Historical Relationship Between the Synagogue and Church - Coursework Example

Running Head: Historical relationship between the synagogue & the church Plus how early Christian liturgy borrows from Jews with their added innovations. College Name: Historical Relationship Between The Synagogue And Church Following the fact that it was the earliest and principal institution of Diaspora Judaism, the synagogue history is very much related with that of the church. Like in the church inscriptional, literacy and archeological materials existed in the synagogues. Syria, Greece, Italy and Asia Minor were among the principal centers and units of Jewish communal organization, this also happened with the parish system in the late medieval France or England. Leadership in the synagogues remained essentially as lay rulers of the Jewish Ethnos in the empire and the relationship between the people and the Roman Empire authorities. Similar to the church the synagogue had the largely political administrative character evidence as the commune or assembly of worship. Synagogues were even afforded some space by the roman authorities with the Roman’s buildings in the locality. (Tchevikover, 1996) It was hard for people to believe that the Roman authorities would donate such space to Dionysiacs, for instance, or for a Judaic sanctuary as the sacramental functions of the synagogues primary activity but it happened. This view of the synagogues explains further the proper links between the larger Jewish communities political organizations such as that of Rome and the administrative structures in the synagogues. Titles borne by the functionaries at both level were similar with their institutions being parallel to each other. (Tchevikover, 1996) The synagogues were ruled by a community ruler (an archesynagoges) in conjunction with senate of elders known as Gerousia. The very criteria applied in the city of Rome where Parish units were under the authority of a senate and its ruler i.e. archon. In some locality for instance Alexandria the rulers were referred to as the ethnarch i.e. the ruler of the Hellenistic times onwards ethnos denoted an official legal political entity within the host empire, the archontes and gerousion administrative structure constituted the legal government and administration of the Jews within their larger political settings. Criteria for choosing government functioninaries to take office in the Jewish community varied widely within the period and the geographic area in question. Both in the synagogues and the church administrative positions remained a hereditary issue, major officials as purvey of government and justice demonstrates that the synagogue was a locus of the sacred and an institution mediating between heaven and earth. As cited by Tchevikover, (1996) in his book Hellenistic Civilization And The Jews both the church and the synagogue did not view themselves as exclusive centers and riguisite systematic creation of the sacred places. Israelites priests were concerned to be of a different order of human who were church by the divinity. Etiological myths remained a common feature in the shamanistic pattern of religion, particularly in the propitious places for mediation of the sacred but not a hereditary center of mediators. This is well exhibited by the fact that the history of the priestly caste in Ancient Israel had its origins before and outside the ascendancy of the systematic model of the Deuteronomic Reformation that was in the decentralized local cultic sites. The priesthood, its origin being sacerdotal cost was based in the shammastic type of cult among the ancient Israelites. Though special the synagogues and the church were located in the strategic places where the community without much difficulty accessed them. They were normally located at the sites where communities could set it shops, the holy places since these places were believed to be the links between heaven and earth. They both housed Torah scrolls for example from the end of the first century onwards there was great efforts in building more elaborate niches in the synagogues for receiving the Torah and prophetic scrolls. (Tchevikover, 1996) This development included not only the synagogues being constructed in the second and subsequent centuries but also extended the modification of older buildings where previously the synagogue had no such architectural features. The design of these Torah – niches often assumed the character of a portal, which constituted a common feature of synagogue architecture, mosaics, furerary art as well as frescos. The stylized character indicated that it functioned as a symbol within late antique Judaism and could not be dismissed as a decorative device. (Tchevikover, 1996) In both cases communal prayers were legitimately viewed as a type of group incarnation, the repetition of established word formulae and rites which could be replicated anywhere and simultaneously in any number of locations provided they accrued after zenith passage, at the new moon, near sunrise among other propitious moments. Hereditary priesthood was equally well suited and it was part and parcel of the charismatic model that rites were carried out at opportune moments and by appropriate individuals. Etiological myths remained the common features of the shamanistic pattern of religion. (Tchevikover, 1996) The synagogue liturgy within the shammanistic pattern of religion gives further evidence in the extensive participation of gentile Christians and pagans in that cult. Gentile Christians not only attended synagogue services, selectively observed Jewish rites and taboos and participated in the liturgy but also were welcomed by the ethnic Jews who permitted this participation, harboring no allusions that these Yahweists would formally join the Jewish ethnos through conversion. The temple system could never tolerate such burring of ethnic boundaries because the systemic model largely functioned through maintenance of other social frontiers. Non-systemic, shamanistic patterns of cult could afford to remain less xenophobic in this regard, as seen to be the case both with Diaspora Judaism and with non-Deteronomic cults in Ancient Israel. (Stevenson, 1999) Sacrifices were both offered in the synagogue and the church with lots of dancing to praise God. In both histories the scripture implied drama where nations experience was typified in line with the Messiah. Both mysteries were exhibited in complementary and mutual relationship where each held the key to the other in itself. The grand mystery, which was viewed as the historical climax in the great day of the Lord, had the elect nation and the messiah or its counter parts. (Stevenson, 1999) The messiah typified himself in the humiliation, eschatological exaltation and historical suffering of the elect nation. It is from these humiliations, death and resurrection, exaltation of the nation in the Lord’s great relationship approaches taken towards the mystery with both the church and the synagogue confessing itself to the others exclusion portrays some form of historical relationship. How Early Christian Liturgy Borrows From Jews And Add Its Own Innovations According to Richardson (1990), the officially laid down order of services in the early Christian made extension borrowing from the Jews and also injected its open inventions. Like the Jews, early Christians worked towards reconciling the renunciations as per the requirements of faith in Christ with much commitment shown to the traditions and cultures of their own people. Like the Jewish liturgy early Christians believed that they were never gathered together by the human decision but their gatherings were guided by God in the Holy Spirit and responded to his gratuitous call in faith. This was made in an effort to speak the same language of worship, gather all people together and penetrate various cultures in worship. Like the Jews early Christians believed in baptism, that with baptism all were made to be God’s children and formed one people in the Lord. This was the baptism of water where individuals were immersed into the waters and believed to be fully cleansed. However the early Christians made some inventions into this by introducing other forms of baptism, for instance sprinkling waters to somebody or the use of special perfumes. (Richardson, 1990) Early Christians believed that God was a super natural being who was behind all the creations and was to be worshipped by all. They therefore made all sort of worshipping through singing dancing and reading the scriptures. In the first century Jewish worshipped in the temple and used musical instruments to worship. Early Christians also applied musical instruments in their liturgy but later did some innovation arguing that whatever Jews used to do in the temple should not be taken as a model to be copied by Christians. (Richardson, 1990) The history of the early church confirms that the church did not see the need to bring integrate Jewish mode of worship into their congregations. (Smith, 2000) The early fathers from the church opposed the use of instruments; for example, Theodoret in the fifth century raised an argument suggesting that the use of musical instruments in worshipping was a childish artifact, which ought to be disqualified from the worship of the church. The Levites and priests conducted worshipping programs in the church. The Levites carried the singing and temple worship was no longer a congregation assembling. The early Christians borrowed more activities in their worship from the synagogue with its music being exclusively vocal similar to that of the early synagogue like the Jews early Christians offered sacrifices in the temple with the difference being that, the Jews animal sacrifices and also burned incense. However, early Christians made innovations to this and sacrifices were no longer restricted to “animal sacrifices”. One could not sacrifice farm produce money and other necessary forms. (Smith, 2000) Like the Jews, early Christians believed in prophets and that they were appointed by God to prophesy both doom and hope. They believed in the existence of demonic powers and believed that the Holy Spirit could chase the demonic powers through prayers and other forms of worship. Early Christians were also aware of sins and believed that they were all sinners who needed forgiveness from the Lord through repentance. Like the Jews they used to repent their sins to be cleansed by the Holy Spirit. Things like myths, idols and superstitions were also renounced when one was coming from the life of paganism. They also believed that the first-born were for the Lord but made some differences from the Jews such that early Christians should not offer their first born as human sacrifices to the Lord. Instead they demonstrated their sacrifices through prayers and thanksgiving. They were opposed to offering such sacrifices (human) and described Jesus Christ as their atoning sacrifice at all time. Similar with the Jews religion early Christian religious was very optimistic. It was believed to infuse faith in believers and to their future. By seeing the divine Spirit in man the religion was seen as autonomous. Although the Jewish ethics saw human beings as self – redemptive through repentance and prayers thus making much of the free will. Modifications were made where early Christian ethics views individual as a victim of the fall without self – redemptive ability in the world of abnormal where he stands in desperate needs for heavenly interposition through restoration. They also borrowed the idea of believing and observing the words in the Holy Scripture. However, unlike the Jews scriptures that existed in scrolls the early Christians made some innovations to their scriptures by compiling them into the Bible, which were translated into various languages. This ensured that each and every tribe would be able to get to know the word of God as per their language through reading the portable Holy books. Like the Jews early Christians believed that the human body was the temple of the Holy Spirit and ought to be kept Holy. Practices that were against the conservation of the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit were heavily condemned. For instance, activities like prostitution were not allowed. (Nock, 1989) Like the Jew, the early Christians viewed the temples as the Holy places of worship. With the Jews these sites were normally under trees and on high mountains where the supernatural being was thought to reside. The early Christians constructed buildings of worship as churches, which were also viewed to be Holy and no other activities, were to be conducted there other than worshiping. The Holy days (Sabbath) were strictly observed by both the early Christians and the Jews and they were set-aside for prayers, thanksgiving and repentance. (Nock, 1989) Like the Jews, early Christians believed in life after death suggesting that when one dies he goes on with life in heaven where he faces judgment and if a sinner then he is sent to hell in external life. They believed that Satan also had some powers and was the one to be assigned the sinners to punish. The development of ceremonies was another liturgy that the early Christians borrowed from the Jews. Early Christians used to perform ceremonies in the church where the congregation feasted together to mark certain event or as a sign of solidarity. (Nock, 1989) References Richardson, C. (1990): Early Christian Fathers, New York, Macmillan Nock, A. (1989): Conversion, Oxford, Clarendon. Smith, J. (2000): Imagining Religion, Chicago, University of Chicago Press. Stevenson, J. (1999): Creeds, Councils And Controversies, London, SPCK. Tchevikover, V. (1996): Hellenistic Civilization And The Jews, Newyork, Athenium. Read More

Criteria for choosing government functioninaries to take office in the Jewish community varied widely within the period and the geographic area in question. Both in the synagogues and the church administrative positions remained a hereditary issue, major officials as purvey of government and justice demonstrates that the synagogue was a locus of the sacred and an institution mediating between heaven and earth. As cited by Tchevikover, (1996) in his book Hellenistic Civilization And The Jews both the church and the synagogue did not view themselves as exclusive centers and riguisite systematic creation of the sacred places.

Israelites priests were concerned to be of a different order of human who were church by the divinity. Etiological myths remained a common feature in the shamanistic pattern of religion, particularly in the propitious places for mediation of the sacred but not a hereditary center of mediators. This is well exhibited by the fact that the history of the priestly caste in Ancient Israel had its origins before and outside the ascendancy of the systematic model of the Deuteronomic Reformation that was in the decentralized local cultic sites.

The priesthood, its origin being sacerdotal cost was based in the shammastic type of cult among the ancient Israelites. Though special the synagogues and the church were located in the strategic places where the community without much difficulty accessed them. They were normally located at the sites where communities could set it shops, the holy places since these places were believed to be the links between heaven and earth. They both housed Torah scrolls for example from the end of the first century onwards there was great efforts in building more elaborate niches in the synagogues for receiving the Torah and prophetic scrolls.

(Tchevikover, 1996) This development included not only the synagogues being constructed in the second and subsequent centuries but also extended the modification of older buildings where previously the synagogue had no such architectural features. The design of these Torah – niches often assumed the character of a portal, which constituted a common feature of synagogue architecture, mosaics, furerary art as well as frescos. The stylized character indicated that it functioned as a symbol within late antique Judaism and could not be dismissed as a decorative device.

(Tchevikover, 1996) In both cases communal prayers were legitimately viewed as a type of group incarnation, the repetition of established word formulae and rites which could be replicated anywhere and simultaneously in any number of locations provided they accrued after zenith passage, at the new moon, near sunrise among other propitious moments. Hereditary priesthood was equally well suited and it was part and parcel of the charismatic model that rites were carried out at opportune moments and by appropriate individuals.

Etiological myths remained the common features of the shamanistic pattern of religion. (Tchevikover, 1996) The synagogue liturgy within the shammanistic pattern of religion gives further evidence in the extensive participation of gentile Christians and pagans in that cult. Gentile Christians not only attended synagogue services, selectively observed Jewish rites and taboos and participated in the liturgy but also were welcomed by the ethnic Jews who permitted this participation, harboring no allusions that these Yahweists would formally join the Jewish ethnos through conversion.

The temple system could never tolerate such burring of ethnic boundaries because the systemic model largely functioned through maintenance of other social frontiers. Non-systemic, shamanistic patterns of cult could afford to remain less xenophobic in this regard, as seen to be the case both with Diaspora Judaism and with non-Deteronomic cults in Ancient Israel. (Stevenson, 1999) Sacrifices were both offered in the synagogue and the church with lots of dancing to praise God. In both histories the scripture implied drama where nations experience was typified in line with the Messiah.

Read More