Musings on church history

"As I have been talking about early church history (2nd and 3rd century) we do see a good bit of that confusion. But these people were pioneers, leading the way in doing the great work of defending the faith, stating the faith, and living the faith. We honor them for that even though they made many mistakes. It was a time of productive confusion. . .The church had to try to decide what really is allowable, what is true and what is not. Gradually there was an answer to that question. We call that answer “orthodoxy,” the orthodox position of the church. “Orthodoxy” means “right belief.” And we call everything else heresies. Originally that word simply meant “an opinion,” “a party,” or “group.” But eventually it came to mean something that is wrong, something that is opposed to true teaching."

This is a quote from a study on church history I’m reading.  It’s interesting to me that through out much of the church’s history there have been areas of division, points on which two (or more) sides can’t seem to agree.  

I do appreciate all those who wrestled with these issues and believe it was necessary to establish parameters of truth. 

I just sometimes wonder if the church, like the rabbinical Jews, spent too much time focusing on “doctrine” (which means teaching, much like the word torah) and not enough on just following Jesus.  We seem to like well defined “rules” that we can point to and say this is right and this is wrong.  If we really understand loving the Father, loving one another and living loved, it just seems we wouldn’t need to be so concerned with defining it.

Augustine is attributed with saying “"In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity.”  I guess the question has always been, what are the “essentials”.  I think that’s a reason why the Father gives us His Spirit, so that we can discern what is essential and leave the rest in His hands.