Forces That Ruin Fellowship – Lesson From Second Century

Why did koinonia and dynamic church life fade in Christianity?

Many of us sense that church should be more relational and that everyone should be able to develop and exercise their spiritual gifts. Without this church seems more like a spectator experience (or a “busy-ness” experience) than a participation experience.

By the end of the 2nd century several forces began to combine to reduce koinonia, or fellowship, in the Christian church. Fellowship became less important in the Church’s spiritual theology (the theology of spiritual growth.) Understanding these forces will help us to avoid the same problems today and recommit ourselves to true koinonia. As you read this list you might ask yourself if there are similar forces today that interfere with koinonia. Here is a list of some of the forces:

1. The Church was focusing on teaching proper doctrine so believers would not be led astray. Christianity was experiencing a lot of opposition from other philosophies, from sects within Christianity, and from Roman government. This included the traditional pantheon of gods and the Roman temple system, lies about Christian practices, Neoplatonism (which was just beginning and influenced Origen who influenced many others), Gnosticism, Montanism, etc. Unfortunately, the focus on doctrine led to the neglect of biblical koinonia.

2. The Eucharist and liturgy came to dominate weekly gatherings. Liturgy was used for doctrinal education. This meant less time for building relationships and developing spiritual gifts. Believers became less involved.

3. Bishops claimed more authority in order to combat false teachers. The Roman culture emphasized authority and most of the Church Fathers adopted this attitude. The eventually led to the doctrine of papal authority. As the clergy claimed more authority and control over “doing ministry” the rank and file lost control. Also, by the end of the 4th century more bishops became worldly as the office of bishop became a financial advantage.

4. Platonic philosophy influenced the Church. Platonism disdained the physical world because it was considered somewhat illusory; reality was “behind” what our senses perceived. This meant the natural world and natural life were not valued as much; this reduced the value of close relationships. Origen and the Desert Fathers were strongly influenced by this.

5. Platonic and Stoic individualism influenced the Church’s teachings. Platonism and Stoicism emphasized the development of virtue by one’s own efforts. This attitude crept into the Church and magnified the ever present problem of human self-effort that scripture teaches against. This problem became especially prominent in many of the Desert Fathers.

6. Gnostic and platonic emphasis on knowledge which reduces the value of affections and relationships. Some Church Fathers were strongly influenced by this.

7. Biblical koinonia requires vulnerability and leaders naturally avoid vulnerability for the sake of their pride. Sharing burdens with others, asking for prayer, receiving encouragement, or confessing weaknesses is hard for leaders even if they are fellowshipping with other leaders. Thus, leaders tend to avoid biblical koinonia. This means they are not modeling it and are less likely to make it happen in their church.

8. Growth of the church meant meetings were larger, especially in more influential cities, which meant it was less practical for all believers to edify one another. Presumably, extra, smaller gatherings would be required for koinonia to happen.

9. Widespread use of the allegorical hermeneutic meant that many Christian teachers looked behind the biblical text for meaning. This was an influence from Platonism which emphasized looking behind the natural. The natural meaning of the text was often neglected. This meant Pauline theology and other New Testament theology was not fully studied and embraced. This meant that the Pauline emphasis on koinonia did not become prominent in the Church. Church government eventually became so elitist that Luther was compelled to reestablish the priesthood of all believers. (Note: I am not a Plato basher. Plato was an important transition teacher from Greek polytheism towards monotheism and virtue. I.e., he helped prepare the Roman Empire for Christianity. Unfortunately, it was a two-edge sword since Platonism also brought weaknesses into the Church. It was a powerful force that Church Fathers had a hard time getting past.)

10. The decline of spiritual gifts meant rank and file believers were less equipped to minister. As the idea faded that each believer had spiritual gifts (supernatural and “non-supernatural”) to actively contributing towards koinonia it became less important for believers to meet in small groups for biblical koinonia. Fewer tools meant less “work” being done.

This last item is by no mean the least. In fact, it may be the most important item, along with the trend toward increasing ecclesiastical authority.

We can observe the reverse dynamic in koinonia in the Pentecostal movement of the early 20th century. Many laymen were equipped with spiritual gifts to edify one another and for evangelism and spread throughout America and the world. Within a hundred years the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement numbered over 500 million. It was the second largest social movement of the 20th century after communism and the largest movement still growing at the end of the 20th century. And it was very decentralized.

Thus, we should be on our guard against forces similar to the ones faced in the second century. Fellowship needs to be a foundation for our spiritual theology. This will go a long way towards restoring true koinonia and a more dynamic life in our churches.