The Marks of the Church

a) Meaning and Value of Marks

b) The Marks in Detail a) MEANING AND VALUE OF MARKS

Our Lord, as we have seen, founded a Church. Since Our Lord is God, His is the true Church to which all men are bound to belong. He has given command that all belong to it in the commission given to the Apostles (the Teaching Church) to teach, baptize, and govern “all nations … all days, even to the consummation of the world.” Now, Our Lord is Infinite Wisdom. Therefore, He does not found a Church, and require all men to belong to it, without marking it unmistakably for their recognition. Indeed, He has Himself compared His Church (the Kingdom of God on earth) to a “city set on a hill, that cannot be hid.” The Church of Jesus Christ has, therefore, unmistakable marks by which it can be known. Now, a mark is an indication, a sign, a token. It is something that points a thing out, indicates it. In looking for the marks of the Church, we look for such “pointers” and “indicators,” such signs and tokens, as are inseparable from it and show it to be what it is. The value of such marks is apparent from the consideration of their necessity, already mentioned in the opening paragraphs of this section.

b) The Marks in Detail

Let us begin our study here by assuming the role of a man who is looking for the true Church of Christ. The man says : “I know that Christ founded a Church to which I am bound to belong. I wish to find that Church. Let me consider how I shall know it when I come upon it. “First, I shall expect the Church, the true Church of Christ, to be without self-contradiction. Wherever I find its recognized members and teachers, I shall find the same doctrine taught, the same truths believed. I shall expect variations of ceremonial, I shall expect differences of language in ritual, I shall expect differences of disciplinary law for different peoples and times. But I shall certainly not expect to find different faiths or different essential worship. In these, the true Church must be one. For, Surely, if I find differences in these things (faith and worship), I shall find a plurality of religions, not one religion, and certainly Christ taught only one religion. I shall not listen to people who tell me that I may be vaguely satisfied with cultivating the “spirit of Christ” and, for the rest, believing what I like. How can I have the spirit of Christ unless I have an ardent interest in knowing what He taught? How can I have the spirit of Christ if I believe what I like? I want to believe what is true, whether I like it or not: I want to believe the very truth that Christ taught. What could be the point or purpose of Christ in founding a Church if people were merely to cultivate a vague and misty self-satisfaction? People could do that without a Church, without Apostles being appointed and sent to death in manifestation of truth, without a clearcut faith for which thousands have been ready to die. Nor shall I listen to those that tell me that essential differences in the many religions that claim to be of Christ are not essential differences. Why, here is one who says infant baptism is not necessary; here is an other who says it is necessary for salvation. Shall I dare to think that these two persons differ in nonessentials, when the very issue of their disagreement is the matter of the eternal salvation of immortal souls ? Here is a man who says that the Eucharist or Lord’s Supper is only a highly symbolic and solemn ceremony, but that the bread and wine are bread and wine throughout the ceremony, and nothing more; here is another who declares that the bread and wine become the actual Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity, of Jesus Christ. Shall I be imbecile enough to think this difference non-essential, when it involves the very question of adoration or idolatry, of due worship or horrible profanation? No, I must not benumb my mind into accepting contradictions as non-essential differences, and attributing these to the teaching of the all-wise Christ. I must find a Church that is uniformly one and the same in doctrine and worship, else I shall not have found the Church of Christ. For Christ taught one doctrine, He founded one Church, He gave one commission to the Apostles, and that not a vague or indefinite, but a clear and practical thing. The authority of Christ is also one, and He communicated that single authority to the Church, and in the Church to St. Peter and his successors. I shall, therefore, know that I have not found Christ’s Church until I shall have found a Church that is one and the same in doctrine, in worship, and in authority. Surely,

2Z2 reason teaches me this at the outset. The first mark, therefore, of the Church of Christ is unity: it must be one. “Suppose, then, t’:hat I shall presently come upon a Church that seems to meet my requirements—and, after all, they are not mine; they are the requirements of common sense and sound reason—shall I be content with unity alone? No, I shall look for something else. Christ founded His Church to lead men safely to God. Now, a man who is safely on the way to God, i.e., to salvation, is a man of virtue and of piety: in a word, he is sanctified, he is holy. I read in Scripture (i Thessalonians iv, 3) that God wills man’s sanctification, man’s holiness; and surely Christ’s Church is to help man to do God’s will and be saved. The Church of Christ was founded to teach and govern all men, and surely sanctification, making men holy, must be the end and purpose of that teaching and government. Therefore, the Church of Christ must teach a holy doctrine; it must govern men with a view to their growth in virtue; in a word, it must show itself holy. And it must show some success in its work of sanctifying men; it must really make holy those that are its representative members, those that truly live up to its ‘ teachings, not only in letter, but also in spirit. Of course, I know that there will be, that there are, members of the true Church who are not holy. There was an unholy member in the Apostolic Church. And Christ, by His parables of the wheat and cockle, of the net of good fishes and bad, of the unworthy wedding-guest, has plainly taught me what my common sense ought to make clear to me in any case. I know many men who belong to societies; some of them are interested and active members who really represent their organizations; others are slackers who will never attend a meeting nor pay their dues unless pressure is brought to bear upon them, and sometimes not then. Shall I judge a society by its unworthy members? I know many splendid physicians, and I know a few quacks. Shall I judge the medical profession, by reason of the quacks, as a group of unscrupulous and ignorant men who prey upon their fellows and trifle with human health and life? I know many good and learned men of law, and I know, unfortunately, some lawyers of the ‘shyster’ variety. Because of this latter knowledge, shall I judge the whole legal profession dishonest? Obviously not; I shall not be such a fool as to judge any group, any society, any profession by its non-representative members. Nor shall I take mere external conduct as the test of the representative character of any member: for the unworthy clubman wears his. lapel-button; the quack looks more learned than any doctor can possibly be; the shyster talks most sagely of the law. No, I shall be fair and honest in this matter. I shall look for the holiness of the Church of Jesus Christ to show in the lives and conduct of those members who are truly and spiritually devoted to the faith for which that Church stands. It may be difficult for me to discern this inner loyalty and spirit in my living fellowmen; but history ought to be full of illumination on he point. On this score, then, I shall look for the 1Church to be holy because its Founder is Holiness itself, because its doctrine is His most holy doctrine, and because the purpose of the true Church must be to make men holy. The second mark of the Church, therefore, is holiness. “Well, suppose I find a Church which appears to be both one and holy. Have I any further test to apply to it, lest I be deceived by mere apparent unity and holiness? Yes, I look for something else. Christ founded His Church, for all nations … all days. I realize, of course, that the whole world was not brought into His Church at once, and by that very word of His. No, the work of conversion was gradual, although miraculously swift in the beginning. The institution of the Church was obviously the placing of the Church in the world for all men to recognize and enter. I shall look for a Church, then, that is, in fact, very widespread in its membership; and I shall look for a church that is without bar or hindrance to any nation, caste, class, or group of men. In a word, I shall look for the Church that is universal, or, as the Greek derivative expresses it, catholic. I understand quite well that many men may never know of Christ or of His Church; I hold that these are provided for in God’s own way, and that they are really members of the soul of the true Church if they use their natural power of reasoning to recognize their duty to God, and use their will to accomplish that duty. I do not look for God to work miracles to accomplish what men can accomplish by missionary activity, nor do I expect God to upset, by miraculous means, what man has done from the first sin onwards to the present day. But I do expect the Church of Christ to be a ‘world figure’; I do expect it to be very far-reaching in its existence and its influence; I do expect it to exist, or at least to be known, in every country of the earth. In a word, I expect the Church to be universal. And I have a right to expect this of a Church founded for ‘all nations,’ a Church whose first priests and bishops were sent ‘into the whole world’ to teach, govern, and sanctify all men. The actual number of members, however, or the number of national groups found in the Church, will not affect its universality. It is sufficient (since men remain free to reject even the Church of God) if the Church exists, or at least is known, in all lands (at the present stage of advancement in discovery and exploration of the earth), and that no nation or group is excluded from membership in it. The third mark, therefore, of the Church of Christ is universality or catholicity. “It will not satisfy me to find a Church that is one, holy, and catholic, unless I also find it with an unbroken history, an uninterrupted existence in the world from the time that it was founded. The Church of Christ was founded for ‘all days, even to the consummation of the a world.’ Against this Church the powers or ‘gates’ of hell were never to prevail, never to cause its extinction even for a short time. Christ is God, and He said His Church would endure ‘all days’; He said the gates of hell should not prevail against it; and His word is God’s word; His word is the truth. Therefore, in looking for the Church of Christ, I look for a Church that is traceable back to the Apostles, upon whom it was founded. I look for the Church that teaches what the Apostles taught, that is governed by the lineal and lawful successors of the Apostles, and, in special, is presided over by the successor of St. Peter in the primacy. In a word, I look for an Apostolic Church. The fourth mark, therefore, of the Church of Christ is Apostolicity. “If I find in the world a Church that is truly One, Holy, Catholic or Universal, and Apostolic, I shall know, without doubt of possibility of doubt, that I have found the true Church of Christ. Reason teaches me to look for these marks in the true Church; reason requires no further marks, and will be satisfied with no less.”

Summary of the Article

In this Article we: have followed a quest of reason, and have seen that the reasonable man in search of

Christ’s Church must look for that Church which is characterized by four marks, viz., Unity, Holiness, Catholicity, Apostolicity. These, then, are the Four Marks of The True Church. In the next Chapter we shall make direct inquiry as to which of the existing Churches actually has these four marks.