Don Davis
05-01-2008, 04:51 PM
In their latest book on the church entitled Pagan Christianity, Frank Viola and George Barna make a plea for a return to the first century church as the most viable and natural sense of Church, and accuse the current institutional church of paganism. They argue:
"The practices of the first century church were the natural and spontaneous express of the divine life that indwelt the early Christians. And those practices were solidly grounded in the timeless principles and teachings of the New Testament. By contrast, a great number of the practices in many contemporary churches are in conflict with those biblical principles and teachings. When we dig deeper, we are compelled to ask: Where did the practices of the contemporary church come from? The answer is disturbing: Most of them were borrowed from pagan culture. Such a statement short-circuits the minds of many Christians when they hear it. . . So we would argue that on theological grounds, historical grounds, and pragmatic grounds, the first century church best represents the dream of God . . . the beloved community that he intends to create and re-create in every chapter of the human story." (p. xix).
These authors go on to advocate "organic churches" which is "simply a church that is born out of spiritual life instead of constructed by human institutions and held together by religious programs" (ibid.). These organic churches are Spirit-led, open in participation, and non-hierarchical. These, they argue, stand in bold contrast to clergy-led, institution-driven church.
More and more those in urban ministry are being characterized by a similar view of the church. Unfortunately, such discussions seem oblivious to a central fact which makes the first century different than any other century of the church: the living presence of the apostles. No New Testament in the form we know it today existed among the churches of the first century. Ironically, our current canon of the New Testament did not solidify until the end of the third beginning of the fourth century, and even then it was an untidy process. It, therefore, makes no sense to posit a pristine first century church. We honor them for they are the apostolic generation, trained and taught by the apostles themselves, the only firsthand eyewitnesses of the Messiah in the world. We honor their life and faith, and seek to emulate them in all the ways they honored the risen Lord in their lives.
Still, to treat them as angels is a misread of history and Scripture. For instance, it appears as if the authors have not read or simply have forgotten about the shameful moral struggles of the Corinthian church, the legalistic tendencies of the Galatians, the eschatological laziness of the Thessalonians. The first century believers needed pastors and shepherds to guide them, and God provided them in the apostles of our Lord, who led them with grace and authority in the Holy Spirit, an authority exercised not to tear down but to build up. It was certainly hierarchical and to some extent, institutional. (Who but Paul or Peter could order churches to set their things in order in anticipation of their soon arrival? Sounds hierarchical to me!)
Because these authors and others today ignore or underestimate the grace of having the living apostles present to shepherd and guide the church under the Spirit's guidance, they sentimentalize the first century church. To be sure, the beliefs, practices, and documents of those valiant Christians, represent the roots of all authentic faith today. Still, to treat all the work of God through history as pagan in a search for a pristine first-century church seems dismissive of God's work in the Holy Spirit. As we seek to plant churches in the inner cities of America, we ought not pretend that you can draw a line from the NT to the present day, and in one stroke, say everything that the Church in the world today is pagan. That is what the authors and others do, unfairly and ill-advisedly.
We seek to retrieve the Great Tradition here at TUMI because Christians from the beginning have always at their core believed and practiced the same things everywhere, at all times, and by all of us. History ought not to be repudiated by believers, but received. Christ has been with his people through the Church age to give us our current Scripture, to map out our doctrinal faith, to establish missions efforts that have seen the Gospel spread to the four corners of the earth. If we cut out or diminish every sense of church history, including the Reformation, in search of a purer, simpler, truer kind of "organic" church, one not so burdened with the historic issues of doctrine, faith, and practice, we are liable to replicate the same tired and dangerous schisms and heresies of the past. To ignore history in what we're doing is to invite ourselves and others to repeat it, and usually not the best parts of it.
To retrieve that evangelical core of faith and practice which believers have held since the beginning of the Church is the essence of retrieving the Great Tradition. This is what we as missionaries are called to define and contextualize. Since the departure of the apostles, Christians worldwide in all places and dimensions have sought to rediscover, defend, and embrace their teaching and faith, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church has sought to preserve this in its fundamental teaching, practice, and thought. This is what guided Christians of the 3rd centuries to select and canonize the books of Scripture we have (especially our current New Testament), and what led the bishops of the Church to define carefully and biblically through the Ecumenical Councils what all Christians hold true about Christ and the Trinity. The diligence of Christians throughout history is why our worldwide Christian movement wasn't overrun or destroyed by Gnosticism in the 2nd century or wiped out by the emperors in the 3rd and 4th. Let us affirm "For all the saints," as the hymn says, not just the first century ones.
It alarms me much that so many so-called evangelicals like Viola and Barna are so dismissive of Church history, and appear to easily ignore and dismiss the fruit of sacrifice of all Christians throughout the ages who gave so much for our edification, and to do it all in a futile search and call for a return to first century purity. If we are going to plant viable churches in the city, we ought not pretend that the first century, even with the presence of the Spirit and the living apostles, had it easy or found it simple to do what they did. Like us, they had to suffer and struggle and claw and fight their way into the Kingdom, for their enemies were numerous and dangerous. We like them must live for such a time as this, our time, today.
The ease in which so many call the church of history into question is disturbing to me. While we as missionaries of the Gospel must proclaim full freedom won for us in Christ, we ought never to define this freedom as radical discontinuity with the church of the ages. Today there is and always has been only one baptism, one faith, that one which is in sync with the essential tenets and practices of historic Christian orthodox faith. Could the reason why many are experiencing a mass exodus from evangelicalism be rooted in its break from the historic faith, often times for the sake of relevance, expediency, and efficiency?
Our task in urban ministry is to rejoice in the wonder and power of the first century church, and, yet also thank God for the presence of the Holy Spirit in the church through the ages, those believers whose lives still challenge us to be worthy disciples and congregations of the 21st century. We ought to abandon, though, the search for the pristine perfect church, of the first or any century. As far as I can tell, such a church has never existed, but we still remain the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, the body of Christ. Let us in urban ministry strive to raise up men and women who can defend the Great Tradition of the Christian faith, the historic orthodox faith, and train them to do so with with valor and honor.
The city is looking for a faith that is as vital as the first century and fresh as the 21st century. This is our task, to plant and sustain these kinds of churches in the city today.
Don
"The practices of the first century church were the natural and spontaneous express of the divine life that indwelt the early Christians. And those practices were solidly grounded in the timeless principles and teachings of the New Testament. By contrast, a great number of the practices in many contemporary churches are in conflict with those biblical principles and teachings. When we dig deeper, we are compelled to ask: Where did the practices of the contemporary church come from? The answer is disturbing: Most of them were borrowed from pagan culture. Such a statement short-circuits the minds of many Christians when they hear it. . . So we would argue that on theological grounds, historical grounds, and pragmatic grounds, the first century church best represents the dream of God . . . the beloved community that he intends to create and re-create in every chapter of the human story." (p. xix).
These authors go on to advocate "organic churches" which is "simply a church that is born out of spiritual life instead of constructed by human institutions and held together by religious programs" (ibid.). These organic churches are Spirit-led, open in participation, and non-hierarchical. These, they argue, stand in bold contrast to clergy-led, institution-driven church.
More and more those in urban ministry are being characterized by a similar view of the church. Unfortunately, such discussions seem oblivious to a central fact which makes the first century different than any other century of the church: the living presence of the apostles. No New Testament in the form we know it today existed among the churches of the first century. Ironically, our current canon of the New Testament did not solidify until the end of the third beginning of the fourth century, and even then it was an untidy process. It, therefore, makes no sense to posit a pristine first century church. We honor them for they are the apostolic generation, trained and taught by the apostles themselves, the only firsthand eyewitnesses of the Messiah in the world. We honor their life and faith, and seek to emulate them in all the ways they honored the risen Lord in their lives.
Still, to treat them as angels is a misread of history and Scripture. For instance, it appears as if the authors have not read or simply have forgotten about the shameful moral struggles of the Corinthian church, the legalistic tendencies of the Galatians, the eschatological laziness of the Thessalonians. The first century believers needed pastors and shepherds to guide them, and God provided them in the apostles of our Lord, who led them with grace and authority in the Holy Spirit, an authority exercised not to tear down but to build up. It was certainly hierarchical and to some extent, institutional. (Who but Paul or Peter could order churches to set their things in order in anticipation of their soon arrival? Sounds hierarchical to me!)
Because these authors and others today ignore or underestimate the grace of having the living apostles present to shepherd and guide the church under the Spirit's guidance, they sentimentalize the first century church. To be sure, the beliefs, practices, and documents of those valiant Christians, represent the roots of all authentic faith today. Still, to treat all the work of God through history as pagan in a search for a pristine first-century church seems dismissive of God's work in the Holy Spirit. As we seek to plant churches in the inner cities of America, we ought not pretend that you can draw a line from the NT to the present day, and in one stroke, say everything that the Church in the world today is pagan. That is what the authors and others do, unfairly and ill-advisedly.
We seek to retrieve the Great Tradition here at TUMI because Christians from the beginning have always at their core believed and practiced the same things everywhere, at all times, and by all of us. History ought not to be repudiated by believers, but received. Christ has been with his people through the Church age to give us our current Scripture, to map out our doctrinal faith, to establish missions efforts that have seen the Gospel spread to the four corners of the earth. If we cut out or diminish every sense of church history, including the Reformation, in search of a purer, simpler, truer kind of "organic" church, one not so burdened with the historic issues of doctrine, faith, and practice, we are liable to replicate the same tired and dangerous schisms and heresies of the past. To ignore history in what we're doing is to invite ourselves and others to repeat it, and usually not the best parts of it.
To retrieve that evangelical core of faith and practice which believers have held since the beginning of the Church is the essence of retrieving the Great Tradition. This is what we as missionaries are called to define and contextualize. Since the departure of the apostles, Christians worldwide in all places and dimensions have sought to rediscover, defend, and embrace their teaching and faith, the Apostolic Tradition, and the Church has sought to preserve this in its fundamental teaching, practice, and thought. This is what guided Christians of the 3rd centuries to select and canonize the books of Scripture we have (especially our current New Testament), and what led the bishops of the Church to define carefully and biblically through the Ecumenical Councils what all Christians hold true about Christ and the Trinity. The diligence of Christians throughout history is why our worldwide Christian movement wasn't overrun or destroyed by Gnosticism in the 2nd century or wiped out by the emperors in the 3rd and 4th. Let us affirm "For all the saints," as the hymn says, not just the first century ones.
It alarms me much that so many so-called evangelicals like Viola and Barna are so dismissive of Church history, and appear to easily ignore and dismiss the fruit of sacrifice of all Christians throughout the ages who gave so much for our edification, and to do it all in a futile search and call for a return to first century purity. If we are going to plant viable churches in the city, we ought not pretend that the first century, even with the presence of the Spirit and the living apostles, had it easy or found it simple to do what they did. Like us, they had to suffer and struggle and claw and fight their way into the Kingdom, for their enemies were numerous and dangerous. We like them must live for such a time as this, our time, today.
The ease in which so many call the church of history into question is disturbing to me. While we as missionaries of the Gospel must proclaim full freedom won for us in Christ, we ought never to define this freedom as radical discontinuity with the church of the ages. Today there is and always has been only one baptism, one faith, that one which is in sync with the essential tenets and practices of historic Christian orthodox faith. Could the reason why many are experiencing a mass exodus from evangelicalism be rooted in its break from the historic faith, often times for the sake of relevance, expediency, and efficiency?
Our task in urban ministry is to rejoice in the wonder and power of the first century church, and, yet also thank God for the presence of the Holy Spirit in the church through the ages, those believers whose lives still challenge us to be worthy disciples and congregations of the 21st century. We ought to abandon, though, the search for the pristine perfect church, of the first or any century. As far as I can tell, such a church has never existed, but we still remain the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church, the body of Christ. Let us in urban ministry strive to raise up men and women who can defend the Great Tradition of the Christian faith, the historic orthodox faith, and train them to do so with with valor and honor.
The city is looking for a faith that is as vital as the first century and fresh as the 21st century. This is our task, to plant and sustain these kinds of churches in the city today.
Don