East and West

Church history is fascinating because it drives us to the question, "How did these guys read Scripture? Did they read it at all?" As we all know, there was a lot of fighting in the centuries of the Imperial Church over who was the greatest--the bishop of Rome, or the bishop of Constantinople? What's more is that this question comes up again in the context of Catholic-Orthodox relations.

To just about every Christian in the Reformation tradition, with its strong emphasis on sola scriptura, this seems amazing in light of Luke 22:24-28, where the disciples are fighting over who is the greatest--at the Last Supper, no less! This is, of course, not the only place where the disciples where arguing over honor, and we all know what Jesus' response is. It seems obvious enough that if you are arguing over primacy, power, and greatness, you are completely missing what Jesus is about.

Yet these fights happened in the Imperial Church without anyone saying "Hey! What did Jesus say about greatness in the kingdom of God?" And they still happen today, as though this ancient question deserves an answer. ("No. It's the pope at Rome. No, it's still the patriarch of Constantinople!") So what happened?

I think when you read the Bible itself, you find the answers. No one knew the Scripture better than the Pharisees, yet they were often completely blinded to its meaning by their own agenda. And I suppose that's what happens. The same thing happened to Southern Presbyterians when it came to slavery. It's really easy to become so convinced that you are right that even God's Word cannot speak to you. The only alternative is to be continually open to correction--which is to sacrifice pride, the greatest idol of mankind.