The Mustard Seed Church

There is a temptation among fundamentalists to try to claim that their particular church group more closely resembles that of the "New Testament Christians", and the 2x2s are no different in this regard, either. The main idea is that if a group is more like the early Christians, then they must be the one true church - this belief is held not only by 2x2's, but certain Baptist denominations, Plymouth Brethren, the modern Waldense church, and countless "remnant" evangelical groups.

It should be noted that 2x2's should be commended for their asceticism; in this regard it is worthwhile to be more like the early Christians because modern society assigns too much value to material things. The 2x2 lifestyle of simplicity is something to be emulated, not ridiculed. However, this idea is not unique to the Friends & Workers, as St. John Vianney had already said, "You cannot please both God and the world at the same time, They are utterly opposed to each other in their thoughts, their desires, and their actions."

However, the presumption that Christ's church on earth would not develop over time is simply false, and there are two obvious examples of why this reasoning is fallacious.

The Doctrine of the Trinity
It is agreed that the word "Trinity" does not appear in the Bible. It is a concept accepted by all who call themselves Christian, yet it is not explicitly spelled out in Scripture. It is an example of the development of doctrine; in other words, the doctrine of one God in Three Persons took centuries to be revealed and understood. For the first 3 or 4 hundred years after Christ, there was bitter debate over the nature of Jesus - whether He was both human and divine, or mostly divine and partly human, or so divine that His humanity was merely an illusion, or not divine but a saintly "way-shower", etc. There were debates about there being 3 separate Gods, Jesus was the main God, the Holy Spirit as a Person, whether the Holy Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, etc. When you read about the various doctrinal struggles, you quickly get the feeling that it is truly God's providence that the truth was finally understood. The point here, however, is that the mystery of the Holy Trinity was something that developed over time, much like God's Church developed over time.

The Canon of Scripture
This is another example of the development of doctrine. Contrary to what many Christians believe, the Bible simply did not fall out of the sky and land at your nearest Christian book store. As Newman writes:

"As regards the New Testament, Catholics and Protestants receive the same books as canonical and inspired; yet among those books some are to be found, which certainly have no right there if, following the rule of Vincentius, we receive nothing as of divine authority but what has been received always and everywhere. The degrees of evidence are very various for one book and another. "It is confessed," says Less, "that not all the Scriptures of our New Testament have been received with universal consent as genuine works of the Evangelists and Apostles. But that man must have predetermined to oppose the most palpable truths, and must reject all history, who will not confess that the greater part of the New Testament has been universally received as authentic, and that the remaining books have been acknowledged as such by the majority of the ancients."

For instance, as to the Epistle of St. James. It is true, it is contained in the old Syriac version in the second century; but Origen, in the third century, is the first writer who distinctly mentions it among the Greeks; and it is not quoted by name by any Latin till the fourth. St. Jerome speaks of its gaining credit "by degrees, in process of time." Eusebius says no more than that it had been, up to his time, acknowledged by the majority; and he classes it with the Shepherd of St. Hermas and the Epistle of St. Barnabas.

Again: "The Epistle to the Hebrews, though received in the East, was not received in the Latin Churches till St. Jerome's time. St. Irenæus either does not affirm, or denies that it is St. Paul's. Tertullian ascribes it to St. Barnabas. Caius excludes it from his list. St. Hippolytus does not receive it. St. Cyprian is silent about it. It is doubtful whether St. Optatus received it."

Again, St. Jerome tells us, that in his day, towards A.D. 400, the Greek Church rejected the Apocalypse, but the Latin received it.

Again: "The New Testament consists of twenty-seven books in all, though of varying importance. Of these, fourteen are not mentioned at all till from eighty to one hundred years after St. John's death, in which number are the Acts, the Second to the Corinthians, the Galatians, the Colossians, the Two to the Thessalonians, and St. James. Of the other thirteen, five, viz. St. John's Gospel, the Philippians, the First to Timothy, the Hebrews, and the First of St. John are quoted but by one writer during the same period."

On what ground, then, do we receive the Canon as it comes to us, but on the authority of the Church of the fourth and fifth centuries? The Church at that era decided,—not merely bore testimony, but passed a judgment on former testimony,—decided, that certain books were of authority. And on what ground did she so decide? on the ground that hitherto a decision had been impossible, in an age of persecution, from want of opportunities for research, discussion, and testimony, from the private or the local character of some of the books, and from misapprehension of the doctrine contained in others. Now, however, facilities were at length given for deciding once for all on what had been in suspense and doubt for three centuries. On this subject I will quote another passage from the same Tract: "We depend upon the fourth and fifth centuries thus:—As to Scripture, former centuries do not speak distinctly, frequently, or unanimously, except of some chief books, as the Gospels; but we see in them, as we believe, an ever-growing tendency and approximation to that full agreement which we find in the fifth. The testimony given at the latter date is the limit to which all that has been before said converges. For instance, it is commonly said, Exceptio probat regulam; when we have reason to think that a writer or an age would have witnessed so and so, but for this or that, and that this or that were mere accidents of his position, then he or it may be said to tend toward such testimony. In this way the first centuries tend towards the fifth. Viewing the matter as one of moral evidence, we seem to see in the testimony of the fifth the very testimony which every preceding century gave, accidents excepted, such as the present loss of documents once extant, or the then existing misconceptions which want of intercourse between the Churches occasioned. The fifth century acts as a comment on the obscure text of the centuries before it, and brings out a meaning, which with the help of the comment any candid person sees really to be theirs." (Essay on the Development of Doctrine)

Therefore, it is clear that there were bitter debates over which books should belong in the Bible - a question which wasn't settled until the 4th Century

The Mustard Seed
It is interesting to note that Jesus never instructed His apostles to go out and write the Bible. Instead, He spent time instructing them how to pray (Matthew 6), remember His sacrifice (Luke 22), and spread the Gospel (Matthew 10). That Peter was selected as the leader of the developing Christianity movement is accepted by many Protestant scholars, and the Council of Jerusalem in Acts 15 is an example of the church governing itself.

In other words, Jesus knew that His Church would be a living, growing thing. Paul even describes the church as one Body with many parts (1 Cor 12). In Matthew 13, Jesus delivers the parable of the mustard seed:

"The kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed that a person took and sowed in a field. It is the smallest of all the seeds, yet when full-grown it is the largest of plants. It becomes a large bush and the birds of the sky come and dwell in the branches." (Mt 13:31-34)

He goes on to give a similar parable about the yeast being mixed with the wheat flour. In these parables, the "kingdom of heaven" is Christ's church on earth, not in heaven. How can we know this? Because in heaven all things are perfectly realized. There are no mustard seeds in heaven - they have all developed into the large bush. The weeds among the wheat developed (Mt 13:24-30). The mustard seed developed into a bush large enough that birds of the sky come and dwell within its branches. The person's body develops into adulthood. The neophyte church began as a tiny mustard seed and has developed over time as well.

And, as if the parables weren't clear enough, Jesus continues in Matthew 15, warning of a change in the hierarchy - a development in the church, the kingdom of heaven:

"Every plant that my heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted..." (Mt 15:13)

Therefore, just because the Christ's church, the kingdom of heaven, developed and doesn't always resemble the "New Testament Church" does not automatically mean that an apostasy has taken place.

"Then every scribe who has been instructed in the kingdom of heaven is like the head of a household who brings from his storeroom both the new and the old." (Mt 13:52)

"And he gave some as apostles, others as prophets, others as evangelists, others as pastors and teachers, to equip the holy ones for the work of ministry, for building up the body of Christ until we attain to the unity of faith and knowledge of the Son of God, to mature manhood, to the extent of the full stature of Christ, so that we may no longer be infants, tossed by waves and swept along by every wind of teaching arising from human trickery, from their cunning in the interests of deceitful scheming. Rather, living the truth in love, we should grow in every way into him who is the head, Christ, from whom the whole body is joined and held together be every supporting ligament, with the proper functioning of each part, brings about the body's growth and builds itself up in love" (Eph 4:11-16)