A Journey of Fear and Joy: Second Edition Revised & Expanded

By Oswin Craton

A Journey of Fear and Joy is the story of one man’s journey to the church of the New Testament. Having been brought up in the Church of Christ (a part of the Campbell-Stone Restoration Movement), he believed his church was the original first-century church restored. But while investigating the history of the Lord’s church, he discovered a number of inconsistencies in the beliefs and practices of the present-day “restored” church with the church of the first century. This book presents a summary of his findings and the startling conclusions he reached in his rediscovery of the church we read about in the New Testament. It is the tale of a journey that brought the author both much fear and great joy. Readers may be surprised at his conclusions, but no more surprised than he when he learned that the original church had been with us all along, the faith having been maintained in historical continuity throughout the centuries by the Eastern Orthodox Church.

This second edition incorporates both the original book first published in 2004, and also the companion volume Apologia from 2014 that helped expand upon the original and included a number of questions and answers stemming from the first book.

• Language: English
• Publisher: AuthorHouse
• Release date: May 20, 2020
• ISBN: 9781728361819

Oswin Craton

Oswin Craton was born to two devout Bible-believing Christian parents who first taught him to love the Lord Jesus Christ. Himself a staunch advocate of Restoration Movement principles during his early life, he received his undergraduate degree in Bible from a Christian university and remained active in the education ministry of various Churches of Christ in several states throughout his adulthood. While serving as a deacon he began researching the history of the church and through an intense study was led eventually to the Eastern Orthodox Church into which he was received in 2002.

Book preview

© 2020 All Saints Orthodox Church, Bloomington, IN. All rights reserved.

No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted by any means without the written permission of the author.

Published by AuthorHouse  05/19/2020

ISBN: 978-1-7283-6182-6 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-7283-6181-9 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2020908842

Cover: St. Sergius Chapel in Eagle River, Alaska.

Photo by Victor Lutes. Used by permission.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Contents

Preface

PART ONE

Why the Discussion?

Objections Considered

Orthodoxy and the Bible

PART TWO

Baptism

Chrismation

The Eucharist

Repentance and Confession

The Priesthood

Icons

Worship

Mary and the Departed Saints

Concluding Thoughts

PART THREE

Miscellaneous Questions & Answers

Questions about Mary

Further Reading

Footnotes

Preface

This book is not about me. But because it is addressed primarily to those who are affiliated with the Campbell-Stone Restoration movement, it likely will be beneficial for my readers to know something of my religious background and upbringing. Seeing as I spent all my formative years and much of my adult life in the Church of Christ, my decision to be received into the Eastern Orthodox Church a number of years ago has caused many of my associates to question why. It is my hope that this little treatise will help lead to a fuller understanding of and perhaps even to a deeper inquiry into the church and her mission.

Since each congregation of the Church of Christ is considered autonomous, it is possible that some of the points I discuss in this book may be different from what individual readers may have experienced or been taught in their own upbringing. The things I discuss represent what I myself was taught and experienced during my time in the Church of Christ from the 1950s through the 1990s, mostly in the Deep South. I understand that many followers of this movement have softened their approaches to some of these issues, but I must rely on what I know and was taught myself. (For those who wish to know more of the substance of beliefs held by the majority of members of the Church of Christ during my formative years, I would refer you to the book Why I Am a Member of the Church of Christ by Leroy Brownlow as this volume was considered – and still is in many areas – the definitive work on what the Church of Christ believes and teaches.)

A little of my history

I was born into a very devoted Christian family that was part of the Campbell-Stone Restoration movement, specifically one of the three major groups that came out of the movement, the Church of Christ (hereafter referred to as the CofC simply as a matter of convenience and to differentiate this particular religious body from the general term church of Christ). I was nurtured in this church by many wonderful, loving people, and I wish it known from the outset that I have a great love and appreciation for all who taught me throughout the years. I do not question the sincerity of anyone’s devotion, nor do I harbor any ill-will whatever toward those who lovingly taught me Christ and His Gospel during my formative years. The foundation they gave me has been crucial to my spiritual life, and I sincerely thank all who had a hand in my development. To this day a number of my immediate family and close friends remain devoted members of the CofC, and it is to them primarily that I address what follows. I trust that it will be received with the love with which it is written. If in any part I appear unappreciative or strident, it will be due solely to my inability to express my thoughts in a more appropriate manner. In no wise do I wish to appear demeaning of or condescending toward those who hold to the restorationist viewpoint.

I was fortunate to have been brought up in a rather active congregation of the CofC that, for its time and place, was moderately large in number and full of vitality for the Lord. I have many fond memories of both Sunday school and outside activities for us children, and during my teen years a very active youth group of which I was a part. So influenced was I by all that I was taught and observed that after my freshman year of college I decided I wanted to be a missionary for the CofC, and so I put on hold a rather promising music career to pursue studies at a Christian college where I hoped I would learn what I needed to be an effective missionary.

As events transpired, I never went into the mission field (though this had nothing whatever to do with any disillusionment with the church) but instead married after graduating and helped put my wife through medical school. I remained quite active in every congregation we attended throughout her schooling and residency and even became the minister of education in one of these congregations. After we settled into a permanent residence I continued to act as a minister of education in our home church, where later I was appointed a deacon.

While remaining fully devoted to the Restoration cause, I will confess to having begun entertaining various questions about some of our beliefs and practices a number of years ago. I never considered that any of my questions represented anything significant enough to necessitate going elsewhere (I truly believed that the CofC, for whatever faults it may have, was the closest thing we had to the genuine New Testament church), but over time I did note a number of inconsistencies with our claims. Throughout all this time I continued studying and praying intensely that God would lead me to know what I should do to further restore His church to what He desired it to be.

It was during this time of deep soul-searching and prayer that I, seemingly by accident, stumbled upon an Orthodox bookstore in Indianapolis, Indiana. Never having been to an Orthodox bookstore before (and knowing little about Orthodox Christianity beyond what I’d read in some of my Russian history classes in undergrad), I looked through its shelves eagerly. My main idea was that I might perhaps find some material that I could bring home to the CofC – some jewel of thought, some new insight, that would help us grow. I knew (or so I thought) that Orthodoxy was false, but I’d long ago learned that one can find at least a small gem of truth in even the most false religions.

While browsing the shelves I happened upon a little book titled Becoming Orthodox by Fr. Peter Gillquist. This was a book about the story of the conversion en masse of thousands of evangelical Christians to the Orthodox Church. I remember to this day my astonishment at reading the liner notes of that book. I was incredulous that intelligent, well-informed evangelicals could convert to such a backward, superstitious faith as Orthodoxy. The first question that ran through my mind when I saw that book was, Why would they do that? It seemed so retrograde to everything I’d ever considered about the Christian faith.

Intrigued, I bought the book, never considering that it might cause me to wonder whether I too should join them on their journey to Orthodox Christianity. I wanted to read it merely out of curiosity and perhaps to discover what missionary technique this false church had used to so successfully hoodwink so many otherwise intelligent Christians.

But I discovered instead that I was in for the biggest surprise and the greatest challenge of my life. I spent the better part of the next ten years struggling with issues Orthodoxy presented to me that flew in the face of everything I’d ever been taught. But they were issues I could not refute. On every point where I felt certain I’d discover at last why Orthodoxy is false, it was I who kept being proved wrong. This current book actually grew out of that struggle, as I wrote it initially as a way of working through these various challenges. When I first started writing I wasn’t sure how things would go – I even expected to be able to prove the restorationist view over the Orthodox – but I suppose the result now is obvious.

Many who read this book, and especially those who are members of the fundamentalist and what I term restoration churches, will likely wonder how someone who grew up in such a conservative Protestant faith could write what follows. It may cause the reader to ask how a Christian who owes so much to the church that nurtured him throughout his childhood (and, indeed, much of his adult life as well) could dare author a book that attacks his own church and the things it teaches.

But I must state at the outset that this book was never designed to be an attack on any church or any Christian tradition. I began this book as a way of reexamining the teachings with which I grew up. I have no vendetta; I am not trying to be contentious. I was indeed brought up in a fundamentalist, restoration church from my earliest days, and I have loved this church and the people in it. As a teenager I even decided I wanted to become a missionary for this church and put my musical studies on hold in order to pursue that goal. I received my bachelor’s degree in Bible from a Christian school and, although I never became a missionary, I have participated actively in the work and worship of this church wherever I have lived. I feel a deep indebtedness to the church of my youth and to all those who instructed me in the Lord from my earliest days in Sunday school through my undergraduate studies. To this day most of my closest friends and much of my immediate family are faithful Protestants. I have been well-treated by every congregation with which I have had to do and bear no ill-will toward any within the fellowship.

With such positive experiences in this church throughout my life, why then did I begin reexamining its teachings? I did so because, as much as I love the church in which I grew up, I love my Lord Jesus more. I wanted to be sure I was where He desires me to be. I wanted to become more secure in my belief that the church as we know it is in fact the Body of Christ on earth, the church He established on the day of Pentecost circa A.D. 33, the church upon which He poured His Holy Spirit to guide it into all truth, and the church of the Holy Apostles and Prophets against which He said the gates of hell would never prevail.

One thing this church has always asked of others is that they be willing to reexamine carefully what their own church teaches and, when necessary, to change. It tells others that the summum bonum is to follow Christ — and I believe it is correct in this. Converts to the CofC, after studying the scriptures and becoming convinced they should leave the denomination in which they grew up, are always highly regarded by its members. This is only natural. Those who have cast their lot with the church in direct opposition to the wishes of their family and friends — sometimes to the point of being formally disowned — are specially honored, and their courage and devotion (their martyrdom, so to speak) are highly praised.

Yet people with whom members of the church study and who do not convert — unwilling to make the change because to do so might break up their family or cause other strife within their circle of associates — are usually accused of loving their families and friends more than they love Christ.

But should we ask of others what we are unwilling to do ourselves? Should we not be willing to reexamine our own church’s teachings to be certain they are correct? And if we do, and if we find them to be different from what we know of the New Testament church (which restorationist churches claim to be), should we not then be willing to change? After all, it is true that our first duty is to Christ our King and not to any particular denominational line or to our family or friends.

As I started my own reexamination I began to see that what we had asked and expected of others for so long is no easy task. To consider that one’s actions could easily divide a family is a frightening prospect, even if the division did not result in any actual separation of husband and wife or in a disinheritance by family members. Even when all members remain on friendly terms, the rift that can result from differing faiths between husband and wife, child and parent, friend and friend, can be a grievous thing to consider.

It has always been my sincerest desire to follow Christ as He would have me do. It is also my desire that I may be united with my family and friends in this discipleship. I have always felt that religious division within a family is a grievous thing. Yet, if one becomes convinced that the Lord is leading him on a path different from that which he and his family has been following, can there be any real choice? This is what the Restoration Movement churches have always asked of those outside its fellowship. It is what I now ask of those within its communion as well.

The crux of the matter

I suppose that one of the crucial disagreements I have found with many members of the restorationist churches is the way in which scripture is understood. To many restorationists, and in large measure to fundamentalists in general, the New Testament is looked upon as a thoroughly legal document. It is felt that everything (and I mean literally everything) is spelled out in the New Testament regarding the organization, life, work, and worship of the Lord’s church. It is claimed that we must have a specific biblical example for everything we believe and practice. Yet, (and this is a big yet) we do not find these divine directives spelled out as they would be in a legal document or as God’s instructions to the Israelites were written out in the Pentateuch. Instead they are scattered throughout the writings of the New Testament and can only be discovered and collated by careful scrutiny of the entire corpus of New Testament documents. (The famous Five Steps of Salvation, for example, which one might consider to be of tantamount importance to the early church, are enumerated by combining various passages from Romans, Acts, Luke, and Galatians. Likewise, the Five Items of Worship are comprised of scattered verses taken from Acts, Ephesians, and I & II Corinthians.) It is as though God intentionally made it a puzzle so that only those dedicated to solving it could fully understand and obey.

It seems clear to me that those of us who grew up in the restorationist tradition were taught largely to discount the traditions of the early church, where we find most of the actual practice of living Christianity in evidence and where we see the early church’s understanding or interpretation of scripture actualized. This will be one of the major issues discussed throughout this book.

Yet while the restorationist churches largely eschew tradition, they nevertheless clearly recognize some of these unwritten traditions as legitimate. For example, there is no clear reference in the New Testament to the type of music to be used in Christian worship. Arguments made from Ephesians 5:19 alone are hardly convincing, and so proponents of a cappella singing quickly turn to the example of the tradition of the early church to press the point. They likewise hasten to remind us that the traditions of the early church included observance of the Lord’s Supper at least once a week on Sunday and the practice of baptism by immersion. We will discuss these seeming inconsistencies as well.

On the opposite side of the coin we also observe that, while the restorationist churches place much emphasis on the need for biblical example, there are a number of New Testament practices not followed in these churches today. One of the most critical of these is that of the Holy Spirit’s use of church councils to guide the church in settling disputes on major issues (a fulfillment of John 14). The example of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 is viewed by nearly all fundamentalists as a singular and unrepeatable event. (It will be remembered that there was a dispute as to whether Gentile converts should be circumcised according to the custom of Moses, and there was no small dissension over this issue. How was the church to settle this dispute before it resulted in a major rift? There were no written guidelines to address this question, and no doubt God in His divine foreknowledge knew that there would be questions the future church would face for which specific scriptural examples would not be found. So, He guided the church to have a general council at which the Holy Spirit directed the participants into the right interpretation to settle this issue. Obviously we learn from this example that when the church meets in general council, the Spirit of God is with those present as verse 28 attests: For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay no greater burden than these necessary things.) This seeming contradiction too will be discussed at some length in later chapters.

Fundamentalist and restorationist churches place a good deal of emphasis on individual study and individual interpretation of scripture. And while it is freely admitted that individual study is very important, it should also be recognized that individual interpretation can lead to unbridled division. One need only look closely at the restored church today to see this, for this body, which originally came into being to put an end to sectarian division, has itself become divided into more than 30 different types of restored churches. This has happened because many have largely ignored I Peter 1:20-21, and also because these groups have never recognized the validity of church councils to settle disputes over doctrine and interpretation.

Another area of conflict lies with the restorationist understanding of church polity. Most fundamentalist and restorationist churches maintain that there can be no higher authority on earth than the local eldership of each congregation. The result of this belief has been one of the reasons why there have been so many divisions within these bodies: When one group of people disagrees with another group within one congregation, they simply withdraw themselves, appoint elders from their own number, and voila! we have a new church with its own highest authority that supports their position.

From a reading of early church history, one will find that at least as early as the end of the first century (during the lifetime of St. John) the church recognized three offices rather than the two insisted on by the restorationist churches. In addition to deacons and elders (also called presbyters and later prests for short, and which eventually evolved into the term priests) there were bishops who oversaw congregations within a particular city or region. This pattern was already widely established by the end of the first century as is evidenced by the seven letters of Ignatius, who died in A.D. 107. If, then, this pattern of church polity was already well-established within St. John’s own lifetime, why is it denied by the restorationist churches today? Would St. John not have addressed so serious a detriment to the furtherance of God’s Kingdom on earth if it were contrary to God’s will?

The rise of episcopacy, rather than being the beginning of the great apostasy as most fundamentalists see it, seems instead to have been the method of governance ordained by God during the time of the apostles and which expanded to shepherd the entire world of Christendom as the church grew from a few thousand believers in Jerusalem on Pentecost to millions throughout the whole world.

The insistence by most fundamentalists on ignoring any extrabiblical examples that can be found from history results in a mindset which views the New Testament as a legal document that contains a blueprint or pattern for everything regarding the work and worship of the church. But with a blueprint, everything is static. Was it Christ’s intention to establish a static church? Hardly. The true church is not static, but instead is a living organism. The church is the body of Christ (Col. 1:18), the family of God (I Tim. 3:15), the Kingdom of God and Christ (Eph. 5:5). That is why Jesus promised to send the Spirit to guide His church, His living body, His family. If it were indeed to be static (if all we had to do was follow the pattern laid down exclusively in the New Testament documents), what need would there be for the Spirit? Would it not then be a highly legalistic system that one could follow simply by observing the letter of the law? That is not the church of our Lord. Just as each of our bodies is directed and governed by our spirits, so the Body of Christ on earth is directed and governed by His Spirit.

Does this mean, then, that we ignore scripture? Do we throw out the standard? By no means! The written scripture is the standard. No tradition or example can stand if it contradicts the written word of God. Tradition often does, however, expand upon or elucidate our understanding of scripture. To use some examples already cited and accepted by most restorationist Christians, we may look at the extrabiblical examples of a cappella singing or the interpretation of marriage and divorce or the development of the doctrine of the Trinity. Each of these elucidate (but in no wise contradict) the New Testament scriptures. They bring us to a fuller understanding of what the New Testament teaches on these matters. For instance, although the doctrine of the Trinity is supported by scripture it was not fully articulated until the First Council of Nicaea in A.D. 325. This, I believe, is an example of what Christ meant when He said He would send His Spirit to guide the church into all truth.

Our task, therefore, must be not to limit ourselves only to the 27 books of the New Testament in order to answer literally every question that can confront us, but instead should be to consider also the traditions and teachings of the early church. If in our examination we find traditions that contradict scripture, then these are to be rejected outright. But when a given tradition or doctrine held by