Is the ‘apostolic church’ missional? (part 3)

The Twelve Apostles

When asking if the expression ‘apostolic church’ refers to the church’s missional nature, one must understand the expression in its historical context.  Clearly the use of ‘apostolic church’ (ἀποστολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν) in the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 referred to the church that continued from Jesus and the Twelve to that day. In early Christianity, the Twelve were the first bearers of the message and teachings of Jesus and they in turn sent other messengers with this message.  The pattern is heard in Paul’s statement to Timothy: “You then, my child, be strengthened by the grace that is in Christ Jesus, and what you have heard from me in the presence of many witnesses entrust to faithful men who will be able to teach others also,” (2 Tim. 2:1-2).

The “one holy catholic and apostolic church” in the fourth century referred to the authentic and authoritative church that continued from Jesus and the apostles, and faithfully transmitted their teaching—the teaching of the apostles that was later canonized in the NT writings. With the rise of Gnostic texts by the second century that claimed apostolic authorship, and by the fourth century as heretical doctrines of Arius were spreading, it became necessary to draw up lists of bishops that could be traced back to the Twelve.[1]  As J. N. D. Kelly says, when Christians inserted the title ‘apostolic church’ into the Nicene Creed, they wanted to affirm the historic and verifiable continuity of the faith of the church.[2]  The emphasis was on the teaching derived from the apostles and the inherent authority therein.

                Although ‘apostolic’ did not refer at the time explicitly to missionality it did so implicitly by the church’s connection to Jesus and the apostles.   J. F. Torrance states:

The one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church is the Church continuously occupied with the interpretation, exposition and application of the Holy Scripture, for it is in that way that the Church opens its mind and life to the direction and correction of the Word of God. And that was precisely what the Church was doing, not least in the theologically turbulent years between the Nicene [AD 325] and the Constantinopolitan Councils [AD 381]. I refer to the constant exegetical activity undertaken by the Church fathers in their attempt to bring to consistent expression the internal connections of the Gospel and thus, not only to clarify and defend the apostolic and catholic faith in the face of heretical disruption, but to provide the Church with a structural framework within which its members could meditate upon the Holy Scriptures, worship the Holy Trinity, proclaim the Gospel of forgiveness, reconciliation and sanctification, and so fulfill its mission in obedience to the command of Christ.[3]

  

Tertullian

              Certainly the authority of the apostolic church was derived from the teaching of the apostles.  By the third century, Tertullian of Carthage linked “apostolic churches” to Jesus’ mission of sending the Eleven into the world (Matt. 28:18-20).[4]  Tertullian stated that Jesus commanded them to “go and teach all nations,” and so “did the apostles, whom this designation indicates as ‘the sent.’”[5] Tertullian held that having “received the promised power of the Holy Spirit and after bearing witness to the faith in Jesus Christ throughout Judea and the surrounding churches,” the Twelve “next went out into the world and preached the same doctrine of the same faith to the nations.”[6]  In this manner, they “founded churches in every city, from which all the other churches, one after another, derived the tradition of the faith and the seeds of doctrine.” Tertuallian then states:

Indeed, it is on this account only that they will be able to deem themselves apostolic, as being the offspring of apostolic churches. Every sort of thing must necessarily revert to its original classification. Therefore the churches, although they are so many and so great, comprise but one primitive church, founded by the apostles, from which they all spring. In this way all are primitive, and all are apostolic while they are all proved to be one, in unbroken unity, by their peaceful communion, and title of brotherhood and bond of hospitality…[7]

                From this statement, Tertullian goes on to qualify what constitutes apostolic churches.  They are founded on the facts that Jesus Christ sent the apostles to preach and what they preached was the gospel.  This gospel message was received by the apostolic churches from their preaching (vive voce, living voice) and subsequently by their epistles.[8] Tertullian claimed:

If, then, these things are so, it is in the same degree made known that all doctrine agrees with the apostolic churches—those original formations and sources of the faith must be reckoned for truth, as undoubtedly containing that which the very churches received from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, Christ from God. Whereas all doctrine must be prejudged as false that tastes like anything contrary to the truth of the churches and apostles of Christ and God.[9]

                With this foundation Tertullian and others were able to judge any teaching as orthodox or heretical by comparing it to the teaching of the apostles.  If it was different—heterodox – then its author was “neither an apostle nor an apostolic man; because, as the apostles would never have taught things that were self-contradictory.”[10]

Interestingly Tertullian went on to state: “…those churches who although they do not derive their founder from apostles or apostolic men as being of much later date, for they are in fact being founded daily, yet, since they agree in the same faith, they are considered no less apostolic because they are agreed in doctrine.”[11] In other words, Tertullian affirmed that any church which arises without a direct tie to an eminent bishop or one of the Twelve was no less apostolic if it held to the same teaching as the apostolic churches.  For Tertullian, apostolicity was orthodoxy.  However, orthodoxy originated in Jesus who commissioned the apostles as “the sent” in order to “go and teach all nations.”

                This raises questions about authority, orthodoxy, and missionality.  As Tertullian claimed authority is derived from apostolic teaching.[12]  Thus, someone in a line of ordained bishops could be disqualified from ecclesial authority when deviating from apostolic teaching. Such heresy would cancel his authority among the apostolic churches.  This would apply equally to those who were missional but not orthodox.

A case in point is Ulfilas, the fourth century missionary who evangelized the Goths and translated the Bible into a Germanic language.  Ulfilas was consecrated bishop of the Gothic Christians by Eusebius of Nicomedia, bishop of Constantinople and follower of Arius who taught the heretical doctrine that Jesus the Son was neither equal with God the Father nor eternal. [13]  Uflilas held to this Arian teaching as well.  Clearly he was missional.  He proclaimed the gospel in word and deed. His missional activity led him, as some historians report, to aid 375 persecuted Christian Goths to cross the Danube into Roman territory.  Even though he labored to create the Gothic church among Visigoths and other Germanic peoples, because of his Arian heresy, he was not apostolic in his doctrine.

 Thus, apostolicity requires not merely missionality but orthodoxy.  Both are necessary.  Missionality must be orthodox in its formulations and orthodoxy must lead to orthopraxy—going, loving one’s neighbor, and making disciples, in the way of Jesus and the apostles.  In the final analysis, apostolicity refers foremost to the church’s grounding in the Scriptures, especially in the teaching of the apostles—the NT—but nevertheless, “… a community of the word is a community engaged in the movement that engaged the apostles.” [14] The church exists “by the ongoing work and word of the apostles.”[15]  For Christians, this means taking part in the movement that engaged Jesus and the Twelve.  In summary, J. F. Torrance states:

In its simplest sense the apostolicity of the Church refers back to the original foundation of the Church once for all laid by Christ upon the apostles, (Matt. 7:5; 1 Cor. 3:10ff; Eph. 2:20f; cf. Matt. 16:13-23; 1 Pet. 2:4-9) but it also refers to the interpretation of the existence and mission of the Church in its unswerving fidelity to that apostolic foundation. As the incarnate Son of the Father, Jesus regarded himself as having been anointed by the Spirit and clothed with his power for the fulfillment of his unique evangelical mission. (Luke 4:18f.).  With its completion in the cross and resurrection, he commissioned his disciples as apostles to act in his name, thereby linking their subordinate mission with his own supreme mission: ‘As the Father has sent me, so I send you.’ At the same time he breathed his Spirit upon them, thereby constituting their sending by him as the empirical counterpart to the sending of the Holy Spirit by the Father in the name of the Son, which took place as Jesus had promised on the day of Pentecost (John 17:18; 20:21; cf. 14:25f; 16:12; Lk. 24:49; Acts 2:2-8). Jesus was the

Apostle in the absolute sense. (Heb. 3:1).  The apostles, however, were sent out by him as his chosen witnesses whose word he promised to empower as his own, and thus to unfold in them his own self-revelation. That was the peculiar function of the apostles, to be the link between Christ and the Church, the hinge on which the incarnational revelation objectively given in Christ was grounded and realized within the continuing membership of the Church.  The apostolate was designed and formed by Christ to be the nucleus of the Church corporate with himself which his own self-witness was integrated with inspired witness to him and translated into the appropriate form ( i. e. the New Testament Scriptures) for its communication in history. [16]

The message and mission of Jesus Christ is entrusted to his disciples who are called to be faithful witnesses, from the original Twelve to those who will take their place in the mission of announcing the kingdom of God and holding fast to the faith once for all delivered to the saints.

---

[1] Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, Principles of Catholic Theology, trans. Sister Mary Frances McCarthy (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1987), in Stanley J. Grenz, Theology for the Community of God (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2000), 468;  Angelo Di Bernardino, Ancient Christian Doctrine 5: We Believe in the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church (Downers Grove, Ill: IVP Academic, 2010), 56. Francis A. Sullivan, From Apostles to Bishops: The Development of the Episcopacy in the Early Church”, 155.

[2] J. N. D. Kelly, “Catholiqué et ‘Apostliqué aux premiers siècles,” Istine (1969): 33-45, in Bernardino, 56.

[3] Thomas F. Torrance, Trinitarian Faith: The Evangelical Theology of the Ancient Catholic Faith (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 2000), 288.

[4] Prescriptions Against Heretics 20. (ANF 3:252) in Bernardino, 82.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid., 83.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Ibid.

[12] Hendrikus Berkof, Christian Faith, trans. Sierd Woudstra (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979), 409, in Grenz, 468-470.

[13] Everett Ferguson, ed. Encyclopedia of Early Christianity, Vol. 1 (New York: Routledge Press, 1990), 1149.

[14] John G. Flett, The Witness of God: The Trinity, Missio Dei, Karl Barth, and the Nature of Christian Community (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 263.

[15] Ibid., 264.

[16] Torrance, 285-286.

Is the ‘apostolic church’ missional? (part 2)

A discussion of the apostolic church as missional must not overlook the fact that Jesus Christ is too called an apostle. The single verse in the New Testament where apostolos (ἀπόστολος) is used of him is Hebrews 3:1, which says: “consider Jesus, the apostle and high priest of our confession.”[1]  In this statement, the author of Hebrews ties apostolicity to the mission of the Triune God (missio Trinitatis).   Jesus is the one whom the Father has sent, a theme repeated throughout the Gospel of John.[2]  In Hebrews 3:1, the basic idea of Jesus as “the apostle” is about mission. [3] He was sent by the Father with authority to accomplish a mission that was sacrificial in nature, as 1 John 4:10 states: “[God] loved us and sent (aposteilen) his Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”[4] Thus, the mission of the Triune God led to Jesus’ apostleship.  Indeed, his apostleship is the basis of all apostleship.  He is “the first apostle, the great apostle, and the source of all apostleship.” [5]  His apostolicity is prior to and the ground of all apostles.

After Jesus’ resurrection and ascension, the Eleven sensed the need to replace Judas, and so they sought someone who had been with Jesus and was an eyewitness of the risen Lord. The selection of this twelfth apostle was taken up in order to preserve the mission and authority entrusted to the Twelve. As such, they represented the church as the people of God on the pattern of the twelve tribes of Israel. Luke records in the Acts of the Apostles:

And they put forward two, Joseph called Barsabbas, who was also called Justus, and Matthias.  And they prayed and said, “You, Lord, who know the hearts of all, show which one of these two you have chosen to take the place in this ministry (diakonias) and apostleship (apostolēs), from which Judas turned aside to go to his own place.” And they cast lots for them, and the lot fell on Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles. (Acts 1:23-26)

With Matthias, the Twelve went on to fulfill their purpose as apostles of Jesus.  Theirs was a unique and historic role in the establishment of the church—“the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,” (Gal. 2:19-20).

Although the Twelve were a distinct group, the New Testament describes other apostles.[6]  Paul and James, the half-brother of Jesus, are two examples.  Paul asks about himself: “Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are not you my workmanship in the Lord? If to others I am not an apostle, at least I am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord,” (1 Cor. 9:1-2). As for James, the half-brother of Jesus, Paul said: “But I saw none of the other apostles except James the Lord’s brother,” (Gal. 1:19).  Clearly, as with Paul and, probably as with James, the apostolate referred to a group larger than the Twelve.

This idea of an apostolate larger than the Twelve, however, has caused some to question the selection of Matthias, thinking that it was a mistake by the Eleven since Paul was clearly identified as an apostle who would have completed the Twelve. In my Formation Group with students at TEDS, I came across this view in J. I. Packer’s Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs that states:

Acts 1:15-26 shows us the church before Pentecost prayerfully asking Christ through the casting of a lot to choose a successor to Judas. Whether they were right to do this, and Paul was Christ’s thirteenth apostle, or whether Paul was Christ’s intended replacement for Judas and the choice of Matthias was a mistake, is not clear in Acts; Luke himself may not have known.”[7]

Of course, Packer does not mention James, the half-brother of Jesus, even though Paul wrote: “I saw none of the other apostles—only James, the Lord’s brother.”[8]  Yet, Paul and James each rose to prominence in their respective spheres of leadership among the Twelve.  Paul was named the “apostle to the Gentiles” and announced himself as an apostle in most of his epistles (Rom 1:1; 11:13). James, the brother of Jesus, became the leader of the church in Jerusalem and was a principal author of the apostolic decree of Acts 15. Moreover, both leaders are mentioned as eyewitnesses of the risen Lord:

[Jesus] appeared to Cephas [Peter], then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.[9] Last of all, as to one untimely born, he appeared also to me [Paul]. For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. (1 Cor. 15:7-9)

Let us consider Barnabas also. While Luke usually limits his use of apostolos to the Twelve, he does refer to “the apostles Barnabas and Paul” (Acts 14:14).[10] Barnabas co-labored with Paul and was commissioned with him by the Holy Spirit to go to Seleucia and Cyprus (Acts 13:2-4). Paul asked: “Don’t we have the right to take a believing wife along with us, as do the other apostles (οἱ λοιποὶ ἀπόστολοι) and the Lord’s brothers and Cephas? Or is it only Barnabas and I who have no right to refrain from working for a living?” (1 Cor. 9:5-6) Like Paul, Barnabas worked to fulfill the apostolic ministries of proclaiming the gospel and establishing churches. Let us further consider Apollos, Silas, and Timothy. Paul referred to himself and Apollos as apostles (2 Cor. 4:6-9), and to himself, Silas and Timothy as apostles (1 Thess. 1:1; 2:6).[11]

So what does it mean that Jesus is the source of all apostleship? It means that his apostleship as the first apostle sent by the Father for redemptive mission is prior to and the ground all apostleship.

Triune God

↓

Jesus, The First Apostle

↓

The Twelve Apostles of Jesus

Peter, James and John, Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, Matthew, Thomas,

 James of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, Simon, Judas Iscariot, and later Matthias

↓

Other Apostles

Paul, James the brother of Jesus, Barnabas, Apollos, Titus, Timothy

↓

 

While the size of the apostolic circle cannot be determined exactly, the Twelve and all other apostles received their apostleship by virtue of their union with Jesus Christ, the first apostle.  Indeed his apostleship is the basis of all apostleship and the basis of the church apostolic.

What does it mean that the church is apostolic?  It means that it is “built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone,” (Gal. 2:20). It means that the church is sent on mission to continue the missio Trinitatis, doing so through the witness to the gospel of Jesus Christ in word and demonstrated in deed. It means the church is entrusted to guard the deposit of faith—the apostles' teaching recorded in the New Testament—in order to dispense it faithfully to others.

If the church is not missional, is it apostolic?  Continued.

---

[1] Hebrews 3:1, κατανοήσατε τὸν ἀπόστολον καὶ ἀρχιερέα τῆς ὁμολογίας ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦν,

[2] John 3:17; 34, 5:36; 6:29, 57; 7:29; 8:42; 10:36; 11:42; 17:3, et. al.

[3] Frank Gaebelein, ed., The Expositors Bible Commentary Vol. 12 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981): 31.

[4] Cf. Mark 10:45.

[5] Philip E. Hughes, A Commentary on the Epistles to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans, 1977): 127.

[6] For the Twelve, see: John 6:70 and Rev. 21:14. The New Testament describes other apostles—apostles of the churches as well.  Paul states : “And as for our brothers, they are messengers (apostles, ἀπόστολοι) of the churches, the glory of Christ.” 2 Cor. 8:23  While some understand “apostles of the churches” as another category of apostles, it more like means messengers or envoys.

[7] J. I. Packer, Concise Theology: A Guide to Historic Christian Beliefs (Carol Stream, Ill: Tyndale House, 1993): 197.

[8] Some doubt whether James, the Lord’s brother, was an apostle, as the ei mē (except, only) of Gal. 1:19 is ambiguous. Colin Brown, New Testament Theology Vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publ., 1986): 130.

[9] 1 Cor. 15:7, ἔπειτα ὤφθη Ἰακώβῳ, εἶτα τοῖς ἀποστόλοις πᾶσιν.

[10] See also Acts 13:50–14:4.

[11] 1 Thess. 2:6b  δυναμενοι εν βαρει ειναι ως χριστου αποστολοι

Is the ‘apostolic Church’ missional?

I am intrigued by the wording of the Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed of 381 that confesses, “We believe … In one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church.”  Within this expression, known historically as the four marks of the church, I am mostly intrigued with the words ‘apostolic church’  (ἀποστολικὴν ἐκκλησίαν).  As the Nicene Creed is recited regularly in Orthodox, Roman, and Protestant churches around the world, what do Christians mean by the words ‘apostolic church’?

I raise this question because of the present emphasis on the church as missional. This adjective describes the church as “sent” or “on mission.” So, is it possible that ‘apostolic church’ in the Nicene Creed describes the church as sent or on mission? Or does it refer simply to the origin and beliefs of the church as rooted in the teachings of the apostles of Jesus?  Or does it, as some claim, refer to the institution of the church as built upon Jesus and the apostles, with authority conferred successively to bishops through the laying on of hands?  Although the Nicene Creed was written as a statement of orthodox faith in response to heresies, it affirms nevertheless the church as apostolic in nature. So, how should Christians understand ‘apostolic church’?  Is the apostolic nature of the church missional as well as doctrinal?  Is it characterized by orthopraxy as well as orthodoxy? Does apostolicity include missionality?

Originally, the Greek verb apostellō (ἀποστέλλω) from which the adjective ‘apostolic’ came means to send forth a messenger, agent, message, or command.  The one sent (apostlos) was the personal representative of the one who sent him. Moreover, a connection existed between the sender and the recipient.[1]  The noun apostolos (ἀποστόλος), derived from the verb apostellō, was used first “in maritime language where it referred to a cargo ship, or the fleet sent, and later denoted a commander of a naval expedition, or a band of colonists sent overseas.[2]  The Jewish historian Josephus used a form of the word for a “group sent on a mission,” specifically Jews sent to Rome.[3] In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Scriptures, the verb apostellō was not used to denote an institutional appointment of someone to an office but the authorization of a person to fulfill a particular function or a clearly defined task.[4]  The stress fell on the one who gave authority to the one who was sent.

In the New Testament, John uses the verb apostellō to stress that it is the Lord who sends.  For instance, in John 17:18, Jesus prays: “As you [Father] sent (aposteilas) me into the world, so I have sent (apesteila) them [disciples] into the world.”[5]  John also uses apostellō with another Greek verb pempō (πέμπω)—a virtual synonym of apostellō—to emphasize that it is the Lord who sends.  In John 20:21, Jesus says to his disciples: “Peace be with you. As the Father has sent (apestalkev) me, even so I am sending (pempo) you.”[6]  Clearly, John’s use of pempo along with apostellō stresses the function of the disciples as being sent, in contrast to any institutional concept of apostolos.

Needless to say, apostolos is used in the New Testament of the fixed designation of a definite office, namely, that of the apostles (ἀπόστολοι) or apostolate, most often designating the Twelve. Mark’s Gospel records:

And he [Jesus] went up on the mountain and called to him those whom he desired, and they came to him. And he appointed twelve (whom he also named apostles) so that they might be with him and he might send (apostelle) them out to preach and have authority to cast out demons. (Mark 3:13-14)

Jesus appointed these disciples as apostles and soon sent them out to participate in his mission.[7]  It is important to note that originally the apostolate was not an office but a commission.[8]  This commission was renewed by Jesus following his resurrection, and certainly the Twelve were called to their authoritative position as witnesses of the resurrection with missionary responsibility (Matthew 28:19).

 

And where did the Twelve go?  Based upon history of church's expansion in the first centuries, various traditions record that Matthew went to Persia and Ethiopia. Peter went to Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Betania, and Italy, dying in Rome. Andrew preached to the Scythians and Thracians. Thomas traveled east and preached to the Parthians, Medes, Persians, Hyrcanians, Bactrians, and Margians, dying in India. Philip preached in Phrygia, and was crucified in Hierapolis. Thaddaeus preached in Edessa, Mesopotamia, and died at Berytus. Bartholomew preached in India with Thomas, went back to Armenia, and perhaps to Ethiopia and Southern Arabia. James preached the gospel in Spain.  Simon the Zealot went to Parthia. John ministered in Asia Minor and was exiled on the island of Patmos.[9]

So, is it possible that ‘apostolic church’ describes the church as sent or on mission?  Does 'apostolic church' describe a mark of the church concerned as much with orthopraxy as with orthodoxy, as much with the missionary nature of the apostles as with any historic connection to them?  Is missionality inherently tied to apostolicity?  Is the 'apostolic church' missional?     (continued)

---

[1] Colin Brown, ed., New Testament Theology Vol. 1, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986): 126-127.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews. 17, 11, 1. “So when Varus had settled these affairs, and had placed the former legion at Jerusalem, he returned back to Antioch; but as for Archelaus, he had new sources of trouble come upon him at Rome, on the occasions following: for an embassage of the Jews was come to Rome, Varus having permitted the nation to send it, that they might petition for the liberty of living by their own laws. Now the number of the ambassadors that were sent by the authority of the nation were fifty, to which they joined above eight thousand of the Jews that were at Rome already.”

[4] Brown, New Testament Theology Vol. 1, 127.

[5] John 17:18, καθὼς ἐμὲ ἀπέστειλας εἰς τὸν κόσμον, κἀγὼ ἀπέστειλα αὐτοὺς εἰς τὸν κόσμον.

[6] John 20:21, Εἰρήνη ὑμῖν, καθὼς ἀπέσταλκέν με ὁ πατήρ, κἀγὼ πέμπω ὑμᾶς.

[7] Mark 6:7, “And he called the twelve and began to send them (αὐτοὺς ἀποστέλλειν) out two by two, and gave them authority over the unclean spirits.”

[8] Brown, New Testament Theology Vol. 1, 131.

[9] Cf. Alvin J. Schmidt, How Christianity Changed the World (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2004): 19.

Missional Creed

A liturgy of worship can shape the witness and mission of the people as they gather for worship in order to be sent. This creed has been read in unison in a variety of settings including my Missional Church course at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School.  A recent post reported that it was used in a service of St. David's Cathedral in Australia. This creed, based on the ancient symbols, is written to affirm the gospel and to prepare the readers for mission in the world:

We believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, who sent his Son into the world, and who now sends us into the world, as witnesses to his reign in heaven and on earth.

We believe in Jesus Christ, who was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the Virgin Mary, and became man, the Light of Light who entered our darkened world, to proclaim good news to the poor, to heal the sick, and to set the oppressed free. For us and for our salvation, he suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried.  On the third day he rose as victor from the dead.  He ascended into heaven where he is head of his body, the church, and will come again in glory and judgment, and reign in his triumphal kingdom.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the giver of life, who leads us, the people of God, on the mission of God, to join in the work of the kingdom of God. In this, we are called as Christ’s holy and apostolic church, to bear witness to God’s love, mercy and justice, to proclaim good news in word and deed, to make disciples of all peoples, for the redemption of all creation, to the glory of God’s holy name.  Amen.

dmg 2014

Charity on the Prairie: Christian Orphans' Home of Nebraska

        The Christian Orphans’ Home of Phelps Center, Nebraska, began in 1888 in response to human need—a response prompted by love of God and neighbor. The orphanage was founded by Axel Nordin (1858-1912), pastor of the Swedish Free Mission at Phelps Center, now Holcomb Evangelical Free Church. Nordin took into his home three young girls and by this act of charity laid the foundation for this work of caring for and educating orphans and other dependent children.

 

According to a local newspaper at the time, L. W. Larson, a blacksmith from Loomis, was without his wife and found he was unable to care for his daughters. The three girls were brought to the pastor with a request that he provide for their care. Since Nordin was a bachelor, he enlisted the help of his mother, Mrs. Lars Nordin. It soon became generally known that they took in destitute children and orphans, and consequently received additional applications.  In over a year the number of children increased from three to nineteen, with eleven boys and eight girls.

 

Nordin, originally from Skultuna, Västmanland, Sweden, was converted to faith during his youth and began to preach at age twenty. When he arrived to America, he joined the Free Mission work. His mother, Anna Stina, and father, Lars, immigrated in 1884, settling in Phelps County. The Free Mission church at Phelps Center had been established in 1880 by Fredrik Franson who along with burgeoning Free Mission Friends drew upon the Swedish Pietism of P. P. Waldenström and American Revivalism of D. L. Moody.

When the home incorporated in 1889, the board included such members as: J. G. Princell and John Martenson of Chicago, Axel Nordin, John Dahlström, and several highly respected citizens of Phelps County. The home was incorporated with the understanding that any homeless child of any race or religious faith would be admitted. The home’s early history titled Hågkomster och Minnen (Recollections and Memories) reported that Nordin knew that such an undertaking would require effort and sacrifice and that the education of the children entrusted to his care came with great responsibility. This work was “not the management of perishable things or temporal capital, but the care of eternal souls whose formation shaped essentially who they would become then, as well as in the future. To undertake such an exceedingly great responsibility before God and humanity was not to be taken lightly.”

 

Mary Johnson Norlen

In 1890 the home continued after Nordin accepted a call to become pastor of the Oak Street Free Mission, now First Evangelical Free Church, in Chicago.  Miss Mary Johnson (1850-1927), affectionately known as “Tant Mary,” came from the Windy City to assume responsibility as the housemother. She was assisted by others including Charles Norlen whom she married. The Norlens themselves adopted two children, Jennie and Reuben.

 

            The orphanage was designed to be a safe and healthy environment— an alternate home for distressed children.  Most of them came from where “hardly a ray of human love and affection was known.” The children often arrived “dirty, clothed in rags, and devoid of humane treatment.” It was reported:

They have perhaps a father in their life, but he consumes everything he earns and then wastes everything he possesses, and moreover, when he comes home, he is a terror to his family. … They have perhaps a mother, but because of sorrow and hardship, she has become so overwhelmed that she has hardly a trace of motherly instinct left. … O, the poor children that are raised in such homes! What can we expect will become of them? How bleak is the future for these small, innocent creatures! Should not philanthropy’s (människokärleken, love of humankind) sunlight displace the dark, heavy clouds that hang over these troubled homes, ready to crush so many of their futures?

 

            The Free Mission Friends who supported this work maintained a theological view of social obligation in this world and eschatological hope for the world to come.  In light of the circumstances that “put innocent children in the most horrific distress, without homes and without care” and in “hearing the heart-rending cries for help until the blood curdles in one’s veins,” they were prompted to ask: “Why all this suffering? Why all this sin? Why such neglect?”

 

Nordin and the staff who followed him were saddened as they witnessed extreme poverty alongside luxuriance, and wondered: “How can some people so completely forget the needs of others? For, from one man ‘[God] made of one blood all the nations of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth.’” Like earlier Pietists whose sense of social obligation was shaped by the Bible, these Free Mission Swedes believed it was their responsibility to care for God’s creation, and asked, “Should we not all be struck by the Master’s words: ‘For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in…Whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’”



Personnel of the Orphans' Home

In contrast to Jesus’ words of warning, the home’s staff held to the conviction that they were “here on earth to protect and care for each other.” They thought that to neglect this responsibility would bring fearful consequences. They held that everyone would “give an account at the judgment.” And yet they looked forward to Jesus’ second coming, saying: “Come soon, come soon!” In essence, they viewed Jesus’ return in glory as “a day of rejoicing for many,” but also a day of “woe to those who will be held accountable for their neglect!”

 

When Nordin presented his plan for the children’s home at the Free Mission’s meeting at Phelps Center in 1889, it was received with great interest.  Since no orphanage existed among the Swedish free-church denominations in America at the time, the need was easily recognized. The Free Mission preachers from different parts of the country pledged their support, and interest continued among their churches as well as other Swedish-American denominations.  Although the home was supported mostly by Swedes, the doors were open to every needy child as long as room and funds permitted. At times there were “twelve to fifteen children of [other] foreign nationality.”

 

From the beginning, the primary objective of the home was “to be a Christian home”—a home that surrounded the children with Christian influence. Therefore, the staff was generally comprised of those “who professed and proved to be Christians.” With such close proximity to the Free Mission church in Phelps Center—just five minutes away—the children attended Sunday school and occasional preachers’ meetings. Regarding the children, it was reported:

 

Not a few have given their hearts to God, and profess faith in Christ. It is certainly great to see human beings saved from temporal suffering and destruction, but how much greater is it to see them saved eternally. Temporal life and happiness are valuable enough but do not compare with eternal life and happiness. How beautiful it is to hear the children’s testimonies when they say they will live for Jesus and obey him. We believe, too, that while seeds planted in the children’s minds may soon be forgotten and we may not see the long-awaited harvest as soon as we would like, the seeds will sooner or later bear fruit. When we have sown and watered, have we done our part; God makes it grow.

 

Clearly, the home not only observed the mandate to care for others but also the mandate to proclaim the good news of Jesus, keeping in view the Pietist principle of personal conversion.

 

            The Christian Orphans’ Home sought the children’s safety and wellbeing, much like the biblical concept of shalom, often translated as peace but includes wholeness or holistic health of body and soul, and living in harmony with God and fellow man. From the beginning, the home was to be a “life-saving institution” (räddningsanstalt). Sometimes it was not mostly orphans who needed protection and care but defenseless children, victims of domestic violence. One such child had come to the home after having been mistreated by the father. It was noted: “The child would scream with all its might whenever a man came in the vicinity.” In light of the home’s purpose, the early history records:

What a contrast between what things should and could be, and how they are!  A

happy home is the best imitation on earth of heaven, while an unhappy home is the extreme opposite. To escape from such a “home” and enter a Christian orphanage is a benefit to these little ones… Therefore, a great deal of insight and understanding is required in order to lead and nurture the minds of these children in the right direction, and in this manner, we pluck the weeds that have taken root and started to grow, and replace them with what is wholesome and good.

 

Girls at the Christian Orphans' Home

 

During its years of operation the home purchased 240 acres of land, erected and expanded its dormitory, and added other buildings including a school. In 1926, it relocated to a new facility west of Holdrege and changed its name to the Christian Children’s Home. The work continued until 1954 when growth of the foster care system in Nebraska enabled an alternative setting for the care of homeless and abused children.

 

Between the years 1888 and 1954, it is estimated that the home welcomed over 1,100 children. While some were residents briefly, others grew there to adulthood. The facility has continued until today as Christian Homes Care Community, providing nursing care and assisted living to senior adults.

 

            The Christian Orphans’ Home remains an example of a theologically informed and socially engaged Pietism. This continued through the early decades of the twentieth century when American Fundamentalism was separating social action from the Christian life and focusing almost exclusively on “spiritual” matters. Yet during this period and afterwards, the Christian Children’s Home practiced a faith that proclaimed the gospel in word and deed. This charity on the Nebraska prairie is an example of what it means to love God and neighbor.