5 Ways Christendom Corrupted Christianity in Europe

Greg B. Rast, M.Div.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

The more I read about the development of the Christendom socio-political system on the
European continent, the more troubled I become. The simple faith of Jesus that calls us
to live in deep unity with the Father heart of God, was traded for a political system that
served to develop wealth and power for a very human purposes. Whereas Jesus calls us
to a matrix of power and social relationship that is a complete alternative to the world
system, the systems of Christendom used Christian terminology, theology, and practice,
to further a human empire system, to control and subjugate people, and to develop
wealth for the imperial leaders. The differences between the teaching of Jesus and the
cultural system that came to attain in Europe by the 800’s A.D. couldn’t be more stark.
Whereas in Jesus’ matrix of power, those who surrender their life gain it (Mt. 16:25) and
the one who serves is the greatest (John 13:1-16), in the Christendom system it was those
among the aristocracy who commanded the greatest financial and military resources that
also commanded the greatest respect and influence in the socio-political system. The
foundations for this corruption of the Christian faith were laid in its transition to official
religion of the Roman Empire in the early fourth century. In the early Middle Ages,
between the fourth and sixth centuries A.D. these foundations were refined and deepened.
Theologians like Augustine played an important role in reinterpreting biblical passages to
fit into an empire system and developed a new biblical hermeneutic. In the early seventh
and eighth centuries A.D., Christian faith was beginning to spread more widely on the
European continent, thanks to the efforts of the Irish and Celtic mission. The Irish and
the Celts brought their own problems to the continent, but early on did not function under
the Roman / Christendom empire system, and provide an interesting ground for reflection
on modern mission to the continent. European culture at this early point was still tribal
and therefore unsystematic in nature and the Irish and Celtic mission pursued its activity
on this basis. The Roman perspective, however, judged itself to be superior to the
indigenous European culture and pursued mission on a systematic, aristocratic and
imperial basis. By the 9th century A.D., Christian faith on the continent had become
absorbed by the interests of a developing empire system and could not be distinguished
from it. At least 5 significant modifications were made to the faith in this time and
illustrate how severe the departures from biblical faith were to become.

Corruption #1: Discipleship as Professional Enterprise

Biblical discipleship has to do with following the person and practices of Jesus Christ and
as such it pertains to every believer. As we see in Acts 2:41-47, new believers were
baptized, began learning the teaching, and joined in the activities of the apostolic mission.
That is the normal pattern throughout the New Testament and as such, Paul could easily
say to the Philippians:

Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me , or seen in me --put

it into practice. And the God of peace will be with you.

In this way, Christian faith was passed from person to person and each person who
became a believer accepted the challenge of living with and like Christ Jesus in a world
gone seriously awry. As in 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4 there were functions for
leadership, but rather than these functions being organizational ones, they were spiritual
by definition. But the Carolingian and Holy Roman Empires would have a much
different approach. As Latin became the only acceptable theological language and the
language of exchange between aristocracy, and as priests themselves slowly became
officials of the empire system, the role of spiritual leaders began to change. It was at this
time that the core of the developing legal and theological system became inaccessible to
all but a tiny group of people. As Peter Brown writes,

In the gap that had opened, now in all parts of Europe, between Latin and the bulk
of the “Christian people,” the voice of the “preacher” was expected to be heard
more frequently than ever before. For only a “preacher,” as translator and
pedagogue, could pass on the correct meaning of a Christian law that had become
opaque in its Latin form.1

Rather than being a spiritual leader, the priest became a translator and interpreter of
religious texts and imperial law. Reading the letters of Boniface one is overwhelmed by
the fact that his correspondence is dominated by questions of how to apply the codes of
Rome to church and monastery rather than questions of biblical teaching. This was a
revolutionary change in the type of leadership exercised by spiritual leaders. Lay people,
on the other hand, had no choice but to simply accept what was said to them as they
neither had access to the source texts, nor were they challenged to apply biblical teaching
to their own lives. It is not surprising then that levels of Christian discipleship would
sink to dismal levels under such a system.

While the Protestant Reformation would later address some of the linguistic issues
involved and give the Bible back to the people in written form, the position of clergy as
“professional disciples” and representatives of the political and social system would not
be addressed. The responsibility of every believer to live as a disciple of Christ would be
obscured for further generations.

Corruption #2: The use of the Bible for social control

Not only did discipleship change, but the meaning of the Bible as a religious source text
changed and its social function changed in the context of the new European empires.
During the apostolic generation teachers such as the apostle Paul appeared to have carried
their own set of manuscripts with them (2 Tim. 4:14). Doing so was no doubt costly in
its own right but served an important function for a spiritual teacher. In the transition,
however, to imperial object, the Bible transformed from a simple set of manuscripts
which fulfilled a spiritual purpose into elaborately decorated objects that illustrated the
wealth and power of the empire and often failed to fulfill their spiritual purpose. Such
manuscripts were exchanged between officials and monasteries and filed in libraries
where experts studied the developing system of imperial law. But how was the Bible
being used as a source text during this time? Stuart Murray writes:

Having accepted political support, and understanding this as divinely

providential, theologians naturally adjusted their interpretation of the Bible to
 reflect and undergird the new context. They used it to legitimize a social order
that benefited both church and state, not to challenge the system. The traditional
‘prophetic minority’ critique was supplanted by a ‘moral majority’ stance.
Furthermore, the church’s social centrality and involvement in the power
structures significantly affected the presuppositions with which it approached
Scripture. The view from the centre differs from the view from the margins. The
story is the same, but it is read and applied differently. Texts like Romans 13,
written to help marginal churches survive in a hostile environment, were now
interpreted in ways that reflected Christendom requirements by inculcating loyal
and uncritical citizenship.2

Rather than transmitting the faith taught by Jesus, who often challenged the religious
establishment of his day, the Bible was now being used to legitimate the policies and
desires of the empire. The obvious disparity was hidden from sight because the Bible
was removed from the hands of the people. The political implications are obvious and
it’s no wonder that the publishing of the Bible in popular language by people like
Tyndale and Luther was so controversial. The Reformation, however, would not
completely resolve the issue, rather each resulting Christendom system and political state
would develop their own Bible translation and method of interpretation and continue with
a similar, simply revised, imperial system.

Corruption #3: Mission as cultural replacement

A third corruption of the Christian faith in Christendom was the replacement of
revelational and declarational mission with a mission model that replaced an “inferior
culture” with a “superior” one. Biblically, when it comes to the mission methods of
Jesus, one notices the absence of morality based teaching (“this is what you should do…
therefore) and also the absence of social pressure as a mechanism. Rather Jesus seemed
to want people to discover the truth of who he is within the framework of their own
experience. Later, the disciples (as Peter’s message in Acts 1) would pursue a
declarational form of mission, carrying the news as eyewitnesses of what Jesus had done.

In Christendom, however, another form of mission developed, and that was mission as
cultural replacement. We have already commented on Christendom’s abandonment of
biblical discipleship. Whereas a missionary role might previously have involved teaching
basics of the Christian faith and then helping new believers become disciples of Christ,
the role of the missionary itself now changed. The new role? To represent the culture and
policies of the empire. Peter Brown writes:

To enforce baptism without so much as a minimal degree of indoctrination – as

had happened in the case of the Saxons and the Avars – shocked men such as
Alcuin. Avars were not like those early converts described in the Acts of the
Apostles, such as the centurion Cornelius. A Roman centurion, Alcuin pointed
out, had received a liberal education. As a result, he understood the preaching of
the Apostle Peter and could be instantly baptized. This was not to be expected of
the Avars around Vienna – “a brutish and unreasonable race, certainly not given
to literacy.” They should be allowed at least a toke forty days of Christian
 preparation. Bishops in Saxony, he complained, had been forced to become
“collectors of tithes” before they were able to act as “preachers of the Gospel.”3

The role of the missionary became essentially to welcome newcomers into the empire
and to collect imperial taxes! There was a dark side though to the new role as well that
one notices in Alcuin’s writing: that of being the judge and enforcer of the new culture.
One sees this clearly in Boniface as well. He is dismayed by the disorganization of the
pre-existing churches and the fact that they do not follow the policies of Rome. He
works tirelessly to bring them under Rome’s allegiance and implement Rome’s policies
and procedures. He is most famous, of course, for the power encounter at Hesse, where
he chopped down the sacred tree dedicated to Thor, and exposing the weakness of pagan
religion. What one notices in these “missionaries” is 1.) their judgment of the pre-
existing culture as wanting and 2.) their judgment of the people as inferior and in many
cases, not just resistant to the gospel, but altogether incapable of receiving it. This
attitude was a Roman imperial legacy, transmitted through the church, and replanted in
European culture! Combined with a lack of biblical focus and biblical discipleship it
would prove deadly. Rather than experiencing Christ within their own experience and
being transformed by it, people would simply be pushed into a cultural system by force,
“for their own good,” and then considered Christians without any personal transformation
having taken place. Because pagan peoples hadn’t experienced the personal
transformation that comes through knowing Christ, they continued to act like pagans.
Rather than deal with the spiritual issues, the empire simply changed the names and dates
of pagan customs and festivals to “Christian” ones, collected the empire’s new taxes, and
called it good.

Corruption #4: Tithing for allegiance and wealth

Stuart takes on the practice of tithing and declares it as essentially unbiblical for a New
Testament church. He also writes from an Anabaptist perspective, which also no doubt
influences this. Biblically, even in the New Testament we know that offerings were
taken up for particular needs (2. Co 8:19 for example) and I see nothing in the New
Testament that would suggest this couldn’t be done on a regular basis. The Old
Testament practice seems to have had several variations. For Abraham, it was an
offering of thankfulness (Gen. 14:20). In Dt. 12:17 it seems to have been a celebratory
event of prosperity and the recognition that what we have comes from God. The tithe
was consumed by the person offering it in the presence of the Lord. Participants were
instructed to not forget to include the priest and the Levites in this celebration and later in
Dt. 26:12 this is fleshed out more specifically so that the Levites, poor and widows could
be provided for. These dimensions of the practice could easily remain in a New
Testament practice of the faith.

What is clear is that tithing served a particular function in the Christendom system in
Europe. Within the context of the emerging empire, tithing was simply the price one paid
for being part of the social system. The spiritual purpose of thankfulness, the direct
application in the worship of God, and the provision for the poor and for spiritual workers
was lost. Tithing also became a compulsory by mandate of the State. This was
essentially a religious tax exacted by the empire. Peter Brown comments that
Charlemagne essentially understood tithing as a pledge of loyalty… not to God, but to
him, and to the State:

For Charles, baptism and the payment of tithes meant loyalty. On the frontier, the
quicker they were imposed the better.

The system of imposed tithing lead to prosperity for the empire and for its churches and
monasteries but at the price of abstracting it from its spiritual purpose.

Corruption #5: The use of compulsory baptism for social control and propagation
Baptism became compulsory as well and the meaning of baptism changed as well.
Rather than being a radical public declaration of the repentance from sin, and the decision
to follow in the footsteps of Jesus, baptism became another symbol of belonging to the
empire. Murray writes:

Second, infant baptism became, not exceptional, but first normal and then legally
required… As late as the fifth-century, children from Christian homes were
usually baptized after the age of twelve, but in most places by the sixth century
infant baptism was normal. This also removed baptism from the start of the
Christian life, linking it instead to the beginning of physical life; it meant entrance
not into the church as a distinct community within society, but into a sacral
society in which the church was no longer a separate entity.4

Summary
Through a number of key changes, emerging post-Roman empires on the continent of
Europe used Christianity to impose structure and order on what had been tribal societies.
In doing so, major points of Christian teaching and practice were subverted and either
ceased to function or became unrecognizable. There ceased to be a separation between
“Christians” and the “world” in any New Testament sense. European society and
Christian faith were simply equated with one another, and no one questioned whether
European society itself was essentially Christian, or in fact sub-Christian. Belonging to
the society by default meant that one was Christian… most of the time without access to
the Scriptures, without being discipled, and often without having had any real experience
of Christ at all. Today we are said to be “post-Christendom” which means that this
cultural system is past. There are remaining cultural vestiges such as baptismal rubrics
and state churches but for the masses they have little meaning. Christianity is still
understood on the European continent as that old world, forced, social structure, and
people want nothing to do with it. We can rejoice that the structure itself has failed, but
we will be paying the price for it for many years to come. Countries experiencing their
own form of Christendom (such as the United States) need to be careful not to repeat the
mistakes of the European Christendom system which have lead widespread skepticism
with regards to the Christian message. On the continent, Christians will have to take care
to recover the biblical meaning of the practices listed above, to engage in new forms of
mission and work patiently towards better days.
1. Brown, Peter. The Rise of Western Christendom. Blackwell: Oxford, 1996. ISBN: 1-
55786-136-6. p. 218.
2. Murray, Stuart. Post-Christendom – Church and Mission in a Strange New World.
Milton Keynes: Authentic Media: 2004. ISBN 978-184227-261-9. p. 119.
3. Brown. p. 289-90
4. Murray. pp. 88-9.