I Can't Believe This Book is Getting Published

...by a big-time publisher.  This is going to be interesting.

It's Frank Viola's new and improved Pagan Christianity.  And Tyndale is printing it, thanks to heavy-hitter and pollster-guy George Barna, who gets co-author credit. 

This book is going to honk people off.  Already is, even though it's not officially "out" yet (but you can get one now at their site.)  They sent me an advance copy to review on Kamp Krusty, because of the enormous influence I exert in the lives of both of my readers.

Here's what's a-ranklin' church folk:  They authors are basically saying -- get this, from a major Christian publisher --that the church, in its contemporary, institutional form, has neither a biblical nor a historical right to exist. 

I'm pretty sure I'm aptly summarizing, because it says -- quote -- "the church, in its contemporary, institutional form, has neither a biblical nor a historical right to exist" in the preface. 

And then things start getting controversial:

-- The "church building" concept is foreign to Jesus's idea of what the church is for.  It has "stalemated the functioning of God's people since the 4th century," and "There does not exist a shred of biblical support for the church building."  And -- oh yeah -- buildings cost American churches $50-60 billion annually.  There's that. 

-- Pulpits, altars, clergy vestments (shoot: clergy, for that matter), nuns, stages, sermons, performance-oriented worship, "sacred relics", buildings named after saints, and such are borrowed from pagan traditions, not from the church of the New Testament.

-- Making preaching the center of church gatherings has no biblical precedent.  Christianity "still has not recovered" from John Calvin's insistence on leading worship services, himself, from a stage.  Luther and Calvin believed each believer had access to God, not through the Eucharist, but through "the preached Word" -- something the writers say is not a biblical idea. 

-- The order of worship now defeats involvement of all the believers, and instead focuses on a few talented people, in the face of the practices of the New Testament church.

-- Protestant churches get the ol' familiar "order of worship" from the Catholic Mass.  And here they approvingly quote Will Durant, who says the mass was "based partly on the Judaic Temple service, partly on Greek mystery rituals of purification, vicarious sacrifice, and participation." 

-- Then there's the chapter on sermons:  "The Sermon:  Protestantism's Most Sacred Cow"

-- And the one on the "office" of Pastor, which the authors say doesn't actually exist in scripture:  "The Pastor:  Obstacle to Every Member Functioning"

-- "Tithing and Clergy:  Sore Spots on the Wallet" is a fun follow-up chapter.  They don't see a biblical basis for tithing to an instutional church, or "tithing" at all, for the Christian. 

-- We don't need Bible colleges.  Never did.  We've inhaled far too much of Athens' approach to knowledge, and the point of knowledge, and misapplied logical tools to the Christian life.

-- And don't get them started on the biblical basis of youth ministers.  Actually:  DO get them started on the biblical basis of youth ministers.  It won't take long:  There isn't any.

-- Also, feel free to get them started on "Sunday School", dressing up for church, worship "pastors", pews, the idea of "sacred spaces", and -- get this -- the "church fathers", who they treat less as all-knowing guides, and more as believers who imported their paganism to re-interpret the meaning of the church.   (This will cost the authors hip points.)

-- Most modern church-people misunderstand how to read the Bible.  They impart qualities to it that aren't biblical.  They don't pay attention to context, and miss the point, and widely apply particular verses that were written for specific situations in a specific context.

Like I say, I'm amazed Tyndale is publishing this.

It's footnoted out the wazoo, but it's readable for high-schoolers.  It's written to be accessible, which means, instead of saying it's "painstakingly documented", I can say it's "footnoted out the wazoo."  Of course, this doesn't make it true, but some people care about quoting other people.

They're going to make a lot of people think.  (What I've seen so far is a reaction against such a "negative" book, but not much refutation on the things that matter.)  The authors' point is not -- insofar as I gather -- that a practice is evil to the extent that its roots are pagan.  That's not it.  The point is that what we consider proper "church" has more to do with surrounding cultures than what Jesus had in mind. 

And honestly, now:  "Too negative", as a central criticism, means, "I prefer the status quo, and...that's about all I got."  As the authors point out, Jesus was a revolutionary, and a "negative" one at that, to those whose first interest was enforcing their version of religion.  They got pretty mad at him.

The authors warn people up-front:  If you think all the trappings of "church" are Holy Writ, the book may be too much for you.  And they're right. 

Did I mention I'm surprised Tyndale is publishing this?  I'm glad they are. 

(By the way:  Before reacting to my bullet-point summaries, read the book.  They make arguments I don't have space to repeat here.)

------------------------

MY OFFICIAL REVIEW:  Well, I liked it, doggone it.  A lot.  I like it because people need to think about this stuff.  And this book will bug a lot of the right people.  In love.

Mostly, I like it because I think they're right about pretty much everything -- that matters, anyway.  I'm an honest reviewer, no? 

The church Jesus envisioned was never about sacred buildings, sacred relics, sacred preaching, special clergy, spectator events, great orations, musical stars, non-stop knowledge accrual, and theological sophistication.  The church is a people, called out for God's purposes, mystically bound together by Christ, and led by Christ. 

In other words, they agree with me.  So, obviously, I highly recommend.

Five stars.

Comments

[John M.]

Well, there also does not exist a shred of biblical support for guitars or airplanes for that matter. But those things aren't automatically bad just because they're not specifically mentioned in the Bible. I think first century Christians met in homes because their just weren't very many of them. Once it got to the point that most people were Christians, including ugly, smelly people with no social skills, it became unreasonable to expect everybody to experience worship only in the context of a circle of close friends. And you can tell that even at that early stage, doctrinal drift was becoming a problem. Paul had to admonish churches all the time for bogus beliefs. Once he was gone, SOMEBODY had to be around to remind us not to start worshiping angels or Baal. Hence the need for clergy.

The church in Japan during the Shogunate survived solely as a secret network of house churches. After 200 years, when European Christians re-established contact with them, their beliefs had become an heretical admixture of Christianity, Shinto, and Buddhism, specifically BECAUSE they had no access to clergy to remind them of what was in the Bible.

[Bill Kinnon]

OK. But. What about my ordination? Eh? Does that, like, matter? Can't I still be Pastor Bill (to the one guy who calls me that). Gee, if I'd gotten an MDiv, I could be Father Bill. How cool would that be! What? I have three kids? Really? And they can call me that!? What a great Christmas.

Oh. And I do look forward to reading the book, O'Krustaceous One.

[TomTom]

Great review,you had me ready to buy even before you wrote "shoot clergy, for that matter". But any specific clergy, or just generally?

Oops, I missed the comma. My bad!

[pattracks]

I read the old version... and Viola's "Straight Talk To Elders"... and "Rethinking The Wineskin". Lot's of good stuff to consider, if anyone can manage to give it even a quarter of a fair shake. Sure, it's inflammatory; Viola could have couched it more diplomatically. And yes, we are free to do whatever the hell we want (see, I can curse, too). Still, the point is... where is this stuff in Scripture? We need to know, 'cause there's a huge burden that comes with believing something is "law" when it ain't. Who was it who said, "why promote the truth when the truth will put you out of business?"

[Your Other Reader]

Pews are unbiblical? Okay, that's gonna be a problem right there.

I'm gonna buy a copy of this for every elder on the board. That's just the kind of a guy I am. You know, the kind that gets his membership revoked.

Seriously - every elder on the board. I mean, what's the worst that can happen?

[Clint]

Am I wrong to feel cutting-edge and cool because I have a version, with page markers sticking out and dog-eared pages, that was published in 2002?
Are you familiar with any of his other books, like "Rethinking the Wineskin"?
I know he's a church planter. Did he help any with starting the group you hang with?

[jared]

I've read Frank Viola's original book by the same name. I liked it. Is it pretty much the same?

[Ryan Springer]

We read "Revolution" as a staff last year at WBGL, so I was very intrigued to see you mention Barna and this new book, which I had not heard of. Thanks for the heads up, Brant, and for a thorough summary of the book. This will be very interesting!

[Jeromy Johnson]

Thanks for posting this review. I am looking forward to this book and I am enjoying your posts. You've been added to my blogroll. Goos stuff.

[Sue]

All that you summarise here is as plain a dog's balls, as far as I see it :) Go, Tyndale, go.

[Patch]

I'm intrigued by this book. I'm not a disgruntled Christian who's detoxing from traditional church. I loved my last church and it was pretty big, with a Paster (who I love and appreciate greatly), a number of associate pastors, a youth pastor, worship pastor, creative arts director, and more. I grew in that church and it was right for me at that time. but...

There is a LOT of truth to what is written in this book, and I've only skimmed through it. I knew most of the Christian "Holy Days" Or holidays come from Pagans, but this other stuff is amazing.

I'll also add, with there being approximately 300,000 to 400,000 churches in America, you can bet the amount spent on pastor salaries is about 10 to 20 billion (this is a VERY low estimate). So, we're rapidly approaching $100,000,000,000 spent on the infrastructure.

That comes out to over 260 million Compassion kids sponsored. 1/4 of a BILLION! I don't think there are 260 Compassion kids.

When you think about what we're doing with Church in America, it might not seem like that big of a deal, but when you think about what we're NOT doing because of it... WOW!

[Mike Taylor]

Hey, Brant.

Sounds like this book does an excellent job of stating the problem. I'm going to get a copy.

But do they have any solutions?

Seriously. Given that the authors want to throw out pretty much all the trappings of the form of Christianity we're all used to, how do they suggest we should do things? I'm not asking this in a "it's all very easy to tear down but what about building up?" way, but out of a real desire to know. If these guys have some insights into how to fix things, I am very ready to hear.

Not to bore everyone with my personal situation, but here is is (feel free to stop reading). My wife and I have spent most of our Christian lives in fairly informal churches where we've been deeply involved all sorts of things: preaching, leading worship, running small groups and so on. We like doing these things. Two and a bit years ago, we moved to a new home and started attending a largish (by British standards) Baptist church. There's a lot to like and respect about it (although I will never get used to voting on stuff) but, oh boy, are we BORED. We don't do any of the stuff we've always done before. I can't get a worship leading gig, we can't get a small group rolling, and there is NO WAY I will ever get into the pulpit, which is sewn up tightly.

So although we have some friends we'd miss, we're thinking we can't stay in this church ... because frankly it won't miss us if we leave, whereas hopefully whatever church that we join instead will really get some use out of us. We're aware of the parable of the talents, and the requirement to account for the gifts we've been given.

So we're seriously considering looking for somewhere new. But your posts, and this book, make me wonder whether all our modern churches are equally missing the point, and whether we could somehow use this problem as an opportunity to do something completely different. The thing is ... what?

Advise me, O Krusty Sage.

[Jeanette]

I loved this review. It puts into words precisely how I feel about the book as well. To me at least, it suggests that God is behind this. I have the priviledge of working with Frank. Having read the new version, it's a lot better than the original. The points are the same, but there's much more added and it reads easier than the first edition. (Frank has never had a professional editor before this and says he'll never work without one now.) The good news is that the book is in print and it's being shipped now. You can order a copy at a great discount at www.paganchristianity.org
The bookstores should have them soon.

[Rainer]

I'm currently reading the "older" version of the book - and I love it.

In response to the first comment (by John), all of those issues you bring up are discussed in the book. Music and musical instruments, the introduction of heretical beliefs, the "need" for clergy, etc...

All of these issues are discussed in light of how they affect our ability to follow what Jesus was trying to teach us, not just because "they aren't in the Bible". That's the whole point of this book.

[Jim]

John M.,

They had no contact with clergy during the Shogunate, and that's why syncretism crept in? Do you seriously believe that?

I'd also wager that there were some, maybe more than a few, ugly smelly people in those small house churches in the ancient world.

Rather, it's in our contemporary North American churches (most of them) that you won't find the ugly, smelly people.

[Brant]

John M. -- I do really recommend reading the book, so you can respond to arguments they make. Among them is not "if something isn't mentioned in scripture, it's wrong", as I noted in the review.

Mike Taylor -- Fortunately, it really isn't a matter of just tearing something down. Although, if you wanted a "how-to"-type manual, one could fault Jesus for not leaving us one.

Or -- maybe he did give us that instruction, but we don't want it. He showed us how to live, but we'd rather busy ourselves with institutions and programs that we feel like we can control.

The modern church is very, very good at making people busy. (Samuel even warned Israel about that when the nation wanted a king: He'll keep you busy!) So it's not surprising you feel bored when not plugging into a programmatic structure. You may, over time, have been disabused of the idea that you, and everyone else, is charged with being the church full-time, and it's not about plugging into their flow charts and ministry structures.

Herein lies the problem: To say, "Hey, there's nothing wrong with a building" is surely right, at a level. Or "Hey, there's nothing wrong with a Bible college" is surely right, at a level. Or, "Hey, there's nothing wrong with a flow chart" is surely right, at a level. Or a pulpit, or a professional clergy, or whatever. What is *not* surely right is a structure that dis-empowers the actual church -- the people, the great unwashed, the theologically unsophisticated -- from being the church.

There's nothing magical about meeting in homes. I don't care about "Home Churches", per se. But it's a hell of a lot less expensive, and it correctly shocks people into integrating their Christ-following into their normal lives. Our group currently meets in a few different homes during the week for meals and mutual edification. All are given a chance to bring a song, a scripture, a word of instruction. All. Everybody.

And we have a great time. And it's a mess. And we're not in control. We're less run-around busy, but more connected, we have more fun, and the thing grows, and it's a big mess. How you like that?

[rob smith]

I will read this book. Brant, how do I join your church? Do I have to move to Fla?

[Seth Ward]

Brant, can't wait to read it.

So, are you saying that you maintain order by perpetuating a kind of disorder?

-btw, not a criticism cloaked as a question or an argumentative trap, just wondering.

I might disagree with their views on the Greeks. They are going to have to throw out half of Paul's letters and a bunch of John to sustain that argument. As for me, I think reason is a good thing. Faith is better, but who says that one can't aid the other?

[robbymac]

Frank's hatred of anything that doesn't fit his "house church where the Holy Spirit is our leader" mindset is well-known.

Hopefully Barna's involvement will temper some of Frank's judgmentalism. I've read most of his earlier works, and he raises some good points, but his inflexibility and narrow solutions sound, well... hyper-fundamentalist, only from a house-church perspective.

I'm still getting a copy, though! :)

[Jason Rackow]

Can't wait for this one. I agree whole-heartedly that preaching should not be the center of a worship gathering. I think that preaching is vital for growth, but I think that preaching should be supplemented, with a healthy dose of outreach (works)--Meaning-- come Sunday, we get up out the pews, and go do some stuff. I know churches that have done the whole-- "The Church has left the building", campaigns, but they're typically short lived. I think there should at least be a ratio of 50/50 in terms of preaching vs. serving.

[Brant]

Rob -- You're already in my church.

Robbymac -- I haven't read his other stuff. I have no idea if he's hyper-anything.

One thing's for sure: If he insists "house churches" are The Only Way, or whatever, I part ways with him on that, big-time. I don't see that error in this book. Who cares whether it's a house or an office or a street corner?

I do note that most of the criticisms I've seen of him don't actually engage what he's saying regarding what so many think is Holy Writ regarding the church. They just say he's "throwing the baby out with the bath water", which really just begs the question.

Seth -- I'm not advocating "order from disorder", per se. I'm saying Christ is to be the head of the church. Since he's actually alive, he can bring order, without our own inventions for command-and-control structures.

I'm proposing that we love God and neighbor, take care of who and what is put before us, and trust that he is able to lead his people.

As for reason, well, I, too, loves me some. But knowledge does not equate to moral character, contra Plato (put simply) and as reason-and-logic-based as I am, I do not approach God only intellectually. Like Tozer says, God is spirit, and man can't apprehend spirit intellectually.

Of course, Paul was educated. But the disciples weren't. The idea that there was a "clergy" class, was a later development, and even later still the idea that they needed a specialized training in theology.

I've argued before that contemporary churches place way too much emphasis on knowlecdge-transfer. Every event is a Bible study, or a Sunday School, or a sermon-centric service, or a seminar, and you're supposed to study the Bible everyday, and buy Christian books, and listen to Christian preachers teach on the radio, and -- whew -- if you're doing that, well, you're living the Christian life.

Knowing things, even true things, about God does not mean you know God.

The life of Christ is not about information-download. The poor, the uneducated, the ruffians, the theologically ignorant, the dumb, the illiterate -- all are quite capable of being instrumental in God's hands, and, if allowed, a blessing to and through the church.

I'm sure you'd agree with that, but using an Greek-influenced education mindset, it just won't happen.

[Jon Zens]

robbymac -- Your comments about Frank were a bit overstated, to say the least. Frank does not have a look-down-your-nose attitude to those in institutional churches. He and I work closely together in many ways. He certainly does advocate simplicity in meeting, and a natural place for that to happen is in homes. However, Frank often critiques what is going on in house churches too. Frank does not "hate" that which is non-home-church. He does believe that the Holy Spirit, not human leaders, should guide Christ-centered meetings, but he has a very gracious attitude toward all brethren, be they institutional or non-institutional. Frank has a heavy burden for the church, but has no interest in being judgmental of others. He knows that the Lord by His spirit will pasture his sheep. If anyone has a Christ-like, non-judgmental spirit, it is Frank. JZ

[Seth Ward]

Hmmmm.

Spoken like a man who has the great intellect and polished reasoning skills to support the confidence of his hindsight.

In other words, spoken like a Greek.

I suppose I'll agree with you on the Plato bit. But as far as the Greek idea of "knowing” well, by Jove, they were on to something. And Paul and John ran with it. There are also surprising similarities in the way the Greeks thought about God to ways the Jews thought of him. Paul saw it.

I agree that "Knowing true things about God does not mean you know God,” but I don't think you can properly "know" reality until you know it the way the church sees it. I would also say that knowing God is not the same as loving God, and that love of God is immeasurably more important the knowledge of God, but doesn't it stand to reason that if a man loves God knowing a little about him he should love God more knowing more about Him? As Sheed says, "For every new thing known about God is another reason to love Him. It is true that some get vast light from lesser knowledge: for love helps sight. But sight helps love too."

Its all apples and oranges in the end – both tasty fruit. You can no more separate spirit from you mind than you can my wife from watching Grey's Anatomy. Man is wondrously both, that's what makes us man. And I think all facets of the mind should be sharpened, enriched and used to know more of God.

And I think that it was no coincidence that Christ came at the height of the Greek reasoning powers. His life, love, teachings, and sacrifice was the missing piece to all that they reasoned for. Paul saw it. The missing piece to their puzzle. The Logos. And he tried to reason it with them.

A Greek poet said, "Through thick and shadowed forests stretch the pathways of his purpose, beyond our power to search out."

I think that falls in line with the Christian view on how much we can really know about God. "You have enclosed me behind and before, And laid Your hand upon me. Such knowledge is too wonderful for me; It is too high, I cannot attain to it. "

I used to wonder how differently we'd be thinking, teaching, operating today if the Church in Jerusalem wouldn't have been destroyed. But I read these two verses and think: Maybe not too different.

[Scott]

Thanks for your last comment, Brant. I enjoyed your review of the book, but that last comment was great.

Thanks.

[John H]

Luther and Calvin believed each believer had access to God, not through the Eucharist, but through "the preached Word"

Um, that would be Jake Luther, right? The neo-Zwinglian preacher somewhere in Idaho?

It can't be Martin Luther, since he was into the Eucharist in a very big way. He said it was the "true body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ", and that by eating and drinking we receive "forgiveness, life and salvation".

He also took a similarly active, instrumental, experiential view of baptism: an encounter with God in which God does something.

To suggest that Luther taught that we only have access to God through the preached Word, and not through the Eucharist... well... just... wow.

[Note from Brant: John, your point is well-made, and certainly valid. This is the danger of me summing up the authors in bullet-points. That's why I included the disclaimer about said points -- but I'm still sorry to be inaccurate.]