What to do with the Early Church
I’ve recently seen a lot of buzz around blogs regarding Barna and Viola’s new book Pagan Christianity. I haven’t read the book yet, but I am intrigued by the topics it seems to address. With quotes such as, “We are also making an outrageous proposal: that the church in its contemporary, institutional form has neither a biblical nor a historical right to exist,” the book raises some serious questions about the purpose and nature of church as well as about Biblical interpretation.
At the heart of the controversy surrounding this book is the question of if we should read the Bible prescriptively, descriptively, or some combination of the two. We actually addressed this issue at church this past week as we started our study of the book of Acts. It seemed prudent to discuss our assumptions about how we read and apply scripture before we examine the stories of the early church. In essence we asked if what we read in Acts is prescriptive (giving us the guidelines for how we should do church forever and ever amen) or descriptive (just an historical picture of how things were done in one particular culture in one particular era). We of course came down on the both/and middle ground. Yes, there are aspects of scripture that are instructive for us today that we should follow; but, there are also cultural elements portrayed that reflect Biblical culture, but don’t translate well today.
Barna and Viola seem to be taking the approach that claims culture doesn’t matter. A perfect system was created once upon a time and must not be deviated from. We must just repeat exactly those things which were done 2000 years ago and discard any practices that have been introduced since then (you know evil things, like pastors). I personally find this view as disturbing as the opposite extreme that sees the early church as just a cute historical vignette – meaningless for our lives today. Not only do such dichotomous views put God in a box, they have the potential to lead to serious misunderstanding and abuses.
I prefer instead the approach often mentioned by N.T. Wright – that of seeing ourselves existing in God’s unfolding story. If the story of the church is the story of God working in the world, then the early church represents say chapter 9 of that tale. Much has come before and those stories play a pivotal role in the unfolding tale. We then find ourselves living today in Chapter 20, not the final chapter, but still significant to what God is doing. As this chapter gets written it would be silly and really poor writing to merely copy exactly what was written in chapter 9 over again. To do so would ignore all intervening chapters and would imply that God is not big enough to work in the world today. But on the other hand it would be equally silly to make chapter 20 utterly unrelated to all the preceding chapters or to ignore the character development that was established in chapter 9. Chapter 20 must be informed by (and in ways constrained by Chapter 9), but it must also allow the story to be told.
So when I read some of the extreme statements from Barna and Viola, I cringe at the disregard for God’s unfolding story. Having just read excerpts I can’t comment on the whole of their argument. But I can’t help but find the “let’s just get back to the early church” stance a bit simplistic and naive. We are not the early church and no matter how hard we try we Westerners are not pre-industrial people living in an occupied territory. It may be easy to blame all the problems in the church on systems and traditions that were not present in the early church and I fully agree that many of those systems need to be re-evaluated, but the issues are more complex than that. And I for one am not willing (or think it is truly possible) to recapture the ethos and social mores that defined the early church. I am not interested in repeating that chapter in history, but I am interested in learning from and being inspired by it.
julieclawson(at)gmail(dot)com 
I’ve just started reading this (about 3 chapters in). Was intrigued by the concept… and so far, while there are some good insights here (i.e. church has become a spectator sport) it reads like a college thesis that is trying too hard to prove its premise. To buy into this hook, line and sinker, you would have to believe that God has not spoken to anyone in the past 2000 years and that anything every invented or first-used by a non-Christian (i.e. chairs) is pagan and unbiblical. My advice is to not buy the book — you can save time and money by reading the reviews and key insights being written over at Kingdom Grace. (If the rest of the book is any different, I’ll let you know.)
You are right in how we are to view the early Church. What we should be looking for are the basic principles that governed the early Church. What was it that drove them to take the gospel to the ends of the earth? What are we missing today? How can we correct our course?
We live in the 21st century. Culture can never be divorced from our Church purpose and practice. We don’t need any more separationist or restorationist groups. We desperately need people who will engage the present culture and press the claims of God’s kingdom
Bruce
Having read the book and having spoke with Frank about it a little bit (interview this sunday), I think it is safe to say it isn’t about a perfect structure being frozen in time for us to go back to. I think it is more about identifying that the things we call tradition aren’t apostolic.
I agree the story of the church is unfolding, but doesn’t it help if we identify the current roots while we unfold it?
Good analogy connecting Scripture to a story that unfolds chapter-by-chapter. Certainly, there are consistent characteristics that make the story compelling, but God can (and does) certainly do new things.
i am curious about Nicholas’ question about roots. so what are some of the roots we need to recognize?
lombard –
I don’t know if that was directed to me or the commentors, but I will bring up one that Franks book points out and that I feel strongly about.
Offerings and what they go to seem to be an unfolding tradition. The early church apparently gave offerings to the poor as needed. Not for buildings, as they first met in houses. We have made buildings now and have paid staff (thanks to constantine) and a new tradition. Offerings/tithing has ‘unfolded’ into a budgeted structure that now mostly supports operating expenses of ‘most’ churches. Perhaps looking at where this money is going to now, and that it is rooted in not apostolic tradition, but our needs, lends to rethinking how we tithe. A la – The Embezzlement Papers.
Does that make sense? Is that complete b.s.??
I agree that NT Wright’s Shakespeare metaphor best works in how we view the church, as well as the Ancient-Future metaphor Robert Webber uses. John Caputo, in his book “What Would Jesus Deconstruct” (WWJD…hehe) argues that we should define the church as Plan B, the gradual work of God birthed in Christ’s death and resurrection and continued until the kingdom of God comes to its fulfillment. In this way, and borrowing from McKnight, the Church is a conduit of atonement and kingdom-building until the true Kingdom comes in its glory.
good thoughts. i haven’t read the book yet so i should probably just hang tight. but to me scripture is too local, contextual, and evolving to be prescriptive. at least in acts. nick and i have a podcast with him and i plan on exploring this some. because i know this is pretty much the common criticism that is rising up out of the blogs.
Nicholas – Thanks for the thoughts. I fully agree that we need to understand the roots of our traditions. In fact I think understanding of those roots should be required of all Christians. I’ve talked with too many people who actually believe that practices and theologies from the 19th century reflect the early church practices. It’s scary. But I’m also not one to place a ton of weight on that which is apostolic. To me it doesn’t matter if a tradition isn’t apostolic, it it serves God and his Kingdom then it is okay for the church to engage in. Just as long as that tradition doesn’t become an idol or is assumed to be the prescribed Biblical mandate.
Thom – Thanks for the mention of the Caputo book. I just got it for Christmas and am looking forward to reading it.
Julie – I agree apostolic doesn’t ammount to much nowadays. What I liked most about this particular book is how it showed things that people generally say are ‘prescribed biblical mandates’, really aren’t.
Thanks Julie, i have found that i can often get all nostalgic for the good ol days of the early church where everything was sweetness and light and then i read it again on a different day and see all the problems, arguements and debates and think it’s pretty much same as it ever was.
As I read it i’d agree with you, there are some parts of the story that are so chapter 9 but then there are also parts that resonate with chapter 20 – so if the early church is not a pancea or a problem, what is it?
The book is on its way to my door, but my understanding is that the point of the book is not at all prescriptive; it simply provides a rigorous description of the practices of the modern church which may have become idols. The whole point of the book is to spark discussions such as these as to the nature of church . From the chapter titles, it looks to me like Frank has hit on almost every problem I have with the current institutional church, and for that alone I’m grateful to know I’m not the only one.
I agree with reading the ongoing discussions over at Kingdom Grace, as they provide a more informed perspective on the book. Please, though, hold criticism until you have read the book.
Dan – thanks for the clarification. It has been interesting to read the variety of reviews and responses to the book. I’m gathering it brings up good points, but is written to extremely for the taste of some.
This is a great discussion! Frank is interacting with people about the book over at http://www.ptmin.org/pcobjections.htm
the book is also on back order in many online stores, but it can be ordered for immediate shipment at http://www.paganchristianity.org