I’ve finally moved into the ranks of people who have actually read their copy of Pagan Christianity, by Frank Viola and George Barna. And I’ve also got to the point where I have the energy and time to get back to blogging here at Postkiwi, after 3 months of relaunching Duncan’s TV as The Inspiration Room. So here goes with my summary and, after the break, my critique of the book.
Frank wrote the original version of the book back in 2003. He aims to challenge most of the practices of regular American Protestant and Pentecostal worship, claiming that they are postbiblical, postapostolic and mostly influenced by pagan culture. Joining him for the January 2008 edition is George Barna, following up his critique of the Protestant obsession with Sunday morning worship in Revolution.
I agree with the need for critiques of what have become standard church practices: the church building with the concept of “sacred space”, pastor’s chair, stained glass windows, Gothic cathedrals, steeples, pulpits and pews, the Sunday morning order of worship, altar call, written liturgy, choir anthems, the concept of a contemporary sermon, the concept of clergy and laity, contemporary ordination, title of pastor, special standards of clothing for church attenders, special special clothing for celebrants, tithing, clergy salaries, collection plates, ushers, infant baptism, sprinkling rather than immersion, baptism separated from conversion, the sinner’s prayer, use of the term “Personal savior”, the condensation of the Lord’s supper.
While the critique provided by Frank and George is in many cases over simplified, the point is clear. Nearly all 21st century church practices are human inventions, developed in the years since the writing of the Scriptures we claim to be based on.
Frank often says that he is no armchair theologian. He time and time again refers us to the practice followed in the fellowships he has been connected with, in which members spontaneously choose songs, share insights and concerns, and pray for one another.Frank’s focus reminds me of The Open Church, published by James Rutz back in 1992.
Critiquing the Critique
My concerns about the style and content of Pagan Christianity?
1. The use of the term “Pagan” to perjoratively label attempts at contextualizing religious practice in contemporary settings, be it 2nd century or 21st century. This seems to be a continuation of the “Us and Them” concept of “Gentile” – anything that doesn’t come out of the New Testament simple church setting. Sure, many practices have their origin in Greek and Roman settings. The same could be said for the models of gathering and worship experienced by Christians in New Testament times.
2. What appears to be an assumption that all-member ministry should happen mostly when we meet together. I share the concerns that the larger our gatherings get, the smaller ratio of meaningful participation. However we rely far too much on the one to two hours in which most churches, large or small, formal or informal. Who really cares how we choose songs, or whether our Bible studies are led by a leader or free flow? I can’t imagine Jesus quizzing us on these things at the end of time.
3. The constant harking back to a New Testament model of church gathering. Unlike the authors, I am reluctant to make broad generalisations about the way the hundreds of Christian fellowships in the first century met and gathered. There appears to have been a generous variety in the forms of worship, teaching, witness and serving from place to place. There were communities who would have brought with them the expectations of the Jewish synagogue. And there were communities who came from a Greek non-Jewish perspective who would have brought other expectations. Frank and George dismiss connections with synagogue worship, claiming that the early Christians had an approach to gathering that was totally unique to the culture, and that synagogue worship was a human invention. Is there any other kind of invention?
4. The common Protestant treatment of the early church (before the Reformation) as belonging to the Roman Catholic church, as if it was to be feared and distrusted. For one, I don’t believe the early church was as uniform in its practice as we sometimes think. And two, the lessons learned over the first 1500 years are part of my heritage as a Protestant.
5. The suspicion of anything that wasn’t in the scriptures comes across as simplistic and naive. Some of the practices named in the book as damaging to the healthy functioning of Christian community are indeed so. But I would say that each of these practices was at some point a creative engagement with contemporary society. Our problem is not so much an engagement with “non-Biblical” environments, it’s more the rigidity with which we have clung to the traditions that have formed.
Now I’ve finished the book, it’s time to lay my hands on the sequel, Reimagining Christianity. See more from Frank Viola at Present Testimony Ministry, Frank Viola’s blog, The Barna Group, Pagan Christianity, and Reimagining Christianity.
Good review and I liked how you have a ‘critiquing the critique’ section. It seems like we’ve had a few big movements over the centuries that have tried to get back to how it was at the beginning, notably the reformation and some of the reforms of Vatican II despite the obvious fact that year-zero culture is gone forever and won’t be coming back. I like the idea of critiquing current Christian practices but without the need to sweepingly discard all the rich history and culture that has gone before us.
I like many of the points that you make, I appreciate you taking the time to read and respond to this book. I am still working my way through it, I keep setting it down and grabbing my Bible and some of Viola’s claims are outrageous.
The idea that the original, NT church was infallible and perfect in some way is not born out in Scripture. The fact that Paul had to write corrections to the churches in Corinth, Galatia, and Thessolonica, are proof positive that human error had crept into the earliest of meetings. As well as the appearance of the first Deacons in response to a snag in the food distribution program for widows, and the Apostles didn’t have the time to oversee it.
And, forgive me for being simple, but in 1 Corinthians 9, and again in 1 timothy 5:17,18 Paul clearly states the case for elders and teachers to recieve pay for their services. The concept of a paid clergy is by no means a pagan idea, and Paul even uses – Gasp! the OT as a proof text!
There are many other points I would make, I just don’t want to weigh down your site with too much info. I will say this: The apalling lack of Biblical understanding, or even the twisting of some of the Scriptures is off-putting to me.
While there are legitimate problems in our church systems, the answer for Viola is to do away with everything and start back at nothing. Too great a leap, in my opinion, and not one required by the Head of the Church, Jesus Christ.
Blessings..