The periods of persecution caused the church to think
heartily regarding the doctrines of salvation and the church. For over 150
years (Emperors Domitian (d. 96) to Decius (d. 251)), Christianity was deemed dissimilar from
Judaism and was not considered an ethnic religion so it was under no protection
in the Roman Empire.[1]
Persecution of Christianity was sporadic; however, in the years where there
were times of peace Christianity saw growth. During the rule of Decius that
changed. Persecution went from sporadic to “an empire-wide assault on
Christianity.”[2] With that came the
opportunity for many Christians to succumb to said persecution and lapse in
ones faith. In the church there
were two frames of thought regarding those who had “lapsed” for one reason or
another – the rigorist view which states the lapsed could not regain full
membership in the church but must stay in penitents for the remainder of their
lives, and the laxis view which states penitent apostates could in fact be
restored to the church right away.[3]
Cyprian considered these two frameworks as extreme and “advocated a middle
course,” one that would have the lapsed learn a hard lesson about sin, be
disciplined for it, and yet be reconciled to the church at time of death and
“thus give their conscience an assurance of salvation.”[4]
The church had to make decisions regarding apostates that required a total
reconfiguration of church polity in an effort to protect its integrity, and a
key component of that was the issue of salvation which really underlined the
issue of apostasy to begin with. I think the greater issue at hand is the issue
of forgiveness and consequence.
[1] Everett Ferguson, Church History, Volume One: From Christ to
the Pre-Reformation, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2013), 159.
[2] Ibid., 160.
[3] Ibid., 164.
No comments:
Post a Comment