical false gospel of modern day rome and that of scripture recovered by the reformers. you have obviously bought into rome's anachronistic and ahistorical view of church history as well. this is not the place to get into that debate but anyone that pretends that the gospel promoted by rome and the protestant gospel are compatible at all does not understand the real issues at hand. with all that being said i must also thank you for agreeing that the traditionalism of the ac church is strikingly similar to romanism. this is a point some of us have been trying to make for a while now and your affimation of this just lends credance to this fact.
tradition is not pointless. tradition is also unavoidable. however, it must be brought under the authority of scripture. this is the underlying problem in both the ac church and the roman catholic church. tradition is treated, or even regarded, as equal in authority with scripture. thus, you have both churches twisting and manhandling the gospel and the word for the sake of backing their own set of traditions. although, i will must say it is far more pronounced and deliberate in the roman church- reaching into the realm of heretical dogma like purgatory and the marian dogmas, etc.
also, feel free to give your name. no reason for the cloak of anonymity.
"to the roman catholic anonymous...you clearly do not understand the distinction between the heretical false gospel of modern day rome and that of scripture recovered by the reformers. you have obviously bought into rome's anachronistic and ahistorical view of church history as well."
Hmmm. It took about five lines for your to attach the Catholic Church about which you seem already have your "opinions" formed.
Anyway, I will be judged someday about how much I have loved and I believe that "electronic emotional violence" hurts persons who are made in God's image. It is like road rage within computer discourse. Your tone seemed immediately cynical and it seems you know a great deal about Catholicism-having perhaps researched her thoroughly and after having spent time prayerfully listeing to faithful Christians who are Catholics no doubt? Yes?
Therefore, I use the "cloak" of annonynity simply to share my voice about Tradition and to share about what I believe is a risk of too hasty of a removal of life-giving Tradition.
Let's explore in humility and charity, for the sake of truth and love.
yes, you are correct in saying i have my opinion formed. i am a christian so i therefore have an opinion in regards to the gospel, of coarse. i would assume you likewise have an opinion. one of our opinions is that a false gospel is correct because the gospel of rome and the gospel of protestantism are mutually exclusive. it is impossible for both to be right. one is right and one is wrong.
i feel comfortable being judged by calling a false gospel heresy. paul does it too. i'm not attacking you, i don't even know who you are. but i am attacking the lies and false doctrine promoted by rome.
as far as researching and listening to catholics, i have. so the answer there is yes. do you understand the distinctions between the gospel of rome and that of protestantism? do you believe that they are compatible?
a 3 year old blog post is not the most ideal place to "explore" these things but have no doubt i am more than willing to engage you on this topic. i just ask it be done either in person or at least over email. i am more than capable of discussing without personal attacks and with love and charity. my email is traever7@yahoo.com or you can reach me at 309-229-6334. i'm available. i'm willing to engage. and like you, i assume, i stand for what i believe in. however, in this case one of us is deceived.
Dear Traever,
Thank you for dropping a few notes into this blog. I located this blog last week by accident and do not typically "blog". I was looking for some history on Froehlich and thanks to the internet, this site popped up.
About 80 percent of human communication is not specifically verbal and I do appreciate that it is almost impossible to have engaged, Christian dialogue via e-mail. Thank you for offering your contact numbers and for inviting a more human response. May I leave two thoughts for those who were blogging about tradition:
1. Please look carefully at the posts I previously made. They may offer some helpful resources about the value and authentic meaning of Tradition.
2. While many who were AC seem to carry a wound about this "legalistic body", it does not seem ultimately healthy to continue to open this wound or to level charges at this group. This is part two of why I posted.
Traever, I admire your zeal and enthusiasm. Your blog shows a network of Christian friends. God bless you for your committment.
I will ask that you consider refraining from calling the Catholic Church such things as "false gospel", "romanism" and "heresy". You consider yourself entitled to use such phrases and perhaps it seems to you likely that God would even want this. While I grant you the respect as a fellow Christian, you seem to enjoy making dogmatic pronouncements that perpetuate ignorance, hatred and violence.
You are speaking about the Bride of Christ, Traevor, although it to you is draped in the hideouse disguise of a cult religion. Let's not debate who is deceived. Let's go forward in Christ.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church is available on-line. Simply google it. You might be surprised at what you see there.
God Bless You.
believe me, i have read plenty of catholic catechism. i'm not sure how you level the charge that i "enjoy making dogmatic pronouncements" and i don't think you can even begin to explain how anything i've said "perpetuate ignorance hatred or violence". we don't hate or act violently against those who follow a different gospel in any way, but we do stand up for what is true and biblical. this brings us right back to the question i asked you. clearly you do not understand the significance difference between the gospel of rome and the gospel of protestantism. they both cannot be true. one is a false gospel. one, by necessity, must be heresy. they are absolutely incompatible. if you are looking for dogmatic pronouncements that perpetuate hatred and violence just look at what the popes said during the reformation. you think they considered protestants fellow members of the body of Christ? would they share in your ecumenical spirit? not for a second. they pronounced anathemas against all those challenging the roman church. you are out of line with the historic teachings of your own church. they may have changed some in the past 500-600 years but that just goes to disprove their claims of infallibility. either the popes were wrong in what they said then or they are wrong now. i'm sure how we would hear how they were not speaking ex cathedra, but it was certainly in regards to faith and doctrine. there is so much more to discuss on this issue. you may back away from it if you'd like but i can see little motivation that other than not being willing to have your beliefs seriously challenged by scripture and history. i realize it's uncomfortable, i've been there, but for those of us who seek God's truth we cannot simply ignore blatant inconsistencies and unbiblical dogmas. i urge you to take me up on my willingness to dialogue. i cannot make myself any more available than i have, the ball's in your court. matters of the gospel are worthy of discussing together.
Heh, was just doing a bit of looking around in some ACC history, i came across your blog. Some really awesome comments from the bloggers out there.
Being a member of the ACC in Ontario Canada i can say that sadly theres a lot of truth to what you guys are saying.
Gods used me to work around the system a lot of times, and he's used me in many ways other ACCer's can't be used due to legalism and traditionalism.
Anyways, God bless.
Keep the ACC in your prayers!
Hey, don't I know you? :) Shon Bruellman here from West Bend, IA. In light of the bomb shell that was dropped here in West Bend yesterday with Minister Pat Zaugg seceding his affiliation with the church I was doing some looking online to see what the "Father' of the church, Samuel Froehlich would think of all this and ran across your blog. That was a God thing fer shur :) May God grant opportunities for light to be shone into the darkness of religion and fear...
You are loved!
Shon Bruellman
You do know me, and I also know you. :-) Although, I'm not sure we've ever officially met. You do know my cousin, Scot Aberle, well though don't you?
Thanks for the update on West Bend. Many of my family in Lester has also separated from the official congregation there. I think they said around 100 left there yesterday.
Crazy times.
Are the works of Froehlich available in English?
John.
John,
Yes they are. They can be found here:
http://www.acpublications.org/materials.asp?f=search
Thanks.
I like the anabaptist vision. Seems more authentic than either the Roman or mainstream Protestant vision.
I renounced the Roman Church. It made me ill.
Luke,
In which Froehlich writing is this quotation found? I've seen this quote before, but I've never been able to determine which one of his letters/books it appears in. Can you help me with this, please?
Anonymous: I do not know where this quotation can be found. If I remember right, I heard it from a member of the AC church in Bluffton. When I asked him his source, he said he had read it, but he couldn't come up with the spot. Sorry.
Luke,
Thanks... I don't disagree with the sentiment of the quote, but I do wonder if it should continue to be repeated if nobody can pin down the source or prove that he actually said it.
Please don't take this as discouragement. Goodness, I don't even know you that I'm aware of. It's just my own frustration/hurt talking after going through a church split and hearing the many, many unproven things people said about others that they thought were true, that really weren't.
Okay, here it is. I found the quote! I still don't know which one of his writings it appears in, but I found it referenced in 'Marching to Zion' (1984 edition) on pages 292-293. This further referenced another source, 'Apostolic Christian Church History' by Herman Reutter. In the 1985 edition, this quote is found on page 158. Mr. Reutter doesn't cite his source for this quote, but does indicate his sources at the beginning of the book as being things such as Samuel Froelich's diary from 1827-1856 and others.
Wow! Color me impressed. I'd be interested to know who you are "Anonymous". :-) Email me if you'd like to reveal yourself lrknapp@gmail.com
Blessings
I did not read all of the commentary...I was just so emotionally moved by Anonymous catholic that I couldn't wait to respond. First I would like to say that I agree that AC and Catholicism are similar which is sad. But..wow... every catholic I talk with seems to totally be blinded by Satan cause they are totally clueless about the obvious indisputable reality that their pope is the anti-Christ! And NO "anonymous catholic person" you do not get to be counted worthy for all your "love" nor all of your long (supposedly convincing) blogs! because you are continually sinning against our Lord Jesus Christ! He died for you and "it is finished"!!! DONE!!! All the rest of the crap you are adding to his death is just a slap in His face!! How dare you?! STOP your traditions! They are made up, pretend, fake, rediculous fantasies!! You are wrong! Catholicism is a cult! You are deceived. You may possibly even go straight to hell. (cause there is NO purgatory!)If everyone would just stop tip toeing around this very serious issue - they would all tell you that you are NOT saved! You are deceived! Bowing to Mary is a sin!! The sacraments and holy days are a big fat joke! And you are being told right now by me (so you have no excuse anymore)that you need to repent of your sin of being catholic!! I hope I have your attention and I hope you are greatly offended! That is the only way that catholics listen! Satan has your brain and you need to break it free and I love you too much to pretend you are not in deep trouble! I finally got out of the AC Church at 40 and my husband finally got out of the catholic church at 45. We have studied religion extensively. Do yourself a favor and read the Alberto Series by Chick publications if you want a real history lesion on your horrific Catholicism. You don't have time to sit around and pretend you are right any more!! Your pope is intending to go to Israel in May and if he signs the 7 year peace treaty - you may have 7 more years before you kneel before Jesus! YOU ARE NOT ready!!
just sayin'!!!!!!! O - and now don't go crying to mama that I offended you!! - better to hear the truth this way than to waste a bunch more of your time with people who make you feel good! Wake up and accept responsibility! My Bible says you are condemned to hell!!
Now here is a bit of history for all of you ACs out there. You can read this too "anonymous catholic". Mr. Samual Froilich happened to be a Baptist, I believe, at the time he started his the new church after seminary. If you do the research, you may find that Seminaries were controlled by Freemasons and so is the Baptist religion. (Freemasonary and Catholicism are ONE as well!) Which is the missing link to how ACs and catholics are so much alike. you see all Satan needs is just a little bit of deceit on top of a bunch of truth to do his work! And because the AC church and the catholic church were both founded by Luciferians/occult....why wouldn't they be messed up! Jesus did not create Religion man did! And as long as we give Satan the time of day (by obeying the foolish man made traditions)he will continue to keep us from the freedom Jesus promised with the cross! So, my belief is that the AC church is a cult as well!
June, please advise more information about the Freemason relationship to Baptists, etc. I would be intensely interested. I am no longer a Baptist and no longer an AC. Thanks
June, please advise more information about the Freemason relationship to Baptists, etc. I would be intensely interested. I am no longer a Baptist and no longer an AC. Thanks
We travel a narrow path with the ditch of worldliness on one side and the ditch of legalism on the other. I suggest listening to what the early Christians had to say on these big issues (see David Bercot on YouTube.com). Another good source is the Anabaptist Identity Conference. This is a meeting of various conservative and Old Order Anabaptists talking about the issues they face in maintaining a biblical way of life. You can listen to them at www.anabaptistslive.org Very likely there are some things that need to be changed in the church, but following the broad road of evangelical teaching is not the answer! Keeping to yourselves is not the answer! There are others who think as you do and are battling the same issues. This is a good time to build bridges with other conservative Anabaptist groups so that you can learn from one another.
Barbara:
A few years after this I posted this, my theology came much more inline with Biblical truth. I would consider myself reformed Baptist now. :-)
Thanks for the links though. Most of my family is still anabaptist.
Post a Comment