Beyond Radical- a brief book review

  "THERE IS NO SCRIPTURAL GROUND FOR ANYTHING WE PROTESTANTS PRACTICE."

This is how Gene Edwards begins his book, Beyond Radical (1999), after first stating the mission of the book: "THIS IS A CALL TO BREAK WITH THE PRESENT PRACTICE OF CHRISTIANITY IN A WAY MORE RADICAL THAN WAS KNOWN DURING THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION" (Yes, it really is printed in all caps;  I think he's trying to get someone's attention!)  He then lists more than twenty practices that we do that are not scriptural, stating that "We distort history when we try to teach that these practices are all New Testament, existed in the first century, and are 'right out of the Word of God!'"  Here's a partial list:

THE CHURCH BUILDING

PASTORS

THE ORDER OF WORSHIP

THE SERMON

THE PULPIT

THE PEW

THE CHOIR

CHAPTER AND VERSE

SUNDAY SCHOOL

THE SEMINARY

THE BIBLE SCHOOL

INTERDENOMINATIONAL AND PARA-CHURCH ORGANIZATIONS

ALL PROTESTANTS GOING TO CHURCH ON SUNDAY MORNING

THE ALTAR CALL

  Edwards' book pre-dates the similar but more comprehensive and well-known volume by Frank Viola and George Barna, Pagan Christianity.   Edwards is more famous for his other works, A Tale of Three Kings, and The Divine Romance, among others.  He and Viola have been part of the house church movement for several decades.  By the way, the modern house church movement dates back to the early 1800's, and only lately has experienced an acceleration in growth, I believe, in response to the fast-growing exodus of about one million believers in North America who are leaving the institutional church every year, and also in response to emerging changes in Western culture.  One of those major changes is the growing quest for authenticity.  The list above should explain the need for that.

Deconstructing Poop

  Okay, here's the big picture about the two main phases of any revolution:  De-construction and re-construction.  Major components of old regimes are torn down and replaced by new stuff.
  We have been watching it happen in Egypt lately as thousands of dissidents are demonstrating in Tahrir Square, shouting their demands for political reform.  The first response from President Mubarak was to announce that he would not run for re-election at the end of his present term.  This commenced the de-construction of his 30-year old regime.  Then He quickly named a new vice president and cabinet, and so the re-construction had begun (not enough for most of the protesters).
  In the Protestant Reformation (1517) Martin Luther began the attempted de-construction of the reigning religious regime, the Catholic Church, by posting his 95 theses on the door of the Wittenburg Chapel.  Unfortunately, the old regime refused to allow de-construction of its oppressive orthodoxies, and the reformers were forced outside the walls, to re-construct their own institution, the Protestant Church.
  In the present-day movement, many would-be reformers are likewise attempting to bring reforms by challenging the oppressive institutions of the reigning powers that be, and again, like 500 years ago, they are mostly having to move outside the walls.
  Frank Viola and George Barna have published a de-constructionist book, Pagan Christianity, which mainly tears down the old obsolete religious structures.  Viola's next book, Re-imagining Church, is a re-constructionist book that attempts to build a new way, often called the organic church.  He says, "An organic church, as I use the term, is a living, breathing, dynamic, mutually participatory, every-member functioning, Christ-centered, communal expression of the body of Christ that gathers under the Lordship and Headship of Jesus Christ.
  This is what I argue to be the proper habitat for the believer in which to live, move, and have our being. It’s also the reason (I believe) that 1 million Christians leave the institutional form of church per year. And 1700 pastors leave the clergy system per month in the U.S.*   Many of them aren’t leaving Jesus Christ or the body, they are seeking what their spiritual instincts are crying out for."

  This mass exodus that Viola cites, is an example of the de-construction that I've seen taking place all around the western religious world.  And the organic church that he subsequently describes, is a manifestation of the re-constructed forms that are emerging.
  It is fascinating to watch a revolution unfold, and even more exhilarating to be in the middle of the throngs in the city square, if you will, shouting out for freedom and reform (even though there are casualties in the struggle), and then working shoulder to shoulder with the visionaries who help to reconstruct relevant, appropriate reforms.
  Reggie McNeal speaks for me when he says, "A growing number of people are leaving the institutional church for a new reason.... They are leaving the church to preserve their faith."
  Yeah, good stuff, man!

*See: pastorburnout.com

Harmful Hierarchy Part 2

Okay, I know where the confusion comes from about this submission to authority doctrine.  Most believers-- and in fact most teachers and pastors-- are thinking of the organization of the institutional church, and the organism of the universal Church, as the same thing, and then trying to apply spiritual truth to a man-made entity.  So let's clarify:
I'm going to define the church (with a small "c") as the man-made denominations, local congregations and structures that have been instituted in order to organize the (capital "C") Church, which is the Body of Believers, the Bride of Christ, that is all believers everywhere.  There are believers both inside and outside this institution, so this organism, the Body of Christ, or the Church, also exists both inside and outside the institution-- the church.
Now, organizations need organization, so some kind of hierarchical structure must be maintained or you'll end with... well, disorganization.  Whether it's a business, an institution, the military, or whatever, there must be hierarchy, and the larger the organization, the more complex the hierarchy.  Denominations and parishes and local congregations are organizations, so they must have an organizational structure-- a man-made hierarchy.  I'm talking about the small "c" church, the institution here.
But the capital "C" Church, the Body of Christ, was not created with a pyramidal hierarchy, it was meant to be an Organism unlike anything else.  It cannot be compared to the military and it should not be run like a business.  There is only one level of hierarchy that exists between the parts of the Body and the Head, which is Christ.  Every part of the Body is answerable directly to the Head.  There are no levels or ranks among the believers, as all are on the same plane and are obliged to respect or submit to one another while submitting to Christ.
All right, I'm not sure that I have cleared up any confusion, but I'll move ahead.  The problem of harmful hierarchies in the church comes when we take a human action such as Paul's appointing of elders in the New Testament churches-- his attempt to organize the local assembles-- and we spiritualize that and build an entire doctrine upon it, calling it a God-ordained clear Biblical principle that should be applied to the church today and without question.
Because this has happened, millions of believers, in their various denominations, are living under an ungodly religious oppression that was never intended by God and is, in fact, anti-Christ, as it perpetuates religious hierarchical empires that stand against the servanthood that Christ taught and exemplified.  The fact is that all believers-- including all leaders in the church-- should "have the same attitude as that of Christ, who...made himself nothing, taking on the very nature of a servant." (Phil. 2: 5-7).  Now where's the hierarchy in that?


Frank Viola speaks for me when he says, "Command-style relationships, hierarchy, passive spectatorship, oneupmanship, religious programs, etc. were created by fallen humans.  And they run contrary to the DNA of the triune God as well as the DNA of the church.  Sadly, however, after the death of the apostles, these practices were adopted, baptized, and brought into the Christian family.  Today, they have become the central features of the institutional church."    ---Frank Viola, Reimagining Church, Cook Press, 2008, p. 37


Viola also says, "The Bible never teaches that believers are given authority over other believers.... The notion that Christians have authority over other Christians is an example of forced exegisis.  As such, it's Biblically indefensible."  --Reimagining Church, p.214, 215


By the way, there is much less confusion about the submission to authority doctrine among believers who are worshipping outside the institutional church in house groups, coffee shops or Boiler rooms*.  Many of those movements are patterned more closely after the New Testament church which had virtually no hierarchy for the first three centuries.  The church in China is an example of one of the largest contemporary house church movements in the world-- where congregations and denominations are outlawed.


* See Punk Monk, New Monasticism and the Art of Breathing, by Andy Freeman & Pete Greig, for more on Boiler Rooms.

Harmful Hierarchy Part 1

I find ironic (even hypocritical) the doctrine of submission to authority as it is widely taught in Protestantism.  The word Protestant means one who protests, and it comes out of a nearly 500-year-old tradition (the Protestant Reformation started in 1517 A.D.) that sprang from the questioning of church orthodoxy by Martin Luther and other reformers.  So, how is it that any Protestant can prohibit another Protestant from being true to the Protestant tradition when he wants to question authority?

Further, many of the existing Protestant denominations rose out of their own protests against earlier groups.  I was raised in the Missionary Church, which was started by a non-conformist named Daniel Brenneman who staged an exodus from the Mennonites.  Yet the Missionary Church is staunch in its doctrine of submission to authority.  Hmm.  Forgetting our roots, aren't we?

I know that this teaching comes from several references citing the naming of elders in the early church and encouraging the respect of those elders.  I believe in respect for elders-- and everybody else in the Body.  Yet the strict and overbearing adherence to this  doctrine regularly generates a forced subjection and oppression that is destructive to multitudes of believers every year as leaders lord it over their people-- in direct defiance of Christ's teaching to the contrary (Matt.20:25-28).*
The submission teaching is an example of a contrived exegesis, and those who promote it are effectively robbing Jesus to pay Paul.  That is, they violate the primary teachings of Christ (servant leadership) while elevating the secondary teachings of Paul (submission to authority).
Further, it's catholic dogma, so Protestants who espouse it are virtual traitors to their own Protestant roots.

The fact is that church leaders often get stuff wrong, and when it happens, there should be questioners who, like Martin Luther, and like Paul who confronted Peter with his hypocrisy (Gal. 2:11-14), will speak up in respectful and appropriate protest.

Shane Claiborne speaks for me when he says, "Dissent is a gift to the church."

Shane Claiborne, author The Irresistible Revolution, thesimpleway.org


See Part 2 of this post for more of who speaks for me on this topic.


*To see a representation of the multitudes of Christians who are hurt every year by harmful hierarchies, visit: www.batteredsheep.com