The Early Christian Community
Although the Pharisees and Jewish leaders considered the dangerous influence of Jesus to be quelled with his execution (especially with the threat/warning of crucifixion for embracing such beliefs), the Christian message continued to be as appealing and inviting as ever, and the movement grew, exponentially. Moreover, whereas oppressive and politically controlling leaders of Judaism continued in their reactionary ways, the early Christians offered inclusivity and freedom to those who wished to join in “The Way” (as the movement was sometimes called).
In this period of great economic and social hardship, the Gospel writer, Luke, records in his church history work, the Acts of the Apostles,
"All the believers were together and had everything in common. They sold property and possessions to give to anyone who had need. Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts, praising God and enjoying the favor of all the people. And the Lord added to their number daily those who were being saved" (Acts 2:44–47).
Not surprisingly, as the number of Jesus’ disciples rose, the Jewish leaders who had earlier been threatened by Jesus’ message and influence upon a society which they wanted full hegemony, worried the Jesus movement could reignite, and turned their criticisms and persecutions upon Jesus’ disciples and followers, many of whom fled the area to safer, more receptive areas (at least, initially).
Still, many early Christian leaders bravely stayed in Jerusalem and Judea to speak their message of Christian love and salvation, leading to public abuse by authorities determined to extinguish this dangerous sect of Messianic Judaism. The Apostle Luke records,
“They called the apostles in and had them flogged. Then they ordered them not to speak in the name of Jesus, and let them go . . . Day after day, in the temple courts and from house to house, they never stopped teaching and proclaiming the good news that Jesus is the Messiah” (Acts 5:40, 42).
Christendom
Some might consider Christian institutionalism contrary to the original Jesus movement; however, it is best to remember that, according to Christian scripture, Jesus was confirmed by Jewish scripture to be the prophesized Messiah, he taught regularly and enthusiastically in the Temple for years, he affirmed and participated in the numerous Jewish festivals and customs required of Judaism, and he became the perfect priest and sacrifice before God on humanity’s behalf. Moreover, Jesus also established his Twelve Disciples to be official ambassadors of the Kingdom of God, to act as heralds of the new covenant between God and humanity. He also promised them that at the Final Judgment, they would be the ones to judge the tribes of Israel.
Yet, if nothing else, Jesus was quite adroit of making the best of all situations, whether personal or public, private or institutional, turning every situation into an opportunity to love God with all his heart, soul, and mind; and to love his neighbor as himself. He also called upon his believers to follow his loving model in reaching the world for God. As the Apostle Paul writes in Galatians 1:3–5, which includes one of the oldest self-definitions of Christianity,
“Grace and peace to you from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, who gave himself for our sins to rescue us from the present evil age, according to the will of our God and Father, to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”
In the twenty-plus centuries since the ministry of Jesus, Christians have willingly and sacrificially tried to reach the world for God, to continue the great commandment of Jesus Christ in their own complicated lives, changing cultures, and imperfect ways—sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. This was true in the first century, CE, and, century after century, it is still a reality for the Christian movement, 2000 years later.
Postmodern Neo-Christianity
Post-1960, Western Society has been undergoing a slow shift from conservative traditionalism, with its policed protection of permitted norms of behavior and religiosity to experiential individualism, which provides more permissiveness within and without church walls in the self-focused choices of people (and kinder judgments upon those actions). This evolution has involved the acceptance of alternative spiritual/theological avenues, divergent spiritual social norms (specifically concerning personal piety, vocational choices, gender roles, and sexual preferences), but truthfully, it has affected the whole of society. Traditional church culture is now considered anachronistic by many post-modern seekers, which the Emerging Church movement seeks to capitalize on with special attention and toleration given to the growing individualism in the post-modern world.
The majority of this paradigm change can be attributed to the post-modern emphasis on the “One,” which has progressed to such a degree that individual power vastly outweighs institutional or community authority for most religious bodies. Attesting to this is a 2007 sociological study of religious life in McMinnville, Oregon (called ‘The McMinnville Project’) that surveyed members from several churches, New Age groups, and even atheists, wherein substantial evidence was gathered and analyzed, which pointed toward a new, radical, individualized expression of faith, also termed, “Sacro-Egoism.” More than ever before, people feel religiously empowered to do what they want, regardless of former Church or biblical mandates, which is evidenced in several ways:
First, a radical authority/priority of the self is embraced cross-culturally in Western churches.
Second, people in post-modern churches, in general, feel an antagonism or ambivalence to institutionalism in society.
Third in the Sacro-Egoistical approach, a personal or pragmatic commitment [implicit] to the spiritual journey (specifically concerning Jesus and the Bible) is sought after and cultivated.
Fourth, an openness to and toleration of non-traditional beliefs and practices is promoted.
The foundation of the Postmodern church is radical individualism, which allows for the spiritual reins to be personally grasped and thereafter directed by private choice(s). In many congregations, the church or the Bible are no longer the only (or final) voice in religious matters; the individual has been awarded the right in society (or perhaps it has been forcefully grabbed) to choose keep all religious avenues open—a dangerous phenomenon considering that goal was what got humanity in trouble in the first place in the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3).
Moreover (and perhaps most importantly), is it possible to call oneself a Christian following the model of Jesus Christ—who willingly submitted all His personal power and comforts to do the Will of the Father—if the main goal in one's life is "to do it MY way"? The latter seems an eternity away from the heart-felt devotion of Jesus who openly declared to the assembly around him,
"For I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of HIM who sent Me" (John 6:38).
Clearly, the Postmodern church has challenged the former religious establishment, usurped some of traditionalism’s authority in Western Society, and created personally empowering tenets based on its own interpretation of religious expression and community. A broader question is whether the lure of radical individualism will eventually eclipse all vestiges of communal and/or institutional Christianity, and what this will mean to the church culture in the future. After all, as Jesus astutely concluded,
"No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money." (Matthew 6:24)
Although radical self-centeredness, creativity, experimentation, and liberation are a fashionable balm to the Postmodern soul, are they enough to satisfy the requirements of a righteous God? Do they bring parishioners closer to God or push them farther away? This is definitely a topic for Selah (contemplation).
