Pagan Christianity?: Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices

== e r< =o -,,il Y65 =8, delving mf;HpffiR Some Definitions As you read this book, we feel it is important that you ...

Author: Frank Viola | George Barna

96 downloads 1214 Views 20MB Size Report

This content was uploaded by our users and we assume good faith they have the permission to share this book. If you own the copyright to this book and it is wrongfully on our website, we offer a simple DMCA procedure to remove your content from our site. Start by pressing the button below!

Report copyright / DMCA form

DOWNLOAD PDF

==

e r< =o -,,il

Y65 =8,

lr@

Visit Tyndale's exciting Web site at www.tlrrdale.com TWDALE is a registered trademark of !'ndale House Publishers, Inc. Bama and the Barna logo are trademarks of George Barna. BarnaBooks is an imprint of Tyndale House Publishers, Inc. Pagan Cbristianity?: Exploring the Rootsof Oar Cburch Practices Copyright @ 2002,2008 by Frank \4ola and George Barna. All rights reserved. First printing by Present Testimony Ministry in2002. Cover photo of tree roots copyright @ Thnja MehViStockphoto. Nl rights reserved. Designed by Stephen Vosloo Unless otherwise indicated, Scripture quotations are taken from the Holy Bible,I{rng James!'ersion. Scriprure quotations marked NLT are taken from the Holy Bible,New Living Tianslauon, secondedition, copFight @ 1996,2004. Used by permission of R'ndale House Publishers,Inc., Carol Stream,Illinois 60188. All rights reserved. Scriprure quotations marked ESV are from Tbe Holy Bible, English Standard Version@,copyright O 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a publishing ministry of Good News Publishers. Used by permission. All rights reserved. Scripture quotations marked NfV are taken from the HOLY BIBLE, NEW. \iERSION@. NIV@. Copyright @ 1973, 1978, 1984 by INTERNAIIONAL International Bible Society. Used by permission of Zondervan. All rights reserved. Scripture quotations marked NASB are taken from the New Americnn Standard B i b l e @c,o p y r i g h t O 1 9 6 0 , 1 9 6 2 , 1 9 6 3 , 1 9 6 8 , 1 9 7 1 , 1 9 7 2 , 1 9 7 3 , 1 9 7 5 , 1 9 7 7 , 1 9 9 5b y The Lockman Foundation. Used by permission. Scripture quotations marked NKIV are taken from the New KingJames Version@. Copyright @ 1982 by Thomas Nelson, Inc. Used by permission. All rights reserved. NKJVis a trademark of Thomas Nelson,Inc. Scripture versions marked WEB are taken from the World English Bible. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication

Data

\4ola, Frank. Pagan Christianity? : exploring the roots of our church practices / Frank Viola and George Barna. p'cm. Includes bibliographical references (p. ). ISBN- I 3 : 97 8-I-4143- 1485-3 (hc) ISBN- I 0: I-4143 -1485-X (hc) l. Church renewal. 2. Church-Biblical teaching. 3. Bible. N.T-Criticism, interpretation, etc. 4. Theology, Practical-History. I. Barna, George. II. Tide. BV600.3.V56 2007 262.001'7-dc22

Printedin the United Statesof America 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 9

8

7

6

2007025967

Tn*urforgottnn hruthers andsist*rsthr*ughcut thefrg*swh*ccuragrously$t*ppe*sutsids thesafehaundrof instituti*nal fhristianity at theriskof lifc andlimh.Vo*faithfully earried th* tareh,endursd persecution, forfeited r*putaticn, lo*t family,suffer*dtorture,and spilledyourbloadta plesnrvrthe primitivetestimony thatJs$il$ Shristis Head# llis church. Andthateverybeliever is a priest, . . a ffiinister ... . anda Nunctigning m*mber af Ssd'shcus*"Thisb*ok ir dedicated to you.

Y

E

F I

g - t

CN -r

-

(D -l

Dear Reader,

{

3n -tt

Perhaps you wonder why a publisher of Christian books would releasea book that questionsso many common church practices.Pleasebe aware, however, that the authors are not questioning the validity or importance of the church. Instead, they are asking us to thoughtfully consider the source of our churches' traditions and then ask how these practices square with Scripture and the practices of the first-century church. Many in the church hold to tradition, even if it is not grounded in Scripture, and these same people wonder why the church seemsto be losing its relevanceand impact in the contemporary world. TiTndaledoesnot necessarilyagreewith all of the authors' positions and realizes that some readers may not either. At the same time, we stand united with Frank and George in our desire to see the church operate according to biblical principles and be a full expressionof God's graceand truth. Furthermore, the authors raise important questionsbasedon their careful research,study, and experiences,and we believe these questions should not be ignored. Our aim is for you to consider their conclusions and then pray seriously about your response. The Publisher

is m TI cl rr1

V

Acknowledgments .. Prefaceby Frank Viola. Introduction: "What Happenedto the Church?" by GeorgeBama SomeDefnitions .

xiii .. xaii ...... xffi) ....... xxxi

Flave We Really Been Doing It by the Book?..........

1

The ChurchBuildins..

9

The Order of Worship . .

47

.i,:ril

:.I

i

Th e S er m on. . . |

, , . .

The Pastor... : , ' , :

105

' , . - .

i

SundayMorning Costumes ' , : : ,

85

a ,

.

r : :

..... L45

i

Ministersof Music TithingandClergySalaries

... 157 .....17I

Baptismandthe Lord'sSupper

.187

ChristianEducation

. L99

Reapproaching the New Testament .... r , i i :

i ; : :

....221

t t t ' i

A Second Glance at the Savior Afterword:TheNextStep..

..243

.....253 Final Thoaghx: QdtA with Frank Wolaand GeorgeBarna. . . 261 Summaryof Origins ..... 271 Key Figures in Church History. . 277 Bibliograpby ...... 281 About theAuthors . 293

CT

ct -

;rF

(D rl

+ CN

"Exp er iencseupplie sp a i n fu pl ro o fth a ttra d i ti o nos n cecal l edi nto At last beingare first calleduseful,thenthey becomenecessary. theyaretoo oftenmadeidols,andall mustbowdownto themor be punis hed. " _J. C.RYLE, WRITER ANDMINISTER NINETEENTH-CENTURY ENGLISH it throughthreestages.First,it is ridiculed. Second, "All truthpasses Third,it is accepted as self-evident." is violentlyopposed. _ARTHUR NINETEENTH.CENTURY GERMAN PHILOSOPHER SCHOPENHAUER,

Y

ffiftTL$ruffiAfTfiffi* Lgp?the institutional church to begin gathering with Christians in an organic way, I sought to understand how the Christian church ended up in its present state. For years I tried to get my hands on a documented book that

s) e, = a -

c,

traced the origin of every nonbiblical practice we Christians

€

observe every week.'

(D

I searchedscores of bibliographies and card catalogs. I also contacted a raft of historians and scholars,asking if they knew of such a work. My quest y'reldedone consistent answer:No such book had ever been penned. So in a moment of insaniry I decided to put my hand to the plow. I will admit that I wish someone else had taken on this overwhelming project-someone like a childless professor without a day jobl It would have saved me an incalculable number of painstaking hours and a great deal of frustration. Nevertheless,now that the work is complete, I am glad I had the privilege of breaking new ground in this all-tooneglected area. Some mav wonder why I spent so much time and energy documenting the origin of our contemporary church practices. It's rather simple. Understanding the genesisof our church traditions can very well change the course of church history. fu philosopher Soren Kierkegaard once put it, "Life is lived forwards but understood backwards."Without understandingthe mistakesof the past,we are doomed to a flawed furure. It is for this reason that I set out to make the first stab at this Himalayan project. My hope in publishing this work is assimple asit is somber: that the Lord would use it as a tool to bring FIis church back to her biblical roots. On that note, I would like to acknowledge the following people: my coauthor, George Barna, for making this a practrces Theonly work thatI could findthattraces isGene some oftheorrgins ofourmodern church Edwards's littlevolume Bevond Radical nodocumentation. ilacksonville' Seedsowers. 1999). butit contains

trL 0q -l|

d

-

CD q +

cn

stronger book; Frank Yaldez for your keen insight and your unwavering friendship; Mike Biggerstaff, Dan Merillat, Phil Warmanen, Eric Rapp, and Scott Manning for proofing the original manuscript; Howard Snyder for the matchless feedback that only scholars can give; Neil Carter for your willing tenacity to help me researcheverything under the sun; Chris Lee and Adam Parke for making repeated trips to the library and lugging counrless stacks of dusry books into my study; Dave Norrington for periodically mailing me valuable leads from acrossthe Atlantic; Gene Edwards for your pioneering efforts and your personal encouragement; those seminary professorswhose names are too numerous to list for kindly responding to my endless and persistent inquiries; the Tilndale staff for your invaluable suggestions and superb editing; and Thom Black-without edition would have never happened. -Frank

Viola

you this new

the pastarecondemned to repeatit." "Thosewhocannotremember -GEORGE TWENTIETH.CENTURY PHILOSOPHER ANDPOET SANTAYANA, SPANISH "Whydo youyourselves transgress the commandment of Godfor the your sakeof tradition?" -JESUS lNMATTHEW 15:3,Nrss CHRIST

Y

WAtKfrnTg{[$fART$i,His chief oppoWHfiHTl"{fiLtrftS,[H$tl$ sition came from the rwo leading religious parties of the day:

EI

the Phariseesand the Sadducees. The Pharisees added to the sacred Scriprures. They obeyed the law of God as it was interpreted and applied by

tl,

the scribes, the experts in the Law who lived pious and disciplined lives. fu the official interpreters of God's Word, the Phariseeswere endowed with the power of creating tradi-

ttt

tion. They tacked on to the Word of God reams of human laws that were passedon to subsequentgenerations.This

z,

body of time-honored customs, often called "the tradition of the elders," came to be viewed as being on equal par with Holy Wiit.' moved in the oppositedirecThe error of the Sadducees tion. They subtractedwhole segmentsof Scripture-deeming only the law of Moses worthy to be observed.' (The Sadduceesdenied the existenceof spirits, angels,the soul, the afterlife, and the resurrection.r) No wonder that when the LordJesus entered the drama of human history His authority was arduously challenged (seeMark 11:28).He did not fit into the religious mold of either camp. As a result, Jesuswas viewed with suspicion by both the Phariseeand Sadduceeparties.It did not take long for this suspicion to turn to hostility. And both the Pharisees and Sadduceestook stepsto put the Son of God to death. History is repeating itself today. Contemporary Christianiry has fallen into the errors of both the Pharisees and the Sadducees. First, contemporary Christianity is guilty of the error of the Pharisees.That is, it has addeda raft of humanly devised (Nashville: 830-831' Publishers, 1986), Thomas Nelson lllustrated BibleDictionary Lockyer Sr, ed.,l'lelson's Herbert 23,23-24. SeealsoMatthew 957-958. lt isalsocalled the i.e., to Deuteronomy. Genesis otthe0ldTestament, refers tothelirstfivebooks ThelawofMoses "five-volumed." (iheLaw) isa Greek termmeaning which Torah andthePentateuch, (Wheaton, 1982)' 1055. Fellowship, lL: InterVarsity ed. New Bible Dictionary,2nd L Howard Marshall ,

-

(D rrh

c) (D '?l

n F

'E

C3 r It

traditions that havesuppressedthe living, breathing, functional headship ofJesus Christ in His church. second, in the tradition of the Sadducees,the grear bulk of New Testamentpracticeshave been removed from the christian landscape. Thankfully, such practices are presently being restored on a small scaleby those daring souls who have taken the terri$,ing step of leaving the safe camp of instirutional Christianity. Even so, the Pharisees and the Sadduceesboth teach us this often-ignored lesson:It is harmful to dilute the authoriry of God's word either by addition or by subtraction. We break the Scriprure just asmuch by burying it under a mounrain of human tradition as by ignoring its principles. God has not been silent when it comes to the principles that govern the practice of His church. Let me explain by posing a question: Where do we find our practices for the Christian life? Where is our model for understandingwhat a Christian is in the first placel Is it not found in the life ofJesusChrist asportrayed in the NewTestament? Or do we borrow it from somewhereelse?perhaps a pagan philosopher? Few Christians would dispute thatJesusChrist, as He is presented in the New Testament,is the model for the Christian life.JesusChrist ei the Christian life. In the sameway, when Christ rose from the dead and ascended,FIe gave birth to His church. That church was Flimself in a different form. This is the meaning of the phrase"the body of Christ.',a consequently, in the New Testament we have the genesisof the church. I believe the first-cenrury church was the church in its purest form, before it was tainted or corrupted. That's not to say the early church didn't have problems-Paul's epistlesmake clear that it did. Floweveq the conflicts Paul addressesare inevitable when a fallen people seekto be part of a close-knit communiry.5 o ln 1 Corinthians 12,12,Paul refers tothechurch asthebody jsthecgrpgrate ofChrist. According toPauline teaching, thechurch Chri$Thehead g,4-5; isin heaven, while (Acts thebody properly isonearth Ephesians 5:23; Colossians i,ia,2,1g). conceived, the church isa spiritual organism, notaninstjtutional orsanization. 5 Interestingly, anorganic problems church willhave identical tothose inthefirst-century church. 0ntheother hand, theInstitutjonal church faces a completely different setofproblems, which have nobiblical antidote since itsstructure issodistinct fromtheNew Iestament church. Forinstance, rnaninstitutional church thelaitymaynotliketheirpreacher sotheyfirehim.Thjsnever would have happened inthefirstcentury because there wasnosuch pastor. thingasa hired

The church in the first century was an organic entity. It was a living, breathing organism that expresseditself far differently from the instirutional church today. And that expressionrevealedJesusChrist on this planet through His every-member functioning body. In this book, we intend to show how that organism was devoid of so many things that we embrace today. The normative practices of the first-century church were the natural and spontaneousexpressionof the divine life that indwelt the early Christians. And those practiceswere solidly grounded in the timeless principles and teachings of the New Testament. By contrast, a gre t number of the practicesin many contemporary churchesare 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 answeris disturbing: Most of them were borrowed from pagan culrure. Such a statement short-circuits the minds of many Christians when they hear it. But it is unmovable, historical fact, as this book will demonstrate. So we would argue that on theological grounds, historical grounds, and pragmatic grounds, the New Testamentvision of 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. The New Testament church teachesus how the life of God is expressedwhen a group of people begin to live by it together. Further, my own experience in working with organic churches confirms this finding. (An organic church is simply a church that is born out of spiritual life instead of constructed by human instirutions and held together by religious programs. Organic churches are characterized by Spirit-led, open-participatory meetings and nonhierarchical leadership.This is in stark contrast to a clergy-led, institution-driven church.) My experience in the United States and overseasis that when a group of Christians begin to follow the life of the Lord who indwells them together, the same outstanding features that marked the New Testament church begin to emerge naturally. This is becausethe church really is an organism.fu such,it hasDNA

that will alwaysproduce these featuresif it is allowed to grow naturally. Granted, organic churchesw"illhavedifferencesdependingon the cultures in which they operate. But if the church is following the life of God who indwells it, it will never produce those nonscriptural practices this book addresses.o Such practicesare foreign elementsthat God's people picked up from their pagan neighbors as far back as the fourth cenrury. They were embraced,baptized, and called "Christian." And that is why the church is in the stateit is in today, hampered by endlessdivisions, power strrggles, passivity,and lack of transformation among God'.speople. In short, this book is dedicated to exposing the traditions that have been tacked onto God's will for His church. Our reason for writing it is simple: We are seekingto remove a great deal of debris in order to make room for the LordJesus Christ to be the fully functioning head of FIis church. We are also making an outrageousproposal: that the church in its contemporary institutional form has neither a biblical nor a historical right to function asit does.f'his proposal, of course,is our conviction basedupon the historical evidencethat we shall presentin this book. You must decide if that proposal is valid or not. This is not a work for scholars,so it is by no means exhaustive.A thorough treatment of the origins of our contemporary church practiceswould fill volumes.But it would be read by few people.Nthough this is a singlevolume, it includesa great deal of history. Yet this book does not chaseevery historical sidelight. Rather, it focuseson tracing the central practices that define mainstream Christianiry today., Becausethe roots of our contemporary church practicesare so important to grasp, we wish that every literate Christian would read this work.o Consequently,we have chosen not to employ technical language,but to write in plain English. "The Fora more in-depth discussion onthisprinciple, seemyarticles Kingdom, thechurch, andculture" (http,//www ptmin.org/culture.htm) (http://www.ptmin.org/organic.hrml. and"What lsan0rganic Church?" Thtsbook practices. focuses onProtestantChrisltan Anditsmainscope is"lowchurch" Protestantism rather than"hrghchurch" denominations likeAnglican, tpiscopal, andsome stripes ofLutheran .Byhighchurch, I mean churches thatemphasize thesacerdotal. sacramental, andltturgical Catholic elements oforthodox Christianity. Thebook practices touches onhigh-church onlyinpassing. philosopher Asthetnglish "lt isnotSt.Augustine's Francis Bacon once said, norSt.Ambrose's works thatwillmake sowisea divine asecclesiastical history thoroughly read andobserved."

At the sametime, footnotes containing added detailsand sources appear throughout each chapter.uReflective Christians who wish to verifr our statements and obtain a more in-depth understanding of the subjectscovered should read the footnotes. Those who care little for such details may ignore them. The footnotes also occasionally qualifit or clarifit easily misunderstood statements. Finally, I am delighted to have worked with George Barna on this revised edition. George's uncomrnon flair for readable research has made this a stronger work. In short, this book demonstratesbeyond dispute that those who have left the fold of institutional Christianiry to become part of an organic church have a historical right to exist-since history demonstratesthat many practices of the institutional church are not rooted in Scripture. GatNssvrrru,, Fronroe JuNr zooT

possible. Note thatwhen fathers, I have works whenever Inthose cases when I donol I quote thechurch elected tocitetheiroriginal (Abilene, citetheiroriginal works, I haveciledEarly ed.,byEverett Ferguson TX,ACIJ Press, 1999), whichisa Christians Speak,3rd compilation andtranslation oftheiroriginal writings.

hasnothingat all on!"saida littlechild."Listento "Butthe Emperor the voiceof innocence!" exclaimed the father;and whatthe child hadsaidwas whispered fromoneto another."But he has nothing on!"at lastcriedall thepeople. TheEmperor wasvexed,for he knew thatthe peoplewereright;but he thought, mustgo "Theprocession 0n nowln' Andthe lordsof the bedchamber tookgreaterpainsthan everto appearholdingup a train,although, in reality,therewasno trai nto hold. -HANSCHRISTIAN ANDERSEN

Y

- t

--lr r!

C) CL F

-

et

=!i C' E El

G?

m

(:,

x

tr.:, "Thereis perhapsnothingworsethanreaching the top 0f the ladder you're anddiscovering that on thewrongwall." _JOSEPH CAMPBELL. TWENTIETH.CENTURY AMERICAN WRITER

1T1

ttr F

n z, It

Wt ARf LlVlNfi lN TFlt fVIln$Tof a silent revolution of faith. Millions of Christians throughout the world are leaving the old, accepted ways of "doing church" for even older approaches.Those older approachesare rooted in the Floly Scriprures and the eternal principles of the living God. Consequently, the motivation for this transition from the old to the older is not simply to get us in touch with our history or to reclaim our roots. It is borne out of a desire to return to our Lord with authenticiry and fullness. It is a thrust to bond with Him through the Word of God, the Kingdom of God, and the Spirit of God. The heart of the Revolutionaries is not in question. There is ample researchto show that they are seeking more of God. They have a passion to be faithful to His Word and to be more in rune with His leading. They ardently want their relationship with the Lord to be their top priority in

life. They are tired of the institutions, denominations, and routines getting in the way of a resonant connection with Him. They are worn out on the endless programs that fail to facilitate transformation. They are weary of being sent off to complete assignments,memorize factsand passages, and engagein simplistic practicesthat do not draw them into God's presence. These are people who have experiencedthe initial realities of a genuine connection with God. They can no longer endure the spiritual teasing offered by churches and other well-intentioned ministries. God is waiting for them. They want Him. No more excuses. But this revolution of faith is challenged. Those involved know what they are shifting from-lifeless, instirutional forms of faith to breakthrough. But what are they shifting to? House churches,marketplace ministries, cyberchurches,independent communitywide worship gatherings, intentional communities. These forms of church are all intriguing, but do they really represent a meaningful step toward God's highest purpose? Or are they just the same sfuff presented in a different setting? Are they developing the salne roles, but attaching new titles adopted by different role playersi Are we living in a culture that is so infatuated with change that we have forgotten that the church is about transformation, not mere change? fu we grapple with such issues,there is much to be learned from the history of God's people.Followers of Christ appreciatethe stories God has given us in FIis Word. We discover much about God, life, culture, and even ourselvesby following the journey of God's people in both the Old and New Testaments.Consider how much we learn from Moses and the Israelites'pursuit of the Promised Land. Or the hard-won insights of David's rise from lowly shepherd boy to king of Israel. Or the plight ofJesus'disciplesasthey left their craft to follow the Lord before meeting with marryrdom. In the sameway, much can be gleaned from the efforts of the earliest Christians-our

physical

and spirirual ancestors-as they sought to be the genuine church that Christ purchasedwith His blood. But what do modern and postmodern Christians know about the

history of the church that would help to shape present-day artempts at honoring God and being the church? Precious little, it rurns out. And therein lies a significant problem. Historians have long held that if we do not remember the past,we are doomed to repeatit. There is ample evidence to support that warning. Yet we often persist in our well-intentioned but ignorant efforts to refine life. The recent story of the Christian church in America is a great example of this. The major changesin spirirual practice over the past half century have been largelywindow dressings.Pick a trend-megachurches,seekerchurches,satellite campuses,vacation Bible school, children's church, affinity group ministries (e.g.,ministries for singles, women, men, young marrieds), contemporary worship music, bigscreen projection systems,EF*f giving, cell groups, downloadable sermons,sermon outlines in bulletins, Npha groups. Nl of the above have simply been attempts to rely on marketing strategiesto perform the same activities in different ways or places,or with particular segments of the aggregatepopulation. Whatever difficulties were present in the larger institutional setting that spawnedthese efforts are invariably present in the smaller or divergent efforts as well. This book will challenge you to consider making more significant changesin the way you practice your faith. Altering the ways in which we worship is no simple task. When people suggest significant changesin some of the hallowed practices,cries of "heretic" can be heard coming from all directions. Such protest is common largely becausepeople have little knowledge of the true foundations of their faith. That's where this book comes in. Rather than foster continued resistanceto methodological innovations, it's time that the body of Christ get in touch with both the Word of God and the history of the church to arrive at a better understanding of what we can and should do-as well as what we cannot and should nor do. From personal experience, the authors of this book can tell you that such a journey of discovery is enlightening, to saythe least.If you spend time searching God's Word for most of the common practices

in conventional churches,you will rarely find them. If you go further and spend time tracing the history of those practices, you will soon discover that most of our religious habits are man-made choices.In fact, you're likely to discern a pattern about the way that we "do church" these days:If we do it, it's probably not in the Bible as one of the practices of the early church! Does it surprise you that most of what we do in religious circles has no precedent in Scripture? This includes many of the activities within church services,the education and ordination of clergy, the routines commonly used in youth ministry the methods of raising funds for ministry the ways in which music is used in churches, even the presenceand nature of church buildings. There were three historical periods when a bevy of changeswere made in common Christian practices:the era of Constantine, the decadessurrounding the Protestant Reformation, and the Revivalist period of the eighteenth and nineteenth cenruries. But asyou are about to find out, those changes were the result of passionate,though often ill-informed, followers of Christ. The believers during those periods simply went along for the ride, which resulted in new perspectivesand practices that churches have held on to for many years. So many years, in fact, that you probably think of those routines as biblical in origin. Not surprisingly,having changedthe biblical model of the church, we have become adept at building support for our approachesthrough proof-texting. Proof-texting is the practice of taking disparate,unrelated verses of Scriprure, often out of context, to "prove" that our position squareswith the Bible. fu you read this book, you may be stunned to discover how many of our esteemedpractices are way off the mark biblically. Does it really matter how we practice our faith, as long as the activities enable people to love God and obey Him? The preponderance of evidence shows that these perspectives,rules, traditions, expectations,assumptions,and practices often hinder the development of our faith. In other instances,they serve as barriers that keep

us from encountering the living God. The way in which we practice our faith can, indeed, affect the faith itself. Does that mean we must go back to the Bible and do every,rhing exactly as the disciplesdid between AD 30 and 60? No. Social and cultural shifts over the last two thousand years have made it impossible to imitate some of the lifestyle and religious efforts of the early church. For example,we use cell phones, drive in automobiles,and utilize central heat and air. The first-century Christians had none of these forms of human convenience.Therefore, adhering to the principlesof the New Testament doesnot mean reenacting the eaentsof the flrst-century church. If so, we would have ro dresslike all first-century believersdid, in sandalsand togas! Nso, just becausea practice is picked up from culture does not rnake it wrong in and of itself, though we must be discerning. As author Frank Senn notes, "We cannot avoid bringing our culture to church with us; it is a part of our very being. But in the light of tradition we need to sort out those cultural influences that contribute to the integrity of Christian worship from those that detract from it."r It is in our best interest to scour the words of God to determine the core principles and ethos of the early church and to restore those elementsto our lives. God has granted us great leeway in the methods we use to honor and connect with Him. But that does not mean ri-ehave free rein. Caution is advisableaswe strive to be humble and obedient people who seekHis central will. Our goal is to be true to His plan so that we may become the people He desiresus to be and that the church may be all she is called to be. So be prepared for a rude awakening asyou find out how offtrack our current religious practicesare. You probably know that today'sjets usevery sophisticatedcomputer systemsto constantly reorient a plane as it travels on its path. During the course of a trip from Los Angeles to New York, literally thousandsof course corrections are made to ensure that the plane sets down on the appropriate landing strip. Frank (Philadelphia, C.Senn, Christian Worship andltsCultural Settlng Fortress Press, 1983), 51.

Wtithout those course corrections, even a tiny one percent deviation from the original flight plan would land that airplane in a different county! The contemporary church is like a jet airplane that has no capacityfor in-flight coursecorrections.A little changehere, a minor deviation there, a slight alteration of this, a barely perceptible rweaking of that-and

before you know it, the whole enterprise has been

redefined! Is this hard for you to believel Then we encourageyou to invest yourselfin the processand do some ofyour own research.Mycoauthor, FrankViola, spent manyyears laboriously tracking down the historical data that identified how the church got onto this crooked path. The references from his journey are supplied for you in each chapter. If you are skeptical-and we encouragehealthy skepticism that leads to fact-finding and truth-then

commit yourself to identifzing exactly

what did happen over the course of time. This matters! Your life is a gift from God and is to be lived for God. Furthermore, the church is one of God's deepestpassions.He caresabout her well-being, aswell as how she expressesherself on the earth. So understanding how we got from the early church to the contemporary church, and figuring out what you will do about it, is very important. Every good author writes in order to bring about positive, meaningful change.This book is no different. We want you to be informed by the Word of God and by church history. We want you to think carefully and biblically about how you practice your faith with other Christians. And we want you to influence others to understand what God leads you to discover. Part of the challenge of living in concert with a biblical view of the world is correlating your spiritual life with God's intentions, as outlined for us in the Bible. We pray that this book will help you to do your part in straightening out the crooked path of the contemporary church.

>delving mf;HpffiR Some Definitions As you read this book, we feel it is important that you understand how we are using the terms below. PAGAI{ W ea r eu s i ntgh i sw o r tdoi n d i c attheo sper a c t i caensdp r i n c i ptl h ea sa t r en o C t h r i s t ioarnb i b l i c ianlo r i g i n l n.s o m e cases, weuseit to refer tothose ancients whofollowed thegodsoftheRoman [mpire. Wearenotusing theword asa syn0nym iorbad,evil,sinful, practice orwrong. A "pagan ormind-set" refers toa practice ormode ofthinking thathasbeen adopted fromthechurch's surrounding pagan practices culture. Webelieve thats0me areneutral glory. andcanberedeemed forGod's Wefeelthatothers stand indirect conflict withtheteachinss ofJesus andthe a p o s t laens dt h u sc a n n ob ter e d e e m e d .

ORGA NI C CHURCH Thetermorganicchurchdoesnotreferto a particular modelof church.(Webelieve that no perfectmodelexists.) I n s t e a dw,e b e l i e vteh a tt h eN e wT e s t a m evni ts i o no f c h u r c hi s o r g a n i cA.n o r g a n icch u r c hi s a l i v i n gb, r e a t h i n g , dynamic, mutuallyparticipatory, every-member-functioning, Christ-centered, communal expression of the bodyof C h r i s tN. o t et h a to u rg o a li n t h i sb o o ki s n o tt o d e v e l oapf u l ld e s c r i p t i o fnt h eo r g a n icch u r c hb u to n l yt o t o u c ho n it whennecessary.

INSTITUTI()I{At CHURCH (nota particular Thistermrefers to a religious group system of people). Aninstitutional church is onethatopera t e sp r i m a rai lsya no r g a n t z atthi oane t x i s tasb o v b ee , y o nadn,di n d e p e n doeftnhtem e m b ewr hs op o p u l art e.l t i s c o n s t r u cm t e0dr0enp r 0 g r a m a nsdr i t u a ltsh a no nr e l a t i o n s hl ti pi ssl .e db ys e t - a p aprrio f e s s i o (n"aml si n i s t e r s " ("laity"). or"clergy") whoareaidedbyvolunieers Wealsousethetermscontenporary church, traditional church, present-day church, andmodern churchlo refertotheinstitutional church ofourday,

(]RFIRST-CENTURY NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH, CHURCH These terms donotrefer to a particular formofchurch. Weareinstead speaking ofthechurch ofcentury onethat (lnthisbook, wereadabout in ourNewTestament. first-centurychurchis usedasa synonym IorNewTestanent church.\ Wedonotadvocate a primitivistic return toa particular model oftheearly church. Instead, webelieve that a r e t u rtnot h es p i r i t uparli n c i p ltehseo, r g a npi cr a c t i c a en s ,dt h es p i r iat n de t h oosft h ef i r s t - c e n tcuhruyr cahl,o n g w i t ht h et e a c h i nogfJse s uasn dt h ea p o s t l es sh,o u g ce l du i doeu rp r a c t i o ft h ec h u r ci h no u rd a ya n dt i m e .

()RSCRIPTURAL BIBLICAL, These words areusedfirstandforemost judgments. assource statements andsecondarily asvalue Bibtical or scripturalrefers to whether a practice hasitsorigins intheNew Testament Scriptures. References Lounbiblicalor practices unscriptural donotautomatically implyerror. These words canrefer to thefactthata certain oractice (inwhich does notappear intheNew Testa ment caseit should notbetreated assacred). Buttheycanalsorefer toa practice thatvtolates theprinciples orteachings oftheNew Testament. Thecontext willdetermine howthese words a r eu s e dW. ec e r t a i ndloyn o ta g r ewe i t ht h ed o c t r i noefs" t h es i l e n coefS c r i p t u a r en"d" t h er e g u l a t p i vrei n c i p l e , " which teach thatif a practice isnotmentioned intheNew lestament thenweshould notfollow it.

THECALFPATH One day, through the primeual wood, A calf walked home,asgoodcalaesshould; But mnde a trail all bent askew, A crookedtrail as all caluesdo. Sincethen three hundredyears haueJled, And, I infer, the ca(-is dead. But still he left behind his trail, And tberebyhangsmy moral tnle. Tbe trnil uas taken up next daJ By a lone dog tbat passedthat way; And then a wisebell-wethersheep Pursued the trail o'er aale and steep, And drew thellock behind him., too, As goodbell-wethersalwaysdo. And from tbat dny, o'er hill and glade, Through thoseold woodsa patb was made. And many men wound in and out, And dodged,and turned, and bent about And uttered words of righteouswrath Because'rwassacha crookedpath.1 But still tbeyfollowed-do not LrughThefirst migrations of that calf, And through this winding wood-waystalked, Because be wobbledwhen he walked. a lane, Thisforex path beca.me That bent, and turned, and turned again; This crookedlane becamea road, Were many a poor horsewith his load Tbiledon beneaththe buruing sun, And traaeledsomethree miles in one. And thus a.centurytand a half They trod thefootstepsof that calf.

path" church toiiscurrent lorm. Thispoem, written more Inthisbook, wesometimes refer to "thecrooked thatledtheinstitutional ago, served astheinspiration forthatmetaphor. thana century

The yearspassedon in nriftnessfl.eet, The road becamea aillage street; And this, beforemen u)ereaTtare) A city's croutdedthoroughfare; And soonthe central street was this Of a renownedmetropolis; And men nuo centariesand a half Tiod in thefootstepsof that calf. Each day a hundred thousandrout Followedthe zigzag calf aboat; journey went And o'er his crooked The trffic of a continent. A handred tbousandmen were led By onecalf near three centuriesdead. Theyfollowed still his crookedway, And lost onehundredyears a dajt; For thas suchreaerenceis lent Tb w ell- established precedent. A moral lessonthis might teacb, WereI ordainedand calledto preach; For men are prone to go it blind Along the calf-patbsof the mind, And work awayfrom sun to sun Todo what other men haaedone. Theyfollow in tbe beatentrack, And out and in, andforth and back, And still their deaiouscwtrseputrsue) Tb keeptbepath that othersdo. They keepthe path a sacredgrooue, Along which all their liues they nx07)e. But how the wise old wood-godslaagh, Wo saw thefirst primeaal calf Ah! Many things this tale migbt teacbBut I am not ordainedto preach. _SAM WALTER FOSS

BEEN DOING ITBY THEBOOK? "Theunexamined life is notworthliving." _SOCRATES

"WE B0 EVERYTHING by the Word of God! The New Testament is our guide for faith and practice! We live . . . and we d i e . . . b y t h i sB o o k ! " These were the words that thundered forth from the mouth of Pastor Farley as he delivered his Sunday morning sermon. Winchester Spudchecker,a member of pastor Farley'schurch, had heard them dozensof times before. But this time it was different. Dressed in his blue suit, frozen in the back pew with his wife, Tiudy, Winchester stared at the ceiling as Pastor Farley continued talking about "doing everything by the sacred Book." One hour before Pastor Farley began his sermon, Winchester had had a fuming fight with Tiudy. This was a common occurrence as winchester, Tiudy, and their three

daughters, Felicia, Gertrude, and Zanobia, got ready for church on Sunday morning. His mind began replaying the event. . . . "Tirruudyy! Why aren't the kids ready? We're always late! Why can't you ever get them prepared on time?" Winchester yelled as he anxiously glanced at the clock. Tiudy's responsewas typical. "If you ever thought to help me this wouldn't haopen all the time! Why don't you start giving me a hand in this house?" The argument went back and forth until Winchester rurned on the children: "Zanobia Spudchecker! . . . Why can't you respect us enough to get ready on time? . . . Felicia, how many times do I have to tell you to turn off your PlayStation before 9 a.m.?" Hearing the commotion, Gertrude burst into tears. Wearing their Sunday best, the Spudcheckerfamily finally drove to church at breakneck speed. flVinchester hated to be late and had received three speeding tickets this past year-all given to him on Sunday mornings!) fu they raced to the church building, the silence in the car was deafening. Winchester was steaming. Tiudy was sulking. \Atth heads down, the three Spudchecker daughters were trytng to prepare their minds for something they hated . . . another long hour of Sunday school! As they pulled in to the church parking lot, Winchester and Tiudy gracefully exited the car, sporting large smiles.They held each other arm in arm and greeted their fellow church members, chuckling and putting on the pretense that all was well. Felicia, Gertrude, and Zanobia followed their parents with chins pointed upward. These were the fresh yet painful memories that coursed through Winchester's mind that Sunday morning as Pastor Farley continued his sermon. Brooding in self-condemnation, Winchester began to ask himself some searching questi ons: Why am I dressedup prim and proper looking like a goodChristian when I actedlike a heathenjust an hoar ago? . . . I wonder how many otherfamilies had this samepitiful experiencethis morning? Yetwe're all smelling niceand lookingpretty for God.

winchester was a bit shocked by these thoughts. Such questions had never before entered his consciousness. fu he peeked over to see Pasror Farley's wife and children sitting prim and proper on the front pew, winchester mused to himselfi 1 wonder if PastorFarley screamedat his wife and kids tbis moruting? Hmmru. . . winchester's mind continued to race in this direction as he watched Pastor Farley pound the pulpit for emphasis and raise his Bible with his right hand. "we ar First Bible New Testament Community Church do everything by this Book! EuerythinglThis is the Word of God, and we cannot stray from it . . . not even one millimeter!" Suddenly winchester had another new thou ght: I don't remember reading anywhere in the Bible that Cbristians are supposedto dressup t0 g0 to cburch.Is that by tbe Book? This single thought unleashed a torrenr of other barbed questions. As scores of frozen pew sitters filled his horizon, Winchester continued to ponder similar new questions. Questions that no Christian is supposedto ask. Questions like: Is sining in this uncusbioned pew, staring at the backof nueluerows of beadsfor forty-fiae minutes, doing things by the Book? Wy do we spendso rnuchmnneyto maintain this baildingwhen u)e'rehereonly ftaicea week for afew hours?Wy is half the congregationbarelyawakewben PastorFarley preaches?Why do my kids hate Sundayschool?Why do we g0 through this samepredictable,yazun-inspiringritual eaerySundaymorning? Why am I going to churchwben it boresrne t0 tenrsand doesnotbingfor me spiritually? wy

do I wear this uncomfortablenecktieeuerysunday morning when all

it seemsto do is cut offblood cirrulatiln t0 my brain? winchester felt unclean and sacrilegious ro ask such things. yet something was happening inside of him that compelled him to doubt his entire church experience.These thoughts had been lprg dormant in Winchester's subconsciousfor years. Today, they surfaced. Interestingly, the questions winchester had that day are questions that never enrer the conscious thinking of mosr Christians. yet the sober reality is that Winchester's eyeshad been opened.

fu startling asit may sound, almost everything that is done in our contemporary churches has no basisin the Bible. fu pastorspreach from their pulpits about being "biblical" and following the "pure Word of God," their words betray them. The truth is that precious little that is observed today in contemporary Christianity maps to anything found in the New Testament church.

TOASK THINK WENEVER OUESTIONS Socrates(470-399 BC)' is considered by some historians to be the father of philosophy. Born and raised in Athens, his custom was to go about the town relentlessly raising questions and analyzing the popular views of his day. Socratesbelieved that truth is found by dialoguing extensively about an issue and relentlessly questioning it. This method is known as dialecticor "the Socratic method." FIe thought freely on matters that his fellow Athenians felt were closed for discussion. Socrates'habit of pelting people with searching questions and roping them into critical dialogues about their accepted customs eventually got him killed. His incessant questioning of tightly held traditions provoked the leaders of Athens to charge him with "cofrupting the youth." As a result, they put Socratesto death. A clear messagewas sent to his fellow Athenians: All who question the established customswill meet the samefate!' Socrateswas not the only provocateur to reap severereprisal for his nonconformiry: Isaiahwas sawnin half,John the Baptistwas beheaded, and Jesuswas crucified. Not to mention the thousands of Christians who have been tortured and martyred through the centuries by the instirutional church becausethey dared to challengeits teachings.' As Christians, we are taught by our leaders to believe certain we ofthechurch), impact onthedevelopment whohada great those figures-(especially ofhistorical Note thatonthefirstmention "Key 277 inChurch History" onpage Figures theappendix You canalsoconsult generally anddeaths. oftheirbirths include thedates influence. ofthese individuals' dates anda briefsummary forthese (New York, McGraw-Hill, 1993), Socrates to Sartre Enoch Stumpf's seeSamuel lifeandteaching, ofSocrates' Fora concise treatment 29-45. (0ldTappan, 1968), NJ'Spire Books, 1996);Foxe's Book ofMartyrs Baker Books, Rapids: Bool(Grand Thelndestructible KenConnolly,

ideasand behavein certain ways.We are also encouragedto read our Bibles.But we are conditioned to read the Bible with the lens handed to us by the Christian tradition to which we belong. We are taught to obey our denomination (or movement) and never to challenge what it teaches. (At this moment, all the rebellious hearts are applauding and are plotting to wield the above paragraphs to wreak havoc in their churches.If that is you, dear rebellious heart, you have missed our point by a considerable distance. we do nor stand with you. our advice:Either leaveyour church quietly, refusing to causedivision, or be at peacewith it. There is a vast gulf berween rebellion and taking a stand for what is true.) If the truth be told, we Christians never seem to ask why we do what we do. Instead, we blithely carry our our religious traditions without asking where they came from. Most Christians who claim to uphold the integrity of God's Word have never sought ro seeif what they do every Sunday has any scriprural backing. How do we know this? Becauseif they did, it would lead them to some very disrurbing conclusions that would compel them by conscienceto forever abandon what they are doing. Strikingly, contemporary church thought and practice have been influenced far more by postbiblical historical events than by New Testamentimperatives and examples.Yet most Christians are not conscious of this influence. Nor are they aware that it has created a slew of cherished, calcified, humanly devised traditionsa-all of which are routinely passedoff to us as "Christian."5

A TERRIFYING INVITATION We now invite you to walkwith us on an untrodden path. It is a terrifiring journey where you will be forced to ask questions that probably r Edwin Hatch, fhelnfluence ofGreek tdeas (Peabody, andusages upontheChristian Church MA:Hendrickson, l8g5),18.Hatch traces thedetrimental effects ofthechurch thatisinfluenced byitsculture rather thanonethatinfluences itsculture. : TheChristian philosopher (1813-1855) Stren Kierkegaard saidthatmodern Christianity isessentially a counterfeit, See Soren "Attack Kierkegaard, press, onChristendom," inA Kierkegaard (Prjnceton, Anthology, ed.Robert Bretall NJ:Princeton Universitv 1946), 59ff., 117,t50ff.. 209ff.

have never entered your conscious thoughts. Tough questions. Ntgging questions. Even frightening questions.And you will be faced squarely with the disturbing answers.Yet those answerswill lead you face-to-face with some of the richest truths a Christian can discover. fu you read through the following pages,you may be surprised to discover that a gre t deal of what we Christians do for Sunday morning church did not come from Jesus Christ, the apostles,or the Scriptures. Nor did it come from Judaism. After the Romans destroyedJerusalem in AD 70,Judaic Christianity waned in numbers and power. Gentile Christianity dominated, and the new faith began to absorb Greco-Roman philosophy and ritual. Judaic Christianity survived for five centuries in the little group of Syriac Christians called Ebionim,but their influence \Masnot very widespread.According to ShirleyJ. Case, "Not only was the social environment of the Christian movement largely Gentile well before the end of the first century but it had severedalmost any earlier bonds of social contact with the Jewish Christians of Palestine.. . . By the year 100, Christianity is mainly a Gentile religious movement . . . living together in a common Gentile social environment."6 Strikingly, much of what we do for "church" was lifted directly out of pagan culrure in the postapostolicperiod. (Legend tells us the last surviving apostle,John, died around AD 100.)According to Paul E Bradshaw,fourth-century Christianity "absorbed and Christianized pagan religious ideasand practices,seeingitself as the fulfillment to which earlier religions had dimly pointed."?While today we often use the wordp aganto describethose who claim no religion whatsoever,to the early Christians, paganswere those polytheists who followed the gods of the Roman Empire. Paganism dominated the Roman Empire until the fourth century and many of its elements were absorbed by Christians in the first half of the first millennium, particularly during 6 WillDurant. TheSocial 1rigins of Christianity (New J.Case, 1950), 577.SeealsoShirley York, & Schuster, Simon Caesar andChrist "From came onthrough, Gentiles thelatefirstcentury (New Hinson adds, E.Glenn Publishers, I915),21-28. Square York: Cooper ofGreek and attitudes, andcustoms ways some oftheideas, imported insubtle They assembly. Jews intheChristian tooutnumber 17). ("Worshiping no.I 119931' History12, Christian Like Pagans?" Roman culture" 7 PaulF Bradshaw, (New and 1992), 65;Durant, Caesar Press, York' 0x{ord University l,/orsfip ofChristran forthe1rigins TheSearch 1,61I-672. 610-619,650-65 Christ.515,599-600,

the Constantinian and early posr-Constantinian eras(324 to 600).t Jivo other significant periods from which many of our current church practices originate were the Reformation era (sixteenth century) and the Revivalist era (eighteenth and nineteenrh cenruries). chapters 2 through 10 each rrace an accepredtraditional church practice. Each chapter tells the story of where this practice came from. But more importantly, it explainshow this practice stifles the practical headship ofJesus Christ and hampers the functioning of His body. warning: If you are unwilling to have your christianiry seriously examined, do not read beyond this page. Give this book to Goodwill immediately! Spareyourself the trouble of having your Chrisrian life rurned upside down. However, if you choose to "take the red pill" and be shown "how deep the rabbit hole goes if you want to learn the true story of where your Christian pracices came from . . . if you are willing to have the curtain pulled back on the contemporary church and its traditional presuppositions fiercely challenged . . . then you will find this work to be disrurbing, enlightening, and possibly life changing. Put another way,,if you are a Christian in the institutional church who takes the New Testament seriously,what you are about to read may lead to a crisis of conscience.For you will be confronted by unmovable historic al fact. On the other hand, if you happen to be one of those people who gathers with other Christians outside the pale of instirutional Christianiry you will discover afresh that not only is Scriprure on your side-but history standswith you as well.

Iheternpaganwas used bytheearly Christian apologists package. togroup non-Christians intoa convenient Atitsroot, a "pagan" isa country dweller, aninhabitant ofthepagus primarily orruraldistrict. Because Christianity spread inthecities, thecountry pagans, ptaces, bumpkins,0r wereregarded asthose whobelieved intheoldgods. SeeJoan E,Iaylor, Christians andtheHoty fhe (lxIord: Mythof)ewish-Christian 0rigins Clarendon Press, i993),301. Theideaoftheredpillcomes fromthethought-provoking hit novieThe gives Matrix. lnthefilm,Morpheus Neo thechoice between living ina deceptive dreamworld orunderstanding reality. Hiswords "After areapplicable tothesubject at hand: this,there's no turning You back. youwake takethebluepill,thestory ends, youwantto believe. upinyour bedandbelieve whatever You takethe youhowdeep redpill. . . andI show goes." therabbit people hole Wehope thatallofGod's would dare totaketheredpill!

>delvingDEEPER l. I don't seehow the Spudcheckers'fanily squabblesbefore charch had anything to do with church itself-other

than frustrating Winchesterand naking hin cynical about everything that went on

at his church. Vrlhydid you lead off the hook with this story? You're right-Winchesterls

Sunday morning troubles were what put him in the

frame of mind to question church practices he normally sat through without giving any thought to at all. The story was simply a humorous way to illustrate how scores of Christians go through the motions on Sunday morning without considering why they do what they do.

2. Whileynu say that contenporary church practice has been intluenced far more by posthiblical historical events than llew festanent principles, isn't it true that there aren't many specifics in the 0ospels,Acts,or Paul's lettersahoutchurchpractice? WhatScriptureswouldyou point to as outlining what Christiansshould do whengathering for worship? The New Testament actually includes many details about how the early Christians gathered. For example, we know that the early church met in homes for their regular church meetings (Acts 20:20; Romans 16:3,5;1 Corinthians 16:19).They took the Lord's Supper as a full meal (1 Corinthians ll.21-34). Their church gatherings were open and participatory (l Corinthians 14:26;Hebrews 10:24-25).Spiritual gifts were ernployed by each member (1 Corinthians 12-14). They genuinely saw themselvesas 'Iimothy 5:1-2; Romans 12:5;Ephefarnily and actedaccordingly (Galatians6:10; I s i a n s4 : 1 5 ;R o m a n s 1 2 : 1 3 ; 1C o r i n t h i a n s1 2 : 2 5 - 2 6 ; 2C o r i n t h i a n s8 : 1 2 -1 5 ) .T h e y h a d a pluraliry of elders to overseethe communiry (Acts 2AI7 , 28-29; 1 Timothy l:5 -7). Thev were established and aided by itinerant apostolic workers (Acts 13-2 1; all the apostolic letters). They were fully united and did not denominate themselves into separateorganizationsin the samecity (Acts 8:1, 13:1,18:22;Romans 16:1; 1 Thessalonians1:1). They did not use honorific titles (Matthew 23:8-12). They did not organize themselveshierarchically (N{atthew 20-25 -28; Luke 22 :25-2 6). Offering a complete biblical basis for these practices and explaining why they should be emulated today is beyond the scope of this book. One book that does so is Paal's Idea of Communiry by Robert Banks (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1994). I (Frank) also treat this subject comprehensivelv in the book Reimagining Church (Colorado Springs:David C. Cook), which will be releasedin summer 2008.

ri.4i,jli

:l i::i:

BUILDING: INHERITI NGTHE EDIFICE COMPLEX "ln the processof replacing the old religions, Christianity becamea re l i gi o n. " _ALEXANDER SCHMEMANN, TWENTIETH-CENTURY EASTERN ORTHODOX PRIEST, TEACHER, ANDWRITER "Thatthe christiansin the apostolicage erectedspecialhousesof worshipis outof the question. . . . As the Saviourof the worldwas bornin a stable,and ascended to heavenfroma mountain, so his apostles andtheirsuccessors downto thethirdcentury, preached in the streets, the markets, on mountains, in ships,sepulchres, eaves, anddeserts, andin the homesof theirconverts. Buthowmanythousandsof costlychurches andchapelshavesincebeenbuiltandare constantly beingbuilt in all partsof the worldto the honorof the crucifiedRedeemer, whoin the daysof his humiliation hadno place of his ownto resthis head!" -PHILIPSCHAFF, NINETEENTH.CENTURY AMERICAN CHURCH HISTORIAN ANDTHEOLOGIAN

r

have a love affair with brick and SHRISTIAN$ MANY C0NTEMPORARY in our thinking that if ingrained is so complex mortar. The edifice a group of believers begins to meet together, their first thoughts are toward securing a building. For how can a group of Christians rightfully claim to be a church without a building? (So the thinking goes.) The "church" building is so connected with the idea of church that we unconsciously equate the two. Just listen to the vocabulary of the averageChristian today: "Wow, honey, did you seethat beautiful church we just passed?" "My goodness!That is the largest church I have ever seen! I wonder what the electric costs to keep it going?" "Our church is too small. I'm developing claustrophobia. We need to extend the balcony." "The church is chilly today; I am freezing my buns off in here!" "We have gone to church every Sunday this past year except for the Sunday when Aunt Mildred dropped the microwave oven on her toe." Or how about the vocabulary of the averagepastor: "Isn't it wonderful to be in the house of God today?" "\A/e must show reverence when we come into the sanctuary of the Lord." Or how about the mother who tells her htppy child (in subdued tones), "Wipe that smile off your face; you're in church now! We behave ourselvesin the house of God!" To put it blundy, none of these thoughts have anything to do with New Testament Christianity. Rather they reflect the thinking of other religions-primarily

Judaism and paganism.

ANDSACRIFICES PRIESTS, TEMPLES, Ancient Judaism was centered on three elements: the Temple, the priesthood, and the sacrifice. When Jesuscame, He ended all three, fulfilling them in Himself. He is the temple who embodies a new and

living house made of living 51engs-6'without hands." He is the priest who has establisheda new priesthood. And He is the perfect and finished sacrifice.tConsequently, the Temple, the professionalpriesthood, and the sacrifice of Judaism all passed away with the coming ofJesus Christ.2 Christ is the fulfillment and the reality of it all.r In Greco-Roman paganism,these three elements were also present: Paganshad their temples, their priests, and their sacrifices.o It was only the Christians who did awaywith all of these elements.tIt can be rightly said that Christianity was the first non-temple-based religion ever to emerge. In the minds of the early Christians, the people-not the architecture-consdruted

a sacred space. The early Christians understood that they themselves-corporately-were the temple of God and the house of God.u Strikingly, nowhere in the New Testament do we find the terms cbarch (ekklesia),temple,or houseof God used to refer to a building. To the ears of a first-century Christian, calling an ekklesia(church) a building would have been like calling your wife a condominium or your mother a skyscraper!7 The first recorded use of the word ekklesiato refer to a Christian

' Forreferences to Christ asTemple, seeJohn1:i4,where theGreek wordused fordwellliterally "tabernacled," means andJohn 2:19-21. Foradditional references toChrist asa newhouse made ofliving stones, seeMark 14;58; Acts7:48; 2 Corinthians 5:1, 5,16;Ephesians 2:21-22;Hebrews 3:6-9, priest, 9:11,24;I Timothy 3:15.Forreferences toChrist as 4:14;5:5-6,10; seeHebrews and8:1.Thenewpriesthood ismenttoned in I Peter 2:9andRevelation l:5.Scriotures thatoointtoChrist asthefinalsacrifice include Hebrews 7:27;9,14,25-28;10:12; "once i Peter 3:18.Hebrews continually stresses thatJesus offered Himself foralltime,', emphasizrng thefactthatHeneed notbesacrificed again. 'Z Stephen's message inActs7 indicates that"thetemple wasmerely a man-made house originating withSolomon; it hadno connectaon withthetentof meeting thatMoses hadbeen pattern commanded to setupona Divinely revealed andthathadcontinued untilDavid'stime."SeeHaroldW.Turner, FromfenpletoMeetingHouse:fhePhenomenologyandTheologyofPlacesoflilorship(I Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1979), (andHerod) 116-117. See alsoMark14:58, where Jesus says thattheTemple ofSolomon was "withhands," made while "without theTemple thatHewould raise upwould bemade hands." Stephen uses thesame wording in Acts7;48.Inother "made words, Goddoesnotdwellintemples withhands." 0urheavenly Father is nota temple dweller! 3 SeeColossians 2,16-17. ThatChrist came tofulfilltheshadows oftheJewish lawisthecentral theme ofthebook of Hebrews. The NewTestament writers allaffirmthatGoddoes notrequire priesthood. anyholysacrifices nora mediating Allthingshavebeen fulfilled prrest. inJesus-the sacrifrce andthemediating a Ernest H.Short dedicates anentire chapter tothearchitecture ofGreek temples in hisbook History ofReligious Architecture(London, Philip Allan "Religious & Co.,1936), ch,2,David Nonington partofGraeco-Roman states, burldings were, nonetheless, anintegral religion" in hisbook (Carlisle, ToPreach orNottoPreach? TheChurch's Urgent Questrbn UK:Paternoster Press, 1996), 27.Pagans alsohad"holy"shrines. Michael Granl,fheFounders of theWestern World: A History of Greece andRome(New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1991), 232-234. Formore onpagan rituals, seeRobin LaneFox, Pagans andChristians(New York: Alfred Knopl, 1987), 39,41-43, 71-76, 206. 5 John "DidYouKnow? 0. Gooch, Little-Known orRemarkable Facts about Worship intheEarly Church," Christian History12, no.! (i993),3, 6 SeeI Corinthians 3,16; Galatians 6:10; Ephesians 2,20-22; Hebrews passages 3,5-6; 1 limothy 3:15; I Peter 2:5,4:17. AlloJthese people, refer to God's notto a building. Arthur Wallis "lnthe0ldTestament, writes, Godhada sanctuary forHispeople; intheNew, (Columbia, GodhasHispeople asa sanctuary" fheRadical Christian M0:Cityhill Publishing, 19S7), 83. / According totheNewTestament, thechurch isthebride of Christ, themostbeautiful woman intheworld: John 3,29:2 Connthians 11'2; Ephesians 5:25-32; Revelation 21,9.

meeting placewas penned around AD 190 by Clement of Alexandria (150-215).t Clement was also the first person to use the phrase "go to church"-which would have been a foreign thought to the firstcentury believers.o(fou cannot go to something you are!) Throughout tire New Testament, ekklesiaalways refers to an assembly of people, not a place.Ekklesia,in every one of its 114 appearancesin the New Testament, refers to an assemblyof people. (The English word church is derived froin the Greek word kuriakon, which means "belonging to the Lord." In time, it took on the meaning of "God's house" and referred to a builditg.)'o Even so, Clement's reference to "going to church" is not a reference to attending a special building for worship. It rather refers to a private home that the second-cenrury Christians used for their meetings." Christians did not erect specialbuildings for worship until the Constantinian era in the fourth cenrury. New Testament scholar Graydon F, Snyder states,"There is no literary evidence nor archaeological indication that any such home was converted into an extant church building. Nor is there any extant church that certainly was built prior to Constantine." In another work he writes, "The first churches consistently met in homes. Until the year 300 we know of no buildings first built as churches."t' Neither did they have a special priestly caste that was set apart to serve God. Instead, every believer recognized that he or she was a priest unto God. The early Christians also did away with sacrifices. For they understood that the true and final sacrifice (Christ) had come. The only sacrificesthat they offered were the spiritual

8 Clement 3,ch.11. fhelnstructor,Book ofAlexandria, s Thenineteenth-century "One thingisclear-the Christians, saidofthefirst-andsecond-century historian Adolf vonHarnack church t0 promote service notonlyfailed yet andol Divine place ideaofGod TheChristian hadnot arisen. ideaoi a special forworshrp andfxpansion of TheMission retarded itsdevelopment." ofthesituation it,whilethepractical circumstances this,butexcluded 1908), 86. Sons, vol.2 (New York, G.P Putnam's Three Centuries, in theFrrst Christianity i0 RobertL.saucy,TheChurchinGod'sProgram(Chicago,MoodyPublishers,l9T2),11,12,16;A.lRoberts (Nashville: Tyndale translated 1934), 174.AsWilliam & Holman, Broadman Research in theLightofHistorical Newlestament Greek nately,the ascongregation. Unfortu Hetranslatedit moreconectly aschurch. to transIateekklesia ment,irerefused theNewTesta oI ekklesia translation They rejected theconect ot ekklesia. didusecfurchasthetranslation Version oftheKingJames translaigrs fromthepreface tothei611 totheReader" See"TheTranslators it wastheterminology ofthePuritans. as congregationhecause DocunentsoftheEnglishReformation(Cambridge,JamesClarke,l994),435. translationinGeraldBray, trClement,Thelnstructor,Book3,ch.ll.Clementwrites,"Womanandmanaretogotochurchdecentlyattire r2 Graydon Press, University GA:Mercer Constantine(Macon, of Church LifeBefore tvidence Ante Pacen: Archaelllgical F.Snyder, Press, 1991), 3' University GA'Mercer Comnentary(Macon, AFaithConnunity First Corinthians' F.Snyder, 67;Graydon 1985),

sacrificesof praise and thanksgiving (seeHebrews 13:15 and 1 Peter

2:5). When Roman Catholicism evolved in the fourth to the sixth centuries,it absorbedmany of the religious practicesof both paganism and Judaism. It set up a professional priesthood. It erected sacredbuildings.'3And it turned the Lord's Supper into a mysterious sacrifice. Following the path of the pagans,early Catholicism adopted the practice of burning incense and having vestal (sacred)virgins.'a The Protestants dropped the sacrificial use of the Lord's Supper,the burning of incense, and the vestal virgins. But they retained the priestly caste (the clergy) as well as the sacredbuilding.

FROM HOUSE CHURCHES TOHOIYCATHEDRALS The earlyChristiansbelievedthatJesusis the very presenceof God. They believedthat the body of Christ, the church, consrirutesa temple. When the LordJesuswason earrh,He madesomeradicallynegativestatements abouttheJewishTemple.t5 The onethat angeredmany most was His announcementthat if the Templewasdestroyed, Jews He wouldbuild a newonein threedays!(SeeJohn2:19-21.)Though Jesuswas referring to the Temple that existedin the architectural sense,He wasreally speakingof His body.Jesussaid that after this templewas destroyed,He would raiseit up in three days.He was referring to the real temple-the church-which He raisedup in Himselfon the third day(Ephesians 2:6). SinceChrist hasrisen,we Christianshavebecomerhe temple of God. At His resurrection,Chrisr becamea "life-giving spirit" (1 CorinthiansL5:45,Nrv).Therefore,He could take up residence

t3"AccordingtoCanonLaw,achurchisasacredbuildingdedicatedtoDivineworshipfortheuseofall t h e f a i t ha l unl d t h e p u b l i c exercise (Milwaukee, ol religion." Peter I Anson, Their Churehes: PlanandFwnrshing Bruce Publishing Co.,1948), 3. to Fox,PagansandChristians,ll,20T,2T,34T,355.Foxstatesthat"inmodernChristianity,therearemorethanl.6mil (p.355). vowed tovirginity" They arecalled nunsandpriests. '5 Stephen alsospoke negatively about Interestingly, theTemple. bothJesus andStephen were charged withthesame exact crime(see speaking against theTemple Mark14,58; Acts6:13-14).

in the believers, thus making them His Temple, His house. It is for this reason that the New Testament always reservesthe word church (ekktesia)for the people of God. It never uses this word to refer to a building of any sort. Jesus' act of clearing the Temple not only showed His anger at the money changers' disrespect for the Temple, which was a picture of God's true house, but it also signified that the "Temple worship" of Judaism would be replacedwith Himself.'oWithJesus' coming, God the Father would no longer be worshipped in a mountain or a temple' He would instead be worshipped in spirit and in rcahq." When Christianity was born, it was the only religion on the planet that had no sacredobjects,no sacredpersons,and no sacredspaces.'t Nthough surrounded by Jewish slmagoguesand pagan temples, the early Christians were the only religious people on earth who did not erect sacred buildings for their worship.'o The Christian faith was born in homes, out in courtyards,and along roadsides.2' For the first three centuries, the Christians did not have any special buildings." As one scholar put it, "The Christianiry that conquered the Roman Empire was essentiallya home-centered movement."22Some have arzued that this was becausethe Christians were

t6 JohnZ,l2-22;Markl:Zl.see0scarCullmann,EarlyChristianWorship(London,SCMPress,1969),72-73,117 tTJohn4:23.TheBibleteachesthatthechurch,thecommunityofthebelievers,istherealTemple(2Corinth oflife.Biblically fromthetotality norextracted located rsnotspatially therefore, Worship, onEarth. ofGod habitation It istheIiving ina certain thathappens isnotsomething Worship Lord. "holy place" astheirascended rsasomnipresent theChristians' speaking, lives today. people, God forthatiswhere ol God's inside andreality rnspirit happens Worship pirruuiu certain time.lt isa lifestyle, (New 1968),3-4. York' TheseaburyPress, l.lse Euildings of church Thesecular See J.G.Davies, (Rone, Paul before Abbey o{ St. r8 James und Agape in Charisna "TheResponsible 14:26-40," 1 Corinthians Congregation, D.G.Dunn, theWall,1983),235-236. Felrx, ch. The0ctavius ofMinucius rs Thethird-century "Wehavenotemples andnoallars." wrote, Felrx Minucius apologist christian 1994), 8-14,26*46' Publishers, MA,Hendrickson tdeaof Comnunity(Peabody, Paul's Banks, 32,SeealsoRobert noted that |t be 20See 1'10 should 1'1-2; 2 John Philemon 4r15; 16:i9;Colossians 16,3, 5;i Corinthians Romans 8,3,20'20; Acts2,46. porch oi purposes. andtheschool Solomon's andtemporary forspecial existingbuildings already used theChristians ongccasion. home. setina prtvate were always however, (Acts church meetings, Their normal 19,9). 5:12, areexamples Tyrannus zt inyder,AntePacem,l66.JohnA.T.Robinsonwrites,"lnthefirsithreecenturiesthechurchhadnobuildin (Philadelphia, 1965), 89. Press, Westminster Refornation ai Dura49-50.Thehouse 22Robert (Peabody, 1998), Publishers, MA:Hendrickson Home Comes IheChurch andJuliaBanks, Banks otthe lacked thepublicity "Christians centuries o{theiirstseveral Senn, toFrank inAD256.According wasdestroyed Europos performances, or musical dances, festivals, nopublic They staged orsacrrfices. statues, pagan temples, hadnoshrines, They cults. Indeed, Christians fromJudaism. inherited andsetting origin thathada domestic involved a meal ritual pilgrimages. central Their gathering Christian for the spaces suitable into converted private had been that in residences met usually centuries ol ihefirstthree notbetaken asa signofprimitiveness, worship should Christian ofearly thattheritualbareness . . . Thisindicates community. andEvangelical Cath\lic Liturgy: Christian worship." character ofChristian thespiritual a wayol emphasizing butratheias (lvlinneaoolis, 53. Press, 1997), Fortress

not permitted to erect church buildings. But that is not true.2'Meeting in homes was a consciouschoice of the early Christians. As Christian congregations grew in size, they began to remodel their homes to accommodatetheir growing numbers.'oOne of the most outstanding finds of archaeologyis the housc of Dura-Europos in modern Syria. This is the earliest identifiable Christian meeting place. It was simply a private home remodeled as a Christian gathering placearound AD 232.25 The house at Dura-Europos was essentiallya house with a wall torn out between two bedrooms to create a large living room.'u With this modification, the house could accommodate about sevenry people." Remodeled houseslike Dura-Europos cannot rightfully be called "church buildings." They were simply homes that had been refurbished to accommodatelarger assemblies."Further, thesehomes were never called temples, the term that both pagansand Jews used for their sacredspaces.Christians did not begin calling their buildings temples until the fifteenth century.2e

ANDOBJECTS SPACES OFSACRED THECREATION In the late second and third centuries a shift occurred. The Christians began to adopt the paganview of reverencingthe dead."'Their focus 23Some poor Under thepersecution Butthisisfalse. andcould notownproperty. Christians were have argued thatthepre-Constantine (253-260), History ofthe SeePhtlip SchafI, byChristians wasseized. owned forexample, allproperty ofEmperor Valerian points (Grand had access to higher early Christians White out that the 2'62. L, Michael Rapids: Eerdmans, 1910), Christian Church groups adapting wasquite open tomany andthirdcentury ofthesecond Also, theGreco-Roman environment socioeconomic strata. (Balltnore, Hopkins University private Johns House in theRonanWorld use.Building God's forcommunal andreligious buildings Restoration Foundation, NewTestament fheology\AtlanIa' Toward a House Church AIkerson, Press, 1990), 142-i43. SeealsoSteve 1998), 29-42 2aSnyder, homes arecalled d0mus ecclestae. AntePacen,67. These restructured 25Everett 46,74. TXrA.C.U. Press, 1999), ed.(Abilene, Centuries,3rd FaithandLifein theFirstThree Ferguson, Early Christians Speak' House, 16-25. Whtte,Building God's 26John Press, 1964),54-55. Yorkr Oxford University Church Architecture(New I White, ProtestantWorship and 27"Converting no.1 (1993)' 33. intoa Church," Christian History12, a House 28Nonington, private century, states homes, AlanKreider that"bythemidthird ToPreach Inaddition toremodeling or Not,25. (islands), containtng multi-storied blocks growing whomelin rnsulae SoChristians innumbers andwealth. congregations were needs. They private {it tailored to congregational into domestic complexes spaces housing, began to convert shops and unobtrusively oltheir required bythelives large andsmall, thatwere spaces, thereby creating thevaried outwalls tounite apartments, knocked (Oxford: 1995), 5. Alain/GR0W Liturgical Study, growing inPre-Christendom communities." [lorship andEvangelism 2 sT u r n ef rro, n T e m p l e t o M e e t r n g H o u s e , l g 5 . T h e R e n a i s s a n c e t h e o r i s t s A l b e r t i a n d P a l l a d i o s t u d i e d t h e t e m p l e adding buildings astemples, refened to Christian building. Later, Calvin refer Christian church using theterntenplelo tothe began SecularUseofChurchBuildings,220*222,forthethinkingthatled ittotheReformationvocabulary(p.207).SeealsoDavies, re{er toa church building. Christians tobegin using theterntenpleto r0 Snyder, 167. Ante Pacem,83, 143-144,

was on honoring the memory of the martyrs. So prayers for the saints (v'hich later devolved into prayers ro them) began." The Christians picked up from the pagans the practice of having meals in honor of the dead.t' Both the Christian funeral and the funeral dirge came straight out of paganism in the third cenrury.rl Third-cenrury Christians had rwo placesfor their meerings:their homes and the cemetery.toThey met in the cemetery becausethey wished to be closeto their dead brethren." It was their belief that to share a meal at a cemetery of a marryr was to commemorate him and to worship in his company.'u Since the bodies of the "holy" marrFrs resided there, Christian burial placescame to be viewed as "holy spaces."The Christians then began to build small monuments over these spaces-especially over the gravesof famous saints.rtBuilding a shrine over a burial place and calling it holy was also a pagan practice.rs In Rome, the Christians began to decoratethe catacombs(underground burial places)with Christian s)zrnbols.tn So art became associated with sacred spaces.Clement of Alexandria was one of the first Christians advocating the visual arts in worship. (Interestingly, the cross as an artistic reference for Christ's death cannot be found prior to the time of Constantine.ooThe crucifix, an artistic representation of

'Dead,"' 3r "Praying (1993): tothe Christian History12,no.1 2,31. i'/ Snyder, AntePacen,65; Johannes Musib Quasten, andl'lorship in Pagan andChristian Antiquity\Washington DC,Natronal Assocration ofPastoral Musicians, 1983). 153*154. i68-169. rr Quasten, Music andt'lorship, 162-168. Tertullian demonstrates therelentless eflorts oftheChristians to doaway withthepagan procession. ofthefuneral custom Yeteventually theChristians succumbed to it,Chri$ian funeral rites,which drewheavily from pagan forms, begin to appear inthethirdcentury. (Peabody, SeeDavid W.Bercot, ed.,A Dictionary ofEarly Christian Beliefs MA: (New Hendrickson, 1998),80; Everett Ferguson, ed.,Encyclopedia ofEarly Christianity York, Garland Publishing, 1990), i63.The practice praying ofChristians lorthedead seems tohave begun around thesecond century. Tertullian tellsusthatit wascommon in hisday.SeeTertull ian,decor.4. i, andF.L.Cross andE.A.Lrvingstone, eds.,The1xford Dictionary 0f theChristian Church,3rd ed. (New York: 0xford Unrversity Press, 1997), 456. 3aSnyder, AntePacen,83. 35Haas, "Where DidChristians Worship?" Christian History12, no.1(1993)' 35;Iurner, fromTemple toMeeting House 168-172. 36Haas,"WhereDidChristiansWorship?"35;JosefA.Jungmann,lheEarlyliturgy'TotheTineofGregorytheGre Dame Press, i959),l4i, 3r White, Protestant V/orship andChurch Architecture,60. These monuments would laterbetransformed intomagnificent church buildings. 38Jungmann, EarlyLiturgy,178;Turner, FromlempletoMeetingHouse,i64-167. 3s SchaJl, Histoty0ftheChristianChurch,2:292."Iheuseofcatacombslastedaboutthreecenturies,fromtheendot theendofthelifth"(Snyder, AntePacen,84). Contrary to popular beliei, thereisnota shred ofhistorical evidence thatRoman persecution. htdinthecatacombs Christians toescape They metthere to beclose tolhedead See"Where saints. DidChristians Worship?" 35;"Early Glimpses," Christian History72,no.1(i993), 30. a0Snyder, "Jesus Ante Pacen,27, notsufler (p.56). does ordieinpre-Constantinian isnocross art,There symbol, noranyequivalent" Philip Schaff says thatfollowing Constantine's victory over Maxentius inAD312,crosses were seen onhelmets, bucklers, crowns, etc. (Schafi, History of theChristian Church,2'270).

the Savior attached to the cross, made its first appearancein the fifth century.otThe custom of making the "sign of the cross" with one's hands dates back to the second century.)at At about the second century Christians began to venerate the bones of the saints, regarding them as holy and sacred.This eventually gave birth to relic collecting.ot Reverence for the dead was the most powerful community-forming force in the Roman Empire. Now the Christians \Mereabsorbing it into their own faith.* In the late second century there was also a shift in how the Lord's Supper was viewed. The Supper had devolved from a full meal to a stylized ceremony called Floly Communion. (For more on how this transition occurred, see chapter 9.) By the fourth century the cup and the bread were seen as producing a senseof awe, dread, and mystery. As a result, the churches in the East placed a canopy over the altar table where the bread and cup sat. (In the sixteenth century, rails were placed upon the altar table.otThe rails signified that the altar table was a holy object only to be handled by holy persons-i.e., the clergy.*o) So by the third century the Christians not only had sacred spaces,they also had sacred objects. (They would soon develop a sacred priesthood.) In all of this, the second- and third-century Christians began to assimilatethe magical mind-set that characterizedpagan thinking.ot Nl of these factors made the Christian terrain ready for the man who would be responsible for creating church buildines.

ar Snyder, AntePacen,165. a2 Schaff, 2,269-70. History of theChristian Church, 4 3A r e l i c i s t h e m a treerm i aal i n s o f a s a i n t a f t e r h i s d e aatshaansywsealcl r e d o b l e c t t h a t h a s b e e n i n c o n t a c t w i t h h i s b o d y , T h e w "toleave rellccomes fromtheLatinwordreliquere, meaning Thefirstevidence oftheveneration ol relics appears around behind." more valuable stones and ADi56 intheMartyrium Polycarpr. lnthisdocument, therelics ofPolycarp areconsidered thanprectous gold.SeeCrossandLivingstone,1xfordDictionaryof theChristianChurch,l3l9;Michael CollinsandMatthewA.Price,TheStoryof (New Christianity York: DKPublish ing,1999), 9l; Jungma nn,Early Liturgy, 184*1 87. aaSnyder, AntePacem,9l; FronTenple House,168-172. Turner, toMeeting a 5I h i s i s t h e t a b l e w h e r e t h e H o l y C o m m u n r o n w a s p l a c e d . T h e a l t a r t a b l e s i g n i f i e s w a nh da w sg t i shoaftfi e r ei vdet onG o d ( t h e a l t a Architecture,40,42,63. intouseuntilGregory the to man(thetable). White, Protestant florship andChurch Sidealtandidnotcome Great. Schaff, History oftheChristian Church,3:550. a6lnthefourthcentury,thelaitywasforbiddentogotothealtar.EdwinHalch,TheGrowthofChurchlnstitutions(Lond Stoughton, 1895), 214-215. ai Norman (New Towar York, TheMacmillan 1931), 209. Boggs, TheChristian Saga Company,

OFTHECHURCH BUILDING CONSTANTINE-FATHER While the emperor Constantine (ca.285-337) is often lauded for granting Christians freedom of worship and expanding their privileges,his story fills a dark page in the history of Christianity. Church buildings began with him.o'The story is astonishing. By the time Constantine emerged on the scene,the atrnosphere was ripe for Christians to escapetheir despised,minority status.The temptation to be acceptedwasjust too gr:eatto resist,and Constantine's influence began in earnest. In AD 312, Constantine became caesarof the Western Empire.ooBy 324,,he became emperor of the entire Roman Empire. Shortly afterward, he began ordering the construction of church buildings. He did so to promote the popularity and acceptanceof Christianity. If the Christians had their own sacred buildings-as did the Jews and the pagans-their faith would be regarded as legitimate. It is important to understand Constantine's mind-set-for

it

explains why he was so enthusiastic about the establishment of church buildings. Constantine's thinking was dominated by superstition and pagan magic. Even after he becameemperor, he allowed the old pagan institutions to remain as they were.tn Following his conversion to Christianiry Constantine never abandoned sun worship. F{e kept the sun on his coins. And he set up a statue of the sun god that bore his own image in the Forum of Constantinople (his new capital). Constantine also built a statue of the mother-goddessCybele (though he presented her in a posture oEIlionI Jones, (New A Historical Approach York, Press, toEvangelical l4orshrp Abingdon 1954),103;Schaif,History of theChristian "After Church,3,542. Schaff's opening words aretelling, Christianity wasacknowledged bythestateandempowered to holdproperty, it raised inallparts houses ofworship oftheRoman Empire. There wasprobably more building olthiskindinthefourth century period, perhaps points hasbeen inany thanthere excepting thenineteenth century intheUnited States." Norrington outthat as (ToPreach grew programs thebishops ofthefourth andfifthcenturies inwealth, theyfunneled it intoelaborate church building or "NotuntiltheConstantinian rVol29).Ferguson writes, agedowefindspecially constructed buildings, atfirstsimple hallsandthen gatherings "houses theConstantinian besilicas." Before Constantine, allstructures used forchurch were orcommercial buildings mod ifiedforchurchuse"(Early I 4l,. Christians Speak, a el h a t y e a r C o n s t a n t i n e d e f e a t e d t h e w e s t e r n e m p e r o r M a x e n t i u s a t t h e b a t t l e o f M i l v i a n B r i d g e . C o n s t a n t i (Connolly, thebattle, hesawa signofthecross intheheavens andwasconverted to Christ lndestructible Booft,39-40). 50Ihisincluded priestly thetemples, offices, college ofpontiffs, vestal virgins, andthetitle(reserved iorhimself) Pontifex Maximus. (London' Duchesne, SeeLouis Early History oftheChristian Church JohnMurray, 1912), 49-50;M.A.Smith, From Chrsflo Con stantine (Downers Grove, lL:InterVarsity, 1973l',172.

of Christian prayer).tt Historians continue to debate whether or not Constantine was a genuine Christian. The fact that he is reported to have had his eldest son, his nephew, and his brother-in-law executed does not strengthen the casefor his conversion.t' But .re will not probe that nerve too deeply here. In AD 321, Constantine decreed that Sunday would be a day of rest-a legal holiday.t' It appears that Constantine's intention in doing this was to honor the god Mithras, the Unconquered Sun.to (He describedSundayas "the day of the sun.") Further demonstrating Constantine's affinity with sun worship, excavationsof St. Peter's in Rome uncovered a mosaic of Christ as the Unconquered Sun.tt Almost to his dying day, Constantine "still functioned as the high priest of paganism."tuIn fact, he retained the pagan title Pontifex Maximus, which means chief of the pagan priests!5t(In the fifteenth century this same title became the honorific title for the Roman Catholic pope.)" When Constantine dedicated Constantinople as his new capital on May 11, 330, he adorned it with treasurestaken from heathen temples.5eAnd he used pagan magic formulas to protect crops and heal diseases.uo Further, all historical evidenceindicates that Constantine was an egomaniac. When he built the Church of the Apostles in Constantinople, he included monuments to the twelve apostles.The twelve monuments surrounded a single tomb, which lay at the center. That tomb was reservedfor Constantine himself-thus making himself the thirteenth and chief apostle. Thus Constantine not only continued

5r PaulJohnson, A History York, 1976), of Christianlty(New Simon & Schuster, 68. s2 Heisalsocharged withthedeath historians thisis a falserumor. Taylor, andHoly of hissecond wiJe, though some believe Christians Places,297;SchafI, History Ramsay of theChristian Church,3:16-17; MacMullen theRlman[npirc,AD100-400 , Christianizing (London: YaleUniversity Press, 1984), 44-58. 53KimTan,Lost (Godalming, tjK,Highland Heritage, fheHeroic Story Books, 1996), 84. ofRadical Christianity 5 aC o n s t a n t i n e s e e m s t o h a v e t h o u g h t t h a t t h e U n c o n q u e r e d S u n ( a p a g a n g o d ) a n d C h r i s t w e r e s o m e h o w c o m p a TheStory of Christianity(Peabody, MA'Prince Press, 1999), 1,122-123. 5s Hinson, "Worshiping LikePagans?" 20;Jungmann, Early Liturgy,136. 55Gonzalez, Story of Christianity, 123. 51 Fox,Pagans andChristians, 565;Durant, Caesar andChrist,63,656. 58Cross andLivingstone, . 1xfordDictionary of theChristian Church,1307 5eRobert (SanFrancisco, M.Grant, Early Harper i55. Christianity andSociety & RowPublishers, 1977), 60Durant. andChrist.656. Caesar

the paganpracticeof honoring the dead,he alsosought to be included as one of the significant dead.nt Constantine also borrowed from the pagans(not the Jews) the notion of the sacrednessof objects and places.o'Largely due to his influence, relic mongering became common in the church.6rBy the fourth century obsessionwith relics got so bad that some Christian leadersspoke out against it, calling it "a heathen observanceintroduced in the churches under the cloak of relieion . the work of idolaters."ou Constantine is also noted for bringing to the Christian faith the idea of the holy site, which was based on the model of the pagan shrine. Becauseof the aura of "sacredness"that the fourth-century Christians attachedto Palestine,it had become known as "the Holy Land" by the sixth cenfury.t't After Constantine'sdeath, he was declaredto be "divine." (This was the custom for all pagan emperors who died before him.)ouIt was the senatewho declaredhim to be a pagan god at his death.67 And no one stopped them from doing so. At this point, a word should be said about Constantine'smother, Helena. This \ ioman was most noted for her obsessionwith relics. In AD 326,Helena made a pilgrimageto Palestine.o'InAD 327 inJerusalem, she reportedly found the crossand nails that were used to crucifz It is reported that Constantinepromoted the idea that the bits of Jesus.o" wood that came from Christ's crosspossessedspiritual powers.tnTirrly,

oLJohnson, History ofChristianify, 69;Duchesne, Early History of theChristtan Church,69. IntheEastern Church, Constantine is actuallynamedthethirteenthapostleandisveneratedasasaint(CrossandLivingstone,0xfordDictionaryof theChristianChurch, 405;Taylor, Christians Holy Places, 303,316;Snyder, AntePacen,93). 62Taylor, Christians andtheHolyPlaces,308; Davies, Secular Useof Church Buildings, 222,231 . b rT h e n o t i o n t h a t r e l i c s h a d m a g i c a l p o w e r c a n n 0 t b e c r e d i t e d t o t h e J e w s , f o r t h e y b e l i e v e d t h a t a n y c o n pollution. (Boggs, pagan Thisideawasc0mpletely Christian Saga,210). 6alohnson, History ofChrrstiamtX 106. Thisisa quote fromVigilantius. 55Taylor, Christrans andHolyPlaces,317, 339-341. 66Boggs, Christian Saga,202. 6/ Gonzalez, Story of Christianity, I23. 5 8C r o s s a n d L i v i n g s t o n e , 0 x f o r d D i c t i o n a r y o f t h e C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h , l 3 l 9 . H e l e n a m a d e h e r p i l g r i m a g e t o t h e following theexecutton ofConstantine's sonandthe"suicide" ofhiswife(Fox, Pagans andChristians,6T0-671, 674). 6 s0 s c a r H a r d m a n , A H i s t o r y o f C h r i s t i a n W o r s h r p \ N a s h v i l l e , P a r t h e n 0 n P r e s s , l 9 3 T ) . H e l e n a g a v e C o n s t a forhisdiadem andtheother forhishorse's bit(Johnson, History ofChnsttanlty, 106;Duchesne, Early History of theChristian Church, "The powers, 64*65). cross wassaidtohave miraculous andpieces ofwood claiming tocome fromit were lound allover theEmpire" (Gonzalez, Story ofChristianity, l26).Thelegend o{Helena's discovery ofthecross originated inJerusalem inthesecond halfofthe fourth century andrapidly spread over theentire Empire. /0 Taylor, Christians andHolyPlaces,308; Boggs. Chrrstian Saga.206-207 .

a paganmagicalmind wasat work in EmperorConstantine-thefather of the churchbuildine.

CONSTANTINE'S BUILDING PROGRAM Following Helena's trip to Jerusalem in AD 327, Constantine began erecting the first church buildings throughout the Roman Empire, some at public expense.t'In so doing, he followed the path of the pagansin constructing temples to honor God.tt Interestingly, he named his church buildings after saints-just as the pagansnamed their temples after gods. Constantine built his first church buildings upon the cemeterieswhere the Christians held meals for the dead saints.ttThat is, he built them over the bodies of dead saints.To Why? Becausefor at least a cenrury beforehand, the burial placesof the saintswere considered"holy spaces."tt Many of the largest buildings were built over the tombs of the martyrs.tuThis practice was basedon the idea that the martyrs had the same powers that they had once ascribedto the gods of paganism.tt The Christians adopted this view completely. The most famous Christian "holy spaces"were St. Peter'son the VaticanHill Ouilt over the supposedtomb of Peter), St. Paul'sOutside the Walls @"ilt over the supposedtomb of Paul), the dazzhnsand astonishing Church of the Holy SepulcherinJerusalem (built over the supposedtomb of Christ), and the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem ftuilt over the supposedcaveofJesus' birth). Constantine built nine churchesin Rome and many others inJerusalem, Bethlehem, and Constantinople.Tt

tt Fox, Pagans andChristians,66T-668. '2 laylor,Christians andHolyPlaces,309. 73Snyder, places AntePacen,65. These arereferred to asnartyria. 7albid.,92;Haas, "Where DidChristians Worship?" Christian History,35. /s Tayfor, "AsthefirstChristians Christians andHolyPlaces,340-341. AsDavies says, hadnoholyshrines, theneed forconsecration (Davies, didnotarise. lt wasonlyinthefourth withthepeace century, ofthechurch, thatthepractice ofdedicating buildings began" Secular Useof Church Buildings,9, 250\. /6 Short, Hrsfory ofReligious Arch itecture, 62. /7 Johnson, History of Christianity,209. /8 Snyder, "Where Ante Pacen,109. St.Pete/s was835feetIong, according toHaas, DidChrrstians Worship?" 35.Details onSt.Paul's foundinCrossandLivingstone,1xfordDictionaryoftheChristianChurch,1442;onHolySepulcherinEdwardNorn God'Church Architecture, Style, andHistory(london: Thames andHudson, 1990), 38-39;ontheChurch lbid.,3i; on oftheNativity, thenineotherchurches in JohnWhjte lVorshrp andChurch Architecture,56;V'lhtte, Building God's House, 150:Grant, Early , Protestant Christianityand Soc ieU,152-155.

T H U R CBHU I L D I N G S E X P L O R ITNHGEF I R SC Becausethe church building was regardedassacred,congregantshad to undergo a purification ritual before entering. So in the fourth cenrury fountains were erected in the courtyard so the Christians could wash before they entered the building.t' Constantine's church buildings were spaciousand magnificent edifices that were said to be "worthy of an Emperor." They were so splendid that his pagan contemporaries observed that these "huge buildings imitated" the strucrure of pagan temples.tnConstantine even decoratedthe new church buildings with pagan art.8r The church edifices built under Constantine were patterned exactly after the model of the basilica.t' These were the common government buildings,tt designedafter Greek pagan temples.to Basilicasserved the same function as high school auditoriums do today. They were wonderful for seating passiveand docile crowds to watch a performance. This was one of the reasonswhy Constantine chosethe basilicamodel.tt He also favored it becauseof his fascinationwith sun worship. Basilicaswere designed so that the sun fell upon the speakeras he faced the congregation.tuLike the temples of the Greeks and Romans, the Christian basilicaswere built with a facade (front) facing east.S7

'e Turner, FronTenple toMeeting House,185. 8r Ihisquotecomesfromtheanti-ChristianwriterPorphyry(Dauies,SecularUseofChurchButldings,8).Porphy (White, pagan yeterected pagan were inconsistent because theycriticized worship buildings thatimitated temples! Christians House. 129). Building God's !: Gonzalez, (the Harvey Story ofChrrstianity, l22.According to Prolessor Yoder, Constantine builttheoriginal church ofHagia Sophia 427pagan fromacross it."From Church ofHoly Wisdom) onthesiteofa pagan temple andimported statues theEmpire todecorate (lecture given inHarrisburg, VA,0ctober House Churches toHoly Cathedrals" 1993). 8 : G r a nFt ,o u n d e rtshoefl t l e s t e r n l t l o r l d , 2 0 9 . T h e f i r s t b a s r l i c a S l a pc e r i a l w ta. sJ tohhenCLhaut er cr ah no bf u i l t f r o m apnai m donatedinAD3l4(W B uhiiltdei,n g G o d b H o u"sCeo, !n8s)t.a n t i n e , w h e n d e c i d i n g w h a t t h e p i o n e e r c h u r c h o f S t . J o h n L a places it asstandard {orRome's to belike, chose thebasilica asa model, thereby establishing Christian ofworship." Lionel Casson, Press, 1998), 133. Everyday LifeinAncient Rone(Ballimore: Johns Hopkins University 83Hinson, "Worshiping Like Pagans?" 19;Norman, House ofGod,24; Jungmann, Early Liturgy,123. Thewordbaslrca comes fromthe "king." "The plan, installing Greek word baslleus, which means Chri$ian architects adapted thepagan analtarnear thelarge, rounded recess, 0rapse, atoneendoftheedifice, where thekingorjudge sat;thebishop wasnowtotaketheplace ofthepagan Collins andPrice, Story ofChristianiU,64. dignitary." 84White, ProtestantWorshipandChurchArchitecture,56.0neCatholicscholarstates,"LongbeforetheChristian (.lungmann Liturgy,123); andassociations hadadapted thebasilica typeofbuilding toworship" seealsoTurner, Frofi sects , Early inJerusalem Templeto Meeting House, 152-163. Furthermore, Constantine's churches andBethlehem, builtbetween AD320and330, h ei xL,i t u r g yCl L w e r e m o d e l e d o n S y r i a n p a g a n s a n c t u aT r ihees S . Ghraepgeoorfyt D oo nn t i dn ou nu 'm l n t e r n a t i o n a l P u b l i s h i n g G r o u 2000).26. 85Michael (London: TheEarly Thames 1961), 134. Gaugh, Chrlslrans andHudson, 86lbid. 87Jungmann, Early Liturgy,131 .

Let's explore the inside of the Christian basilica.It was an exact duplicate of the Roman basilica that was used for Roman magistrates and officers.Christian basilicaspossessed an elevatedplatform where the clergy ministered. The platform was usually elevated by several steps.There was also arail or screenthat separatedthe clergy from the 1aity.88 In the center of the building was the altar. It was either a table (the altar table) or a chest coveredwith a lid.8eThe altar was consideredthe most holy placein the building for wo reasons.First, it often contained the relics of the martyrs.no(After the fifth cenrury the presenceof a relic in the church altar \Masessentialto make the church legitimate.)et Second,upon the altar sat the Eucharist (the bread and the cup). The Eucharist, nowviewed asa sacredsacrifice,was offered upon the altar. No one but the clergy, who were regarded as "holy men," were allowed to receive the Eucharist within the altar rails.n' In front of the altar stood the bishop's chair, which was called the cathedra.erThe term ex cathedrais derived from this chair. Ex cathedra means "from the throne."oaThe bishop's chair, or "throne" as it was called, was the biggest and most elaboratesearin the building. It replaced the seat of the judge in the Roman basilica.e'And it was surrounded by two rows of chairs reserved for the elders.nu The sermon was preached from the bishop's chair.n?The po'\Mer and authority rested in the chair, which was coveredwith a white linen cloth. The eldersand deaconssat on either side of it in a semicircle.nt

88White, "The Protestant htorshrp andChurch Architecture, 57,73-74. church building inthisviewwasnolonger thehouse ofthepeople ofGod fortheircommon worship, buttheHouse ofGod which they were allowed toenter withduereverence. They mustremain inthe (where (the nave thecongregants platform) srtorstand) andrelrain fromentering thechancel clergy which w?sforthechoir orthe sanctuary reserved forthepriesthood." Iurner, From Templeto Meeting House,244;Hatch, Growth ofChurch lnstitutilns,219-220. 8sAltars were firstmade ofwood. Then, beginning inthesixth century, theywere made ofmarble, stone, silver, orgold. Johnson, Hlslory of Christi anity,3: 550. e0Snyder,AntePacen,93;White,ProtestantWorshipandChurchArchitecture,5S;WilliamD.Maxwell,,4n1uttineof ItsDevelopnents andforms(New York, Oxford University Press, 1936), 59 el Kenneth Latourette, Scott A History ofChristianrtl(New York, Harper andBrothers, 1953), 204. s2Johnson, History ofChristranfy, 3:549-550, 551.IntheProtestant church building, thepulpit isintheforeground andthealtartable isinthebackground. e3Short, Hrslory ofReligious Architecture,64. eaCross andLivingstone, lxfordDictionary of theChristian Church,302. e5White, p andChu Protesta nt ltlorshi rchArchitectu re,51. e6 Davies, Secular Useof Church Buildings, ll;Dtx, Shape of theLiturgy,28. s7 White,Protestant V,/o rship and Church Architect ure,59. s8 Dix,Shape of theLiturgy,28.

The hierarchical distinction embedded in the basilican architecture was unmistakable. Interestingly, most present-day church buildings have special chairs for the pastor and his staff situated on the platform behind the pulpit. (Like the bishop's throne, the pastor's chair is usually the largest of them all.) Nl of this is a clear carryover from the pagan basilica. In addition to all of this, Constantine did nor destroy pagan temples on a large scale.Neither did he closethem.eeln some places, existing pagan temples were emptied of their idols and converted into Christian edifices.'00The Christians used materials stripped from pagan temples and built new church buildings on pagan temple sites.'o'

MAJOR INFLUENCES ONWORSHIP The advent of the church building brought significant changesto Christian worship. Becausethe emperor was the number one "I^yperson" in the church, a simple ceremony was not sufficient. In order to honor him, the pomp and ritual of the imperial court was incorporated into the Christian liturgy.'n' It was the custom of the Roman emperors to have lights carried before them whenever they appearedin public. The lights were accompaniedby a basinof fire filled with aromaticspices.'o'Thkinghis cue from this custom, Constantine introduced candles and the burning of incense as part of the church service. And they were brought in when the clergy entered the room.t.a Under Constantine's reign, the clergy, who had first worn every-

eeGrant,EarlyChristianity andSociety,155. iooNorman, House ofGod, 23-24. r0rHinson,"WorshipingLikePagans?"19.GregorytheGreat(540-604)wasthefirsttoprescribetheuse0f pagan (New relicsto purify templesforChristia n use.Bede, A History of theChristian Church andPeople, Irans.LeoSherley-Price pages York; Press, 1985), Dorset 86-87(bk.1,chapter 30).These contain instructions fromGregory theGreat onhowpagan temples were to besanctified forChristian use.SeealsoJohn MarkTerry, Evangehsm' A Concise History(Nashville: Broadman andHolman, 1994), 48-50;Davies, Secu/ar Useof Church Buildings,25L r02Hinson, "Worshiping LikePagans?" 20;White, Protestant llorship andChurch Architecture, S6. ro3Jungmann, tarlyLiturgy, 132. r04Richard (London: gives Krautheimer, tarlyChristian andByzantine Architeclrre Penguin Books, 1986), 40-41.Krautheimer a vivid description oftheparallels between theRoman imperial service andtheChristian liturgy under Constantine.

day clothes, began dressing in special garments. What were those specialclothes?They \\'ere the garments of Roman officials. Further, various gesturesof respect toward the ciergy, comparable to those used to honor Roman officials,were introduced in the church."" The Roman custom of beginning a service with processional music was adopted as well. For this purpose, choirs were developed and brought into the Christian church. (See chapter 7 for more on the origin of the choir.) Worship becamemore professional,dramatic, and ceremonial. All of these features were borrowed from the Greco-Roman culture and carried straight into the Christian church.'nt'Fourthcentury Christianiry was being profoundly shapedby Greek paganism and Roman imperialism.tOT The upshot of it all was that there was a loss of intimacy and open participation. The professional clergy performed the acts of worship while the lairy looked on as spectators.tut As one Catholic scholar wrote, with the coming of Constantine "various customs of ancient Roman culture flowed into the Christian liturgy. . . eventhe ceremoniesinvolved in the ancientworship of the emperor as a deity found their way into the church's worship, only in their secularizedform. "'u' Constantine brought peacefor all Christians.t"'Under his reign, the Christian faith had become legitimate. In fact, it had risen to a statusgreater thanJudaism and paganisrn."' For these reasons, the Christians saw-Constantine's rise to emperor asan act of God. Here was God's instrument who had come r05jungmann, Early Liturgy, 129-133. r0€Gonzalez, Story of Christianity,125, r07Kenneth Scott Latourette paganism traces thestr0ng influence ofGreco-Roman iniotheChristian faithin hisbook A History of Christianity,20 l-2 i 8, r08White, Protestant Vlorshtp andChurch Architecture,56. rOe Jungmann, Early Liturgy, 130,133. i 1 0H i s t o r i a n s c a l l t h e p e r i o d o f C o n s t a n t i n e ' s r e i g n " t h e P e a c e . " T h e P e a c e a c t u a l l y c a m e w i t h t h e E d i c t o f G a l e r i a ofToleration) inAD311.lt wasthenpopularized bytheEdict persecution ofMilan inAD313.These edicts stopped Diocletian s vicious oftheChristians years thatwaslaunched inAD303.Justeleven after theEdict ofMilan, Constantine, thefirstChristian emperor, becamesoleruleroftheRomanEmpire.Gonzalez,StoryofChristianity,l06 107;DuranI,CaesarandChrist,655. Ir1Adolf vonHarnack estimates thatthele were three tofourmillion intheEmpire Christjans atthebeginning ofConstantine's reign. Mission andExpansion ofChristranity,325. p0pulati0n. 0thers estrmate it wasonly4 or5 percent oftheEmpire's Iaylor, Christians andHolv Places.298.

to their rescue. Christianity and Roman culture were now melded together.tt2 The Christian building demonstrates that the church, whether she wanted it or not, had entered into a close alliance with pagan culture."'fu Will Durant, author of The Storyof Ciuilization (asweeping, eleven-volume work on world history that earned him a Pulitzer Prize), put it, "Paganislesremainedin the spreadingChristian sea."1ra This was a tragic shift from the primitive simplicity that the church ofJesus Christ first knew. The first-cenfury Christians were opposed to the world's systems and avoided any contact with paganism.This all changed during the fourth century when the church emerged as a public institution in the world and began to "absorb and Christianize pagan religious ideasand practices."tttAs one historian put it, "Church buildings took the place of temples; church endowments replaced temple lands and funds."ttuUnder Constantine, tax exempt status was granted for all church property.l'7 Consequently, the story of the church building is the sad saga of Christianity borrou'ing from heathen culture and radically transforming the face of our faith."'To put it bluntly, the church buildings of the Constantinian and post-Constantinian era essentially became holy shrines."nThe Christians embracedthe concept of the physical temple. They imbibed the pagan idea that there exists a special place where God dwells in a special way. And that place is made "with hands."ttu fu with other pagan customs that were absorbed into the Christian faith (such asthe lirurgy, the sermon, clerical vestments,and hierarchical leadership strucrure), third- and fourth-century Christians r1zJohnson, "Worshiping History of Christianrfi 126;Hlnson, LikePagans?" 19. rr3Jungmann, Early Liturgy, 123. r14WillDurant, The AgeofFaith(New York, Simon andSchuster, 1950), 8, Ir5Bradshaw, Sea rch for the0rigins of Christian lllors hip, 65. L16 Grant, tarlyChristianity andSociety,163. 1r'Durant, Caesar andChrist,656. r18!lnside Pagan Worship" Christian History12, no.I (1993); 20. LreTurner, (For From Tenple toMeeting House,167, 180.C0nstantine builtChristian shrines atthesitesof biblical-historical locations Pagans andChristians, 614). I20Contrastthis withlVlark 14:58; Acts7:48; 2 Corinthians 5:1;Hebrews 9:11; andHebrews 9,24.

incorrectly attributed the origin of the church building to the old Testament.12' But this was misguided thinking. The church building was borrowed from pagan culrure. "Dignified and sacramentalrirual had entered the church servicesby way of the mysteries [the pagan cults], and was justified, like so many other things, by referenceto the Old Testament."t22 To use the old Testamenr as a justification for the church build-

,i, ... ,:; ",", ';

:;. ing is not only inaccurate, but it is self-defeating.The old Mosaic ,:t, economyofsacredpriests,sacredbuildings,sacredrituals,andsacred objects has been forever destroyed by the cross of Jesus Christ. In addition, it has been replaced by a nonhierarchical, nonritualistic, nonliturgical organism called the ekklesia (church)."'

THEEVOLUTION OFCHURCH ARCHITECTURE Following the constantinian era, church buildings passed through various stages.(They are too complex for us to detail here.) To quote one scholar, "Changes in church architecture are the result of mutation rather than a steadyline of evolution." These mutations did little to change the dominant architectural featuresthat fostered a monopolizing clergy and an inert congregation.'2a

;l; .,. .;1

:::.: tll i.t : .i-. :..., r,;,

Let's quickly survey the evolution of church architecrure: ' After Constantine, Christian architecrure passed from the basilicaphase to the Byzantine phase."t Byzantine churches had wide central domes and decorativeicons and mosaics.t'u

r2rNonington, ToPreach "When orNot,29. J.D.Davies writes, Chrrstians began to build theirgreat basilicas, they turned forguidance totheirBible andwere soon applying allthatwassaidabout theJerusalem Temple tolheirnewedifices, seemingly ignorant ofthe factthatinsodoing theywere behaving goes contrary totheNew Testament outlook." Davies ontosaythatthecultofthesaints (revering dead penehation saints) anditssteady ofchurch buildings finally setitssealupon theoutlook ofthechurch asa holy place, "towards whrch Christians should adopt thesame attitude asJews totheJerusalem Temple andpagans totheirshrines" (Secular UseofChurch "TheRoman \uildings,16-17). Oscar Hardman writes, system ofadministration andthearchitecture ofits larger houses guidance andpublic hallslentsuggestive tothechurch inthegrading ofitshierarchy andthesubsequent defining ol spheres (History ofjurisdiction, andjnthebuilding of itsplaces ofworship" of Christian Worship, I3-I4). r22Boggs, Christian Saga, 209. r23Mark14:58; Acts7:48, 17:24; Galatians 4:9;Colossians 2:14-19; Hebrews 3-11;I peter 2,4-9. '24White, Protesta nt Worsh ip andChurch Arch itect ure,51,57. r25Krautheimer, [arlyChristian andByzantine Architecture. 1 2N 6 o r m aHno, u s eG oo f d , 5 1 - T l . T h e H a g i a S o p h i a ( t hHeoCl yhW u ri sc d hom f ),whichopenedinAD360andwasrebuiltinAD4l5.is touted bytheEastern church to betheperfect embodiment ota church building.

'' Byzantine architecture was followed by Romanesque architecture.t" Romanesquebuildings \Merecharacterizedbya threestory elevation, massivepillars supporting round arches, and colorful interiors."t This form of building arose shortly after Charlemagne becameemperor of the F{oly Roman Empire on Christmas day AD 800. Following the Romanesque period was the Gothic era of the twelfth century. Gothic architecture gave rise to the spellbinding Gothic cathedrals with their cross-ribbed vaults, pointed arches, and flying buttresses.t'nThe term cntbedrnl is derived from cathedra.It is the building that houses the cathedra,the bishop'schair."o Colored glasswas first introduced to church buildings in the sixth cenrury by Gregory of Tours (538-594)."' The glasswas set into the narrow windows of some Romanesquechurches.Suger (1081-1151), abbot of St. Denis, took colored glassto another level. He adorned the glasswith sacredpaintings. FIe thus becamethe first to use stained-glass windows in church buildings, placing them in his Gothic cathedrals.'r' Great panels of tinted glass came to filI the walls of Gothic churchesto emit brilliant, bright colored light.'rt Rich and dark colors were also employed to create the effect of the new Jerusalem. The stained-glasswindows of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have rarely been equaled in their beauty and quality. With their dazzling colors, stained-glasswindows effectively created a soulish senseof majesty and splendor. They induced feelings associatedwith the worship of a mighry fear-inspiring God.'ra 127 ch.10. Architecture, ofReligious Short,Htstory 128 House ofGod.104-135. Norman. r2eFordetails seeShort,History Origins classicvoluneTheGothicCathedral, ch.11-14,and0ttovonSimson's Architecture, of Religious Press, I 988). n' Princeton University of )rder(Princeto ievaI Concept itecture andtheMed Arch of Gothic r30Krautheimer, Architecture,43. anu'Byzantine EarlyChristian 131 856. AeeofFaith, Durant, 132 which "More bef illedinwithlargerwindows, thepillarscould space between writes, I22.trankSenn Gothic Cathedral, vonSimson, could befilledwith Thewindows lacked. buildings thattheoldRomanesque gave tothenewbuildings anda brightness a lightness previously painted on the walls" that were symbols the theological oremploy stories which could tellthebiblical itained-glass, (Christi 214). anLiturgy, r33Durani, Ageoffaith,856. (GrandRapids: r3aNorma Eerd mans,1982),66-67. Exploring Churches Clowney, andTeresa of God,I 53-154;PauI Clowney n, House

As with the constantinian basilicas, the root of the Gothic cathedral is completely pagan. Gothic architects relied heavily on the teachings of the pagan Greek philosopher plato. plato taught that sound, color, and light have lofry'mystical meanings. They can induce moods and help bring one closer to the "Eternal Good.,"rt The Gothic designers took Plato's teachings and set them to brick and stone. They created awe-inspiring lighting to elicit a senseof overwhelming splendor and worship.'30 color is one of the most powerful emotive factors available.Thus the Gothic stained-glasswindows were employed skillfully to create a senseof mystery and transcendence.Drawing inspiration from the grandiose starues and towers of ancient Egypt, Gothic architecrure sought to recapture the senseof the sublime through its exaggerated heights.'37 It was said of the Gothic strucrure rhar "the whole building seems chained to earth in fixed flight. . . . It rises like an exhalation from the soil. . . . I{o architecrure so spirirualizes,refines and castsheavenward the substancewhich it handles."lr*Jt was the ultimate srrmbolof heavenjoining the earth.'re So with its use of light, color, and excessiveheight, the Gothic cathedral fostered a sense of mystery transcendence,and awe.'oo AII of these features were borrowed from plato and passedoff as Christian.'at Basilica,Romanesque,and Gothic church buildines are ahuman r35vonSimson, Gothic Cathedral,22-42,50-55,58, 188-191, 234-235.V0n Simson shows howthemetaphysics ofplatoshaped Gothic architecture. Light andluminosity reach theirperfection inGothic stained-glass windows. Numbers proportions ofperiect harmonize ailelements ofthebuilding. Light andharmony plato areimages ofheaven; prrnciples theyaretheordering o{creation. taught that lightisthemostnotable phenomena-the of natural closest to pureformTheNeoplatonisls conceived lightasa transcendental reality thatilluminates ourintellect tograsp truth. TheGothic design wasessentially a blending together ofthevisions ofplato, Augustine, andDenis (anoted thepseudo-Areopagite Neoplatonist). '36White, Protestant hlorship andChurch Architecture.6. r37NeilCarter, "The (unpublished Story oftheSteeple" manuscript, 2001). Thefulltext, which isdocumented, canbeaccessed at http:// www.christinya ll.com/steeple. hrmL r38Iurner,fron Temple toMeeting House, tgl. r3sThebaroque architecture 0ftheseventeenth andeighteenth centuries followed thepathoftheG0thiiln inducing thesenses withits harmonious (Clowney richness anddecoratton andClowney, Exptoring Churches,T5-17). ) G.Davies states thatintheWest during theMidd leAges, cathedra lswereregarded (Dauies, asmodels ofthecosmos Secutar l)se of Church Buildings, 220). raoWhite, Protestant V/orship andChurch Architecture,131. ra'Fora detailed discussion 0{thehistorical specificities ofGothic architecture, seeDurant, Ageoffaith,ch. 32.Although antiquated, Gothic architecture made a reappearance among Protestants withtheGothic revival inthemid-nineteenth century. ButGothic construction ceased afterWorld Warll (White, Protestant llorshipandChurch Architecture, I30-I4Z;Nornan,House of God. 252-21U.

attempt to duplicate that which is heavenly and spiritual.'o' In a very realway,,the church building throughout history reflects man's quest to sensethe divine with his physical senses.While being surrounded by beauty can certainly turn a person'sheart toward God, He desires so much more for His church than an aesthetic experience. By the fourth cenfury the Christian communiry had lost touch with those heavenly realities and spiritual intangibles that cannot be perceived by the senses,but which can only be registered by the human spirit (see 1 Corinthians 2:9-16). The main messageof Gothic architecture is: "God is transcendent and unreachable-so be awed at His majesty."But such a message defies the messageof the gospel, which saysthat God is very accessible-so much so that He has taken up residenceinside of His people.

BUILDING CHURCH THEPROTESTANT In the sixteenth century the Reformers inherited the aforementioned building tradition. In a short period of time, thousandsof medieval cathedrals became their property as the local rulers who controlled those strucfuresjoined the Reformation.ras Most of the Reformers were former priests. Hence, they had been unwittingly conditioned by the thought patterns of medieval Catholicism.tooSo even though the Reformers did some remodeling to their newly acquired church buildings, they made little functional changein the architecfure.tot Even if the Reformers wanted to bring radical changesto the practice of the church, the masseswere not ready for it.tooMartin Luther was quite clear that the church was not a building or an insti-

tq2Senn, Liturgy,604. Christian ra3White. wasthecastle atTorgua, builtin 1544for building firstProtestant church Architecture,64.Ihe andChurch Protestantl/orship House, 206). fron Tenple toMeeting a simple table\Iurner, wasnochancel, andthealtarhadbecome worship, There Lutheran raaWhite, Architecture,TS. llorshipandChurch Protestant r45Jones, haveseen a andtwentieth centuries thenineteenth lnterestingly, lVorship,142-143,225. I Approach toEvangelical Hrsforlca (White, Architecture,64). Worship andChurch bodies Protestant allProtestant architecture among revival of medieval major La6 Architecture,T9, llorshipandChurch White. Protestant

tution.raTYet it would have been impossible for him to overfurn more than a millennium of confusion on the subject.tot The central architectural change that the Reformers made reflected their theology. They made the pulpit the dominanr cenrer of the building rather than the altar table.'noThe Reformation was built on the idea that people could not know God nor grow spirirually unlessthey heard preaching. Thus when the Reformers inherited existing church buildings, they adapted them toward thar end.rs,

THESTEEPLE Ever since the inhabitants of Babel erected a tower to *reach to the heavens," civilizations have followed suit by building structures with pointed tops."' The Babylonians and Egyptians built obelisks and pyramids that reflected their belief that they vrere progressing roward immortaliry. when Greek philosophy and culrure came along, the direction of architecrure changed from upward and vertical to downward and horizontal. AII of this suggestedthe Greek belief in democracy, human equaliry, and earthbound gods.tt, Flowever, with the rise of the Roman catholic church, the practice of crowning buildings with pointed tops reemerged. Toward the end of the Byzantine period, Catholic popes drew inspiration from the obelisks of ancient Egypt.tt' As religious architecture entered the Romanesqueperiod, points began to appear on the surfacesand

'il'0fallthegreatteachersofChristianity,MartjnLutherperceivedmostclearlythedifferencebetweenthefcc/es Testament andtheinstituti0nal church, andreacted mostsharply again slthequidproquowhich would identify them. Therefore 'church': jt anobscure herefused totolerate themere word hecalled ambiguous term. Inhistranslation oftheBible, herendered ecclesta by'congregation.' . . , Herealized thattheNewTestament ecclesla islustnotan'it,''athing,'an'institution,' butrather 'church,' a unity ofpersons, a people, a communion. . . . Strong aswasLuther's aversion totheword prove thefactsofhistory stronger' Thelinguistlc usage ofboththeReformation andthepost-Reformation erahadtocome toterms withthesopowerfully developed ideaofthechurch, andconsequently alltheconfusion dependent upon theuseofthjs'obscure ambiguous, word penetrated ,church' Reformation theology. lt wasimpossible toputtheclock back onemillennium anda half.Theconception remainedinevocablymouldedbythishistoricalprocessofl500years."EmilBrunner, TheMisunderstandingoftheChurch (Lond0n: Lutterworth Press. 1952), 15-16. ra8lvlartin press. (Philadelphia: Luther, Luther's Works Fortress 1965). 53_54. ooWhite. Protestant lVorship andChurch Architecture, 82. r50Clowney andClowney, Exptoring Churches,T2-73.Ihe altartablewasmoved fromtheloftyposition 0t ,,altar,' andmoved down the (clergy platform) chancel giving steps, it a position oflessprominence. Thepulpit wasmoved closer tothenave where thepeople sat, soasto make thesermon a fixedpartoftheservice. r5rSeeGenesis "The I 1,3-9. Carter, Story oftheSteeple.,' 152 ZahiHavass, Theforanids ofAncient Egypt(Pillsburgh: Carnegie Museum ofNatural History, 19g0), 1;Short, History of Religious Architecture,13, 161. r53Norman, House of God,160.

corners of every cathedral built in the Roman Empire. This trend reachedits pinnacle during the era of Gothic architecture with Abbot Suger'sconstruction of the cathedralat St. Denis' Ilnlike Greek architecture, the characteristic line of Gothic architecrure was vertical to suggeststriving upward. By this time, all throughout Italy, towers began to appearnear the entfancesof church buildings. The towers housed bells to call the people to worship.'s+ These towers representedcontact between heavenand earth.ttt As the years passed,Gothic architects (with their emphasison verticality) sought to add a tall spire to every tower.'s6Spires (also called steeples;spiresis the British/Anglican term) were a q'rnbol of man'saspirationto be united with His Creator.l5tIn the centuriesthat followed, the towers grew taller and thinner. They evenrually became a visual focal point for the architecture. They also reduced in number, from the double-towered "wesrwork" to the singular spire that so characterizedthe churchesof Normandy and Britain' In the year 1666,somethinghappenedthat changedthe courseof tower architecture. A fire swept acrossthe city of London and damSir Christopher Wren agedmost of its eighty-sevenchurch edifices.'5* (1632-1723) was then commissionedto redesign all the churchesof London. Using his own srylistic innovations in modifiiing the Gothic spires of France and Germany, Wren created the modern steeple.tto From that point on, the steeplebecamea dominant featureof AngloBritish architecture. Later the Puritans made their church buildings far simpler than their Catholic and Anglican predecessors.But they kept the steeple and brought it into the new world of the Americas''u"

18' 1900)' (NewYork, & Spielmeyer, Hessling ofEngland 15,Charles Churches of theMedieval andTowers of Spires ltlustrations Wickes, 155 Churches,13. Exploring andClowney, Clowney 156 Ageof Faith,865. DuranI, i570lowney Churches,13. Explonng andClowney, lssGerald (London, 15ff 1977), Batsford, CityChurches London Cobb, wereso ofLondon thechurches 16.Because (London' 1956), r5eViktor LundHumphries, of SirChristopherWren Furst,lheArchitecture Consequently, tigh|ysandwichedbetweenotherbuildings,littleroomwasleftforemphasisonan$hingotherthanthes onone spire tallandornate plainsrdes a drsprop0rtionately featuring withrelatively churches o{building thetrend wienistablished 88 1996), (London: Press, TheHambledon Wren of SirChristopher lheCityChurches end.paulJetfery, Witness Stones of Cunningham 7-9;Colin 160 1997), , peter Press, (Chicag0: oflllinois University Houses ofGod Williams, 60. (Gloucestershire, 1999). Publishing, UK,Sutton

The messageof the steepleis one that contradictsthe messageof the New Testament. Christians do not have to reach into the heavens to find God. FIe is here! With the coming of Immanuel, God is with

.'" ..

us (seeMatthew I:23). And with His resurrecrion, we have an indwelling Lord. The steepledefiestheserealities.

l: .^ i,r

THEPULPIT

i.

The earliest sermonswere delivered from the bishop'schair, or cathedra, which was positioned behind the altar.rutLarer the ambo, a raised desk on the side of the chancel from which Bible lessonswere read, became the place where sermons \Meredelivered.tu'The ambo was

:;'

taken from the Jewish synagogue.'u'Floweveq it has earlier roots in the reading desks and platforms of Greco-Roman antiquiry.John chrysostom (347407) was noted for making the ambo a place for

,rr: 1, i

preaching.tuo

il _.:: t":, .-',,i

As early asAD 250, the ambo was replaced by the pulpit. cyprian of carthage (200-258) speaksof placing the leader of the church

:i: ;,'

into public office upon the pulpirum.r65our word putpit is derived from the Latin word pulpitum which means "a stage."r6u The pulpi-

id

rum, or pulpit, was propped up in the highest elevated place in the congregation.tut

i* ;.,,

In time, the phrase "ro ascend the platfo rm,, (ad pulpitum aenire) became part of the religious vocabulary of the clergy. By AD 252, cyprian alludes to the raised platform that segregatedthe clergy from the laity as "the sacredand venerated congestum of the clergy."tus

r6'Arthur Pierce Middleton, NewWine (Wilton, publishing, in )ld llineskins Connecticut: Morehouse-Barlow lggg),76. r 6 2 / m D o i s t h e L a t i n t e r m flot irspduel pr iivt ,e d l r o m a m b o n w h i c h m e a n s " c r e s t o f a h i l l . " M oasnt b o s w e r e e l e v a t e d a n d r e a c h e d bysteps(Ferguson,EncyclopediaoftarlyChristianity,2g;PeterF. Anson,Churches:TheirptanandFurnishing,Is4;Middleton,flew Wine in jld l{ineskins,T6). 16r Gough, EarlyChristians, lT2;Ferguson, EncyclopediaoftarlyChristianity,2g.Thepredecessor0ftheamb0isthemigdal0fthe "tower" synagogue. Migdal means in Hebrew. r6aFerguson, Encyclopedia ol Earty Christianity,2g, 165 Latinfor"pulpit." White, Building God's House, lZ4. '66Christian pA,Herald press, (Scottdale, g3. SmiIh, Going totheRoot 19g2). r67White, Building God's House,124. 'il lbid.

By the end of the Middle Ages the pulpit became common in parish churches.tunWith the Reformation, it became the central piece of furniture in the church building."o The pulpit symbolized the replacement of the centrality of ritualistic action (the Mass) with clerical verbal instruction (the sermon).t7t In Lutheran churches, the pulpit was moved to the front of the altar."t In Reformed churches the pulpit dominated until the altar finally disappearedand was replacedby the "Communion table."tTl The pulpit has always been the centerpiece of the Protestant church. So much so that a well-known pastor who spoke during a conferencesponsoredby the Billy Graham EvangelisticAssociation claimed: "If the church is alive, it's becausethe pulpit is alive-if the church is dead, it's becausethe pulpit is dead.""o The pulpit elevatesthe clergy to a position of prominence. Ti"ue to its meaning, it puts the preacher at center "stage"-separating and placing him high above God's people.

THEPEWANDBALCONY The pew is perhaps the greatest inhibitor of face-to-face fellowship. It is a symbol of lethargy and passivity in the contemporary church and has made corporate worship a spectator sport.l7s The word pew is derived from the Latin podium.It means a seat raised up above floor level or a "balcony."t76PewSwere unknown to the church building for the first thousand years of Christian history. In the early basilicas,the congregation stood throughout the entire service.'7t(This is still the practice among many Eastern Orthodox.)'7t 'N Middleton, in 1ldllineskins,l6. NewWine r70Clowney Churches,26. Exploring andClowney, r7rFrank Press, 1983),45. Fortress Setting(Philadelphia: andltsCulturat C,Senn, CfrsfianWorship r72gwenChadwick withthe thepulpitwascombined (London, century, Penguin Books,1964),422.Inthesixteenth , TheRefornation part0fthepulpit "twodecker." deskwasthelower-level Thereading structure-the to make a single desk(orlectern) reading (Middleton. in 1ldVlineskins,77). Newlt/ine ttr Senn, Setting,45. V,lorship andltsCultural Christian ri4ScottGabrielson,"AllEyestotheFront,ALookatPulpitsPastandPresent," YourChurch,January/February2002,44. rAJames (New 43. Press, 1967), York' 0xford University of Worsirlp F.White, I/relYorldliness ri6Cross totheRoot,81 1271;Sntth,Going Church, of theChristian 1xfordDictionary andLivingstone, 177 SecularllseofChurchBuildings,l38.0ccasionallyafewwoodenorstonebencheswereprovidedforth Davies, t78Middleton, in OldVrlineskins,73. NewWine

By the thirteenth cenrury backlessbencheswere gradually introduced into English parish buildings.'7nThese bencheswere made of stone and placed against the walls. They were then moved into the body of the building (the area called the nave).r8'At first, the benches were arranged in a semicircle around the pulpit. Later they were fixed to the floor.ttt The modern pew was introduced in the fourteenth century though it was nor commonly found in churches until the fifteenth century.tt'At that time, wooden benchessupplantedthe stone seats.r83 By the eighteenth cenrury box pews became popular.tto Box pews have a comical history. Theywere furnished with cushioned seats,carpets,and other accessories.They were sold to families

:.;t ''a

and considered private properry.ttt Box-pew owners set out to make them as comfortable as possible. some decorated them with curtains, cushions, padded armchairs, fireplaces-even special compartments for pet dogs. It was not uncommon for owners to keep their pews sealed with lock and key. After much criticism from the clergy, these embellished pews were replacedwith open seats.ttu Becausebox pews often had high sides,the pulpits had to be elevated so as to be seen by the people. Thus the "wineglass" pulpit was born during colonial rimes.r87Eighteenth-cenrury family box pews were replaced with slip pews so that all the people faced the newly erected high platform where the pastor conducted the service.tss So what is the pew? The meaning of the word tells it all. It is a lowered "balcony"-detached seating from which to watch performances on a stage (the pulpit). It immobilizes the congregation of 'rulbid., 74.BytheendoftheMiddle pews Ages, these were elaborately decorated withpictures ofsaints andlanciful animals. Norrington, ToPreach press orllot,3l; .1.G.Davies, (Philadelph Thell/estntnster Dictionary of ttYorship ia:Westm inster , Igl2),312. r80Doug Adams,Meeting (AustinTheSharing House to CanpMeeting pany,1gg1), 14. Com r8rClowney andClowney, Exploring Churches,28. '82Senn, Cfrstr'an Liturgy,2l5; Clowney andClowney, Exploring Churches,2g. r83Davies, Secular Useof Church Buildings,138. 'E4White, Prltestant Wlrship andChurch Architecture, l0l. r85Clowney andClowney, Exploring Churches,28. i86lbid.;Davies, SecularUseofChurchBuitdings,l3g.someclergymenattackedtheabuseofpewdecorum.Onepreache giving a sermon lamenting thepew, saying "wants thatthecongregation nothing butbeds to heartheWord ofGodon.', '87Middleton, NewWine in 1ldWineskins.74. r88Adams, Meeting Houseto Camp Meeting,14.

the saints and renders them mute spectators.It hinders face-to-face fellowship and interaction. Galleries (or church balconies)were invented by the Germans in the sixteenth century. They were popularized by the Puritans in the eighteenth century. Since then balconies have become the trademark of the Protestant church building. Their purpose is to bring the congregation closer to the pulpit. Again, ensuring that congregants will be able to clearly hear the preacherhas alwaysbeen the main consideration in Protestant church design.tto

ARCHITECTURE CHURCH CONTEMPORARY Over the last two hundred years,the two dominating architectural patterns employed by Protestant churches are the divided chancel form (usedin liturgical churches)and the concert stageform (usedin evanThe chancelis the areawhere the clergy (and somegelicalchurches).'nn times the choir) conduct the service.to'In the chancel-stylechurch, a rail or screenthat separatesthe clergy from the laity still exists. The concert-style church building was profoundly influenced by nineteenth-century revivalism.le2It is essentiallyan auditorium. The building is structured to emphasizethe dramatic performance of the preacher and the choir.rerIts structure implicitly suggeststhat the choir (or worship team) performs for the congregation to stimulate their worship or entertain them.'noIt also calls excessiveattention to the preacher whether he is standing or sitting. In the concert-style building, a small Communion table may appear on the floor below the pulpit. The Communion table is typically decoratedwith brasscandlesticks,a cross,and flowers. Tivo candles on the Communion table have become the sign of orthodoxy in most Protestant churches today. fu with so many parts of the church T4. Churches, rssWhite,protestant Explorrng andClowney, 85,107.Clowney Architecture, l'lorshipandChurch reO II8. Architecture, andChurch Worship Protestant White, rsrClowney I7. Churches, [xploring andCfowney, ]e White,Protestant IZlIt Architecture, Vlorship andChurch rs3Turner, House,237,241. toMeeting FronTenple ]s White. Architecture,140 lilorship andChurch Protestant

service,the presenceof candleswas borrov'ed from the ceremonial court of the Roman Empire.'oi Yet despitethesevariations,all Protestant architecrureproduces the same sterile effects that were present in the Constantinian basilicas.They continue ro maintain the unbiblical division between clergy and lairy. And they encouragethe congregation to assumea specraror role. The arrangementand mood of the building conditions the congregation toward passiviry.The pulpit platform acts like a stage,and the congregation occupies the theater.t'nIn short, Christian architecture has stalematedthe functioning of God's people sinceit was born in the fourth cenrurv.

EXEGETING THEBUILDING At this point, you may be thinking to yourself, so what's tbe big d.eal? who carestf the first-century Christians did not haue buitdings? o, tf charch buildings wev'epatterned after pagan betiefsand practices?Or if medieaalCatholicsbasedtbeir architecture0npagan phihsopby?Wat bas that got to do with us today? consider this next sentence:The social location of the church meeting expressesand influences the character of the church.totlfyou assumethat where the church gathers is simply a matter of convenience, you are tragically mistaken. You are overlooking a basicrealiry of hurnanity. Every building we encounter elicits a responsefrom us. By its interior and exterioq it explicitly showsus what the church is and how it ftinctions. To put it in the words of Henri Lefebvre, "Spaceis never empv; it alwaysembodiesa meaning."re8 This principle is also expressedin

's5lbid, 129,133,134. Some churches have built-in baptistries behind thepulpit andchoir. IntheCatholic tradition, candles were not placed commonly onthealtartableuntiltheeleventh (lungmann century Liturgy, l33). , Earty is6White, Protestant tlorship andChurch Architecture, IZ0,IZ5,1Zg,l4L i e / A s JG . D a v i e s s a y s , " I h e q u e s t i o n o f c h u r c h b u i l d i n g i s i n s e p a r a b l e f r o m t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e c h u r c h a n d o f i t s f u n c world"lSecularUseof Church Buildings, Z0S). re8Leonard "Church Sweet, Architecture forthe21stCenlury," Your Church, lvlarch/April 1999, 10.Inthisarticle, Sweet triestoenvision postmodern church buildings thatbreak outoftheoldmold promotes ofarchitecture, passivity. which lronically, Sweet writes frgm theoldparadigm ofviewing church buildings assacred "0fcourse, spaces. y0uarenotjustputting Hewrites, upa building when youbuild y0uareconstructing a church; sacred space." Thissortofthinking runsqurte deep.

the architectural motto "form follows function." The form of the building reflects its particular function.tn' The social setting of a church'smeeting place is a good index of that church'sunderstanding of God's purpose for His body. A church's location teachesus how to meet. It teachesus what is important and what is not. And it teachesus what is acceptableto say to each other and what is not. We learn these lessons from the setting in which we gatherwhether it be a church edifice or a private home. These lessonsare by no means neutral. Go into any given church building and exegete the architecture. Ask yourself what objects are higher and which are lower. Ask yourself what is at the front and what is at the back. Ask yourself in what ways it might be possible to "adjust" the direction of the meeting on the spur of the moment. Ask yourself how easyor hard it would be for a church member to speakwhere he is seatedso that all may seeand hear him. If you look at the church building setting and ask yourself these questions (and others like them), you will understand why the contemporary church has the character it does. If you ask the same set of questions about a living room, you will get a very different set of ans\Mers.You will understand why being a church in a house setting (as were the early Christians) has the character it does. The church's social location is a crucial factor in church life. It cannot be assumedassimply "an accidentaltruth of history."tuuSocial locations can teach good and godly people very bad lessonsand choke their lives together. Calling attention to the importance of the social location of the church (house or church edifice) helps us to understand the tremendous power of our social environment. To put a finer point on it, the church building is based on the benighted idea that worship is removed from everyday life. People varft of course, on how profoundly they emphasize this disjunction. rseSenn, while the intoa passive audtence burlding turns thecongregation church Theauditorium-styled Liturgy,2I2,604. Cfnslian nave andcrannles. narrow orinton00ks it through a long, scatters Gothic-style 200 (Lessrng's quote Writings). fheological fromGotthold Lessing A

some groups have gone out of their way to emphasizeit by insisting that worship could occur only in specific kinds of spacesdesigned to make you feel differently than you feel in everyday life. The disjunction between worship and everydaylife characterizes western Christianity. Worship is seen as something detached from the whole fabric of life and packaged for group consumption. centuries of Gothic architecrure have taught us badly about what worship really is. Few people can walk into a powerful cathedral without experiencing the power of the space. The lighting is indirect and subdued. The ceilings are high. The colors are earthy and rich. sound rravels in a specific way. All these things work together to give us a sense of awe and wonder. They are designed to manipulate the sensesand create a "worshipful atmosphere."2or some traditions add smells to the mix. But the effect is alwaysthe same: Our sensesinteract with our space to bring us to a particular state of the soul-a state of awe, mystery and transcendencethat equalsan escapefrom normal life.tt we Protestants have replaced some of the grander architectural embellishments with a specific use of music intended to achieve the sameend. Consequently,in Protestantcircles"good" worship leaders are those who can use music to evoke what other traditions use space to evoke; specifically, a soulish senseof worshipfulness.t'r But this is disjointed from everyday life and is inauthentic. Jonathan Edwards rightfully pointed out thar emotions are transient and cannot be used to measure one's relationship with God.too This disjunction berween secular and spirirual is highlighted by the fact that the typical church building requiresyou to "process"in by walking up stairs or moving through a narthex. This adds to the sense thatyou are moving from everydaylife to another life. Thus a transition

20rWhite, Protestant Worship andChurch Architecture, s. 202 White,l'/orldliness of llorship,Tg-83. 2 0P 3l a t o w a s f e a r f u l o f e x p o s i n g t h e y o u t h t o c e r t a i n t y p e s o f m u s i c b e c a u s e i t m i g h t e x c i t e t h e w r o n g e m o t i o n s (TheRepublic,3,3gg). 204 White, Protestant Worship andChurch Architecture, lg.

is required. Nl of this flunks the Monday test. No matter how good Sundaywas,Mondav morning still comes to test our worship.tnt Watch a choir don their robes before the church service. They smile, laugh, and even joke. But once the servicestarts,they become different people. You will not often catch them smiling or laughing. This false separationof secular and sacred-this "stained-glass mystique" of Sunday morning church-flies

in the face of truth and

realiq. In addition, the church building is far lesswarm, personal,and friendly than someone'shome-the organic meeting place of the early The church building is not designedfor intimacy nor Christians.'oo fellowship. In most church buildings, the seatingconsistsof wooden pews bolted to the floor. The pews (or chairs) are arranged in rows, all facing toward the pulpit. The pulpit sits on an elevated platform, which is often where the clergy also sits (remnants of the Roman basilica). This arrangementmakesit nearly impossiblefor one worshipper to look into the faceof another.Instead,it createsa sit-and-soakform of worship that turns functioning Christians into "p"* potatoes." To state it differently, the architecture emphasizesfellowship berween God and FIis people via the pastor! Yet despitethesefacts,we Christians still treat the building as if it is sacred. Granted, you may object to the idea that the church building is hallowed. But (for most of us) our actions and words betray our belief. Listen to Christians speak of the church building. Listen to yourself as you speak of it. Do you ever hear it referred to as "church"? Do you ever hear it spoken of as "God's house"? The general consensusamong Christians of all denominations is that "a church is essentiallya place set apart for worship."tutThis has been true for the last 1,700years.Constantine is still living and breathing in our minds. 2 0 sT h e s ei n s r g h tos w em u c ht o F r a n k 'fsr i e n dH a lM i l l e r . 2 0 6R o b e rSt o m m esrp e a k o t i t ho n ea n o t h e T r .h em o d e r n s i a " s o c i o f u g sa pl a c e a " s a p l a c ew h e r ep e o p l tee n dt o a v o i dp e r s o n ac lo n t a cw 2 (1967),655. Space,"AnericanJournalof Sociologyl rathernicely."Sociofugal description churchbuildingfits Sommer's 207Davies,SecularUseof ChurchBuildings,2D6,

THEINCREDIBLY HIGHCOST OFOVERHEAD Most contemporary Christians mistakenly view the church building as a necessarypart of worship. Therefore, they never question the need to financially support a building and its maintenance. The church edifice demands a vast infusion of money. In the United States alone, real estate owned by institutional churches today is worth over $2 30 billion. Church building debt, service,and maintenance consumes about 18 percent of the $50 to $60 billion tithed to churches annually.2ut Point: Contemporary Christians are spending an astronomical amount of money on their buildings. All the traditional reasonsput forth for "needing" a church building collapse under careful scrutiny.'nnwe so easily forget that the early Christians turned the world upside down without them (seeActs 17:6).They grew rapidly for three hundred yearswithout the help (or hindrance) of church buildings. In the businessworld, overheadkills. overhead is what gets added on to the "real" work a businessdoes for its clients. Overhead pays for the building, the pencils, and the accounting staff. Furthermore, church buildings (as well as salaried pastors and staff) require very large ongoing expensesrather than onetime outlays. These budget busters take their cut out of a church's monetary giving not just today, but next month, next year, and so on. Contrast the overhead of a traditional church. which includes salaried staff and church buildings, with the overhead of a house church. Rather than such overhead siphoning off 50 to 85 percent of the house church's monetary giving, its operating costs amount to a small percentageof the budget, freeing more than 95 percenr of its shared money for delivering real serviceslike ministry mission, and outreach to the world.tt"

2 0S8 m i t hG,o i n g t o t h e R o o t , 9 5 . G e o r g e B a r n a ' s r e s e a r c h i n d i c a t e s t h a t C h r i s t i a n s g i v e g 5 0 t o g 6 0 b i l l i o n a n n u a l l y 20s Howard Snyder demolishes mostcommon arguments for"needing" church buildings rnhisbookRadical Renewal Theprobten ol Wineskins lodal(Houston: Touch Publications, 1996), 62-74. 2r0Fora discussion onwhytheearly Christians metinhomes andhowlarge congregations canmove intohouse churches, seeFrank (Colorado Yiola, Reinagining Church Springs: David C.Cook, 2008).

THISTRADITION? CANWEDEFY Most of us are completely unaware of what we lost as Christians when we began erecting placesdevoted exclusivelyfor worship. The Christian faith was born in believers' homes, yet every Sunday morning, scores of Christians sit in a building with pagan origins that is based upon pagan philosophy. There does not exist a shred of biblical support for the church building.tlt Yet scores of Christians pay good money each year to sanctit/ their brick and stone. By doing so, they have supported an artificial setting where they are lulled into passivity and prevented from being natural or intimate with other believers."' We have become victims of our past. We have been fathered by Constantine who gave us the prestigious status of owning a building. We have been blinded by the Romans and Greeks who forced upon us their hierarchically structured basilicas.We have been taken by the Goths who imposed upon us their Platonic architecture. We have been hijacked by the Egyptians and Babylonians who gave us our sacred steeples.And we have been swindled by the Athenians who imposed on us their Doric columns."' Somehow we have been taught to feel holier when we are in "the house of God" and have inherited a pathological dependency upon an edifice to carry out our worship to God. At bottom, the church building has taught us badly about what church is and what it does. The building is an architectural denial of the priesthood of all believers. It is a contradiction of the very nature of the ekkleis a countercultural community. The church building impedes our understanding and experience that the church is sia-which

t': l

2irTheTemple withthesacrilicial sysiem thatwentwithit. olJesus Christ, along wasa typeanda shadow o{thechurch inJerusalem lambs canbeused anymore thanslaying tojusiify forowning church buildings cannot beused asa justiiication Thus theTemple Porch special whenit courts andSolomon's on occasions inJerusalem metunder a roofintheIemple Thechurch thatpractice today. (Acts (Acts while hewasin Ephesus i9,1-10). base rented a school ashisapostolic 2:46,5:I2\. Paul temporarily suited theirneeds glory. However, the"church building" forGod's inherently wrong orbad.They canbeused arebynomeans buildings Consequently, principles herein. forthereasons stated isatodds withbiblical inthischapter thatisdepicted 2 ' 2O n e E n g l i s h C a t h o l i c w r i t e r p u t s ittht h e irsew i saoyn, e " lsf r m p l e m e t h o d o i s a v i n g t h e c h u r c h ' s m i s s i o n i t i s p r o b a b l y t h e places in which isnormal toanything unnatural . . . andtheydonotconespond buildings fortheyarebasically toabandon church toMeeting House, 323). life"(lurner, fron Tenple everyday 2r3Richard (NewYork: American churches began to 338.Between 1820and1840, Knopf, 1992), Bushman, TheRefinement ofAmerica Housesof God, GreekclassicalismandarchwaysreminiscentoiancientRome(Williams, appearwithDoriccolumnsreminiscentof t2t.

Christ's functioning body that lives and breathes under His direct headship. It is high time we Christians wake up to the fact that we are being neither biblical nor spiritual by supporting church buildings. And we are doing great damageto the messageof the New Testament by calling man-made buildings "churches." If every Christian on the planet would never call a building a church again, this alone would create a revolution in our faith. John Newton rightly said, "Ler not him who worships under a steeple condemn him who worships under a chimney." w.ith that in mind, what biblical, spirirual, or historical authoriry does any Christian have to gather under a steeple in the first place?

>delvingDEEPER l. Church buildings enahle a large nunber of people to gather together for worship. How did the early ehurch manageto worshipin hones with so manypeopteand stiil see themselvesas a single hody of helievers? Practically, how do organic churches today naintain every-nenber

. , ;ii jli

tunctioning as theygrow in size? il: Today Christians often assume that the early churches were large like many contemporary institutional churches. This, however, was not the case.The early Christians met in homes for their church gatherings(Acts 2:46; 20:20;Romans 16:3,5;1 Corinthians l6:19; Colossians4:15; Philemon 2). Given the size of first-cenrury houses, the early Christian churches were rather small compared to today's standards.In his book Paul's Idea of Communiry, New Testament scholar Robert Banks says the average-sizedchurch included thirty to thirty-five people.2ra Some first-century churches, such as the one in Jerusalem, were much larger. Luke tells us that the church inJerusalem met in homes all throughout the city (Acts 2:46). Yet each home gathering didn't see itself as a separatechurch or denomination but as part of the one church in the city. For this reason, Luke always refers to this church as "the church atJerusalem," never as the "churches atJerusalem" (Acts 8:r, lr,22, 15:4). when the entire church needed to come together for a specific zraRobert Banks, Paul's ldeaof Connunity(Peabody, MA,Hendrickson, lgg4),35.

purpose (i.e., Acts 15), itmet in an already existing facility that was large enough to accommodate everyone. The porch of Solomon outside the Temple was used for such occasions(Acts 5:12). Today, when an organic church grows too large to garher in a single home, it will typically multiply into separatehome meetings throughout the city. Yet it will often still see itself as one church meeting in different locations. If the home groups need to congregate together for special occasions,they often rent or borrow a large spaceto accommodate everyone.

2. l'n not sure I anderstand the prnblem with church buildings. Are you saying that they are had becausethe first ones were nldeled 0n large puhlic huildings or promnted by an enperor with suspect theological grounding? ls there anything in Scripture that prohibits the body of Christ fron neeting in then? The answer to the first question is no, that is not what we are saying. By detailing their origin, howeveq we are showing that they developed apart from any scriptural mandate, contrary to what some Christians believe. Furthermore, we believe they detract from a proper understanding ofthe church as the body ofbelievers. Although Scripture never discussesthe topic specifically, church buildings teach us a number of bad lessons that run contrary to New Testament principles. They limit the involvement of and fellowship between members. Often their grandeur distances people from God rather than reminding them that Christ indwells each believer. As Winston Churchill said: "First we shapeour buildings. Thereafter, rhey shape us." This has definitely been the casewith the church building. The idea that the church building is "the house of God" and is constantly referred to as "church" is not only unbiblical, it violates the New Testament understanding of what the ekklesiareally is. We believe that this is why the early Christians did not erect such buildings until the era of Constanrine. Church historian Rodney Stark says,"For far too long, historians have accepted the claim that the conversion of the Emperor Constantine (ca. 285-337) caused the triumph of Christianiry. To the contrary, he destroyed its most attracrive and dymamic aspects,turning a high-intensiry grassroots movement into an arrogant institution controlled by an elite who often managed to be both brutal and lax. . . . Constantine's 'favor'was his decision to divert to the Christians the massivestate funding on which the pagan temples had always depended. Overnight, Christianity became 'the most-favoured recipient of the near limitless resources of imperial favors.'A faith that had been meeting in humble structures was suddenlv housed in

magnificent public buildings-the

new church of Saint Peter in Rome was rnodeled

on the basilicanforn used tbr imoerial throne rooms."ll5

3. lust becausePlato, a pagan phillsnpher, was the first to articulate how sound, light, and color influence moodand elicit splendor awe,and worship,whyis it wrongfor churchesto considerhow to naxinize thesefactors whendesigningtheir buildings? Isn't it appropriate to employthese to the fullestin Christianworship?After all, Scripturemakesclear that we are t0 remember0od's holinessand righteousness. Our point in that brief discussionon Plato r,r'assimply to show that pagan philosophy had a hand in engineering sacred buildings to create a psychological experience in those who occupy them. To our minds, psvchological experience ought never to be confused with spiritual experience.

4. Sincebelieversare in a church buildingnnly twl to three hoursa week,how canyou say that these structuresstymiethe functioningof Eod'speople? Most Christians equate church servicesin a church building with "church." Church leaders often quote Hebrews 10:25 ("not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together") when telling members they should "go to church" on Sunday mornings. This reinforces the misconception that when the New Testament writers talk about church, what they had in mind is passively sitting through a service in a special building once a week. But the fact is, the New Testament vision of the church meeting is one in which every member functions and participates in the gathering. Atrd as we have established,the church building defeats this purpose by its architecrure. Case in point: I (Frank) have met a number of pastors who came to the con-Ibstament teaches that church rneetings are to be open and

viction that the New

participatory. Shortly after making this discovery these pastors "opened up" their church servicesto allow nembers to freely function. In every case,it did not work. 'fhe The members were still passive. reason: the architecture of the building. Pews and elevated floors, for example, are not conducive for open sharing. They obstruct it. By contrast, when these samecongregations began meeting in homes, functioning and every-member participation flourished. To put it another way: If we equate church v'ith sitting in a pew and taking a mostly passive role, then church buildings are appropriate for the task (but we

215 RodneyStark, FortheGloryofGod:HowMonotheisnLedtoRefornations,science,Witch-Hunts,andtheEndofslavery(P Princeton Universitv Press, 2003). 33-34.

still cannot claim that they are biblical since the New Testament knows nothing of church buildings). On the other hand, if u'e believe that God's idea of a church meeting is for every member to participate in ministering spiritually to one another, then church buildings as we know them today greatly hinder that process.

5. ltlasn't the concept of "sacred space" a tewish idea as well as a pagan idea? \bs, the Jews believed in sacred spaces(the Temple), a sacred priesthood (the Levites), and sacred rituals (the Old Testament sacrifices).Howeveq these things were done away with by Christ's death, and the New Testament Christians knew nothing of them. Later, the Christians picked up these concepts from the pagans, not the Jews. This chapter supplies evidence for that statement. 6. 0o you think it's alwayswrangfnr a group 0f Christiansto usea buildingfor worshipor ninistry? Not at all. Paul rented a building (the Hall of Tyrannus) when he was in Ephesus,and the church ofJerusalem used the outer courts of the Temple for special gatherings. What we are establishing in this chapter are five key points: (1) it is unbiblical to call a building a "church," "the house of God," "the temple of God," "the sanctuary of the Lord," and other similar terms; (2) the architecture of the typical church building hinders the church from having open-participatory meetings; (3) it is unscriptural to treat a building as though it were sacred;(4) a typical church building should not be the site of all church meetings becausethe average building is not designed for face-to-face community; and (5) it is a profound error to assumethat all churches should own or rent buildings for their gatherings. It is our opinion that each church should seek the Lord's guidance on this question rather than assume the presence of a building to be the Christian norm. Tiacing the history of the "church" building helps us to understand why and how we use them today.

WORSHIP: SUNDAY MORNINGS SETIN CONCRETE withouttruthis errorgrownold." "Custom -TERTULLIAN, THIRD-CENTURY THEOLOGIAN I haveshown "Sonof man,describe to the peopleof lsraeltheTemple you,so theywill be ashamed." -EZEKIEL 43:10.ur

iF YSl.i&RUA fifi'{lIRtt$$ruilruffi S['{K$STIAH, it is likely that you observe the same perfunctory order of worship every time you go to church. It does not matter what stripe of Protestantism you belong to-be it Baptist,Methodist, Reformed, Presbyterian,EvangelicalFree, Church of Christ, Disciples of Christ, CMA, Pentecostal,Charismatic, or nondenominational-your

Sunday morning serviceis virrually identical

to that of all other Protestant churches.tEven among the so-called cutting-edge denominations (like the Vineyard and Calvary Chapel), the variations are minor. Granted, some churchesuse contemporary choruseswhile others use hymns. In some churches, congregantsraise their hands. In others, their hands never get above their hips. Some churches observe the Lord's Supper weekly. others observe it quarterly. In some churches,the liturgy (order of worship) is written out in a bulletin.t In others, the liturgy is unwritten, yet it is just as mechanical and predictable as if it were set to print. Despite these slight variations, the order of worship is essentially the same in virtually all Protestantchurches.

THESUNDAY MORNING ORDER OFWORSHIP Peel away the superficial alterations that make each church service distinct and you will find the same prescribed lirurgy. See how many of the following elements you recall from the last weekend service you attended: The Greeting.lsyou enter the building, you are greeredby an usher or an appointed greeter-who should be smiling! You are then handed a bulletin or announcementpage.(bJote:If you are part of some newer denominations, you may drink coffee and eat doughnuts before you are seated.) Praye, or scripture Reading. I]sually given by the pastor or song leader.

r There (both arethree exceptions tothispoint. ThePlymouth Brethren 0penandClosed) have anencased liturgy where there issome open sharing among thecongregants atthebeginning oftheservice. Nevertheless, theorder ofservice isthesame every week. 0ldschool Quakers have anopen meetrng where thecongregants aresilent is"enltghtened," untrlsomeone after which theyshare. The thirdexception are"highchurch" "smells Protestant churches, which retatn the andbells" ofanelaborate Catholic luass-includins a prescribed order ofservice. I Theword liturgyisderiuedfromtheGreekwordleitourgia,whichreferredtotheperformanceolapublictaskexpect citizensof ancient Athens; inother words, it wasthefulfilling picked otcivilobligations. Christians it uptoreler tothepublic ministry toGod. A liturgy, therefore. issimply prescribed a worship service ora order ofworship. White, Protestant l,lorship andChurch Architecture. 22;Ferguson, EarlyChristiansSpea*,83,SeealsoJ.D.Davies, TheNewllestminsterDictionaryofLiturgyandWorshiplPhiladel Westminster Press. 1986). 314.

The SongSeruice.Led bv a professional song leader, choir, or worship team. In charismatic-styled churches, this part of the service typically

., :".

lasts thirty to forty-five consecutiveminutes. In other churches, it is shorter and may be divided into severalsegments. The Announcenzents. News about upcoming events. Usually given by the pastor or some other church leader.

f .: .i! ;

The Offering. Sometimescalled "the offer toryi'it is usually accompanied by special music by the choir, worship team, or a soloist. Tbe Sermon.Typically,the pastor delivers an oration lasting twenty to forty-five minutes.'The current averageis thirty-two minutes.

'l

f; ''''

j'

'i

Yo ur s er v ic em ay a l s o h a v e i n c l u d e d o n e o rmo reofthefol l ow i ng post-sermon activities: An after-the-sermon pastoral prayer,

. :, ...

An altar call', lor h-, More singing led by tr,o worship ra4,the ^1,^i. choir ^. or -,,^.or.in team,

;:

.;,

The Lord's Supper, Prayer for the sick or afflicted. The Benediction.Thrsmay be in the form of a blessing from the pastor or a song to end the service. With some minor rearrangements, this is the unbroken liturgy that 345 million Protestants acrossthe globe observereligiously week after week.*And for the last five hundred years,few people have questioned it. Look again at the order of worship. Notice that it includes a 3 Seechapter 4 fora complete discussron 0nther00ts 0ftheserm0n. o There areanestimated 345,855,000 Protestants intheworld: 70,164,000 arein North America, and77,497,000 arein Europe fheWorld Alnanac andBook ofFacts 200J(New York' World Almanac Education 2003), Group, 638.

,.

threefold structure: (1) singing, (2) the sermon, and (3) closing prayer or song. This order of worship is viewed as sacrosanctin the eyes of many present-day Christians. But why? Again, it is due simply to the titanic power of tradition. And that tradition has set the Sunday morning order of worship in concrete for five centuries . . . never to be moved.t

WHERE DIDTHEPROTESTANT ORDER OFWORSHIP COME FROM? Pastorswho routinely tell their congregations that "we do everything by the Book" and still perform this ironclad liturgy are simply not correct. (In their defense,the lack of truthfulness is due to ignorance rather than overt deception.) You can scour your Bible from beginning to end, and you will never find anything that remotely resembles our order of worship. This is becausethe first-century Christians knew no such thing. In fact, the Protestant order of worship has about as much biblical support as does the Roman Catholic Mass.t'Both have few points of contact with the New Testament. The meetings of the early church were marked by every-member functioning, spontaneity, freedom, vibrancy, and open participation (see,for example, 1 Corinthians 14:1-33 and Hebrews 10:25).?The first-century church meeting was a fluid gathering, not a static ritual. And it was often unpredictable, unlike the contemporary church service. Further, the first-century church meeting was not patterned after practices 0nescholar defines tradition as"inherited worship (White, andbeliefs thatshow lromgeneration continuity togeneration" Prote stant Wors hip andChurch Architectu re,2!1. Themedieval Mass isa blending o1Roman, "The Gallic, andFrankish elements. Formore details, seeEdmund Bishop's essay Genius oftheRoman Rtte"in SttdiesrnCerenonial: Essays lllustrative of English Ceremonial, ed.Vernon Staley(0xford'A.R.Mowbray, 1901) (NewYork, andLouisDuchesne s Christian Wlrship:lts1riginandEvolution Society forPromoting Christian Knowledge, 19121,86-227 . Theceremonial aspects oftheMass, suchastheincense, candles, andanangement the of church building were allborrowed fromthe ceremonialcourtoftheRomanemperors(Jungmann, EarlyLiturgy,132-133,291-292;Smith,FronChristtoConstantine,lT3l. TheNewTestament church meeting is being observed today ona growing scale. While suchgatherings areoftenconsidered radical andrevolutionary bymainline Christianity, theyarenomore radical orrevolutionary thantheNewTestament church. Fora scholarly discussion ontheearly church meeting, seeBanks, Paul's ldeaof Connunity, ch.9-11;Banks andBanks, Church Comes Hone, (Chatham, ch.2; Eduard Schweizer, Church 1rderin theNewTestament UK:W & J.Mackay, 1961), l-135.

theJewish synagogueservicesassome recent authors have suggested.t Instead, it was totally unique to the culture. So where did the Protestant order of worship come from? It has its basic roots in the medieval Catholic Mass.' Significandy, the Mass did not originate with the New Testament;it grew ouc of ancientJudaism and paganism.tuAccording to Will Durant, the Catholic Mass was "based partly on the Judaic Temple service,partly on Greek mystery rituals of purification, vicarious sacrifice,and participation."t' Gregory the Great (540-604), the first monk to be made pope, is the man responsiblefor shapingthe medievalMass." While Gregory is recognized as an extremely generous man and an able administrator and diplomat, Durant notes that Gregory was also an incredibly superstitiousman whose thinking was influenced by magical paganistic concepts. He embodied the medieval mind, which was influenced by heathenism, magic, and Christianiry. It is no accident that Durant calls Gregory "the first completely medievalman."t' The medieval Mass reflected the mind of its originator. It was a blending of pagan and Judaistic ritual sprinkled with Catholic theology and Christian vocabulary.loDurant points out that the Mass was

E SeeBanks, Paul's ldeaof Conmunity,106-108,112-117t Bradshaw, 0rigins of Christian t'/orship,13 15,2129,159-160, 186. practices Bradshaw argues against theideathatfirst-century inherited Christianity itsliturgical fromJudaism. Hepoints outthat "Wehavelrttleevidence thisideabegan around theseventeenth century. David Nonington states, to suggest thatthefirstChristians (ToPreach attempted to perpetuate thestyleofthesynagogue" orNot,48). Moreover, theJewish synagogue wasa human invention. (sixth Some scholars believe it wascreated during theBabylonian captivity century BC), when worship Temple was attheierusalem impossible; others believe theyemerged inthethirdorsecond century BCwiththeriseofthePharisees. Even though thesynagogue (ordivine) precedent became thecenter ofJewish lifeaftertheJerusalem Temple wasdestroyed inAD70,thereis no0ldTestament (Downers forsuchaninstitution, JoelB.Green, ed.,Dictionary ofJesus andtheGospels Grove, lL:InterVarsity, 1992), 781-782; Alfred (Mclean, Edersheim, fheLifeandfimes of Jesus theMessiah VA'MacDonald Publishing Company, 1883), 431.Furthermore, the (Nonington, architectural inspiration forthesynagogue waspagan loPreach orNot,28). e Thewordmass, "dismissal" which means ofthecongregation disnissiol became, attheendofthefourth century, theword \mission, (SchaII, fortheworship service thatcelebrated theEucharist History oftheChristian Church3:505). r0ThestoryoitheoriginoftheMassisfarbeyondthescopeo{thisbook.Sufficeittosaythatthel\4asswasessentia (Senn, together of a resurgence interest ofGentile insynagogue worship influence andpagan thatdatesbacktothelourthcentury Christia n Liturgy, 54;Jungmann, Early Liturgy, 123,130*144). rr Durant. Caesar andChrist.599 r2 Gregory's period major reforms shaped theCatholic Mass intowhatit wasallthroughout themedieval upuntiltheReformation. -388. Schat'f, History of theChristian Church, 4,387 r3 Durant, Ageof Faith,521-524. raPhilipSchalfoutlinesthevariousCatholicliturgieswhichclimaxinGregory'sliturgy.Gregorysliturgydominat centuriesandwassanctionedbytheCounciloflrent(Schaff, HistoryoftheChristianChurch,3,53l-535).Gregoryisalsotheperson whodeveloped andp0pulanzed theCatholic doctrine of "purgatory," although heextracted it {romseveral speculative comments (Gonzalez, fromAugustine Story of Christianity,24T). lneffect, Gregory made Augustine's teachrngs thefoundatjonal theology ofthe "Augustine," "wasthedarkgenius Western church. Paul says Johnson, ofimperial Chri$ianity, theideologue oftheChurch-State alliance, andthefabricator ofthemedieval mentality. Next whosupplied toPaul, thebasic theology, hedidmore toshape Christianity (History philosophy thananyotherhuman being" of Christianity, Il2). Durant saysAugustine's theology dominated Catholic untilthe thirteenth Augustine century. alsogaveit a Neoplatonic tinge(Durant, AgeofFaith,74).

Luther's belief in the centrality of preaching asthe mark of the worship service has stuck till this day. Yet making preaching the center of the church gathering has no biblical precedent.roAs one historian put it, "The pulpit is the throne of the Protestantpastor."3lFor this reason ordained Protestantministers are routinely called"preachers."" But asidefrom this change,Luther's liturgy varied litde from the Catholic Mass," since Luther tried to preservewhat he thought were the "Christian" elementsin the old Catholic order.roConsequently, if r.ou compare Luther's order of worship with Gregory's liturgy, it is r-irrually the same." He kept the ceremony,believing it was proper.'o For instance,Luther retained the act that marked the high moment of the Catholic Mass: the elevation of the bread and cup to consecrate them, a practice that began in the thirteenth century and was based mostly on superstition.tt Luther merely reinterpreted the meaning of this act, seeingit as an expressionof the grace Christ has extendedto God's people." Yet it is still observedby many pastorstoday. In like manner, Luther did drastic surgery to the Eucharistic prayer, retaining only the "words of institution"'n from 1 Corinthians lI:23ff. (wnn)-"That the Lord Jesuson the night in which he was betrayedtook bread . . . and said, 'Take, eat. This is my body."'Even today, Protestant pastorsreligiously recite this text before administering Communion.

r! Acts2'42(tlu)tellsusthat"thebelievers devoted themselves totheapostles'teaching." Inthispassage, Luke isdescribing theapostolic which meetings, tookplace over fouryears andwere designed tolaythe{oundation fortheJerusalem church. was Because thechurch solarge, these meetings were heldinthelemple However, courts. thebelievers alsometforregular open-participatory worship tnhomes (Acts 2,46), rr Schaff, History oftheChristian Church,l,490. 32Whiie, Protestant Worship,20. 33luther prayers still{ollowed Western thehistoric 0rdo. Themaindifference wasthatLuther eliminated theoffertory andtheprayers oftheCanon after theSanctus thatspoke ofofferings. Insum,Luther struck fromtheMass everything smacking of"sacrifice." He,along withother Reformers, removed many ofthedecadent late-medieval elements oftheMass, They didsobyrendering the (chants psalms liturgy inthecommon vernacular, including congregational songs andchorales fortheLutherans; metrical forthe Reformed), thecentrality ofthesermon, andallowing thec0ngregants t0participate inHoly Communion Christian llorship, lSenn, 84,102). 3aSchaff, HistoryoftheChristianChurch,T:486-4ST.TheGermanReformerCarlstadt(1480-1541)wasmoreradic During Luther's absence Carlstadt abolished theentire Mass, destroying thealtars along withthepictures. 3 5F r a n k S e n n i n c l u d e s t h e e a r l y C a t h u l i c l i t u r g y i n h i s b o o k l C h r i s t i a n L i t u r g y , I 3 9 l . L u t h e r e v e n r e t a i n e d t h e (p.486). mean worship theentire service 36Luther pointed totheceremonial inthecourts ofkings andbelieved thisshould beapplied totheworship o{God(Senn, Christian protocol Worship, lil. Seechapter 2 ol thisbook forhowimperial itswayintotheChristian made liturgy during thefourth century withthereign ofConstantine. 3t Senn, Christian fi/orsh ip,18-19. 38When priest theCatholic heldupthesacrament, hewasdoing sotoinaugurate thesacrifice. 3sWhjte, Protestant l'/orshrp.4l-42; Maxwell, 1utline l'/orship,15. ofChristian

In the end, Luther's lirurgy was nothing more than a truncated version of the Catholic Mass.ooAnd the Lutheran order of service contributed to the sameproblems:The congreganrswere still passive spectators (though they could now sing), and the entire lirurgy was still directed by an ordained clergynan (the pastor had replacedthe priest). This was in stark contradiction to the glorious, free-flowing, open-participatory every-member-functioning church meetings led byJesusChrist that the New Testamentenvisions(see1 Corinthians I4:2 6; Hebrews 10:24-25). In Luther's own words, "It is not now nor ever has been our intention to abolish the lirurgical service of God completely, but rather ro purift the one that is now in use from the wretched accretionswhich corrupt it."*t Tlagically, Luther did not realize that new wine cannot be repackagedinto old wineskins.*'At no time did Luther (or any of the other mainstream Reformers) demonstrate a desire to rerurn to the principles of the first-cenrury church. These men set out merely to reform the theology of the Catholic church. In sum, the major enduring changes that Luther made to the Catholic Mass were as follows: (1) he performed the Mass in the language of the people rather than in Latin, (2) he gave the sermon a central placein the gathering, (3) he introduced congregationalsinging,43(a) he abolishedthe idea that the Mass was a sacrificeof Christ, and (5) he allowed the congregation to partake of the bread and cup (rather than just the priest, as was the Catholic practice). Other than these differences, Luther kept the same order of worship as found in the Catholic Mass. worse, although Luther talked much about the "priesthood of all a! Luther retained thebasic order ofthemedieval Mass along withtheceremonial (Maxwell, aspects oflights, incense, andvestments p, 7l\. )utlineof Christian lt/orshi or Luther, Luthe/sllorks,Llll,20. a2lronically, Luther insrsted thathisGerman lVlass should notbeadopted legalistically, andif it became outdated it should bediscarded (Christran Worship andltsCultural Setting, lT).Ihisnever happened. a3A lover pagans?" ofmusic, (WhiIe, Luther made music a keypartoftheservice "Worshiping Protestant l,lorship,4I: Hinson, Like Christian History12, no.1 (1993), genius. 16-19. Luther wasa musical Sopowerful washisgifting in music thattheJesuits said "destroyed thatLuther's songs more souls thanhiswritings andspeeches." lt isnotsurprising thatoneofthegreatest musical talents inchurch history happened tobea Lutheran. Hisname wasJohann Sebastian Bach. Fordetails onLuther's musical contribution totheProtestant liturgy seeSenn, Christian Liturgy,284-287;\Nhite, Protestant llorship, 4I,47-48; WillDurant, Reform ation(New York:SimonandSch uster,1957),118-i 7g.

believers,"he never abandonedthe practiceof an ordained clergy.* In fact, so strong was his belief in an ordained clergy that he wrote, "The public ministry of the Word ought to be establishedby holy ordination as the highest and greatest of the functions of the church."o' Under Luther's influence, the Protestant pastor simply replacedthe Catholic priest. And for the most part, there was little practical difference in the way these two offices functioned.*uThis is still the case, aswe rvill consider in chapter 5. What follows is Luther's order of worship.aTThe general outline should look very familiar to you-for

it is the taproot of the Sunday

morning church servicefound in most Protestant denominations.as Singing Prayer Sermon Admonition to the people Lord's Supper Singing+n Post-Communion prayer Benediction

ZWINGLI'S CONTRIBUTION With the advent of Gutenberg'sprinting press(about 1450),the bulk production of liturgical books acceleratedthe liturgical changesthat 44White. Worship, 41. Protestant a5"Concerning Luthe/s Works,XL, IL theMinistry," 46TheCatholic pastor priest 0nly administered two(baptism andtheEucharist). seven sacraments, while theProtestant administered ForLuther, authority of proclaiming theWord ofGod. theuseof were viewed ashaving theexclusive However, bothpriest andpastor (SchaII, werematters of indifference History ofthe oftheminister whilepraying robes, candles onthealtar,andtheattitude clerical (Senn, thattheyberetained Christian Liturgy, Butthough hewasindifferent about them,hedidadvise Church,7,489). Christian 282). Hence, theyarestillwithustoday, 4/ ThisliturgywaspublishedinhisGermanMassand0rderofServiceintheyearl526. 48 Senn,Christian Liturgy,282-28:t. 4s Notice withsongs wasbothpreceded Luther believed thatsandwiching thesermon byandfollowed bysinging andprayer. thesermon Liturgy,306). Mosto{thes0ngs sungin Luthe/s andprovided a devotional response to it (Senn, Chrsflan strengthened thesermon (Versification is making verse outofprose.) ToLuthe/s credit, were versificatrons liturgical chants andcreeds. German Mass ofLatin (luther's Andhewasa genius attaking contemporary songs andredeeming themwith wrote about 36hymns Works, Llll). hehimself "Why good Reachrng 1utwithout Dunbing Down, haveallthe tunes?" Marva ). Dawn, lyrics. Hisfeeling was, letthedevrl Christian Rapids' Eerdmans, 1995), 189,(Note thatothers havebeen credrted fortheTurn-of-the-Century Culture(Grand A Theology of l/orship also, William Booth oftheSalvation Army being oneofthem.) withthisquote

the Reformers attempted to make.tuThose changeswere no\Mset to movable rype and printed in mass quantiry. The Swiss Reformer Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531) made a few of his own reforms thar helped shape today's order of worship. He replacedthe altar table with something called "rhe Communion table" from which the bread and wine w.ereadministered.t'He also had the bread and cup carried to rhe people in their pe\MS using wooden rrays and cups.tt Most Protestant churches still have such a table. Tiarocandles typically sit upon it-a custom that came directly from the ceremonial court of Roman emperors.53 And most carry the bread and cup to the people seatedin their pews. Zwingli also recommended that the Lord's Supper be taken quarterly (four times a year). This was in opposition to taking it weekly as other Reformers advocated.toMany Protestants follow the quarterly observation of the Lord's Supper today. Some observe it monthly. zwingli is also credited with championing rhe "memoriai" view of the Supper.This view is embracedby mainstreamAmerican Protestantism.ttIt is the view that the bread and cup are mere symbols of Christ's body and blood.56Nevertheless,asidefrom thesevariations, zwingll's liturgywas not much different from Luther's.s' Like Luther, zwtngli emphasized the centraliry of preaching, so much so that he and his coworkerspreachedfourteen times a week.tt

50Senn, Christian Liturgy,300. 5r Hardman, History ofChristian Worship, "lnReformed 16l.0nthispoint, Frank Senn writes, churches, thepuloitdominated the altarsototally thatintimethealtardisappeared andwasreplaced bya tableused forHoly Communion onlya fewtimes a year. The preaching oftheWord dominated theservice. Thishasbeen taken asa consequence oftheso-called rediscovery oftheBible. Butthe rediscovery oftheBible wastheinvention press, phenomenon" (Christian oftheprinting a cultural llorship,45). 52Senn, Christian Liturgy,362;WhiIe, Protestant Wo rship, 62. s3Jungmann, EarlyLiturgy,132-133,291-292iSmith, From ChristtoConstantine,fl3. 5a Senn, Christian Liturgy.363. 55White, Protestant h/orship, 60. 5 5Z w i n g l i ' s v i e w w a s m o r e c o m p l e x t h a n t h i s . H o w e v e r , h i s i d e a o f t h e E u c h a r i s t w a s n o t a s " h i g h " a s t h a t o f C a l )utlineofChristian t'/orship, Sl).Zwingli isthefather ofthemodern Protestant viewoftheLord's Su0per 0f course, hisviewwould notberepresentative ofthe"liturgical" Protestant churches, which celebrate both Word andSacrament weeklv. 5/ Zwingli's order ofservrce is listedin Senn, Christian Liturgy,362-364. s8 White, Protestant lltorshio. 6L

ANDCOMPANY THECONTRIBUTION OFCALVIN ReformersJohn Calvin (1509-1 564),John Knox (1513-1572), and Martin Bucer (1491-1551) added to the liturgical molding. These men created their own orders of worship between 1537 and 1562. Even though their liturgies were observed in different parts of the world, they were virtually identical.tnThey merely made a few adjustments to Luther's liturgy. Most notable was the collection of money that followed the sermon.uo Like Luther, Calvin stressedthe centrality of preaching during the worship service.He believedthat eachbeliever has accessto God through the preached Word rather than through the Eucharist.u' Given his theological genius,the preaching in Calvin's Geneva church was intensely theological and academic.It was also highly individualistic, a mark that never left Protestantism.62 Calvin's Geneva church was held up asthe model for all Reformed churches.Thus its order ofworship spreadfar and wide. This accounts for the cerebral character of most Protestant churches today, particularly the Reformed and Presbyterian brand.u' Becausemusical instruments were not explicitly mentioned in the New Testament, Calvin did away with pipe organs and choirs.u* Nl singing was a cappella. (Some contemporary Protestants, like the Church of Christ, still follow Calvin's rigid noninstrumentalism.) This changed in the mid-nineteenth century when Reformed churches began using instrumental music and choirs.utHowever, the Puritans

53These (1542), (1562). (1537), Switzerland andScotland rnStrasbourg, Germany Geneva, liturgies were used 60Thecollection "Noassembly (Senn, wrote, ofthechurch should beheld Liturgy,365-366). Calvin wasalmsforthepoor Christian (Nichols, prayers preached, andalmsgiven" Corporate Supper being administered, being offered, theLord's without theWord being practice followed Zwingli's oftakingit weekly, hisReformed churches desrred to have theLord's Supper V'/orship,29), Although Calvin (Wh quarterly ite,Prote rship, 65,67). stant ltt/o 6rstanleyM.BurgessandGaryB.McGee,eds.,DictionaryofPentecostalandCharismaticMovements(Grand Word. Both thesermon and word asconveying theincarnated meant andthepreached inReformed usage theBible 904.Ihe"Word" " (Nichols, pture-read ngofthe Corporate Worship, 30).Theideathatthepreachi viewed asthe"Word ingwere connected andwere Scri Posteriorol 1566. in IheConfessio Helvetica of God"appears Bibleisthevery"Word 6 2l h e r u g g e d i n d i v r d u a l i s m o f t h e R e n a j s s a n c e i n f l u e n c e d t h e m e s s a g e o f t h e R e f o r m e r s . T h e y w e r e a p r o personal preached ofthe lt was notcommunitarian aswasthemessage indrvidual needs and development. was centered on they all Pietists, andRevivalists, andit pervaded waspicked upbythePuritans, Christians. Thisindividualrstic emphasis firsfcentury (Sen I25. 100,I 04;Terry, Evangelism, n Iifeandthought n, CfrlslianV'lorship, areasofAmerica 63White. Protestant Worshrp.65. 6 1l b i d . , 6 6 . Z w i n g l i , a m u s i c i a n h i m s e l f , s h a r e d C a l v i n ' s c o n v i c t i o n t h a t m u s i c a n d c h o i r s o u g h t n o t t o b e p a (0.62). s lbid., (page sohymns were excluded 66). of0ldTestament Scripture, allsongs hadtoinclude thewords 76 ForCalvin,

(English Calvinists) continued in the spirit of Calvin, condemning both instrumental music and choir singing.66 Probably the most damaging feature of calvin's lirurgy is that he led most of the service himself from his pulpit.67christianity has not yet recovered from this. Today, the pasror is the MC and CEo of the Sunday morning church service-just as the priest is the MC and CEo of the Catholic Mass. This is in stark contrast to the church meeting envisioned in Scriprure. According to the New Testament, the Lord Jesus christ is the leader, director, and cEo of the church meeting. In 1 Corinthians 12, Paul tells us that Christ speaks through His entire body, not just one member. In such a meeting, His body freely functions under His headship (direct leadership) through the working of His Holy Spirit. First Corinthians 14 gives us a picrure of such a gathering. This kind of meeting is vital for the spiritual growth of God's people and the full expressionof His Son in the earrh.68 Another fearure that calvin contributed to the order of worship is the somber attitude that many Christians are encouraged to adopt when they enter the building. That atmosphere is one of a profound senseof self-abasementbefore a sovereign and austere God.uo Martin Bucer is equally credited with fostering this attirude. At the beginning of every service, he had the Ten commandments uttered to create a senseof veneration.T' Out of this mentality grew some rather outrageous practices. Puritan New England was noted for fining children who smiled in church! Add to this the creation of the "Tithingman" who would wake up sleeping congregants by poking them with a heavily-knobbed staff.7'

tr lbid.,126. u lbid.,67.Thiswasals0thepractice (White, ofCalvin's contemporary, lvlartin Bucer. Protestantlt/orship andChurch Architecture,S3\. 68Note thattheNewTestament presents to usdifferent kinds of meetings. Some meetings arecharacterjzed bya central speaker likean preaching apostle orevangeltst toanaudience. Butthese kinds ofmeettngs were sporadic andtemp0rary innature. They weren't the ordinary, normative meeting offirst-century believers. The"church meeting," gathering however, istheregular ofChristians thatis marked participation bymutual functioning, open fromevery member, lreedom andspontaneity under theheadship ofJesus Christ. .. 6s Horton york:Abingdon press, Dauies, Christian (New Wlrship:ltsHistltyandMeaning lg57),56. 70White, Protestant Vlorship, 74. 7r AliceMorse Earle, "Sketches ofLilein Puritan NewEngland," Searching Togetherll, no.4 (1982): 38-39.

Such thinking is a throwback to the late medieval view of piety." Yet it was embraced and kept alive by Calvin and Bucer. While many contemporary Pentecostalsand Charismatics broke with this tradition, it is mindlessly followed in many churches today. The message is: "Be quiet and solemn, for this is the house of God!"t' One further practice that the Reformers retained from the Mass was the practice of the clergy walking to their allotted seatsat the beginning of the servicewhile the people stood singing. This practice started in the fourth century when the bishops walked into their magnificent basilica churches. It was a practice copied straight from the pagan imperial court ceremony.toWhen the Roman magistrates entered into the courtroom, the people would stand singing. This practice is still observed today in many Protestant churches. fu Calvinism spreadthroughout Europe, Calvin's Geneva liturgy was adopted in nost Protestant churches. It was transplanted and took root in multiple countries.ttFlere is what it looks like:to Prayer Confession Singing (Psalm) Prayer for enlightenment of the Spirit in the preaching Sermon Collection of alms General prayer Communion (at the appointed times) while Psalm is sung Benediction

72Themedievals were marked by theearly Christians Bycontrast, withgodliness. andmoroseness withholiness equated somberness 1,8. 15,3, 1 Peter Acts2'46, 8:8,13'52, ofgladness andjoy,See anattitude 73Bycontrast, (See i00). people Psalm andthanksgiving Hisgates withjoy,praise, toenter beckon God's thePsalms 14Senn. (Kyrie), (lntroit), "entrance psalmody anda songof thelitanyprayer rite"included . Thisso-called lt/orship,26-27 Christian (Jungmann, as As Constantine sawhimself tarlyLiturgy,292,296\. (Gloria). praise courtceremony fromtheimperial lt wasborrowed performed before God into ceremony lVass turned a heaven. Thus the the emperor of to be viewed as on earth, God came God's vicar performed clad Thebishop, andhismagistrate. before theemperor liketheceremony thebishop-just Hisrepresentative, andbefore preceded procession on Hewasthenseated bycandles. insolemn building entered thechurch oi a highmagistrate, in hisgarments R a n d l l a v o r o h i s s p e ctiharlo n e - t hsee l l a c u r u l i s o t a R o m a n o t f i c i a l . T h e f o u r t h - c e n t u r y c h u r c h h a d b o n o w e dofbmoat hnt h e r i t u a l (Krautheimer, Architecture,lS4l. and Byzantine Early Christian its worship in officialdom 7 sT h e G e n e v a l i t u r g y w a s " a f i x e d R e f o r m e d l i t u r g y u s e d w i t h o u t v a r i a t i o n o r e x c e p t i o n n o t o n l y f o r t h e c e l e b llorship,69J. Protestant worship aswell"(White, Sunday butforordinary 75James (New detailed version oi the i962),83-84.Fora more andRussell, York: Russell Calvin andtheReformation Mackinnon, Liturgy,365-366. liturgy, see Senn, Christian Geneva

It should be noted that calvin sought to model his order of worship after the writings of the early church fathersTT-particularly those who lived in the third through sixth cenruries.tsThis accounts for his lack of clariry on the character of the New Testament church meeting. The early fathers of the third through sixth cenruries were intensely lirurgical and rirualistic.TnThey did not have a New Testament Christian mind-set.t' They \Merealso theoreticiansmore than practitioners. To put it another way, the church fathers of this period represent nascent (early' Catholicism. And that is what Calvin took as his main model for establishinga new order of worship.t' It is no wonder that the so-called Reformation brought very little reform in the way of church practice.s'Aswas the casewith Luther's order of worship, the liturgy of the Reformed church "did not try to change the structures of the official fCatholic] liturgy bur rather it tried to mainrain the old liturgy while cultivating extra-lirurgical devotions."sl

THEPURITAN CONTRIBUTION The Puritans were calvinists from England.taThey embraced a rigorous biblicism and sought to adhere tightly to the New Testament order of worship.s5The Puritans felt that Calvin's order of worship

7i Hughes 0liphant 0ld,ThePatristic (Zurich, Roots ofReforned llorship Theologischer Veriag, 1g70), l4l_155.Calvin alsotook thepostapostolic fathers government. ashismodel forchurch pastorate (Mackinnon, Hence, heembraced a single Calvin andthe Refornation.81\. 78Nichols, Corporateh/orship,l4 7 eT h e c h u r c h f a t h e r s w e r e g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e d b y t h e i r G r e c o - R o m a n c u l t u r e . M a n y o f t h e m , i n f a c t , w e r e p a g a n p h i before theybecame Christlans. Asalready stated, thlsiswhytheirchurch services reflected a blending ofpagan cuLture andJewish synagogue forms. Further, recent scholarship hasshown thatthewritings 0fthefathers onChristian worshi0 were written later than assumedandhavebeenreshapedbyvariouslayersoftradrtion(Bradshaw,0riginsofChristiantlorship,ch.3l. ,. 80 Thechurch fathers were heavily influenced bypaganism andNeoplatonism. WillDurant, Caesar andChrist,610-61g. 650-651. See alsoDurant's /geofFaith,63,74,521-524. E' Since thtsstudy focuses ontheunscriptural contributions oftheReformers, listing theirpositive contributions isbeyond thescope of thisbook. Nevertheless, letrt beknown thattheauthors arewellaware thatLuther, Zwingli, Calvin, positive etal.,contributed many practrces andbeliefs totheChristian faith. Atthesame time, they failed to bring ustoa complete reformation. 82TheProtestantReformationwasmainlyanintellectualmovement(While,Protestantll/orship,37).Whilethetheolog compared tothatofRoman Catholicism, it hardly practice. touched ecclesiastical Ihose whowent further rntheirreforms, letting it touch theirpractice 0fthechurch, arerefened toasthe"Radical Reformation." Fora discussion ontheRadical Reformers, seeife PilgrinChurchby [.H.Broadbent(GrandRapids:GospelFolioPress,lggg); fheRefornersandTheirStepchildrenbyLeonardVerduin (Grand Rapids,Eerd mans,1964); press, TheRadical Reformation byGeorge H.Williams(Ph iladelph ia:Westm inster !962);TheTorch (Bombay, oftheTestimonyby John Kennedy Gospel Literature Service, 1965). u }ld, PatristicRoots ofReformed lllorshio.12. EaSenn, Christian Liturgy,510. 8s White,Protestant Vlorshio. 118,

was not biblical enough. Consequently,when pastorssermonize about "doing everything by the Word of God," they are echoing Puritan sentiments. But the Puritan effort to restore the New Testament church meeting did not succeed. The forsaking of clerical vestments,icons, and ornaments, aswell asclergymen writing their own sermons (asopposedto reading homilies), were positive contributions that the Puritans gave us. Flowever, becauseof their emphasison "spontaneous"prayer,the Puritans also bequeathedto us the long pastoralprayer that precedesthe sermon.to This prayer in a Sunday morning Puritan service could easily last an hour or moreltt The sermon reachedits zenith with the American Puritans. They felt it was almost supernafural, since they saw it as God's primary meansof speakingto FIis people. And they punished church members who missed the Sunday morning sermon.tt New England residents who failed to attend Sunday worship were fined or put in stocks.t' (Next time your pastor threatens you with God's unbridled wrath for missing "church," be sure to thank the Puritans.) It is worth noting that in some Puritan churches the laity was allowed to speakat the end of the service.Immediately after the sermon, the pastor would sit down and answer the congregation's questions. Congregants would also be allowed to give testimonies. But with the advent of Frontier-Revivalism in the eighteenth century this practice faded aw^y,,never again to be adopted by mainstream Christianiry.oo Nl in all, the Puritan contribution in shaping the Protestant liturgy did little in releasing God's people to freely function under Christ's headship.Like the liturgical reforms that precededthem, the

s6White, to question thepastor's alsoallowed thecongregation IhePuritans Liturgy,512. Vt/orship,119,125; Senn, Christian Protestant Worship,129. Y'lhiIe, Protestant hissermon. handling ofthebiblical textwhenhe{inished 8/ Cassandra (1994)' History 13, no. 1 2. "0id Puritans," Christian American Facts about the You Know? Little-Known Niemczyk, s 80 n e P u r i t a n l e a d e r w r o t e t h a t " t h e p r e a c h i n g o t t h e W o r d i s t h e S c e p t e r o f C h r i s t ' s K i n g d o m , t h e g l o r y o f a n in hislifetime. hours ofpreaching might hear15,000 riding." APuritan lifeandsalvation comes which upon ss Niemcryk, "When no.I (1994), 23. Hrstory13, Reigned," Christian "DidYouKnow?" theSermon 2;Allen C.Guelzo, e0White, 13,14. to Canp Meeting, Meeting House 126, 130. Adans, Protestant [,/orship,

Puritan order of worship was highly predictable. It was written out in detail and followed uniformly in every church."' what follows is the Puritan liturgy." compare it to the lirurgies of Luther and Calvin and you will notice that the central fearuresdid not change. Call to worship Opening prayer Reading of Scriprure Singing of the Psalms Pre-sermon prayer Sermon Post-sermonprayer flA4ren communion is observed, the minister exhorts the congregation, blessesthe bread and cup, and passesthem to the people.) In time, the Puritans spawned their own offshoot denominations.erSome of them were part of the "Free church" tradition.ea The Free churches createdwhat is called the "h).nnn-sandwich,"ntand this order of serviceis quite similar ro rhar used by most evangelical churches today. Flere is what it looks like: Three hymns Scripture reading Choir music Unison prayers Pastoral prayer Sermon er White, Protestant llorship,120,121. s2Senn,ChristianLiturgy,5l4-5l5.IhePuritan'sbasicliturgyiscontainedinaworkcalled ADirectoryofthepublicWorshipof eod written in 1644(White, Protestant lVorship, 127),Thiswasa revision oftheAnglica n Book ofCommon Prayer which was lirsidrafted presbyterians in 1549. lheDirectorywas (notScottish) used byEnglish andCongregationalists. sr Thedescendants ofPuritanism aretheBaptists, Presbyterians, (White, andCongregationalists Protestant Worship, l1g). eaTheso-called "Free Church" tradition includes Puritans, Separatists, Baptists, Quakers intheseventeenth andeighteenth centuries, Meth0distsinthelateeighteenthcentury,andDisciplesofchristintheearlynineteenthcentury(Adams, MeetingHousetocanpMeeting,I0). e5White, Protestant ltlorshi o. 133.

Offering Benediction Does this look familiar to you? Rest assured,you cannot find it in the Neu'Testament.

BUTIONS CONTRI ER.REVIVAL METHODISTAND FRONTI Eighteenth-century Methodists brought to the Protestant order of rvorship an emotional dimension. People were invited to sing loudly ri'ith vigor and fervor. In this walz,the Methodists were the forerunners of the Pentecostals. Like the Puritans, the Methodists spiced up the pastor'sSunday morning pre-sermon prayer.The Methodist clerical prayer was long and universal in its scope.It swallowed up ail other pravers' covering the waterfront of confession,intercession'and praise. But more importantly, it was always offered up in Elizabethan English (i.e., Thee, Thou, Thy, etc.)."u Even today, in the twenty-first cencury the Elizabethan pastoral prayer lives and breathes."tMany contemporary pastors still pray in this outdated language-even though it hasbeen a dead dialect for four hundred years!Whv? Becauseof the power of tradition. The Methodists also popularized the Sundayevening worship service. The discoveryof incandescentgasas a meansof lighting enabled Today, John Wesley (1703-1791) to make this innovation popular.n' many Protestantchurcheshavea Sundayeveningservice-even though it is typically poorly attended. The eighteenth and nineteenth centuriesbrought a new challenge to American Protestantism. It was the pressureto conforTn to the everpopular American Frontier-Revivalist services.These servicesgreatly influenced the order of worship for scoresof churches.Even today, the % t b i d1 . ,5 31, 6 4 . Directory of Worship ,/ lbid.,183.The"pastoral indetailin Iheflestninster prayer lvasprescribed be{ore theserm0n" prayer 1961), l08 Evening (Princeton' Press, !8 Horton university Princeton 1690-1850 in Engtand, Worship andTheology Dauies, parto{ (evening were a stable services) vespers AndSunday century. thefourth since church intheCatholic were comm0n servrces fatththe intotheProtestant forbringing arenoted theMethodists However, centuries. lileformany liturgical andparish cathedral service. worshiP evening Sunday

changesthey injected into the bloodstream of American Protestantism are evident.on First, the Frontier-Revivaiists changed the goal of preaching. They preached exclusivelywith one aim: to convert lost souls.To the mind of a Frontier-Revivalist, nothing beyond salvation was involved in God's plan.'u"Salvationwas God's supremepurposefor church and all of life. This emphasisfinds its seedsin the innovative preachingof George Whitefield (17 11-1770).'u' whitefield was the first modern-day evangelistto preach to outdoor crowds in the open air.'02He is the man that shifted the emphasis in preaching from God's plans for the church to God's plans for the individual. The popular notion that "God loves you and has a wonderful plan for your life" becameprominent after Whitefield.',,, Second, Frontier-Revivalist music spoke to the soul and sought to elicit an emotional responseto the salvation message.tuo Nl the great revivalistshad a musician on their ream for this purpose.tutWorship began to be viewed as primarily individualistic, subjective, and emotional.'n6This shift in emphasiswas picked up by the Methodists, and it began to penetrate many other Protestant subcultures.The main goal of the church shifted from experiencing and expressingthe ss White, Protestant l/orship, 91,171;lainH.lVlurray, Revival andRevivalisn: TheMaking andMarring ofAmerican [vangelicalisn (Carlisle, PA'Banner ofTruth Trust, 1994). r00 American gave revivalism birthtothe"missionary society" attheendoftheeighteenth century. Thisincluded theBaptist lMissionary (1792), Soclety (1795), theLondon lvlissionary Society (1796), theGeneral lVlethodist lVlissronary Society andtheChurch lvlissionary (l/99).Ian,Lost Society Heritage, l95. r01 "the{ather Whitefield iscalled ofAmerrcan revivalism." Whitefield's central message was"thenewbirth"oftheindividual Christian. WiththisheledtheFirst GreatAwakening inNewEngland, which reached itspeak intheearly 1740s. preached ln45days, Whitefield 175sermons, A superb people orator, hisvoice could beheard by30,000 rnonemeeting. Asmany as50,000 would c0me t0 hear him speak. Remarkably, it issaidthatWhitefield's voice could beheard at a range ofonemrle without amplification. Andhisoratorical p0wers were sogreat thathecould make anaudience weep withhispronunciation. Positively, Whitefield iscredited forrecovering the lostpractice ofitinerant ministry. Healsoshared credit withthePuritans forrestoring prayer (Yngve extemporaneous andpreachrng press, (Phtladelphia: Brilioth, ,4BriefHistory ofPreaching F0rtress 1965), 165.SeeatsoChristian History 12,no.2 (1993), whichis "TheGreat devoted toGeorge Whitefield; Awakening," Christian History 9,no.4 (1990),46; J.D.Douglas. Who,s llhoin Christian History(Carol Stream, lL:Tyndale House, 1992), 716-717; Iery,fvangelisn,100, I 10,124-125. r02Davies, "TheGreat Worship andTheology in Engtand,146; (1990), Awakening," "George Christian History 9, no.4 46; Whitefield," Christian History 8,no.3 (1989), 17. r03MarkA,Nol l, "Father of lVlodern tvangelica Is?" Interview in Christian History 12,no,2 (i g93), 44;' TheSecond Vatrcan Cou ncil," Christian History 9,no.4 (1990), 47.TheGreat Awakening under Whitefield stamped American Protestantism withanindividualisticrevivalistic character fromwhich it hasnever recovered. IOa Sen n, Chrisil?n titurgy,562-565;White, Protestant lilorship andChurch Architecture, 8, lg. r05Finney used Thomas Hastings. Moody used lraD.Sankey. BillyGraham continued thetraditron byusing CliffBanows andGeorge (Senn, Beverly Shea Christian Liturgy,600l. Musrc wasextremely instrumental infurthering thegoals of revivalism. George Whitefield andJohn Wesley arecredited withbeing thefirsttoemploy music toinduce (Terry, conviction anda readiness to hear thegospel Evangelisn, !10). r06Whrte, Protestant llorshipandChurch Architecture,71.

Lord Jesus Christ corporately to the making of individual converts. In doing so, the church by and large lost sight of the fact that while Christ's atonement is absolutely essential to getting humanity back on track and restoring our relationship with God, it is not His sole purpose. God has an eternal purpose that goes beyond salvation. That purpose has to do with enlarging the eternal fellowship He has with His Son and making it visible on planet Earth. The theology of revivalism did not discussGod's eternal purpose and put little to no emphasison the church.tot Methodist choral music was designedto soften the hard hearts of sinners. Lyrics began to reflect the individual salvation experienceas well aspersonaltestimony.'o*CharlesWesley (1707-1788) is credited for being the first to write invitational h)rynns.too Pastors who gear their Sunday morning sefmons exclusively toward winning the lost still reflect the revivalist influence.ttoThis influence has pervaded the majority of today's television and radio evangelism. Many Protestant churches (not iust Pentecostal and charismatic) begin their serviceswith rousing songs to prepare people for the emotionally targeted sefmon. But few people know that this tradition began with the Frontier-Revivalists little more than a century ago. Third, the Methodists and the Frontier-Revivalists gave birth to the "altar call." This practice beganwith the Methodists in the eighteenth century.t" The practice of inviting people who want prayer to stand to their feet and walk to the front to receive prayer was given to us by a Methodist evangelistnamed Lorenzo Dow."t Later,in 1807 in England, the Methodists createdthe "mourner's r07Fora fulldiscussion (Gainesville, Ministry, 2006). Testimony purpose, FL:Present Passiln 6odbllltimate seeViola, eternal onGod's r08White.Protesta 184-i85. ip. 164-165, nt Worsh rosR.Alan StreetI,lheEffective Wesley wroteover6,000hymns. I Co.,1984),190.Charles ingH.Revel lnvitation(}ld Tappan, NJ,Flem ofthe andthoughts theleelings ofsinging thatexpressed style a congregational writer to introduce wasthelirsthymn Charles individual Christian. rr0TheBaptists calltomake service. Revlvalism's morning ofthelostthegoaloftheSunday thewinning formaking arethem0stnoted justasthe"new individualism ideology olAmerican tothecultural "personal andappealed bothreflected lorChrist decisions" pragmatism lT0-17i). Evangelisn, toAmerican Finney reflected andappealed lTerry, Charles under measures" rLrMurray, 185-190. andRevivalsm, Revival rL2Streett. in 1785in tothefrontof hischurch thefirstto callinquirers Taylor wasamong 94-95.Reverend James tnvitation, Effective in meeting camp in 1799 at a lVlethodist invitation occurred witha public useoithealtarinconnection Thefrrstrecorded Tennessee. Il 4. Protestant Worship, Kentucky. SeealsoWhite,

bench."ttr Anxious sinners now had a place to mourn for their sins when they were invited to walk down the sawdust trail. This method reached the United States a few years later and was given the name the "anxious bench" by Charles Finney (1792-1875)."0 The "anxious bench" was located in the front where preachers stood on an erected platform.t''' It was there that both sinners and needy saints \Merecalled forward to receive the minister's prayers.t'u Finney's method was to ask those who wished to be savedto stand up and come forward. Finney made this method so popular that "after 1835,it was an indispensablefixfure of modern revivals."tl7 Finney later abandoned the anxious seat and simply invited sinners to come forward into the aisles and kneel at the front of the platform to receive Christ."S fuide from popularizing the altar call, Finney is credited with inventing the practice of praying for persons by name, mobilizing groups of workers to visit homes, and displacing the routine servicesof the church with special servicesevery night of the week. In time, the "anxious bench" in the outdoor camp meeting was replaced by the "altar" in the church building. The "sawdust trail" was replaced by the church aisle. And so was born the famous "altar c al l ."tre Perhaps the most lasting element that Finney unwittingly contributed to contemporary Christianiry was pragmatism. Pragmatism is the philosophy that teachesthat if something works, it should be embracedregardlessof ethical considerations.Finney believed that r13 Finney wasaninnovator inthebusiness ofwinning souls andstarting revivals. "newmeasures," Employing hisso-called heargued thatthere existed nonormative forms ofworship intheNew Testament. Butwhatever wassuccessful inleadir,g sinners toChrist was (Senn, approved Christian Liturgy,564; White, Protestant Worship,lT6-Ilj). iraStreett, Effective lnvitation, 95,Finney began using thismethod exclusively following hisfamous Rochester, Newyork, crusade of 1830. Theiirsthistorically "anxious traceable useofthephrase "0h,thatblessed seat" comes fromCharles Wesley: anxious seat." pA,German Fora cntique ontheanxious (Chambersburg, bench. seeJ.W.Nevin's The Anxious Bench Reformed Church, lg43). IlsWhite, Protestant "Charles hlorship, 181;James E.Johnson, Grandison Finney: Father ofAmerican Revivalism HistoryT ," Christian , no.4(1988)' 7;"Glossary ofTerms," Christian Historyl, no.4 (1988), 19. r16"TheReturn oftheSpirit: TheSecond Great Awakenrng," Christian History8, "Charles no.3 (1989): 30;lohnson, Grandison Finnev," 7: Senn. Chri stian Lfturgy,566. rr7Munay, Reviva I and Reviva Iism,226,241-243, Zi7. r18Streett, Effective lnvitation, 96, rlsBurgess andMcGee, Dictionary of Pentecostals, 904.Forfurtherstudy, seeGordon L. Hal|sfheSawdust frail:lhe Story ofAmerican (Philadelphia: tvangelisn Macrae Smith Company. 1964). The,,sawdust trail,,laterbecame equated withthedust_covered aisleol ("hitthesawdust tie evangelist's tent.Thts usage popularized trail")was (1862-1935). bytheministry ofBilly Sunday See Terry, Evangelism, 16l.

the New Testamentdid not teach any prescribedforms of worship."n He taught that the sole purpose of preaching was to win converts.Any devicesthat helped accomplish that goal were acceptable.t"Under Finney, eighteenth-century revivalism was rurned into a science and brought into mainstream churches.'" Contemporary Christianity still reflects this ideology. Pragmatism is unspiritual, not just becauseit encouragesethical considerations to be secondary but becauseit dependson techniques rather than on God to produce the desired effects. Genuine spirituality is rnarked by the realization that in spiritual things, v/e mortals are utterlv and completely dependent on the Lord. Recall the Lord's u-ord that "unless the Lord builds the house, those who build it labor in vain" (Psalm I27:1, nsv) and "without me ye can do nothing" (lohn 15:5). Unfortunately, pragmatism ("if it works let's do it"), not biblical principle or spiritualiqt, governs the activities of many present-daychurches.(Many "seekersensitive"churcheshave excelled at following in Finnev's footsteps.)Pragmatism is harmful becauseit teaches"the end justifiesthe means."If the end is considered "holy," just about any "means" are acceptable. The philosophy of pragmatism opens the door for human manipulation and a complete reliance upon oneselfrather than upon God. Note that there is a monumental difference berween wellmotivated humans working for God in their own strength, wisdom, and porver versus God working through humans."' Becauseof his far-reaching impact, Charles Finney has been called "the most influential liturgical Reformer in American history.""o Finney believed that the revivalist methods that worked in his camp meetings could be imported into the Protestant churches

120 White, Protesta nt l'/orsh ip, l1 1 t t t P a s t o r ' s N o t e s ' A C o m p a n i o n P u b l i c a t i o n t o G t i n p s e s 4 , n o . 2 ( W o r c e s t e1r 9, P9 A 2 ): C , 6h, r i s t i a n H i s t o r y l n s t i t u t e , r22White. Architecture.l. Prltestant Worshio andChurch 123 Nee'The Normal Christian Life(Carol Stream, lLrTyndale House, 1977) Twobooks thisdif'ference wellareWatchman thatexplain (lndianapolis: Foundation, 1965). Fora further discussion onthenon-Christian nature of of theSpirit Sure andTheRelease pragmatism, in Everyday Life(London' Hodder Rolheiser's TheShattered Lantern, Redisclvering God's Presence & seeRonald 1994), 31-35. Stoughton, ' 2 4W h i t P e ,r o t e s t a n t W o r s h i p , l l 6 ; P a s t o r ' s N o t e s 4 , n o . 2 : 6 . l a i n l V l u n a y p o i n t s 0 u t t h a t t h e c a m p m e e t i n g s u n d e (Revival precursor andRevivalrsm, 184-185). toFinney's systematic evangelistic technrques

to bring revival there. This notion was populanzed and put into the Protestant mind-set via his 1835 book Lectur.es on Reuiaal.To the contemporary Protestant mind, doctrine must be vigorously checkedwith Scripture before it is accepted.But when ir comes to church practice, just about anything is acceptableas long as it works to win converts. In all of theseways,American Frontier-Revivalism turned church into a preaching station. It reduced the experienceof the ekklesia into an evangelisticmission.'" It normalized trinney'srevivalistmethods and createdpulpit personalitiesas the dominating attraction for church. It also made the church an individualistic affair rather than a corporare one. Put differently, the goal of the Frontier-Revivalists was to bring individual sinners to an individual decision for an individualistic faith.''u As a result, the goal of the early church-murual edification and every-member functioning to corporately manifestJesusChrist before principalities and po\Mers-was altogether lost.'" Ironically, John Wesley,an early revivalist,understood the dangersof the revivalist movement. FIe wrote, "Christianity is essentiallya socialreligion . . . to rurn it into a solitary reiigion is indeed to destroy it."rr8With Nbert Blake Dick's invention of stencil duplicating in 1884,the order of worship began to be printed and distributed.'tuThus was born the famous "Sunday morning bulletin."""

THESTAGGERING INFLUENCE OFD.L. MOODY The seedsof the "revivalistgospel"were spreadthroughout the Western world by the mammoth influenceof D. L. Moody (1837-1899). r 2 :P r o p e rcl yo n c e i v etdh,eg o a lo f p r e a c h i nigs n o t t h e s a l v a t i oonf s o u i sl.t i s t h e b i r t ho f t h ec h u r c f rA. so n es c h o i apr u t i t , " C o n v e r s i o n can 0nlybethe meansithe goalis the extension of the visiblechurch."KarlMuller,ed.,Dictronary of Mission:Theology, History, P e r s p e c t i v e s ( M a r y k n o l l , N Y : O r b i s B o o k s , 1 9 9 7 ) , 4J3. T 1 i. dSbcahlol hl aarsDe c h o e d t h e s a m e t h o u g h t s a y i n g , " P a u l ' s p r i m a r y i n t e r e swt a sn o ti n t h ec o n v e r s i oonf i n d i v i d u a lbsu t i n t h ef o r m a t i oonf C h r i s t r acno m m u n i t i e sD. "i c t r o n aor yf P a u la n d H i sL e t t e r s ( D o w n e rGsr o v el L . :I n t e r V a r s i 1t y9,9 3 )8. 8 5 .T h eF r o n t i e r - R e v r v ahl iasdt sn oc o n c e pot f t h ee k k l e s i a . rtFWhite,Protesfant Worshipand ChurchArchitecture,121-124. ' 2 7S e e1 C o r i n t h i a n1s2 - 1 4 ;E p h e s i a n1s- 3 . r28JohnWesley, "Sermonon the MountlV,"Sermons on Several)ccasions(L0nd0n, EpworthPress,1956),237. i r l b i d .1 , 32S . e eh t t p , / / w w w . o f { i c e m u s e u m . c om ma/ ccohpi nye s . hftomrd e t a i l o s nD i c k ' m s imeograp s the n c i ln v e n t i o n . :r0 Ferguson, EarlyChristrans Speak,84,Writtenliturgieslirst cameinto beingin the {ourthcentury,But theywerenot put into bulletin J o r mu n t r tl h e n i n e t e e n ct he n t u r y .

He traveledmore than one million miles and preachedto more than 100 million people-in the cenrury before airplanes,microphones, television, or the Internet. Moody's gospel, like Whitefield's, had but one center-salvation for the sinner. FIe preached the gospel with a focus on individuals, and his theologv was encapsulatedin the three Rs: ruined by sin, redeemedby Christ, and regeneratedby the Spirit. While those are certainly critical elementsof the faith, Moody apparentlydiC not recognizethat the eternal purposeof God goesfar bevond redemption."t I{oody's preaching was dominated by this single interestindividual salvation.He instituted the solo hyrlt that followed the pastor's sermon. The invitational solo hymn was sung by a soloist until George Beverly Shea encouraged Billy Graham to employ a 'Just As I Am" as people came forward to choir to sing songs like receiveChrist."' Moody gaveus door-to-door witressing and evangelisticadvertising/ campaignitg."t He gaveus the "gospel song" or "gospel h)trnn."tt*And he popularized the "decision card," an invention of Absalom B. Earle (1812-1895)."5 In addition, Moody was the first to ask those who wanted to be savedto stand up from their seatsand be led in a "sinner'sprayer.""o Some fifty years later, Billy Graham upgraded Moody's technique. He introduced the practiceof askingthe audienceto bow their heads, closetheir eyes("with no one looking around"), and raisetheir hands in responseto the salvationmessage."t(Nl of thesemethodshavemet

nt Christian 152;H.Richard 485;Ierry,Evangelisn,151 Who in Chrrstian Htstory,483 Douglas, Who's History9, no.I (1990); (San Publishers, 1956), 256.While Francisco' Harper & Row Perspectives The Ministry in Hrstorical D.Williams, Niebuhr andDaniel just We arenotagainst in what He is ultimately after. is the lirst step redeemed by Chri$, that wants souls to be God certainly thathappens sp0ntaneously a dutyrather thansomething {ocus, evangelism becomes wemake thatourentire butwhen evangelism. which iswhyourevangelism Christjocused, church were completely Believers intheearly withChrist. when Christians areconsumed purpose, Ultimate eternal see\/iola, God's discussion ofGod's fromtheirs. Fora thorough aresodif{erent methods andoutlook Passion. I32Streett, 197. lnvitation, 193-194, Effective t33Ierry,Evangelisn, 153-154, 185, r3aDavid 1965), 142. Mustc lvloody Press, History ofChurch P Appleby, \Chicag0: r35Streett, "Each lifeandto person hispledge to livea Christian lorward a cardtoindicate whocame signed lnvitation, 97. Effective could beworked worker, sosome {ormoffollow-up preference. bythepersonal Ihisportion ofthecardwasretained show a church o u t . A n o t h e r p o r t i o n o f t h e c a r d w a s g i v e n t o t h e n e w C h r i s t i a n a s a g u i d e9f8o)r.C h r i s t i a n l i v i n g " ( p a g e s 9 r$ lbid., prayer," seechapter 9. information onthe"sinneis 98.Formore 13/lbid., l00millionpeoplein35differentcountries(Pastor'sNotes4 ministry,Grahamhadpreachedt0 lnhisfortyJifthyearof 112-ll3.

fierce opposition by those who argue that they are psychologically manipulative.)ttt For Moody, "th" church wasa voluntary associationof the saved."tro So staggeringwas his influence that by 1874 the church was not seenas a grand corporate body but asa gathering of individuals.'t'This emphasiswaspicked up by every revivalistwho followed him.'+t4.1d it evenrually entered into the marrow and bones of evangelicalChristianiry. It is alsoworth noting that Moody was heavily influenced by the Pl).rnouth Brethren teaching on the end times. This was the teaching that Christ may rerurn ^t any second before the great Tlibulation. (This teaching is also called "pretribulational dispensationalism.")'+2 Pretribulational dispensationalism gave rise to the idea that Christians must act quickly to saveas many souls as possiblebefore the world ends.'otWith the founding of the SrudentVolunteer Movement byJohn Mott in 1888,a relatedidea sprangforth: "The evangeIization of the world in one generation."l++The "in one generation" watchword still lives and breathes in the church today.totYet it does not map well with the mind-set of the first-century Christians who did not appear to be pressuredinto trying to ger the entire world savedin one generation.r+r'

r18lain H. Munay,Thelnvitation '.revival,,which Systen(Edinburgh: Bannerof TruthTrust,1967) Murraydistinguishes between is an a u t h e n t i cs,p o n t a n e o w u so r ko f G o d ' S s p i r i ta n d" r e v i v a l i s mw"h i c hi s t h e h u m a nm e t h o dosf o b t a i n i n(ga t l e a s ti n a p p e a r a n cteh)e s i g n so f c o n v i c t i o Ine, p e n t a n caen, dr e b i r t hI .h e u s eo f p s y c h o l o g i caanlds o c i apl r e s s u r et 0s b r i n gc o n v e r tiss p a r to f " r e v i v a l i s m " ( p p .x v i i - x i x )S. e ea l s oJ i mE h r h a r d" ,T h eD a n g e rosf t h e I n v i t a t i 0Sny s t e m("P a r k v i l lleV, l 0C: h r i s t i aC n o m m u n i c a t oWr so r l d w i d e , 19 9 9 ) ,h t t p , / / w w w . g r a c e s e r m 0 n s . c o m / h i s b y g r a c e / i n v i t a t i o n . h t m l 13qNiebuhrandWilliams,Ministry in Historical Perspectives,256. ra0SandraSizer,Gospel press,1978),134. (Philadelphia: Hynnsand Sociat Retigion TempleUniversity r a rM o o d a y l o n gw i t hG r e aAt w a k e n i npgr e a c h e rl isk eG e o r gW e h i t e f i e lsdt r o n g layp p e a l etdo t h ee m o t i o n T s .h e yw e r ei n f l u e n c ebdyt h e p h i l o s o p hoyf R o m a n t i c i s tmh,e b o d yo f t h o u g hst t r e s s i ntgh e w i l la n de m o t i o n sT.h i sw a sa r e a c t i otno t h e s t r e s so n r e a s o tnh a t marked e a r l i eC r h r i s t i atnh i n k i n gt h a t w a ss h a p e db yt h e E n l i g h t e n m e(nDta v i dW .B e b b i n g t o"nH, o wl v l o o dCyh a n g eR devivalism," C h r i s t i aH n i s t o r y 9n, o .1 ( 1 9 9 0 )2, 3 ) .T h eA w a k e n i npgr e a c h e r s ' e m p h awsai sst h e i n d i v i d u as lh e a r t f e rl te s p o n st 0 e G o dC . onversion c a m et o b ev i e w e da s t h e p a r a m 0 u ngto a lo f d i v i n ea c t i v i t i e sA.sJ . S t e p h eLna n ga n dM a r kA .N o l lp o i n to u t ," B e c a u soef t h e p r e a c h i nogf t h eA w a k e n i ntgh,e s e n s eo l r e l i g i o u s e l f i n l e n s i l i eI d h .e p r i n c i p loef i n d i v i d u aclh o i c eb e c a m feo r e v ei rn g r a i n eidn A m e r i c aPn r o t e s t a n t i sam n di s s t i l le v i d e nt to d a ya m o n ge v a n g e l i c aal sn dm a n yo t h e r s("J .S t e p h eLna n ga n dM a r kA .N o l l ," C o l o n i a l N e wE n g l a n dA,n 0 l d 0 r d e rA, N e wA w a k e n i n gC, "h r i s t i aH n i s t o r4y, n o .4 t 1 9 8 5 19,- 1 0 ) . L o Jr o h nN e l s o n D a r b ys p a w n etdh i st e a c h i n gT.h eo r i g i no f D a r b y 'psr e t r i b u l a t i o ndaolc t r i nies f a s c i n a t i n g S.e eD a v eM a c P h e r s oInh,e (Medford, lncredible Cover-Up 0R:0megaPublications, 1975). r 4 rB e b b i n g t o"nH, o wM o o d y C h a n g eR d e v i v a l i s m2, 3 " -24. roaDanielG. Reid,Concise Dictionary of Christianity in Anerica(Downers Grove,lL: InterVarsity, 1995),330. r ' 5E x a m p l e T,h eA D2 0 0 0a n dB e y o nm d o v e m e net t, c . r a 6l h e a p o s t l e s s t a y e d i n J e r u s a l e m f o r m a n y y e a r s b e f o r e t h e y w e n t " u n t o t h e u t t e r m o s t p a r t s o f t h e e a r t h " a s J e s u s p r e d i c t e d . T h e y w e r ei n n o h u r r yt o e v a n g e l i zt heew o r l dE . q u a l l yt h, ec h u r c hi n J e r u s a l edmi d n o te v a n g e l i zaen y o nfeo rt h ef i r s tf o u ry e a r so f i t s l i f e .T h e yt ,o o ,w e r ei n n o h u r r yt o e v a n g e l i zt heew o r l dF. i n a l l yt h, e r ei s n o tt h ef a i n t e sw t h i s p eirn a n yo f t h e N e wT e s t a m e e np t is|es w h e r ea n a p o s t l tee l l sa c h u r c ht o e v a n g e l i zbee c a u s"et h eh o u ri s I a t ea n dt h e d a y sa r ef e w . "l n s h o r tt,h e r ei s n o t h i n gw r o n gw i t h C h r i s t i a nhsa v i n ga b u r d e n t 0 s a v ea s m a n ys o u l sa st h e yc a nw i t h i na s p e c i f itci m ef r a m e B . u tt h e r ei s n o b i b l i c ailu s t i f i c a t i oonr d r v i n ep r e c e d e tnot p u tt h a t p a r t i c u l abru r d e n o n a l l o f G o ds p e o p l e .

THEPENTECOSTAL CONTRIBUTION Beginning around 1906, the Pentecostalmovement gave us a more emotional expressionof congregational singing. This included the lifting of one'shands,dancing in pews,clapping, speakingin tongues, and the use of tambourines.The Pentecostalexpressionwas in harmony with its ernphasison the ecstaticworking of the Holy Spirit. \Arhat few people realize is that if you removed the emotional f-eaturesfronr a Pentecostalchurch service,it would look just like a Baptist liturgy. Thus no rnatter how loudly Pentecostalsclaim that thev are following New Testament patterns, the typical Pentecostal or charismaticchurch follows the same order of worship as do most other Protestantbodies.There is simply more freedornfor emotional expressionin the per,l'. Another interesting feature of Pentecostalworship occursduring the song service.Sometimesthe singing will be punctuatedby an occasional utterance in tongues,an interpretation of tongues,or word of "prophery." But such utterancesrarely last more than a minute or two. Such a pinched fbrm of open participation cannot accuratelybe called "body ministry."'otThe Pentecostaltradition also gaveus solo or choral music (often taggedas "specialmusic") that accompaniesthe offering.'ot As in all Protestantchurches,the sermon is the climax of the Pentecostalmeeting. Floweveq in the garden-varietyPentecostalchurch, the pastor will sometimes"feel the Spirit moving." At such times he will suspendhis sermon until the following week. The congregation r,villthen sing and pray for the rest of the service.For many Pentecostals, this is the pinnacle of a great church service. The way congregantsdescribethese specialservicesis fascinating. They typically say,"The Floly Spirit led our meeting this week. Pastor Cheswald did not get to preach." Whenever such a remark is to lead nll of made, it begs the questron, Ivt't the Ho[, Spirit supposed oat,churcbrneetings?

' 1 ;B y ' r p i n c h e d " w e m e a n v e r y r e s t r i c t e d . P e n t e c o s t a l a n d c h a r i s m a t i c c h u r c h e s t h a t h a v e s e r v i c e s t h a t a r freely without congregation to minister andshare anyrestrictions arenotat alltypical today. r48White, Protestant Worshio, 204.

Even so, as a result of being born in the afterglow of FrontierRevivalism,Pentecostalworship is highly subjectiveand individualistic.to'In the mind of the Pentecostal,as in the minds of most other Protestants, worshipping God is not a corporate affair, but a solo experience.t5u

MANYADJUSTMENTS, NOVITAL CHANGE Our study of the liturgical history of the Lutherans (sixteenth century), Reformed (sixteenth cenrury), Puritans (seventeenthcenrury), Methodists (eighteenth cenrury), Frontier-Revivalists (eighteenth to nineteenth centuries),and Pentecostals(rwentieth cenrury) uncovers one inescapablepoint: For the last five hundred years,the Protestant order of worship has undergone minimal change.'s' In the end, all Protestant traditions share the same unbiblical fearuresin their order of worship: They are officiated and directed by a clergyman, they make the sermon central, and the people are passive and not permitted to minister.lsr The Reformersaccomplisheda great dealin changing the theology of Roman Catholicism. But in terms of actual practice, they made only minor adjustrnentsthat did litde to bring worship back to the New Testament model. The result: God's people have never broken free from the liturgical constraintsthev inherited from Roman Catholicism.tt'

raeWhite, Protestant V'lorship andChurch Architecture, l2g, '50TheGreat Awakening oftheeighteenth century setthetoneforanindividualistic faith,something {oreign tothefirst-century church. America wasfastbecoming a nation ofrugged individualists, sothisnewemphasis satwellwiththecountry Evangetisn, ]erry, 122-I2T 15rFrank Senn's Christran Liturgycompares scores ofvarious liturgies down through theages. Anyone whocompares themwillreadily spot theircommon features. rs2Senncompares fivemodern writtenliturgiessidebyside:RonanCatholicMissal, Lutheran Bookof Worship, Bookof Common Prayer, (Christian thelVlethodist order ofworship, andBook of Comnron llorship. Thesimilarities arestriking. Liturgy,646-641). r53Some scholars have triedtotease outofthewritings ofthechurch lathers a unified, monolithic liturgy observed byallchurches. But recent scholarship hasshown thatnone oftheirwritings canbeuniversalized torepresent whatwashappening inallthechurches atagiventime(Bradshaw,OrigrnsofChrrstianV/orship,67-73,158 183).Furthermore,archaeological{indingshavedemonstrate thatthewritings ofthechurch fathers, whowere theologians, donotprovide anaccurate viewofthebeliefs orpractices ofthe g a r d e n - v a r i e t y C h r i s t i a n s o f t h o s e t i m e s . N e w T e s t a m e n t p rA o fnet sesPoarcGerm a yi sdaosnt F . Synoyf tdheei as r c h a e o l o g i c a l ud evidence thatcontradicts giveofchurch theportrait thatthechurch fathers lifebefore Constantine. According tooneseminary writer, "Snyder raises thequestion, dothewritings giveusadequate portrait oftheintellectuals inearly Christianity ofthechurch oftheir 'no' times? Thequestion hasonly to beasked {ortheobvious answer io beheard onourlips.Dotheintellectuals ofanyagetellit like it isinthetrenches? DoBarth, Tillich, oreven theNiebuhrs describe in anywaywhatpopular twentieth-century American Christianity 'Patristic'theologians hasbeen like? Weallknow theydon't, andyetwehave assumed thattheNew Testament andtheso-called giveusaccurately a description part, ofChristianity ofthefirstthree centuries, ln ofcourse, thishasbeen assumed because we have thought theyaretheonlysources wenave, andtoa large (Robin extent thisistrue,aslaras literarydocuments areconcerned" Scroggs, Chicago fheological Seninary RegisterT5, no.3 [Fall1985],26).

As one author put it, "The Reformers acceptedin substancethe ancient Catholic pattern of worshiptto. . . the basic strucrures of their serviceswere almost universally taken from the late medieval orders of varioussorts."'" In the end, then, the Reformers reformed the Catholic liturgy only slightly. Their main contribution was in changing the central focus. In the words of one scholar,"Catholicism increasingly followed the path of the fpagan]cults in making a rite the center of its activities, and Protestantism followed the path of the synagoguein placing the Unfortunately, neither Catholics book at the center of its seryices."ttu nor Protestants were successfulin allowing Jesus Christ to be the center and head of their gatherings. Nor were they successfulat liberating and unleashing the body of Christ to minister one to another in the gathering, as the New Testament envisions. Becauseof the Reformation, the Bible replacedthe Eucharist and the pastor replacedthe priest. But there is still a person directing God's people, rendering them assilent spectators.The centrality of the Author of the Book was never restored. Hence, the Reformers dramatically failed to put their finger on the nerve of the original problem: a clergyled worship ser'riceattended by a passivelaity.ttt It is not surprising, then, that the Reformersviewed themselvesasreformed Catholics.ttt

WHATIS WRONG WITHTHISPICTURE? It is clear that the Protestant order of worship did not originate with This the LordJesus,the apostles,or the New TestamentScriptures.ttn just means in itself doesnot make the order of worship misguided.It it has no biblical basis. r5aNichols, Worship in theReforned Tradrtion,13. Corporate 155 terminology andconcepts aretrulypartoftheLutheran approach aswell lbid., 13."Much oftradrtional Catholic] theological Ii.e., AHistory of the0rdained Ministry in theRonan approach." Kenan B.0sborne, Priesthood' astheywerepartoftheRoman Catholic (New Paulist Press, 1988), 223. Catholic Church York: rs6Banks, Paul's ldeaofCommunity,108; Hatch, lnfluence ofGreek ldeas andUsages,308-309. r57Chapter andthepassive congregation. Inthis offourth-century church architecture ontheactive clergy 2 discusses theinfluence "The passing a great inthecharacter ol Christian worship. ... Horton Davies writes, ofthree orfourcenturies shows alteration vern, private magnificent not in worship isnotcelebrated in houses, butinstately cathedrals and churches; freeand Inthefourth century, (Cfrisfian Worship' History forms butinlixedandordered worship" andMeaning,26). simple ofservice, 158 llorship, 155. Nichols, Corporate '5sSome lestament contains a primitive model oithe liturgical scholars, likeAnglican Gregory Dix,have trjedtoargue thattheNew reading examination oftheirarguments shows thattheyaremerely theirpresent tradttion backintothe Mass. However, a careful Origins ofChristran ll/orship, ch.2), biblical text(Bradshaw,

The use of chairs and pile carpets in Christian gatherings has no biblical support either. And both were invented by pagans.'uo Nonetheless, who would claim that sitting in chairs or using carpets is "wrong" simply becausethey are postbiblical inventions authored by pagans? The fact is that we do many things in our culture that have pagan roots. Consider our accepted calendar.The days of our week and the months of our year are named after pagan gods.totBut using the acceptedcalendardoes not make us pagans.'o' So why is the Sunday morning order of worship a different matter than the type of chairs and carpeting we use in the place we worship? I{ot only is the traditional order of service unscriprural and heavily influenced by paganism (which runs contrar)/ to what is often preachedfrom the pulpit), it does not lead to the spirirual growth God intended.'utConsider the following. First, the Protestant order of worship repressesmutual participation and the growth of Christian community. It puts a choke hold on the functioning of the body of Christ by silencing its members. There is absoiutely no room for anyone to give a word of exhortation, share an insight, start or introduce a song, or spontaneously lead a prayer. You are forced to be a muted, staid pewholder! You are prevented from being enriched by the other members of the body as well as being able to enrich them yourself. Like every other "lay person," you may open your mouth only during the congregational singing or prayer. (Ifyou happen to be part t60Theearliest known chairs weremade in Egypt. Forthousands priests, ofyears, theywereusedonlybyroyalty, nobility andthe wealthy. Chairs populace didnotcome intocommon useamong thegeneral untilthesixteenth cenlury. Encarta Encyclopedia,1999 "Chairs." ed.,s.v. Pilecarpets were developed in Indiaintheeleventh century andspread throughout therestoftheEastern world. Encafta Encyclopedia, l99Sed.,s.v."Floor andFloor Coverings." 1 6 r T h e s e v e n - d a y w e e k o r i g i n a t e d i n a n c i e n t M e s o p o t tahm n dabnec caal emnedpaar irnt oAfD 3 2 l . . l a n u a r y i s n a m e d a f t e r e iRaoam godJanus; theRoman godMars; March isnamed after theRoman Aprilcomes ftonApritis, thesacred month ofVenus; lVay is named forthegoddess Maia; andJune isnamed forthegoddess Juno. Sunday celebrates thesungod;Monday isthedayo1themoon goddess;Tuesdayisnamedafterthewaniorgod /T4WednesdayisnamedaftertheTeutonicgod Wltanilhwsday isnamedafterthe godlho4Friday Scandinavian goddess isnamed after theScandinavran god FnggandSaturday isnamed after Saturn, theRoman (seeMonths ofagriculture of the/earatwww,ernie.cummings.neVcalendar.htm). 162 you Tothose of whoarewondering gathering whyChristmas, please Easter, andChristians onSunday arenotaddressed inthtsb00k, seeFrank's fullcomments at http://www.ptmin.org/answers.htm. '63David Nonington makes thepoint thatalthough isnothing there intrinsically wrong withthechurch embracing rdeas fromthe surrounding culture, because theyarepagan theyareoften contrary to biblical laith.Thus syncretism andacculturation are (ToPreach frequently harmlul tothechurch orNot,23l.

of a typical Pentecostal/charismaticchurch, you may be permitted to give a one-minute ecstatic utterance. But then you must sit down and be quiet.) Even though open sharing in a church meeting is completely scriptural,'uoyo,r would be breaking the liturgy if you dared try something so outrageousl You would be considered "out of order" and askedto behaveyourself or leave. Second,the Protestant order of worship stranglesthe headship of JesusChrist.tt" The entire serviceis directed by one person. You are limited to the knowledge,gifting, and experienceof one member of the body-the pastor. l\4rere is the freedom for our LordJesus to speak through FIis body at will? Where in the liturgy may God give a brother or a sister a word to share with the whole congregation? The order of v'orship allows for no such thing.Jesus Christ has no freedom to expressHimself through His body at His discretion. FIe too is rendered a passivespectator. Granted, Christ may be able to expressHimself through one or rwo members of the church-usually the pastor and the music leader.But this is a very limited expression.The Lord is stifled from manifesting Himself through the other members of the body. Consequently, the Protestant liturgy cripples the body of Christ. It turns it into one huge tongue (the pastor) and many little ears (the congregation). This doesviolence to Paul'svision of the body of Christ, where every member functions in the church meeting for the common good (see1 Corinthians 12). Third, for many Christians, the Sunday morning service is shamefully boring. It is without variety or spontaneiry. It is highly predictable, highly perfunctory and highly mechanical.There is little in the way of freshnessor innovation. It has remained frozen for five centuries. Put bluntly, the order of worship embodies the ambiguous

priests oneanother 164 toedify areto usetheirgiftsasfunctioning teaches thatallChristians Testament TheNew i4,26. 1 Corinthians 1 Peter 2,5,9). 10,24-25.13,15-16; 4,7;Hebrews (R0mans Ephesians 12,7; 1 Corinthians 12:3-8; tggether theygather when r 6 sI n t h e w o r d s o f A r t h u r W a l l i s , " L i t u r g i e s , w h e t h e r a n c i e n t o r m o d e r n , w r i t t e n o r u n w r i t t e n , a r e a h u m a n d e v presence oftheSpirit." andoperation faithintheimmediate rather thanexercising whatiscustomary, bydoing wheels turning

po\Merof the rote. And the rote very quickly decaysinto the routine, which in turn becomestired, meaningless,and ultimately invisible. Seeker-sensitivechurches have recognized the sterile nature of the contemporary church service.In response,they have incorporated a vast affay of media and theatrical modernizations into the lirurgy. This is done to market worship to the unchurched. Employing the latestelectronic technology,seeker-sensitive churcheshave been successfulat swelling their ranks.fu a result, they have garnereda large portion of the American Protestant market share.tut' But despitethe added entertainment it affords, the market-driven seeker-sensitiveservice is still held captive by the pastor, the threefold "h\.rynnsandwich" remains intact, and the congregants continue to be muted spectators(only they are more entertainedin their spectating).'07 Fourth, the Protestant liturgy that you quietly sit through every Sunday, year after year, acrually hinders spirirual transformation. It does so because(1) it encouragespassivity,(2) it limits functioning, and (3) it implies that putting in one hour per week is the key to the victorious Christian life. Every Sunday you attend the sen'ice to be bandaged and recharged,like all other wounded soldiers. Far too often, however, the bandaging and the recharging never takes place. The reason is quite simple. The New Testament never links sitting through an ossified ritual that we mislabel "church" as having anlthing to do with spiritual transformation. We grow by functioning, not by passively watching and listening. Let's face it. The Protestant order of r,r'orshipis largely unscriptural, impractical, and unspiritual. It has no analogin the Nev'Testament. Ratheq it finds its roots in the culture of fallen man.tooIt rips at the heart of primitive Christianity, which was informal and free of rirual. Five centuries after the Reformation. the Protestant order of

166 Fordetails,seeGaryGilley, ThisLittleChurchllenttoMarket:TheChurchintheAgeofEnterlatnmenf(WebstetNY:Evang 2005). 16/Seemy(Frank s)book Reimagining form0re Churc, onthistopic. 1 6lE hepurposeofthefirst-centurychurchmeetingwasnottorevangelism,sermonizing,worship,orfellowship edificatjon through manifesting Christ corporately Rethinking theltineskin, ch.l). lViola.

worship still varies little from the Catholic Mass-a religious rirual that is a fusion of pagan andJudaistic elements. As one lirurgical scholar put it, "The history of Christian worship is the story of the give and take between cult and culture. As the gospel was preached in different times and places,missionaries brought with them the forms and styles of u,'orshipwith which they \\,erefamiliar.""'u I (Frank) em no armchair liturgist. What I have written about open meetingsunder the headshipof Christ is not fanciful theory. I har-eparticipatedin such meetings for the last nineteen years. Such meetings are marked by incredible variety. They are not bound to a one-man, pulpit-dominated pattern of worship. There is a great deal of spontaneiry creativiry and freshness.The overarching hallmark of these meetings is the visible headship of Christ and the free yet orderly functioning of the body of Christ. I was in such a meeting not too long ago. Let me describeit to you' About thirry of us gathered together in a home and greeted one another. Some of us steppedinto the center of the living room and began singing a capella. Quickly, the entire church was singing in unison, arms around one another. Someoneelsebegan another sorlgr and we all joined in. Betweeneach sor]g,prayerswere uttered by different people. Some of the songs had been written by the members themselves.We sang severalof the songsseveraltimes. Some people rurned the words of the songs into prayers. On severaloccasions,a few of the members exhorted the church in relation to what we had just sung. After we sang,rejoiced, spontaneouslyprayed, and exhorted one another, we sat down. Then, very quickly, t woman stood and began explainingwhat the Lord had showedher during the week. She spoke for about three minutes. After she sat down, a man stood up and shareda portion of Scripture and exalted the Lord Jesusthrough it. Next another gentleman stood up to add a few very edi$zing words '6eSenn, Setting,38,40 andltsCultural lVorship Chrslran

to what he said.A woman then broke into a new song that went right along with what the two men had just shared.The whole church sang with her. Another woman stood and read a poem that the Lord had given her during the week . . . and it meshed perfectly with what the others had sharedup to that point. One by one, brothers and sistersin Christ stood up to tell us what they had experiencedin their relationship with the LordJesus Christ that week. Exhortations, teaching, encouragements,poems, songs, and testimonies all followed one right after the other. And a common theme, one that revealedthe glories ofJesus Christ, emerged.Some of those gatheredwept. None of this wasrehearsed,prescribed,or planned.Yet the meeting was electric. It was so rich, so glorious, and so edi{ting that it became evident to everyone that someone was indeed leading the meeting. But He was not visible. It was the Lord JesusChrist! FIis headship was being made manifest among His people. We were reminded again that F{e in fact is alive . . . alive enough to direct His church. The New Testamentis not silent with respectto how we Christians are to meet. Shall we, therefore, opt for man's tradition when it clearly runs contrary to God's thought for His church? Shall we continue to undermine the functioning headship of Christ for the sakeof our sacrosanctliturgy? Is the church ofJesus Christ the pillar and ground of truth or the defender of man's tradition (1 Timothy 3 : 15 ) ? Perhaps the only sure way to thaw out God's frozen people is to make a dramatic break with the Sunday morning ritual. May we not be found guilty of our Lord's bone-rattling words: "Full well do you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition."ttu

r 7 0l V l a r7k, 9 ,w t e .S e ea l s oM a t t h e w1 5 , 2 ' 6M ; o l o s s i a n2s, 8 ; a r k7 ' 9 - 1 3C

In this regard, mainstream evangelicalismhas made the profound error of divorcing soteriology (salvation) from ecclesiology (church practice). The message conveyed is that soteriology is a required course, while ecclesiology is an elective. So church practice does not really matter. But this thinking does not reflect God's curriculum. The church is not a footnote in the gospel. It stands at the center of God's beating heart. In fact, when the church functions as she should, she is the greatest evangelism knor.r'nto humankind. When God's people are living in authentic community, their lir-estogether are a sign to the world of God's coming reign.r-l

6. Yousay that "neither Catholics nor Prntestants were saccessful in allowing lesus Christ to he the center and head of their gatherings." I nust disagree. ln my church, the songs we sing, the Scripture we read, the messagethat is proclaimed all center 0n lesus.Furthernore, we are given practical instruction 0n how to nake Christ our Lord every day of the week. The central issue we were addressingis not, "Is Jesustalked about and given honor in the service?" We agree that in many institutional churches, He is. The issue we were addressingis, "Is JesusChrist the functional head of the gathering?" There is a significant difference between makingJesus the invisible guest of honor and allowing Him to be the practical leader of the gathering. Let's supposethe authors of this book attend your church service.And let's suppose that the Lord Jesus Christ puts something on our hearts to share with the rest of His body. Would we have the freedom to do so spontaneously?Would everyone else have the freedom to do it? If not, then we would question whether your church service is under Christ's headship. You see, a meeting that is under the headship of Christ rneans that He may speakthrough every member of the body in the gathering. This is the very argument of 1 Corinthians 12-14. Paul begins this section by saying thatJesus Christ is not speechlesslike the idols the Corinthians once worshipped. And through whom does Christ speak? He speaks through His body using the various gifts and ministries granted by the Spirit (1 Corinthians 12). In the next chapter, Paul saysthat believers' gifts and ministries are to be used in love, as love seeksto edilr everyone else (rather than to take for itself). Paul then moves on to the specifics of the church meeting where "every one of you hath" something to bring and "ye may all prophesy one by one" (1 Corinthians 14). In this connection, if you were to attend an organic church gathering that met r/2 SeealsoStanley Grenz, forConnunitylGrand Rapids, Created Baker Books, 1998).

in New Testament fashion, vou would have both the right and the privilege to share whatever the Lord laid on your heart in the manner in which the Spirit led you. Not only that, but you would be expected to. In other words, Jesus Christ would be the functional head of that gathering. 7. Youoften use the phrase headshipof Ghrist to reter to Christ'sleadershipand authorityin the church. I read sonewhere that head in the llew festanent means "snurce" rather than "authnrity." Whatdo you think? It actually means both. We are using headshipof Christ to refer to the idea thatJesus Christ is both the authority over the church as well as the source of the church. There is good scholarly support for this ,rrrg".tt' 8. Didn't the early church hold their servicesin the synagogues?I renenher reading that the apostles went to the synagoguest0 preach. And didn't Paul and Peter preach t0 a passiveaudience? The aposdes,as well as gifted people like Stephen, visited the syrragoguesfor evangelistic purposes. But these meetings were not church meetings. They were not for believers. Rather, they were opportunities for the apostles to preach the gospel to the Jews. (In that day, a visitor could visit a synagogue and preach to the audience.) Yes, Paul and Peter preached in certain settings, but again, these were not at church meetings. They preached at apostolic meetings designed to evangelizethe lost or to equip and encourage an existing church. Apostolic and evangelistic meetings were temporary and sporadic, while church meetings were normative and ongoing. 9. Are you saying that just hecause the first-century church had open-participatory meetings, we should too-even though we live in the twenty-first century? No. We are suggesting that open-participatory meetings are rooted in New Testament theology, namely the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers and the everymember functioning of Christ's body. Wb are also suggesting that Christians have a spirirual instinct to sharewhat God has shown them with others for their edification. And we are raising three key questions: (1) After exploring where the modern Protestant order of worship came from, is it really successfulat transforming people and expressingJesusChrist? (2) Is it possiblethat open-participatory church meetings are more in line with what God had in mind for His church than the Protestant order of worship? (3) Would it be worth our time to begin exploring new ways to gather and expressChrist in our church life together? r/3[ F.Bruce, (Grand fheEpistles Rapids: Eerdmans, 1984), 68-69,274-275] totheColossians, toPhtlenon, andtotheIphesians Foulkes, 73-74. Francis Ephesia ns(GrandRaDids: Eerdmans, 1989),

PROTESTANTISM'S MOSTSACRED COW "Christianity did notdestroypaganism; it adopted it." -WIL[ DURANT, TWENTIETH-CENTURY AMERICAN HISTORIAN "And my speechand my preaching was not with enticingwordsof man'swisdom, butin demonstration oftheSpiritandof p0w0r:Thatyour faithshouldnotstandin thewisdomof men,butin thepowerof God." -PAUL0FTARSUS lN I C0RINTHIANS 2:4-5

Xfdfr ruffiW #*fSHto one of the most sacrosanctchurch practices of all: the sermon. Remove the sermon and the Protestant order of worship becomesin large part a songfest.Remove the sermon and attendanceat the Sundaymorning serviceis doomed to drop. The sermon is the bedrock of the Protestant liturgy. For five hundred years, it has functioned like clockwork. Every Sunday morning, the pastor steps up to his pulpit and delivers an inspirational oration to a passive,

pew-warming audience.' So central is the serlnon that it is the very reason many Christians go to church. In fact, the entire service is often judged by the quality of the sermon. Ask a person how church was last Sundayand you wiil most likelv get a description of the message.In short, the contemporary Christian mind-set often equates the sermon u'ith Sundal' morning worship.t But it does not end ther e. Remor.ethe sermon and you have eliminated the most important sourceof spiritual nourishment for countlessnumbers of believers (so it is thought). Yet the stunning reality is that today'ssertnon has no root in Scripture. Rather, it was borrowed from pagan culture, nursed and adopted into the Christian faith. That's a startling statement, is it not? But there is more. The sermon acrually detracts from the very purpose for which God designedthe church gathering. And it has very little to do with genuine spiritual growth. Don't faint dead away .

. we will prove

these r,r'ordsin the following pages.

T H ES E R M OANN DT H EB I B L E Doubtlessly, someonereading the previous few paragraphswill retort: "People preachedall throughout the Bible. Of course the sermon is scripturall" Granted, the Scriptures do record men and women preaching. However, there is a world of difference between the Spirit-inspired preaching and teaching describedin the Bible and the contemporary sermon. This difference is virtually always overlooked becausewe have been unwittingly conditioned to read our modern-day practices back into the Scripture. So we mistakenly embracetoday'spulpiteerism as being biblical. Let's unfold that a bit. The present-dayChristian sermon has the followins features:

r "Nothing in it attaches t0 preaching." Niebuhr andY,lillians, Ministry ofProtestantism thantheimportance ismore characteristic Historical Perspectives, I 10. 2 lnFrance,theProtestantchurchserviceiscalledallerisernon("goIo asermon")lWhite,ProtestantWorship,20).

It is a regularoccurrence-deliveredfaithfully frorn the pulpit at least once a w-eek. It is deliveredbythesameperson-most rypically the pastor or an ordained guest speaker. It is delivered to a passive audience-essentially it is a monologue. It is a cultivatedformof speech-possessinga specific strucrure. It typically contains an introduction, three to five points, and a conclusion. Contrast this with the kind of preachingmentioned in the Bible. In the Old Testament, men of God preached and taught. But their speaking did not map to the contemporary sermon. Here are the featuresof Old Testamentpreaching and teaching: Active participation and interruptions bv the audiencewere common.' Prophets and priests spoke extemporaneouslyand out of a present burden, rather than from a set script. There is no indication that Old Testamentprophets or priests gaveregular speechesto God's people.oInstead,the nature of Old Testament preaching was sporadic, fluid, and open for audience participation. Preaching in the ancient synagogue followed a similar pattern.t Corne now to the New Testament.The LordJesus did not preach a regular sermon to the same audience.uHis preaching and teaching took many different forms. And He delivered His rnessagesro many different audiences.(Of course,FIe concentratedmost of FIis

Norrington, ToPreachor Not,3. m: y1 ,5 : 1 ,2 7 : 1 ,9 ; J o s h u a T h ep r o p h e tssp o k ei n r e s p o n st o e s p e c i { iecv e n t s( D e u t e r o n o 1 2 3 1 2 4 , 1 5l;s a i a hJ; e r e m i a h E;z e k i e l ; DanieA l ; m o sH r a g g a iZ; e c h a r i a e h t; c . ) N . 0 r r i n g t oT n ,oP r e a c h o rN o t . 3 . NorringtoT n ,oP r e a c o p r e a c h i n g h r N o t , 4 .T h eo n l yd i f f e r e n ci n e synag0gue i s t h a t a m e s s a gdee l i v e r eodn a b i b l i c atle x tw a sa r e g u l a r o c c u r r e ntcve .n s o ,m o s ts y n a g 0 g u a e h ow i s h e dt o d o s o .T h i s o e lsl o w e ido r a n ym e m b et ro p r e a c h t o t h e p e o p lw , fcourse, i s i n d i r e c ct o n t r a d i c t i o t ont h e m o d e r n s e r m ow n h e r eo n l yr e l i g i o u"ss p e c i a l i s t sa"r ea l l o w e tdo a d d r e stsh ec o n g r e g a t i o n . 'first Augustine wasthe to title Matthew5 7 in his bookTheLord'sSernonon theMount(writlenbetween 392 and396).Butthe p a s s a gw e a sn o tg e n e r a l lrye f e r r etdo a s t h eS e r m oonnt h e M o u n u t n t i lt h e s i x t e e n tche n t u r(yG r e e nD. i c t i o n a o r yf J e s uasn dt h e Gospels,736; Douglas,lilho5Whoin Chrrstran History.48)Despiterts name,the Sermonon the Mountis quitedifferentfromthe m o d e r sne r m o n i n b o t hs t y l ea n dr h e t o r i c .

teaching on F{is disciples.Yet the messagesHe brought to them were consistentlyspontaneousand informal.) Following the samepattern, the apostolicpreaching recorded in Acts possessed the following features: It was sporadic.t It was delivered on specialoccasionsin order to deal with specificproblems.t It was extemporaneousand without rhetorical structure." It u'asmost often dialogical(rneaningit included feedbackand interruptions from the audience)rather than monological (a one-waydiscourse)."' In like manner, the New Testamentletters show that the ministry of God's Word came from the entire church in their regular gatherings.ttFrom Romans 12:6-8,15:14,1 Corinthtans 14:26,and Colossians 3:16, we see that it included teaching, exhortation, prophecy, singing, and admonishment.This "every-member" functioning was also conversational(1 Corinthians 14:29) and marked by interruptions (1 Corinthians 14:30).Equally so, the exhortationsof the local elderswere normally impromptu.t' In short, the contemporary sermon delivered for Christian consumption is foreign to both Old and New Testaments.There is nothing in Scriprure to indicate its existencein the early Christian gatherings.ll

I

N o n i n g t o nf o, P r e a c h o r N o t , l - 1 2 .N o r r i n g t oann a l y z et h s e s p e e c h ei ns t h e N e wT e s t a m e a nn t dc o n t r a s ttsh e mw i t ht h e m o d e r n - d a y serm0n. 8 A c t s2 , 1 4 - 3 51; 5 , 1 3 - 2 13,2 : 2 0 ' 7 - 1 2 , 1 1 - 3 5 t 2 6 , 2 4 -N2 o9 r. r i n g t o T n ,oP r e a c o h r N o t , 57 . e T h es p o n t a n e o au ns dn o n r h e t o r i ccahla r a c t eorJt h e a p o s t o l im c e s s a g edse l i v e r ei d n A c t si s e v i d e nut p o nc l o s ei n s p e c t i oS n .e ef o r i n s t a n cA e c t s2 , 1 4 - 3 5i , 1 - 5 3 ,1 1 : D - 3 4 r0 JeremyThomson,PreachingAsDialogue:lstheSernlnaSacredCowl(Cambridge:GroveBooks,1996),3-8.IheGreekwordoften usedtodescribefirst-centurypreachingandteachingisdralegomai(AclsIl'2,17:18'4,19;19r8-9;20,1,912425).Thisrvo m e a n sa t w o - w afyo r mo f c o m m u n i c a t i o0nu.r E n g l i s h w o r dd i a l o g u e idse r i v e fdr o mi t . I n s h 0 r ta, p o s t o l im c i n i s t rw y a sm o r ed i a l o g u e t h a ni t w a sm o n o l o g i csael r m o n i cW s .i l l i a mB a r c l a yC, o n m u n i c a t i nt hgeG o s p e l { S t e r l iTn hg e, D r u m m o nPdr e s s1, 9 6 8 )3, 4 * 3 5 . r r 1 C o r i n t h i a 1n 4s , 2 6 , 3 1R:o m a n1s2 : 4 1 fE. rp h e s i a 4 n :s1 1 f f H . ; e b r e w1s0 ' 2 5 . rr Kreider, Worship and Evangelisnin Pre-Christendon,3l. r3 Norrington, ToPreachor Not,12.

WHERE DIDTHECHRISTIAN SERMON COME FROM? The earliest recorded Christian source for regular sermonizing is found during the late second century.'o Clement of Alexandria lamentedthe fact that sermonsdid so little to changeChristians.lsYet despiteits recognizedfailure, the sermon becamea standardpractice among believers by the fourth century.'u This raisesa thorny question. If the first-cenrury Christians were not noted for their sermonizing, from whom did the postapostolic Christians pick it up? The answer is telling: The Christian sermon was borrowed from the pagan pool of Greek culrure! To find the headwaters of the sermon, we must go back to the fifth century BC and a group of wandering teachers called sophists. The sophistsare credited for inventing rhetoric (the art of persuasive speaking).They recruited disciplesand demanded payrnent for delivering their orations.rT The sophistswere expert debaters.They were mastersat using emotional appeals,physicalappearance,and clever languageto "sell" their arguments." In time, the style, form, and oratorical skill of the sophistsbecame more prized than their accuracy.to This spawneda class of men who became masters of fine phrases, "cultivating sfyle for sryle'ssake." The truths they preached were abstract rather than truths that were practiced in their own lives. They were experts at imitating form rather than substance.'u The sophists identified themselves by the special clothing they wore. Some of them had a fixed residencewhere they gave regular sermons to the same audience.Others traveled to deliver their polished orations. (They made a good deal of money when they did.) * lbid.,13.Thefirstrecorded Christian sermon iscontained intheso-called Second Letter of Clenent daled between AD100andAD i50. Brilioth, BriefHtstory ofPreaching, 19-20. r5 Norrington, ToPreach orNot,|i. 16Hatch, lnfluence of Greek ldeasandUsages,109. r/ Douglas.l. Soccio, Archetypes of Wisdom' Anlntroduction toPhilosophy(Belnont, CA:Wadsworth/lTP Publishing, lgg8),56,57. 'E lbid. 's Wegetourwords sophistryand (bogus) sophisticallron thes0phists. Sophistryrelers tospecious andfallacious reasoning used to (Soccio, persuade Archetypes of ll/isdom,57). TheGreeks celebrated theorator's styleandformovertheaccuracy ofthecontent of hissermon. Thus a good 0rat0r c0uld usehissermon tosway hisaudience to believe whatheknew to befalse. TotheGreek mrnd, winning anargument wasa greater virtue thandistilling truth. Unfortunately, anelement ofsophistry hasnever lefttheChristian lold(Noni ngton,ToPreach or Not,2I,22;Halch,lnfluence of Greek ldeasandl|sages, 1I 3). 20Hatch, lnfluence of Greek ldeas andUsases.113.

Sometimesthe Greek orator would enter his speakingforum "already robed in his pulpit-gown." He would then mount the steps to his professionalchair to sit before he brought his sermon. To make his points, he would quote Homer's verses.(Some orators studied Homer so well that they could repeat him by heart.) So spellbinding was the sophist that he would often incite his audience to ciap their hands during his discourse.If his speaking\Masvery well received,sornewould call his sermon "inspired." The sophists were the most distinguished men of their time. Some even lived at public expense.Others had public statueserected in their honor.t' About a century later, the Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BC) gave to rhetoric the three-point speech."A whole," said Aristotle, "must havea beginning, a middle, and an end."t'In time, Greek orators implemented Aristotle's three-point principle into their discourses. The Greeks were intoxicated with rhetoric.tr So the sophists fared well. When the Romans took over Greece, they too became obsessedwith rhetoric.to Consequently, Greco-Roman culture developed an insatiable appetite for hearing someone give an eloquent oration. This was so fashionablethat a "sermonette" from a professional philosopher after dinner was a regular form of entertainment." The ancient Greeks and Romans viewed rhetoric as one of the greatestforms of art.26Accordingly, the orators in the Roman Empire were lauded with the same glamorous starusthat Americans assignto movie stars and professional athletes. They were the shining stars of their day. Orators could bring a crowd to a frenzy simply by their powerful speaking skills. Teachers of rhetoric, the leading scienceof the 21tbid., 112. 54,56,91-92, 96,97-98, 22Aristotle, "Plot" wasnonetheless hisprinciple applied to Aristotle wasspeaking about writing or"Fable," ch.7,Although 0n Poetics, delivering speeches. 23Theloveofspeech (Halch, "They ldeas werea nation oftalkers" lnfluence ofGreek andUsages,2l) nature wassecond totheGreeks. 24Norrington, ToPreach orNot,2l. 25 Hatch, lnfluence of 6reekldeasandUsages,40. 26Brilroth, BriefHistory ofPreaching,26.

era, were the pride of every majorciqt.t' The orators they produced were given celebriry starus. In short, the Greeks and Romans were addicted to the pagan sermon-just asmany contemporary Christians are addicted to the "Christian" sermon.

THEARRIVAL OFA POLLUTED STREAM How did the Greek sermon find its way into the christian church? Around the third century a vacuum was createdwhen mutual ministry faded from the body of Christ." At this time the last of the traveling Christian workers who spoke out of a prophetic burden and spontaneous conviction left the pagesof church history.'nTo fill their absence, the clergy began to emerge. open meetings began to die out, and church gatherings became more and more lirurgical.3. The "church meeting" was devolving into a "service." As a hierarchical structure began to take root, the idea of a "religious specialist" emerged." In the face of these changes,the functioning Christians had trouble fitting into this evolving ecclesiastical structure." There was no place for them to exercisetheir gifts. By the fourth cenrury the church had become fully instirutionalized. As this was happening, many pagan orarors and philosophers \{rere becoming Christians. As a result, pagan philosophical ideas unwittingly made their way into the Christian communiry." Many of these men became the theologians and leaders of the early Christian church. They are known as the "church fathers," and some of their writings are still wirh us.ro Thus the pagannotion of a trained professionalspeakerwho delivers orations for a fee moved straight into the Christian bloodstream. 27Robert "Golden A.Krupp, Tongue andlronWill,"Christian History 13,no.4 (1994): 7, 28Nonington, ToPreach or Not,24 2eHatch, lnfluence ofGreek ldeas andl)sages,106-107, 109. 30Nonington, lo Preach orNot,24-25. rr lbrd.: seechapter 5 ofthisbook. 3' lbid.,25. 33 lbid.,22;Smith,Frorn Christto Constantine. II5. 3aAmong themareTertullian, Cyprian, (Norrington, Arnobius, Lactantius. andAugustine ToPreach or Not,22). See alsoHatch. lnfluenceofGreekldeasandUsages,T-9,109;RichardHanson, ChristianPriesthoodExanined(Guildlord,UK,Lutterworthpress. 1979)53.

Note that the concept of the "paid teaching specialist" came from Greece,notJudaism. It was the custom ofJewish rabbis to take up a trade so as to not charge a fee for their teaching.tt The upshot of the story is that these former pagan orators (now turned Christian) began to use their Greco-Roman oratorical skills for Christian purposes.They would sit in their official chair'u and "expound the sacredtext of Scripture, just as the sophist would supplv an exegesisof the near-sacredtext of Homer.D' If you compare a third-century pagan sermon with a sermon given by one of the church fathers, you will find both the structure and the phraseology to be quite similar.tt So a new style of communication was being birthed in the Christian church-a style that emphasizedpolished rhetoric, sophisticated grammar, flowery eloquence,and monologue. It was a style that was designedto entertain and show off the speaker'soratorical skills. It was Greco-Roman rhetoric.t" And only those who were trained in it were (Does any of this sound familiar?) allowed to addressthe assemblylou One scholar put it this way: "The original proclamation of the Christian messagewas a two-way conversation . . . but when the oratorical schools of the Western world laid hold of the Christian message,they made Christian preaching something vastly different. Oratory tended to take the place of conversation.The greatnessof the orator took the place of the astoundingevent ofJesusChrist. And the dialogue between speakerand listener faded into a monologue."*t In a word, the Greco-Roman sermon replacedprophesying,open sharing, and Spirit-inspired teaching.o'The sermon becamethe elit-

15 [ [ Bruce,Paul,Apostleof the HearISetFree(GrandRapids,Eerdmans, 1917),220.ThenotedJewishrabbiHillelsajd,"Hewho m a k e sa w o r l d lcyr o w no f t h eT o r a hs h a l lw a s t ea w a y "( 1 0 7 1 0 8 ) . rs Hatch,lnfluenceof Greekldeasand Usages,l!0. i / N o r r i n g t o fno, P r e a c o 0 n de x p l a n a t i oonf a b i b l i c atle x t . . n e x e g e s irssa n i n t e r p r e t a t i a h r N o t , 2 2A 38 Hatch,lnfluenceof Greekldeasand Usage,lI0. re Astudenlwhostudiedrhetoriccompletedhisstudieswhenhecouldtalkofthandonanysubjectthatwaspresentedtohim d o wt o a r g u ea n da r g u ew e l l .L o g i cw a sn a t u r atlo t h e i n t h e s t u d yo ' fr h e t o r i cE. v e r sy t u d e nlte a r n e h t h ef g r m0 f d e b a t ew, a sc o m m o n s .h i se n t i r em i n d - s est e e p e idn t ot h eC h r i s t i a n G r e em k i n d .B u t i t w a sl o g i cd i v o r c efdr o mp r a c t i c ae n db u i l to n t h e o r e t i c a rl g u m e n tT faith earlyon (Hatch,lnfluenceof Greekldeasand Usages,32-33). { l b i d . ,1 0 8 .H a t c hw r i t e s", w i t ht h e g r o w t ho f o r g a n i z a t i tohne r eg r e wu p a l s o ,n o to n l ya l u s i o no f t e a c h i n g a n de x h o r t a t i obnu, t a l s o t h e g r a d u arle s t r i c t i oonf t h e l i b e r t yo f a d d r e s s i nt hg ec o m m u n i t yo t h e o f f r c i acl l a s s . " ar WayneE.}aIes, Protestant (Philadelphia, Press, 1962), 162. Westminster PastoralCounselrng { 1bid.,107.

ist privilege of church officials,particularlv the bishops.Such people had to be educatedin the schoolsof rhetoric to learn how to speak.o, Without this education, a Christian was nor permitted to address God's people. fu early asthe third cenrury christians called their sermonsbomilies, the same term Greek orators used for their discourses.*o Today, one can take a seminary course called homiletics to learn how to preach. Homiletics is considereda "science,applying rules of rhetoric, which go back to Greece and Rome."ai Put another way, neither homilies (sermons)nor homiletics (the art of sermonizing) have a Christian origin. They were stolen from the pagans.A polluted srream made irs entrance into the Christian faith and muddied its warers.And that stream flows just as strongly today as it did in the fourth century.

CHRYSOSTOM ANDAUGUSTINE John chrvsostom was one of the greatest christian orators of his duyjo (Chrysostom, means "golden-mouthed.")ut Never had Constantinople heard "sermons so powerful, brilliant, and frank" as those preached by chrysostom.uschrysostom's preaching was so compelling that people would somerimesshove their \Maytoward the front to hear him better.+e Naturally endowed with the orator's gift of gab, chrysostom iearned how to speak under the leading sophist of the fourth cenrury Libanius.s,Chrysostorn'spulpit eloquencewas unsurpassed.So ar Brilioth, EriefHistory ofPreaching,26,2l . lnfluenceofGreekldeasandllsages,i0g;Briljoth, " Hatch, BriefHistoryofpreaching,Ig 15J.D.Douglas, NewTwentiethCenturyEncyclopediaofReligiousKnowledge(GrandRapids:BakerBookHouse,lggl),4 a 60 n h t s d e a t h b e d , L i b a n i u s ( C h r y s o s t o m ' s p a g a n t u t o 0 s a i d t h a t h e w o u l d h a v e b e e n h i s w o r t h i e s t s u c c e s s o r " i f t notstolen him"(Hatch, lnfluence ofGreek ldeas andusages. l0g). ar Tony Castle, IivesofFanous Christians(AnnArbor, Ml,Servant Books, 1988), 69;Hatch, tnfluence of Greek ldeas andIJsages, 6.John ,'Golden golden-mouth wasnicknamed (ChrysostonosJ because ofhiseloquent anduncompromisrng preaching (Krupp, Tongue and lronWill,"Christian Hrstory,7) aEDurant, AgeofFaith,63. a eK e v i n D a l e l V l i l l e r , " D i d Y o u K n o w ? L i t t l e - K n o w n F a c t s a b o u t J o h n C h r y s o s t o m , " C h r i s t i a n H i s t o r y 1 3 , n o3. 4. 0( 1 f t9h9e4s )e: r m o n s preached, thatChrysoslom more than600survrve. '0 Krupp, "Golden Iongue andlronWill,"7;Schaff, Histary of theChristian Church,3:933-941;Durant, Age offaith,g. Chrysostom imbibed rhetoric fromLibanius, buthewasalsoa student philosophy of pagan (DuranI, andliterature Ageof Faith,63\.

powerful were his orations that his sermons would often get intefrupted by congregational applause.Chrysostom once gavea sermon condemning the applauseas unfitting in God's house.t' But the congregation loved the sermon so much that after he finished preaching, they applaudedanyway.t'This story illustratesthe untamable power of Greek rhetoric. Wrecan credit both Chrysostom and Augustine (354-+30), a former professcrof rhetoric,tt for making pulpit oratory part and parcel of the Christian faith.toIn Chrysostom, the Greek sermon reachedits zenith. The Greek sermon sryle indulged in rhetorical brilliance, the quoting of poems, and focusedon impressingthe audience.Chrysostom emphasizedthat "the preachermust toil long on his sermonsin order to gain the power of eloquence."ss In Augustine, the Latin sermon reached its heights.tt'The Latin sermon style was more down to earth than the Greek style' It focusedon the "common man" and was directed to a simpler moral point. Zwingli took John Chrysostom as his model in preaching, while Luther took Augustine ashis model.tt Both Latin and Greek srylesincluded a verseby-versecommentary form aswell as a paraphrasingform.tt Even so, Chrysostom and Augustine stood in the lineage of the Greek sophists.They gaveus polished Christian rhetoric. They gave us the "Christian" sermon: biblical in content, but Greek in style.to

ANDTHEGREAT THEPURITANS, THEREFORMERS, AWAKENING During medievaltimes, the Eucharist dominated the Roman Catholic Mass, and preaching took a backseat.But with the coming of Mar5LTheenthusiasticapplausefromanaudiencetoasophist'shomilywasaGreekcustom' 52Schaff, Church,3'938. oftheChristtan History 53Durant, AgeofFaith,65. s4 Nonington, ToPreach orNot,23. ss Niebuhr Perspectives,ll. Historical /l4lnlsfrvin andWilliams, 56Brilioth, of Preaching,3I,42. History Brief Thiswascharacteristic exposition. 5i Senn, preaching to bea verse-by-verse tended andReformed BothLutheran titirgy,366. Christian andAugustine. likeChrysostom fathers ofthepatristic 29,2002 September Frank Viola, 58John to message e-mail Seminary, Theological at Union professor history church ofearly McGuckin, se Norrington, orNot,23 ToPreach

tin Luther, the sermon was again given prominence in the worship service.60 Luther vieu,'edthe church as the gathering of those who listen to the word of God being spoken to them. For this reason, he once called the church buildin g a Mundhaus (mouth-house or speech-house)!u' Thking his cue from LutheqJohn calvin argued that the preacher is the "mouth of God."o' (Ironically, both men vehemently railed againstthe idea that the pope was rhe vicar of Christ.) It is not surprising that many of the Reformers had srudiedrhetoric and were deeply influenced by the Greco-Roman sermons of Augustine, chrysostom, Origen, and Gregory the Great.n' Thus the flaws of the church fathers were duplicated by the Reformers and the Protestant subcultures that were created by them. This was especially true of the Puritans.u+In fact, the contemporary evangelicalpreaching tradition finds its most recent roots in the puritan movement of the seventeenth cenrury and the Great Awakening of the eighteenth cenrury. The Puritans borrowed their preaching method from calvin. What was that method? It was the systematic exposition of Scriprure week after week. It was a method taken from the early church fathers that became popular during the Renaissance.Renaissancescholars would provide a sentence-by-sentencecommentary on a writing from classicalantiquiry. Calvin was a master at this form. Before his conversion, he employed this sryle while writing a commentary on a work by the pagan author seneca. when he was converted and turned to sermonizing, he applied the same analytical sryle to the Bible. Following the path of John calvin, the Puritans centered all 60White, Protestant llorship,46-47. 6r Niebuhr andWillians, Ministry in Historical Perspectives, Il4. 62Thomson, g-10. Preaching asDialogue, il jld, PatristicRoots of Reformed Worshio.TgII. 6aTracing theevolution ofsermon contenttron theReformation totoday isbeyond thescope ofthisbook. Suffice it tosaythatsermons during period theEnlightenment degenerated intobarren moral djscourses forimproving human society. ThePuritans 6rought back theverse-by-verse preaching expositional justice thatbegan withthechurch fathers. Social prominent themes became in ntneteenthcentury Methodism. Andwiththeadvent preaching ofFrontier-Revivalism, inevangelical churches wasdominated bya salvation call, ThePuritans alsomade contributions to modern sermonic rhetoric. Their sermons were written 0utahead oftimerna four-oart ouiline (Scripture reading, theological proof statement, andillustration ofdoctrine, andapplication) witha detailed organizational structure. W h i t e , P r \ t e s t a n t W l r s h i p , 5 3 , 1 2 1 , 1 2 6 , 1 6 6 , 1 8 3 ; A I l e n C . G u e l z o , "C Whhrei sntti ha en S Hei sr tmoor yn1R3e, ingon.el (d1,9" 9 4 ) : 24-25.

their church services around a systematic teaching of the Bible. As they sought to Protestantize England (purifyitg it from the flaws of Anglicanism), the Puritans centered all of their church services around highly structured, methodical, logical, verse-by-verseexpositions of Scripture. They stressedthat Protestantism was a religion of "rhe Book." (Ironically, "the Book" knows nothing of this rype of sermon.) The Puritans also invented a form of preaching called "plainsryle." This style was rooted in the memorization of sermon notes. Their dividing, subdividing, and analyzing of a biblical text raised This form is still used today by countthe sermon to a fine science.ut lesspastors.In addition, the Puritans gave us the one-hour sermon (though some Puritan sermons lasted ninety minutes), the practice of congregants taking notes on the sermon' the tidy four-part sermon outline, and the pastor'suse of crib notes while delivering his oration.uo Another influence, the Great Awakening, is responsible for the kind of preaching that was common in early Methodist churches and is still used in contemporary Pentecostal churches. Strong outbursts of emotion, which include screaming and running up and down the platform, are all carryovers from this tradition.ut Summing up the origin of the contemporary sermon, we can say the following: Christianity had taken Greco-Roman rhetoric and adapted it for its own purposes,baptized it, and wrapped it in swaddling clothes. The Greek homily made its way into the Christian church around the second century. It reached its height in the pulpit orators of the fourth century-namely Chrysostom and Augustine.ut The Christian sermon lost its prominence from the fifth cenrury until the Reformation, when it became encasedand enshrined 1999), 92-95. Publications, 65Meicpearse UK:Kingsway Likelhis(E.Sussex, Meeting lle MustStop Matthews, andChrrs preaching are o1Puritan Theghosts 24-25. 66White, "When Reigned," protestant theSermon Guelzo, 126,166,183; Worship,53,121, stylewhichhasits youwillfindthePuritan sermon pastor underneath sermonize, timeyouheara Protestant Every stillwithustoday. rhetoric. rootsin pagan 6/ Pearse LikeThis,95. Meeting WeMustStop andMatthews, 68Brilioth, ofPreaching,22. History Brief

as the central focus of the Protestant worship service.Yet for the last five centuries, most Christians have never questioned its origin or its effectiveness.o"

HOW SERMONIZING HARMS THECHURCH Though revered for five centuries, the conventional sermon has negatively impacted the church in a number of ways. First, the sermon makes the preacher the virtuoso performer of the regular church gathering. As a result, congregational participation is hampered at best and precluded ar worst. The sermon turns the church into a preaching station. The congregation degenerates into a group of muted spectatorswho watch a performance. There is no room for interrupting or questioning the preacher while he is delivering his discourse.The sermon freezes and imprisons the functioning of the body of christ. It fosters a docile priesthood by allowing pulpiteers to dominate the church gathering week after week.tu Second, the sermon often stalematesspirirual growth. Becauseit is a one-way affair, it encouragespassiviry.The sermon prevents the church from functioning as intended. It suffocatesmurual ministry. It smothers open participation. This causesthe spirirual growth of God's people to take a nosedive.T' fu Christians, we must function if we are to marure (see Mark 4:24-25 and Hebrews 10:24-25).We do not grow by passivelistening week after week. In fact, one of the goals of New Testament-styled preaching and teaching is to get each of us to function (Ephesians 4:lL-16)." rt is to encourageus to open our mourhs in the church meeting (1 Corinthians 12-14).71The conventional sermon hinders this very process.

6 sT h e n i n e t e e n t h - c e n t u r y h i s t o r i a n t d w i n H a t c h w a s o n e o f t h e f i r s t t o c h a l l e n g e t h e s e r m o n . /0 lhesermonsellsitselfasthemajorfacilitatorofChristiangrowth.Butthisideaisbothmisleadingandmisdirec 7r Formore onthistopic,seeViola, Reinagining Church. 72Thispassage alsopoints outthatfunctioning isnecessary forspiritual maturity. 73Themeeting thatisdescribed inthispassage gathering. isclearly a church

Third, the sermon preservesthe unbiblical clergy mentality. It createsan excessiveand pathological dependenceon the clergy. The sermon makesthe preacher the religious specialist-the only one having anything worthy to say.Everyone else is treated as a second-class Christian-a silent pew warmer. (lA/hile this is not usually voiced, it is the unspoken reality.)'o How can the pastor learn from the other members of the body of Christ when they are muted? How can the church learn fully from the pastor when its members cannot ask him questions during his oration?75How can the brothers and sisterslearn from one another if they are prevented from speaking in the meetings? The sermon makes "church" both distant and impersonal.tuIt deprives the pastor of receiving spiritual sustenancefrom the church. And it deprives the church of receiving spiritual nourishment from one another. For these reasons,the sermon is one of the biggest roadblocks to a functioning priesthoodltt Fourth, rather than equipping the saints, the sermon de-skills them. It matters not how loudly ministers drone on about "equipping the saints for the work of the ministry" the truth is that the contemporary sermon preached every week has little power to equip God's people for spiritual service and functioning.78 Unfortunately, however, many of God's people are just as addicted to hearing sermons as many preachers are addicted to preaching them.TeBy contrast, New Testament-styled preaching and teaching equips the church so that it can function without the presenceof a clergyman.to For instance, I (Frank) recently attended a conference where a

/a Some andeatgrass." doissay'baa' ideathat"allthatsheep pastors togivevoice tothemindless been known have /5 Reuel partners (New 1967), 36. Press, York: Seabury andLaityin Dialogue Clergy in Preaching: L.Howe, 76George 1981), 24. Press, Forge, Hudson inPreaching(Yalley Style Dialogical W,Swank, 77Kevin 22. no.l-2 (1986)' TogetherL5, "lstheSermon Biblical?" Searching Concept Craig, 7sWhile promises the "liberating laityandequip tofreetheflaccid Iaity," "equipping the pastors and thesaints" talkabout many byhissermonics, thechurch service isstilldominating prove Solongasthepastor to beempty. virtually always forministry church "equipping rhetoric. istypically empty thesaints" people Therefore, inthegathering. arenotfreetolunction God's is Forthoseofuswhoregardthesermontobeexoticallyborrng,weunderstandthefeelingofbeing"preached "He to deathby to bepreached deserves the sentiment: Smith captures Sydney writerandclergyman English thenineteenth-century " wildcurates! s0 Consider Fordetails, seeFrank oltrme. it onitsownforlongperiods thenleaving church, toaninfant method ofpreaching Paul's FL,Present Testimony forToday(Jacksonville, Planting Styled Church FirslCentury Church? Viola,5ofouftlantto Starta House 2003). Ministry,

contemporary church planter spent an entire weekend with a network of house churches. Each day, the church planter submerged the churches in a revelation ofJesus Christ. But he also gave them very practical instruction on how to experiencewhat he preached. He then left them on their own, and he probably will not return for months. The churches, having been equipped that weekend, have been having their own meetings where every member has contributed something of Christ in the gathering through exhortations, encouragements,teachings,testimonies,writing new songs,poems, etc. This is essentially New Testament apostolic ministry. Fifth, today'ssennon is often impractical. Coundesspreachersspeak as experts on that which they have never experienced. Whether it be abstract/theoretical, devotional/inspirational, demanding/compelling, or entertaining/amusing, the seffnon fails to put the hearers into a direct, practical experienceof what has been preached.Thus the typical sermon is a swimming lesson on dry land! It lacks any practical value. Much is preached,but litde ever lands.Most of it is aimed at the frontal lobe. Contemporary pulpiteerism generally fails ro get beyond disseminating information and on to equipping believers to experience and use that which they have heard. In this regard, the sermon mirrors its true father-GrecoRoman rhetoric. Greco-Roman rhetoric was bathed in abstraction.ttIt "involved forms designed to entertain and display genius rather than instruct or develop talents in others."t2 The contemporary polished sermon can warm the heart, inspire the will, and stimulate the mind. But it rarely if ever shows the team how to leave the huddle. In all of these ways, the contemporary sermon fails to meet its billing at promoting the kind of spiritual growth it promises. In the end, it acrually intensifies the impoverishment of the church.tr The sermon acts like a momentary stimulant. Its effects are often short-lived. Let's be honest. There are scores of Christians who have been Er Craig, "lstheSermon Concept Biblical?" 25. 82 Norringon, lo Preach or I'10t,23. 83 ClydeH.Reid,lheEmptyPulpft(NewYork,Harper & RowPublishers, 1967),47-49

sermonized for decades,and they are still babes in Christ.to We Christians are not transformed simply by hearing sermonsweek after \Meek.We are transformed by regular encounters with the LordJesus Christ.ssThose who minister, therefore, are called to preach Christ and not information about Him. They are also called to make their ministry intensely practical.They are callednot only to revealChrist by the spoken word, but to show their hearers how to experience, ktto*, follow, and serve Him. The contemporary sermon too often lackstheseall-important elements. If a preachercannot bring his hearersinto a living spiritual experience of that which he is ministering, the results of his messagewill be short-lived. Therefore, the church needs fewer pulpiteers and more spiritual facilitators.It is in dire need of those who can proclaim Christ and know how to deploy God's people to experienceHim who has been preached.sr46d on top of that, Christians need instruction on how to share this living Christ with the rest of the church for their mutual edification. Consequently, the Christian family needs a restoration of the biblical practice of mutual exhortation and murual ministry.tt For the New Testament hinges spiritual transformation upon these two things.88Granted, the gift of teaching is present in the church. But teachingis to come from all the believers(1 Corinthians 14:26,31) as well as from those who are speciallygifted to teach (Ephesians4:1 1, James 3:1). We move far outside of biblical bounds when we allow teaching to take the form of a conventional sermon and relegate it to a classof professionalorators.

1947), Union, sa Alexander Missronary NJ,NewTestament andMissionary(Audubon, 1rderforChurch TheNewTestament R.Hay, 292-293,4r4. 850nemayencounter (2Corinthians l2:1ff). Hebrews 3,18; inglory orinsuf{ering either Christ 8 6A c t s 3 , 2 0 . 5 : 4 2 , 8 , 5 , 9 , 2 0 ; G a l a t i a n s l : 6 ; C o l o s s i a n s 1 , 2 7 - 2 8 . W h e t h e r o n e i s p r e a c h i n g l k e r y g m a ) t o u n b Preaching andlts Apostolic The C.H.Dodd, is Christ. alike Jesus unbeliever and both believer message t0 the believers, @idache\ preached "They a writes, Green Michael church, oftheearly 7ff.Speaking 1963), Hodder andStoughton, Developments(London: 'Hepreached.lesus to orChrist: asJesus isreferred tosimply thegospel Indeed, Christocentric. person. waslrankly Their messege was meantime power . . . Jesus who place in the universe of to the exalted risen, Jesus crucified, Jesus Jesus theman, him. . . Jesus in the Evangelisn Green, intheirmessage." central wasunambiguously Christ . . . Therisen present intheSpirii. Hispeople among I970),150 Hodder andStoughton, Church Earty lLondon: s7 Formore Church Reimagrning onthistopic,seeViola, has 8s Hebrews passages. thattheauthor exhortation lt ismutuai inthese on"oneanother" Notice theemphasis 10:24-26. 3,12-13, invtew.

WRAPPING IT UP Is preaching and teaching the Word of God scriptural? Yes, absolutely. But the contemporary pulpir sermon is not the equivalent of the preaching and teaching that is found in the Scriptures.tnft cannot be found in the Judaism of the Old Testamenr,the ministry ofJesus, or the life of the primitive church.noWhat is more, Paul told his Greek converts that he refused to be influenced by the communication patterns of his pagan contemporaries(1 Corinthians l:I7 , 2 2 ; 2 : 1- 5 ) . But what about 1 Corinthians 9:22-23 (rvrr), where Paul says,"I try to find common ground with everyone, doing everything I can to savesome"? We would argue that this would not include making a weekly sermon the focus of all worship gatherings, which would have stifled the believers' transformation and murual edification. The sermon was conceivedin the womb of Greek rhetoric. It was born into the Christian community when pagans-rurned-Christians began to bring their oratorical sryles of speaking into the church. By the third century it became common for Christian leaders to deliver a sermon. By the fourth cenfury it became the norm.nt Christianity has absorbed its surrounding culrure.n' When your pastor mounts his pulpit wearing his clerical robes to deliver his sacredsermon, he is unknowingly playing out the role of the ancient Greek orator. Nevertheless, despite the fact that the contemporary sermon does not have a shred of biblical merit to support its existence,it continues to be uncritically admired in the eyes of most presentday Christians. It has become so entrenched in the Christian mind that most Bible-believing pastors and layrnen fail ro see that they are affirming and perpetuating an unscriptural practice out of sheer tradition. The sermon has become permanently embedded in a 8s Craig "Preacher A.Evans, andPreachingr Some Lexical 0bservations," Journa! of theEvangetical lheotogical Society24, no.4 (December 1981), 315-322. eoNonington, lo Preach or Not,69. s Ll b i d . e2George "TheInfluence T.Purves, ofPaganism 0nPost-Apostolic Christianity," ThePresbyterian Reyr'ew 36(0ctober 1888); 529-554.

complex org^nizational structure that is far removed from New Testament church life.o' In view of all that we have discovered about the contemporary sermon, consider these questions: How can a man preach a sermon on being faithful to the Word of God while he is preaching a sermon? And how can a Christian passivelysit in a pew and affirm the priesthood of all believers when he is passivell'sitting in a pew? To put a finer point on it, how can you claim to uphold the Protestant doctrine of sola scriprura ("by the Scriprure only") and still support the pulpit sermon? As one author so eloquently put it, "The sermon is, in practice, beyond criticism. It has become an end in itself, sacred-the product 'the tradition of the elders' . . . it seems of a distorted reverence for strangely inconsistent that those who are most disposedto claim that 'supreme guide in all matters of the Bible is the Word of God, the faith and practice' are amongst the first to reject biblical methods in favor of the 'broken cisterns'of their fathers (Jeremiah 2:13)."'+ In light of what you have read in this chapter, is there really any room in the church's corral for sacred cows like the sermon?

>delvingDEEPER l. Youtake issuewithmakingtheproclamationof the Wordthe centerof the churchmeeting. preachingwheninstructingTimothy. ln 2 fimothy4:2,he tells Paulseensto emphasize However, andout of season;cnrrect,rebukeandencourhin: "Preachthe Word;hepreparedin season (ttrv). great patience instruction" andcareful age-with Timothywasan apostolicworker.His rolewasto equipGod'speopleto functionand to knowthe Lord. It wasalsoto win lost soulswith a viewto buildingthe church.(In 2 Timothy 4:5,PaultellsTimothy to "do the work of an evangelist.") Therefore,preachingthe Word of God is part of the apostoliccall.Timothy certainlydid this, just asPauldid when he preachedin the marketplacein Athensand e 3 S e ea l s oc h a p t e5r . e4 Nonington,ToPreachor Not,102,104

in the hall ofTpannus in Ephesus.Those were apostolic meetings designedfor equipping the church and for building rhe communiry by converting people to christ. By contrast, the normative church meeting is when every member of the church comes together to share his or her portion of Christ (l Corinthians 14:26, Colossians 3:16, Hebrews 10:24-25).Nl are free to reach,preach,prophesy,pray, and lead a song.

2. 0reeks and Ronans nay haveusedrhetoric to titillate a crlwd; hlwever, why doesthat tact nake including the principles of rhetoric and verse-by-versecnnmentary wrlng? After all, Eod tells us to love Hin with "all nur nind," as well as with all our heart and slul. The point of our argument is that the sermon originated from Greco-Roman paganism rather than fromJesus or the apostles.It is for the reader to decide whether or not the Greco-Roman sermon is wrong or right-an

improved development to

apostolic preaching or a departure from it.

3. lYhenyou describe the work of a church plantef ynu say he "submergedthe churchesin a revelation of lesusChrist." Whatexactlydoesthat nean, and hlw d0 you think thisexperienceaffects howa churchhody assemblestogether? The first-cenrury church planters had a deep and profound revelation (or insight) ofJesus Christ. Thev knew Him, and they knew Him well. He was their life, their breath, and their reason for living. They, in turn, imparted that same revelation to the churchestheyplanted.John 1:1-3 is a good exampleof this dlnamic. Paul of Thrsus preached a messageof Christ that was so profound that it caused immoral, blood-drinking pagansto become full-fledged Christians in love withJesus Christ in just a few short months. (These new believers made up rhe churches of Pisidian Antioch, Iconium, Lysrra, Derbe, Philippi, Thessalonica, and Berea [Acts 13-171.) Paul shared the depths of Christ with them in such a way that they knew that they were holy in His eyesand that they could know Him internally, for Christ indwelt them. This profound, personal understanding of the indwelling Christ affected how they gathered togerher and what they did in those garherings. Furthermore, Paul typically spent severalmonths with these new converts and then left them on their own for long periods of time, somerimes years. And when he rerurned, they were still gathering together, still loving one another, and still following their Lord. What kind of gospel did he preach to causethis kind of remarkable effect? He called it "the unsearchable riches of Christ" (Ephesians 3:8, Nrv). To put it another way, he submerged them in a revelarion ofJesus Christ.

4. It atnost soundslike you are arguing againstpreaching and teaching.ls that whatyou are saying? lf nat, what are yoa arguing? We strongly believe in preaching, teaching, prophesying, exhorting, and all forms of sharing the Word of God. We are simply saying that the modern sermon, which we define as the sameperson (usually a clergyman) giving an oration to the samegroup of people week after week, month after month, and year after year is not only unbiblical, it is counterproductive. We want readers to look at the biblical and historical evidence for this point and decide for themselveswhether or not we are correct in our analysis.In fact, research conducted by The Barna Group has shown that sermons are generally ineffective at facilitating worship, at drawing people closer to God, and at conveying life-changing information to those in the audience'

OBSTACLE TO EVERY.MEMBER FUNCTIONING "lt is a universal tendency in the Ghristian religion,as in manyother religions, to give a theologicalinterpretation to institutions which gradually havedeveloped througha periodof timefor the sakeof practicalusefulness, andthenreadthatinterpretation backintothe periods earliest andinfancy of theseinstitutions, attaching themto an agewhenin factnobodyimagined thattheyhadsucha meaning." -RICHARD HANSON, TWENTIETH.CENTURY PATRISTIC SCHOLAR "l majoredin Biblein college.I wentto the seminary and I majored in the onlythingtheyteachthere:the professional ministry. When I graduated, I realizedthatI couldspeakLatin,Greek,andHebrew, andthe onlythingon earthI wasqualifiedfor wasto be pope.But someone elsehadthejob." _ANONYMOUS PASTOR

T${nPA$TffiR.He is the fundamental figure of the Protestant faith. So prevailing is the pastor in the minds of most

Christians that he is often better known, more highly praised, and more heavily relied upon thanJesus Christ Himself! Remove the pastor and most Protestant churches would be thrown into a panic. Remove the pastor, and Protestantism as we know it would die. The pastor is the dominating focal point, mainstay, and centerpiece of the contemporary church. He is the embodiment of Protestant Christianity. But here is the profound irony. There is not a single verse in the entire New Testament that supports the existenceof the modern-day pastor! He simply did not exist in the early church. Note that we are using the term pasturthroughout this chapter to depict the contemporary pastoraloffice and role, not the specificindividual who fills this role. By and large, those who servein the office of pastor are wonderful people. They are honorable, decent, and very often gifted Christians who love God and have a zealto serveHis people. But it is the role they fill that both Scripture and church history are opposed to.'

. . . RIGHT? ISINTHEBIBLE THEPASTOR The word pastnrsdoes appear in the New Testament: And He gaaesomeas apostles,and someasprlpbets, and someas eaangelists,and slme as pastors and teacbers. ( E n H r s l n N s 4 : r r , N A s B ,A U T H o R S r' u r H e s l s )

The following observationsare to be made about this text. This is the only verse in the entire New Testament where the word pasturis used.t One solitary verse is a mighty scanty piece of evidence on which to hang the Protestant faith! In this regard, there seemsto be more biblical authoriry for snake handling (seeMark 16:18 and Acts 28:3-6) than there is for r Today or generally asa pastor arelimited to serving theiroptions believe ofthelocalchurch totheministry whofeelcalled those didnotexistinthefirstcentury. thesepositions workisdelinitely a realexperience, totheLord's While being called leader. worship office, pastors desplletheir Buttheyhelppeople oftendohelppeople. basis, scriptural though theirofficeiswithout Nevertheless, notbecause oi it. 2 Aderivative 5,2-3. inActs20:28andI Peter formoithewordpoinenisused

the present-day pastor. Roman Catholics have made the same error with the word priest. You can find the word priest used in the New Testament three times. In every case,it refers to all Christians.r " The word is used in the plural. Itis pastors.This is significant. For whoever these "pastors" are, they are plural in the church, not singular. Consequently, there is no biblical support for the practice of sola pastora (single pastor). :' The Greek word translated pastors is poimenas. It means shepherds. (Pastor is the Latin word for shepherd.) Pastor, then, is a metaphor to describe a particular function in the church. It is not an office or a title.4 A first-cenrury shepherd had nothing to do with the specializedand professional sense it has come to have in contemporary Christianiry. Therefore, Ephesians4:11 doesnot envision a pastoraloffice, but merely one of many functions in the church. Shepherds are those who naturally provide nurture and care for God's sheep.It is a profound error, therefore, to confuse shepherdswith an office or tide as is commonly conceived today.t At best, Ephesians 4:1 1 is oblique. It offers absolutely " no definition or description of who pastors are. It simply mentions them. Regrettably, we have filled this word with our own Western concept of what a pastor is. We have read our idea of the contemporary pastor back into the New Testament. Never would any first-century Christian have conceivedof the contemporary pastoral office ! Richard Hanson observes,"For us the words bishops, presbyters, and deaconsare stored with the associationsof nearly two thousand Revelation 1:6,5'10,20'6.R.PaulStevens, fhelther SixDays'Vocation, Work, andMinistry in BiblicalPerspective(Grand Raprds: Eerdmans, 1999), 173-181. Banks, Paul's ldeaof Community, l3l-i35. TheNewTestament never uses thesecular Greek words forcivilandreligious authorities to depictministers priestlysystem in thechurch.Further, eventhoughmostNewTestament authorsweresteeped in theJewish of the (priest) OldTestament, theynever presupposes usehiereus to refer to Christian ministry. Ordination tooffice a staticanddefinable church leadership rolethatdidnotexistintheapostolic churches. Marjorie Warkenlin, )rdination: ABiblical-Histlrical ViewlGrand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 160-161, 156. Thewords person, ofJobcome to mind,"Letmenot,I prayyou,accept anyman's neither letmegiveflattering titlesuntoman"(Job 32:21)'.

years. For the people who first used them, the titles of these offices can have meant little more than inspectors,older men and helpers. It was when unsuitable theological significance began to be attached to them that the distortion of the concept of Christian ministry began."u First-century shepherds were the local elders (presbyters)t and overseersof the church.t Their function was at odds with the contemporary pastoralrole.o

FROM? COME DIDTHEPASTOR WHERE If contemporary pastorswere absentfrom the early church, where did they come from? And how did they rise to such a prominent position in the Christian faith? The roots of this tale are tangled and complex, and they reach as far back as the fall of man. With the Fall came an implicit desire in people to have a physical leader to bring them to God. For this reason, human societies throughout history have consistently created a specialcasteof revered religious leaders.The medicine man, the shaman,the rhapsodist,the miracle worker, the witch doctor, the soothsayer,the wise man, and the priest have all been with us sinceAdam's blunder.'nAnd this person is alwaysmarked by specialtraining, specialgarb, a specialvocabulary and a specialway of life." We can seethis instinct rear its ugly head in the history of ancient Israel. It made its first appearanceduring the time of Moses. Two servantsof the Lord, Eldad and Medad, received God's Spirit and began to prophesy. In hasry response, a young zealot urged Moses to "restrain them" (l{umbers ll:26-28, Nasn).Moses reproved the 6 r 8 e

Exa n ined.34-35, Hanson. Chri stian Priesthood wordfor"eldel'lpresbuteros). letters oftheGreek intoEnglish Thiswordisthespelling FromChristtoConstantine,32). bishopsand deacons(Smith, Theterms overseersandservantswereecclesiasticrzedintothewords "The Wl:Searching Together, 1981); JonZens, Croix Falls, ThePastorlSt. lo theRoot, ch.2-3;JonZens, Christian Smith, Colng 'Clergy/Laity'Distinction,AHelporaHindrancetotheBodyofChri$?" SearchingTogether23,no.4(1995). 10"Christianity. pagan or approach God without the to understand religions thatmostmeniindit difficult fromtheexample of . . learnt ministry" himself tothisrepresentative Him,andfeels called todevote foiGod, reDresents sense stands aidofa manwhoinsome (Hanson, Exan ined,100],. ChristianPriesthood I' Walter Yoder, "New andJohn 5.SeealsoW.Klassen, J.L.Burkholder, 17(1969)' Presbyter ls0ldPriest WritLarge," Concern Klassen, 1969). Book Service, DC,Sojourners of Believers TheRelation ol Elders to thePriesthood lWashington.

young suppressorsaying he wished all of God's people could prophesy.Moses had set himself against a clerical spirit that had tried to control God's people. We see it again when Moses ascended Mount lloreb. The people wanted Moses to be a physical mediator berween them and God becausethey feared a personal relationship with the Almighry (Exodus 20:19). This fallen instinct made another appearanceduring the time of Samuel. God wanted His people to live under His direct headship. But Israel clamored for a human king instead (1 Samuel 8:19). The seedsof the contemporary pastor can even be detectedin the New Testament era. Diotrephes, who "love[d] to have the preerninence" in the church, illegitimately took control of its affairs (3 John 9-10). In addition, some scholarshave suggestedthat the doctrine of the Nicolaitans thatJesus condemnsin Revelation 2:6 is a reference to the rise of an early clergy." Alongside humanity's fallen quest for a human spirirual mediator is the obsessionwith the hierarchical form of leadership. All ancient cultures were hierarchical in their social structures to one degree or another. Regrettably, the postapostolic Christians adopted and adaptedthesestrucruresinto their church life aswe shall see.

THEBIRTH OFONE.BISHOP RULE Up until the second century the church had no official leadership. That it had leaders is without dispute. But leadership was unofficial in the sensethat there were no religious "offices" or sociologi* cal slots to fill. New Testament scholarship makes this abundantly clear.'3 In this regard, the first-century churches w.erean oddity indeed. '2 [W.Grant, NicolaitanisnortheRiseandGrowthof Clerisy(Bedford,PA,MMB,n.d.),3-6.TheGreekword nicolaitaneneans "conquering "toconquer "thepeople." thepeople." il*osmeans over" and/aos means Grant believes thatNicolaitans arethose who "laity"outofGod's people make byraising up"clergy" to lordit overthem.SeealsoAlexander Hay,What ls Vrlrong in theChurchl (Audubon, NJ:New Testament l\4issionary Union, n.d.), 54. 13See-Banks, Paut's tdeaofConnunity,131-135. Thewordofficehas noanalog intheGreek NewTestament whenreferring to leaders. Christian Weread these conventions ofhuman sociological organization back intoourNew Testament.

They were religious groupswithout priest, temple, or'sacrifice.'oThe Christians themselvesled the church under Christ's direct headship. Leaderswere organic, untitled, and were recognizedby their service and spiritual marurity rather than by a title or an office. Among the flock were the elders (shepherdsor overseers).These men all had equal standing. There was no hierarchy among them.15 Also present were extra-localworkers who planted churches.These were called"sent ones" or apostles.But they did not take up residency in the churches for which they cared. Nor did they control them.'u The vocabulary of New Testament leadership allows no pyramidal structures. It is rather a language of horizontal relationships that includes exemplaryaction.tt Church leadership began to formalize at about the time of the death of the itinerant apostolic workers (church planters). In the late first and early second centuries, local presbyters began to emerge as the resident "successors"to the unique leadership role played by the apostolic workers. This gave rise to a single leading figure in each church.tt Without the influence of the extra-local workers who had been mentored by the New Testament apostles,the church began to drift toward the organizational patterns of her surrounding culrure.tn Ignatius of Antioch (35-107) was instrumental in this shift. He was the first figure in church history to take a step down the slippery slope toward a single leader in the church. We can trace the origin of the contemporary pastor and church hierarchy to him. Ignatius elevatedone of the elders in each church above all the others. ra JamesD.G.Dunn,NewTestanentfheologyinDtalogue(Philadelphia'WestminsterPress,l98T),123,121-1 rs lnthewritings usedinterchangeably, asisthecaseIn arealways overseer, andelder {athers, thewords shepherd, church oftheearly between the "Thatthelanguage a distinction does notallowusto press oftheNewTestament F.F.Bruce states, theNewTestament. 'bishoO' (presbyteros) (eprsfopos) at length. Paulcould address need notbeargued andthattranslated'elder' wordtranslated Greek (those inthePastoral Epistles hadmade bishops.Laler, whom theHoly Spirit asthose thechurch ofIphesus e/dersof theassembled (TheSpreadrng Rapids' Eerdmans, 19581 FlamelGrand to beusedinterchangeably" andTitus), thetwotermsstrllappear toTimothy (always inthewritings o{1 Clement, asidentical continue to beregarded intheplural) andshepherds elders, 65).InJact, bishops, Seealso ofthesecond century. upuntilthebeginning They wereseen asidentical ofHernas. andTheShepherd theDidache, EarlyChristiansSpeak,169-113. CalvinandtheRefornation,S0-8I;Ferguson, lVlackrnnon, L6SeeViola, fordetails. Reinagining Church '7 1 Corinthians 4'12;1 Peter 5'3, 2 Thessalonians 3,9;1Timothy 11,1; r8 Ferguson, Early Christians Speak,172. rs ln hisbookToPreach gives and ofhowhierarchical structures discussion Nonington anrn-depth or NottoPreach?David (pp.24-25). inthechurch began toemerge specialists ecclesiastical

The elevated elder was now called the bishop. All the responsibilities that belonged to the college of elders were exercisedby the bishop.:n In AD 107, Ignatius wrote a series of letters when on his way to be marryred in Rome. Six out of seven of these letters strike the same chord. They exalt the authority and importance of the bishop's office." According to Ignatius, the bishop had ultimate power and should be obeyed absolutely. Consider the following excerpts from his letters: "Plainly therefore we ought to regard the bishop as the Lord Himself. . . . Nl of you follow the bishop asJesusChrist follows the Father. . . . Wherever the bishop shall appear, there will the people be; even as where Jesusmay be. . . . It is not lawful apart from the bishop either to baptize or to hold a love feast; but whatever he shall approve,this is well-pleasingalso to God. . . . It is good to recognize God and the bishop. He that honors the bishop is honored of God. . . . Do nothing without the bishop. . . . Therefore as the Lord did nothing without the Fatheq being united with Him, either by Himself or by the Apostles, so neither do you anything without the bishop and the presbyters. . . . You should look on your bishop as a type of the Father."t' For Ignatius, the bishop stood in the placeof God while the presIt fell to byters, or elders,stood in the place of the twelve apostles.2r the bishop alone to celebratethe Lord's Supper, conduct baptisms, give counsel, discipline church members, approve marriages, and preach sermons.to The elders sat with the bishop at the Lord's Supper.But it was the bishop who presidedover it. He took chargeof leading public prayers 20Ferguson, Early Christians Speak,113. 2r Bruce, Spreading Flane,203-204. ,, Epistle 7,1; 7,1;Epistle totheMagnesians, 8r1-2; Epistle tothePhiladelphians, totheEphesians, 6,1;Epistle totheSmyrnaeans, The Ap1st1lic Wiltings: withthissortof language. SeefarlyChristian epistles arereplete Epistle t0theTrallians, 3,1.lgnatius's (New Press, 75-130. Faifers York: Dorset 1968), 23Edwin (London: Early Christian 106,185; L0ngmans, Green, andCo.,1895), Churches Hatch, The0rganization oftheEarly Christian andvarious elements ofthat oftheorganization ofthechurch evolution Writings,88. Hatch's book shows thatthegradual werebonowed fromGreco-Roman society. organization 2aRobert Thomas Nelson 1964), 58, vol,11 (New York, & Sons, andConnentary, TheApostolic Fathers: A NewTranslation M.Grant, 171

and ministry.tt Only in the most extreme casescould a layman take the Lord's Supper without the bishop present.'uFor the bishop, said Ignatius, must "preside" over the elementsand distribute them. In Ignatius's mind, the bishop was the remedy for dispelling false doctrine and establishing church unity." Ignatius believed that if the church would survive the onslaught of heresy,it had to develop a rigid power structure patterned after the centralized political structure of Rome." Single-bishop rule would rescuethe church from heresy and internal strife.2e Historically this is known as the "monoepiscopate" or "the monarchical episcopacy." It is the type of organization where the bishop is distinguished from the elders (the presbytery) and ranks above them. At the time of Ignatius, the one-bishop rule had not caught on in other regions.'oBut by the mid-second cenrury, this model was firmly establishedin most churches." By the end of the third century it prevailed everywhere." The bishop evenruallybecame the main administrator and distributor of the church's wealth." He was the man responsible for teaching the faith and knowing what Christianiry was all about.'oThe congregation, once active, was now rendered passive.God's people merely watched the bishop perform. In effect, the bishop became the solo pastor of the church"-the professional in common worship.'o He was seen as the spokesperson

2sR.AlastairCampbell,TheElders'SenioritywithinEarliestChristianity(Edinburgh, l&lClark, 1994),229. 26 Hatch,0rganization of theEarlyChristian Churches,124. ,, lbid.. i00. 28KennethStrand,"TheRiseoftheMonarchicalEpiscopate,"infhreeEssaysonEarlyChurchHistory(AnnArbor, )rdinatron, A Biblical-Historical View, 115. 196i);Warkentin, 2s Hanson, ChristianPriesthoodExanined,69;EarlyChristianWritings,63-72. 30Bruce, Flane,56-69; Mrnistry lgnatius Spreading Niebuhr andWilliams, in Historical Perspectives,23-25, When wrote hisletiers, the practiced insuch Philadelphia, one-bishop rulewasbeing Asian cities asEphesus, Magnesia, andSmyrna. Butit hadnotyetreached intheWest, asRome. rulemoved in a westward fromSyria Greece orcities such lt appears thattheone-bishop direction across the Empire, 3r Hanson, "TheChristian Christian Priesthood Exanined,67; Bruce, Spreading Flame,69..1. B.Lightfoot's Ministry" in Sarnt Paul's in Frank's Epistle tothePhilippians lL,Crossway, 1994) offers, opinion, themostsatisfactory explanation ofthehistorical lWheaton, gradually evidence of howthebisfrop developed outofthepresbytery. 32Niebuhr andWilliams, Ministry in Historical Perspectives,25. 33S.L.Greenslade, (London' Shepherding theFlock SCM Press, 1967), 8. 3a Hanson, Christian Priesthood Exantned,68. 35Hatch, Growth of Church lnstttutions,35. 36White. Protestant Worshio andChurch Archttecture.65-66.

and head of the congregation and the one who controlled all church activities.In short, he was the forerunner of the contemporary pastor.

FROM PRESBYTER TOPRIEST Clement of Rome, who died in about 100, was the first Christian writer to make a distinction in stafus between Christian leaders and nonleaders. He was the first to use the word laity to distinguish them from the ministers." Clement argued that the Old Testament order of priests should find fulfillment in the Christian church." Tertullian was the first writer to use the word clerEtto refer to a separateclassof Christians.'uBoth Terrullian and Clement popularized the word chrgtin their writings.ao The New Testament, on the other hand, never uses the terms clergt and laity and does not support the concept that there are those who do ministry (clergy) and those to whom ministry is done (laity).t' Thus what we have in Terrullian and Clement is a clear break from the New Testament Christian mind-set where all believersshared the samestarus.By the mid-third century the authority of the bishop had hardened into a fixed office.ot Then Cyprian of Carthage appeared, furthering the impact. Cyprian was a former pagan orator and teacher of rhetoric.a' When he became a Christian, he began to write prolifically. But Cyprian never abandonedsome of his pagan ideas. Due to Cyprian's influence, the door was open to resurrect the Old Testament economy of priests, temples, altars, and sacrifices.ou

37 1 Clement 40'5.SeealsoFerguson, Early Christians Speal, 168;R.PaulStevens, The Abolition of thelarty(Carlisle, UK;Paternoster Press, 1999), 5. 38Warkentin, Ordination, A Biblical-Histuical View,38. 3s Tertullian, 0nMonogamy, 12. a0Stevens, Abolition oftheLaity,28. a' Theterm/aifyisderived (see1 Peter "thepeople" lromtheGreek from word/aos, whichmeans 2,9-10). Ihelernclergyis derived "a lot,a share, theGreek wordk/eros, whichmeans oraninheritance." TheNewTestament never theword/r/eros forleaders. uses (see people people It rather uses it forthewhole ofGod. Forit isGod's thatareGod's inheritanceEphesians 1:11; Galatians 3'29; Colossians 1,12; I Peter 5:3). Inthisconnectron, it isironic thatPeter in 1 Peter 5:3exhorts theelders ofthechurch tonotIordover thel/eros("clergy")t Again, kleros flock. and/aosbothrefer tothewhole ofGod's 42J.G.Davies,TheEarlyChristianChurch'AHistoryofltsFirstFiveCenturies(GrandRapids'BakerBooks,l965),92 synopsis of howtheclergy developed, seeStevens, 0therSixDays, 39-48. a3"Come andSee" lcons, Books, http://www.c0meandseeicons.com/c/phm12.htm. andArt,"St.Cyprian ofCarthage," aaNichols, Corporate l'lorship, 25.

Bishops began to be called priests,ota custom that became common by the third century.46They were also called pastors on occasion.ot In the third century every church had its own bishop.o' (At this time bishops were essentiallyheadsover local churches.They were not diocesansuperintendentsas they are today in Roman Catholicism.) And bishops and presbyterstogether started to be called "the clergy."o' The origin of the unbiblical doctrine of "covering" can be laid at the feet of Cyprian also.tnCyprian taught that the bishop has no superior but God. FIe was accountable to God alone. Anyone who separatedhimself from the bishop separatedhimself from God." Cyprian also taught that a portion of the Lord's flock was assignedto each individual shepherd(bishop)." After the Council of Nicaea (325), bishops began to delegate the responsibility of the Lord's Supper to the presbyters.t' Presbyters were little more than deputies of the bishop, exercising his authority in his churches. Becausethe presbyters were the ones administering the Lord's Supper,they began to be called priests.toMore startling, the bishop

as Ferguson, language Sacerdotal whichisLatinfor"priest." sacerdos, called thebishop normally Speal, 168.Cyprian Christians Early takenfromthe0ldTestamenttodefinechurchofficesquicklycaughton(Warkentin.1rdination'ABiblical-His and isoneofthemoststriking viewoftheministry wrote thatthe"sacerdotal 136). J.B.Lightfooi From Christ toConstantine, Smith, "Christian Ministry," 144. phenomena oithechurch." inthehistory important a5Hanson, priests as until the ministers thought of Christian that anyone There is no evidence 95. Priesthood Exanined,35, Christian hiswritings, hecallsthebishop Throughout andpresbyters. bishops year thetermprlestto isthefirsttoapply AD200.Tertullian (highpriest). anyexplanation, Hedoes sowithout (priests) sumnus sacerdos andhecallsthebishop sacerdos andthepresbyters (p. Tradition vonCampenhausen, andLifein theChurch titles 38).SeealsoHans were familiar withthese indicating thathisreaders istheequivalent oftheOldTestament thatthebishop (Philadelphia, forsaying isalsocredited 1968), 220.Cyprian Fortress Press, "priests" in hisvoluminous (Smith, regularly callsclergy Eusebius Thehistorian 136). Frorn Christ toConstantine, highpriest (Hanson, 6l). Priesthood Exanined, Christian writings a7"Thus the ministry. Hewasprophet, of thefullness whocame to represent church, ofthelocal aschiefpastor it wasthebishop, 'synagogue"' (Niebuhr and oitheChristian ofoverseers oftheboard andchairman assembly, attheliturgical chief celebrant teacher, inAD591isa discussion Rulewritten workTheBook ofPastoral Gregory theGreat's Perspectives,2S). Ministry in Historical V'lillians, duties. Gregory's isoneofhismostimportant andpreaching isa pastor, ToGregory, thebishop office. ofthebishops ontheduties andArthur SeealsoPhilip Culbertson today. inProtestant seminaries totrainpastors classic andisstillused isa Christian book Press, 1990). Fortress Patristic Perlod(lVinneapolis: Readings fron the The Pastor' Shippee, Bradford a8 Fora discussion Speak, I3-I4. Early Christians seeFerguson, ofthisdevelopnent, as Niebuhr in Historical Perspectives,23. Minrstry andWilliams, 50Fora thorough Church. seeViola, Reimagrnrng anditsrefutation, ofthisdoctrine discussion 5r Stevens, 1therSixDays,4I-42. s2Cyprian having togive pastor, heisto ruleandgovern, which "a portion indivrdual toeach assigned oftheflockhasbeen said, accountofhisdoingtothelord"(LettertoCorneliusofRome,LlV,l4).SeealsoHatch,1rganizationoftheEarly 171. 53Niebuhr in Historical Perspectives,2S-29. Ministry andtl'lilliams, sa Camobell, in Historical Perspectives,29 Ministry andYtilltans, Niebuhr Elders,23l;

came to be regarded as the high priest who could forgive sinsls'Nl of these trends obscured the New Testament reality that all believers are priests unto God. By the fourth centu[', this graded hierarchy dominated the Christian faith.tuThe clergy castewas now cemented. At the head of the church stood the bishop. Under him was the college of presbyters. Under them stood the deacons.ttAnd under all of them were the laymen. One-bishop rule became the acceptedform of church government throughout the Roman Empire. (During this time, certain churches began to exerciseauthority over other churches-thus broadening the hierarchical structure.)tt By the end of the fourth century the bishops walked with the great. fu noted in chapter 2, Constantine was the first to give them tremendous privileges. They becameinvolved in politics, which separated them further from the presbyters.toIn his attempts to strengrhen the bishop's office, Cyprian argued for an unbroken successionof bishops that traced back to Peter.u0This idea is known as apostolic succession.ut Throughout his writings, Cyprian employed the official language of the Old Testament priesthood to justi$z this practice.u'Like Terrullian (160-225) and Hippoly'tus (170-236) before him, Cyprian used the term sacerdotes to describe the presbyters and bishops.utBut he went a step further.

55Davies, (Cambridge: [arlyChristian Church, l3I; The Apostolic-tradition ofHippolytus, trans.Burton S.Easton Cambridge University Press, 1934). Hippolytus distinguishes givethebishop sharply between thepowers ofthebishop andthepresbyters. Hiswritings thepower toforgive stnsandto allotpenance Christian Priesthood Examined 39-40). Presbyters anddeacons could only lHanson, (Campbell, withthebishop's baptize authority Elders,233l. 5 6D a v i eEsa, r l y C h r i s t i a n C h u r c h , I S T . l n A D 3 l 8 , C o n s t a n t r n e r e c o g n i z e d t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e b i s h o p . l n A D 3 3 3 placed (p.188). onanequal footing withRoman magi$rates 57Hans Lietzmann, A History oftheEarly Church, vol.2 (New York, TheWorld Publishing Company, 1953), 247. 5 8A c c o r d i n g t o t h e c a n o n s o f t h e C o u n c i l o f N i c a e a , A l e x a n d r i a , R o m e , a n d A n t i o c h h a d s p e c i a l a u t h o r i t y o v e r t (Smith, fromChristtoConstantine.95l. ss Hanson, Christian Priesthood Exanined,72. Hanson howthefalloftheRoman explains Empire inthefifthcentury strengthened the bishop's office(pages 72-l 7). 60AnnFremantle, ed.,Afreasury ofEarly Christianity(New York, Viking Press, 1953), 301. 6' Apostolic succession firstappears inthewritings ofClement 0fRome andlrenaeus. lt alsoappears inHippolytus. ButCyprian turned itintoacoherentdoctrine.Grant, EarlyChristianityandSociety,38;NormanSykes,1ldPriestandNewPresbyter(London University Press, 1956), 240. 62G.S.M.Walker, (London: TheChurchnanship of St.Cyprian Lutterworth Press, 1968), 38.Many ofthechurch fathers treated the0ld Iestament Scriptures priest ascontaining a normatrve ordering ofthechurch. Iheuseof0ldTestament terminology forchurch o{ficebearers became c0mm0n asearly asthesecond century Ordination' ABiblical-Historical View,50, 16I;Hanson, {Warkentin, Christian Priesthood Examined, 46,51). 63 Hanson, Christian Priesthood Exanined,59; Warkentin. Ordrnation: A Biblical-Historical View,39.

The non-New Testament concept of sacerdotalism-the belief that there existsa divinely appointed person to meditate between God and the people-originated with Cyprian. FIe arguedthat becausethe Christian clergy were priests who offer the holy sacrifice (the Eucharist) they were sacrosanct(holy) themselves.''o We can also credit Cyprian with the notion that when the priest offered the Eucharist, he was actually offering up the death of Christ on behalf of the congregation."5To Cyprian's mind, the body and blood of Christ are once again sacrificedthrough the Eucharist.oo Consequently, it is in Cyprian that we find the seedsof the medieval Catholic Mass.nT This idea widened the wedge between clerg;yand laity. It also created an unhealthy dependenceof the laity upon the clergy.

THEROLE OFTHEPRIEST Until the Middle Ages,the presbyters(now commonly called "priests") played secondfiddle to the bishop. But during the Middle Ages there was a shift. The presbytersbegan to represent the priesthood while the bishops were occupied with political duties.n'The parish (local) priestsbecamemore central to the life of the church than the bishop.oo The priest now stood in God's place and controlled the sacraments. As Latin becamethe common languagein the mid-fourth century the priest would invoke the words hocestclrrpusmeum. These Latin words mean "This is my body." Mrith these words, the priest became the overseerof the mysterious happenings that were believed to have occurred during the Catholic Mass.Ambrose of Milan can be credited for the idea that the 5a Hanson,ChristianPrresthood Exanined,54. i l l b i d . , 5 8l.n b o t ht h e D i d a c h e a n1dC l e m e n t . t hEeu c h a r i si st r e f e r r etdo a s a " s a c r i t i c ea"n da n " o f f e r i n gp" e r f o r m ebdy t h eb i s h o p s (vonCampenhausen, Traditton andLifern the Church,220). '6 Thewordsacriftceasusedrn a liturgicalsensefirst appearsin the Didache(uon Campenhausen, Tradition and Lifein the Church, 220). 5'Theideathatthenriestof{ersthesacrificeo{ChristthroughtheEucharistissacerdotalism.0nthisscore,RichardHans p o i g n a n trl ye m a r k s" ,T h i ss a c e r d o tcaol n c e pot f p r i e s t h o oadp p e a rts0 o b s c u r ei f, n o ta c t u a l l a y b o l i s ht h , e d o c t r i noef t h e p r i e s t h o o d priesthood of all believers. lt drainsbelievers' all awayintothe priesthood of the clergy"lHanson,ChristianPriesthood fxanined,98\ il tbid.79. 6 e I n t h et h i r dc e n t u r ye,a c hp r i e sct h o s ea b i s h o p t o o v e r s eaen dc o o r d i n a h t er sf u n c t i o n i n g I n. t h ef o u r t hc e n t u r yt h, i n g sg o t m o r e c o m p l e xB.i s h o pns e e d esdu p e r v i s i oHne. n c w e e r eb o r na r c h b i s h o pa sn dm e t r o p ot al n sw h og o v e r n et d h ec h u r c h eosf a p r o v i n c e lDuranI,Ageof faitr, 45, i56 760).

mere utterance of bocestcl?'pusmeum supernaturally converted bread and wine into the Lord's physical body and blood.'o (Some scholars say that the stage-magic phrase houtsplcus comes from bocestclrpus meum.) According to Ambrose, the priest was endowed .with special powers to call God down out of heaven into bread. Becauseof this sacramentalfunction, the wordpresbyterlscameto mean "sacerdos" (priest). Consequently, when the Latin word presbyterwas taken into English, it had the meaning of "priest" rarher than "elder."t' Thus in the Roman Catholic church, priest was the widely used term to refer to the local presbyter.

THEINFLUENCE OFGRECO.ROMAN CULTURE The Greco-Roman culfure that surrounded the early Christians reinforced the graded hierarchy that was slowly infiltrating the church. Greco-Roman culture \Mashierarchicalbynature. This influence seeped into the church when new converts brought their cultural baggageinto the believing comm.ntity.t' Human hierarchy and "official" ministry institutionalized the church ofJesus Christ. By the fourth century these elements hardened the arteriesof the once living, breathing ekklesiaof God-within which ministry was functional, Spirit-led, organic, and shared by all believers. By the fifth century the concept of the priesthood of all believers had completely disappearedfrom Christian practice. Accessro God was now controlled by the clergy caste.Clerical celibacy began to be enforced. Infrequent Communion became a regular habit of the so-called lairy. The church building was now veiled with incense and smoke. Clergy prayers were said in secret. And the small but

t0 ConcerningtheMysteries,9:52,54.lntheEasternchurchesaprayerisofleredfortheSpirittodothemagic.lnt theprayer wasleftout,forthewords themselves didthetrick(Dix,Shape oftheLiturgy, 240*241,2 75;losefA.Jungm ann,TheMass of theRoman Rite, vol.1 [New York' Benziger, 1951], 52). 7r Campbell, Elders,234-235.Thewordprleslisetymologicallyacontractionof"presbyter."Bythecloseofthe0ldEnglis priesthad Engltshterm becomethecunentwordfor"presbyter"and"sacerdos"(CrossandLivingstone,0xfordDictionar Christian Church,1325). 72 Hatch, 1rganization of theEarlyChristian Churches.3A.4I

profoundly significant screen that separatedclergy from laity had been introduced. The role of the bishop was also changing, elevating him from serving as the head of a local church to becoming the representative of evervbody in a given are^." Bishops ruled over the churches just as Roman governors ruled over their provinces.tt Eventually, the bishop of Rome was given the most authority of all, and his position finally evolvedinto the office of the pope.tt

HIERARCHY ANDROMAN CONSTANTINE The hierarchical leadership structure first emerged in ancient Eg'ypt, Babylon, and Persia.'uIt was later carried over into the Greek and Roman culture where it was perfected. Historian D. C. tueman writes, "The Persiansmade two outstanding contributions to the ancient world: The organization of their empire and their religion. Both of these contributions have had considerable influence on our western world. The system of imperial administration was inherited by Nexander the Great, adopted by the Roman Empire, and evenruallybequeathedto modern Europe."77 The social world into which Christianity spreadwas governed by a single ruler-the

emperor. Soon after Constantine took the throne

in the early fourth century the church became a full-fledged, topdown, hierarchicallyorganizedsociety.Ts

73Hanson, Christian Priesthood Examrned,TL /4 Robert fheChurch rnLattnandPatristic Thought(tondon: S.PC.K., 1972),48. F.Evans,One andHoly: /5 Before hewashonored, exercised nojurisdiction outside ofRome, While hedidnothave thatkindof Constantine, theRoman bishop (Bruce Thewordpope from Shelley, Church History in PlainLanguage TX,Word, 1982], 151). comes ecclesiastical authority lWaco, toexpress thefatherly careofanybishop, lt wasnotuntilthesixthcentury thatthetermbegan to be Ihetillepapa, a termused pope: forthebishop ofRome. Here isa briefsketch oftheorigin oftheRoman Catholic Attheendofthesecond used exclusively given great Roman were honor. Stephen | (d.257)wasthefirstto usethePetrine text(lVlatthew 16,18) tosupport century, bishops pope oftheRoman bishop. Butthiswasn0tuniversally held. Theemergence ofthemodern canbetraced toLeothe thepreeminence andbiblical claim fortheprimacy oftheRoman bishop. Great, whoserved from440to461.Leowasthefirstto make a theological (540-604), wasfinally Withthecoming ofGregory theGreat the"papal chair" was Under him.theprimacy o{Rome established. (lncidentally, precedent landowner ltaly, for rrch became byfarthelargest in setting a andpowerful extended andenhanced. Gregory popes Bythemid{hird church had30,000 members, 150clergymen, and1,500 widows andpoor tofollow.) century, theRoman people(Gonzalez, l,242;Schaff, HrstoryoftheChristianChurch,uol'212,2I8-2I9tShelley,ChurchHistoryi StoryofChristianity, PlainLanguage, l50-151;Dauies,EarlyChristianChurch, l35-136,250;Durant, AgeofFaith,52l;Hanson, ChristianPrresthood servantoftheservanlsof6od(Schaff, HistoryoftheChrrstianChurch, Exanined,T6ff,).Gregorywasalsothefirsttousetheterm 3,534,4,329). i6 Durant, andChrist,670-671. Caesar rr D.C.Trueman, (loronto; ThePageant of thePast'fhe1riginsof Civilization Ryerson, 1965),105. r8 Grant, EarlyChristianityandSociety,ll*l2."Theorganizationofthechurchadapteditselftothepoliticalandgeo (Schafi, History oftheChrrstian Church,3:l). o{theEmpire"

Edwin Flatch u'rites, "For the most part rhe Christian churches associatedthemselvestogether upon the lines of the Roman Empire." This not only applied to the gradedhierarchy it adoptedinto its leadership structure, but also to the \Mayrhe church divided itself up into gradationsof dioceses,provinces,and municipalitiesall controlled by a top-down leadershipsystem."The development of the organization of the Christian churcheswas gradual," Hatch adds, "[and] the elements of which that organrzatronwere composed were already existing in human society."Te Will Durant makes a similar point, noting that Christianiry "grew by the absorption of pagan faith and ritual; it became a triumphant church by inheriting the organizing patterns and genius of Rome. . . . As Judea had given Christianiry ethics, and Greece had given it theology, so now Rome gave it organization; all these, with a dozen absorbed and rival faiths. entered into the Christian synthesis."so By the fourth century the church followed the example of the Roman Empire. Emperor Constantine organized the church into diocesesalong the pattern of the Roman regional districts. (The word diocese was a secular term that referred to the larger administrative units of the Roman Empire.) Later, Pope Gregory shapedthe ministry of the entire church after Roman law.tt Durant adds, "When Christianiry conquered Rome the ecclesiastical structure of the pagan church, the title and vestments of the pontifex maximus . . . and the pageantry of immemorial ceremony, passedlike maternal blood into the new religion, and captive Rome capruredher conqueror."82 All of this was at gross odds with God's way for His church. Thus whenJesusentered the drama of human history FIe obliterated both the religious professional icon as well as the hierarchical form of

7eHatch, 0rgantzatron oftheEarly putsit, "Asthechurch Christian Churches,185, grew, quite 213.AsBruce Shelley it adopted, naturally, thestructure oftheEnpie."Church History in Plain Language, 152. 8 aC a e s a r a n d C h r i s l 5 T 5 , 6 l S . D u r a n t w r i t e s , " T h e R o m a n C h u r c h f o l l o w e d i n t h e t o o t s t e p s 0 f t h e R o m a n S t a t e " ( p 8LStevens,0therSixDays,44;Irueman,PageantofthePasl.3ll:Fox PagansandChristians,5T3;CrossandLivingstone,0xlord Dictionary of theChristian Church,482. 82Durant, Caesar andChrist.671-612.

leadership.trAs an extensionof Christ's narure and mission, the early church was the first "lay-led" movement in history. But with the death of the apostlesand the men they trained, things began to change.to Since that time, the church of Jesus Christ has derived its pattern for church otganrzation from the societiesin which it has been placed-despite our Lord's warning that He was initiating a new society with a unique character(Matthew 23:8-11 and Mark 10:42ff.).In striking contrast to the Old Testament provisions made at Mt. Sinai, neitherJesus nor Paul imposed any fixed organnational patterns for the New Israel.

OFTHECLERGY ANDTHEGLORIFICATION CONSTANTINE From AD 3 I 3 to 32 5, Christianity was no longer a struggling religion tryng to survive the Roman government. It was basking in the sun of imperialism, loadedwith money and starus.ttTo be a Christian under Constantine'sreign was no longer a handicap.It was an advantage.It was fashionableto become a part of the emperor's religion. And to be among the clergy was to receive the greatest of advantages.tu Clergymen received the same honors as the highest officials of the Roman Empire and even the emperor himself.tTIn fact, Constantine gave the bishops of Rome more power than he gave Roman governors.tt He also ordered that the clergy receive fixed annual allowances(ministerial pay)l In AD 3 13, he exempted the Christian clergy from paying taxes-something that pagan priests had traditionally enjoyed.'nHe also made them exempt from mandatory public office and other civic duties.nt'Theywere freed from being tried by secular courts and from 83 lVlatthew . 20:25-28, 23:8-12;Luke22'25'27 84Paul Trophimus, Tychicus, etc.See Viola, Solou Timothy, Titus, Gaius, Among themwere a number ofmentotakehisplace. trained details. Wantt0 Starta House Church?Ior 8s Hanson, Priesthood Examined,62. Christian 86Atthistime,thetermc/ergy (Niebuhr Ministry in Historical Perspectives, inthechurch andV,lillians, to include allofficials broadened Saga,206-207. 29).SeealsoBoggs, Christran 8/ Jungmann, Liturgy, 130-131. Early 88Durant, andChrist,618-619. Caesar 8eHanson, 668. andChrist,656-657, Priesthood Exanrned,62; Durant, Caesar Christran s0 Duchesne, HistoryofChristianity,Tl;fox,PagansandChristians,66T. farlyHistoryoftheChristianChurch,50;Johnson,

servingin the army."' (Bishopscould be tried onlrr by a bishop'scourt, not by ordinary law courts.)"' In all these things the clergy was given specialclassstarus.Constantine was the first to use the words clericnl and clericsto depict a higher socialclass.nt He alsofelt that the Christian ciergy deservedthe sameprivilegesas governmentalofficials. So bishopssat in judgment like secularjudges.ou The net result was alarming: The clergy had the prestige of church office bearers,the privilegesof a favored class,and the power of a wealthy elite. They had become an isolated classwith a separate civil statusand way of life. (This included clergy celibacy.)ns They even dressed and groomed differently from the common people."t'Bishops and priestsshavedtheir heads.This practice,known asthe tonsure,comesfrom the old Roman ceremony of adoption. Nl those who had shaved heads were known as clerks or clergy.oTThey also beganwearing the clothes of Roman officials (seechapter 6). It should come as no surprise that so many people in Constantine's day experienceda sudden "call to the ministry."etjTo their minds, being a church officer had become more of a careerthan a calling."o

A FALSE DICHOTOMY [Jnder Constantine, Christianiry was both recognized and honored by the state.This blurred the line berweenthe church and the world.

er Such granted exemptions hadbeen t0suchprofessions asphysicians andprofessors. David Andrews, Christi-Anarchy()xford: Lion P u b l i c a t i1 o9 n9 s ,92) 6 ,. Collins and Price, Story of Christianity,l4 " !r Johnson, Historyof Chrtstranity,TT.AcenIury later,JuliantheApostatewasusrngthesesameletns(clericat,cterics)inanegativ sense. sa Fox, Pagans andChristians,66l . )rganization of theEarly Christran Churches,153-155, priests 163.Inthefirstthree centuries otChristianity, " Hatch, werenot required t0 becelibate. IntheWest, theSpanish Council ofElvira heldinAD306wasthefirsttorequire clergy tobecelibate. This wasreasserted byPope Siricius inAD386.Anypriest whomarried orcontinued to livewithhiswifewasdefrocked. IntheEast. priests anddeacons could marry before 0rdination, butnotafter. Bishops hadtobecelibate. Gregory theGreat dida great dealto promote clerical celibacy, which many were notfollowing. Clerical celibacy only wrdened thegulfbetween clergy andtheso-called "0rdinary" people o{God(Cross andLivrngstone, 1xford Dictionary oftheChristian Church,310;Schatl, History oftheChristian Church, I'441 446;Durant, AgeofFaith,45) e 6T h e b i s h o p ' s d r e s s w a s t h e a n c i e n t r o b e o f a R o m a n m a g r s t r a t e . C l e r g y w e r e n 0 t t 0 l e t t h e i r h a i r g r o w l o n g l i (Hatch, philosophers 0rganization oftheEarly Christian Churches.164 165) s/ Collins andPrice, Story ofChristianity,T4. !8 Hans0n, Christran Priesthood fxamined,62 3eNiebuhr andWlllians, Ministry in Historical Perspectives 29

The Christian faith was no longer a minority religion. Instead, it was protected by emperors. As a consequence,church membership grew rapidly-as large numbers of people with questionable conversions began to join. Such people brought into the church a wide variety of pagan ideas. In the words of Will Durant: "While Christianity converted the world; the world converted Christianity, and displayed the natural paganismof mankind."roo As we have seen in chapter 3, the practices of the mystery religions began to be employed in the church's worship. And the pagan notion of the dichotomy berween the sacred and profane found its way into the Christian mind-set.101It can be rightfully said that the clergy/Iairy class distinction grew out of this very dichotomy. The Christian life was now being divided into two parts: secular and spiritual-profane and sacred. By the third cenrury the clergy/laity gap widened to the point of no rerurn.to' Clergymen were the trained leaders of the church-the guardians of orthodoxy-the

rulers and teachersof the people. They

gifts and gracesnot availableto lessermortals. possessed untrained Christians.The great The laity were the second-class, 'Iaiq' is one of the theologian Karl Barth rightly said, "The term worst in the vocabulary of religion and ought to be banished from the Christian conversation."' n' This falsedichotomy led to the profoundly mistaken idea that there are sacredprofessions(a call to "the ministry") and ordinaryprofessions (a call to a worldlyvocation).'ooHistorian Philip Schaffrighdy describes these factors as creating "th. secularizationof the church" where the "pure stream of Christianiqt" had become polluted.totThke note that this mistaken dichotomy still lives in the minds of many believers today. IooDurant, Caesar andChrist,65l tatSenn, Christian Wvrship and ltsCutturalSetting,40-4L l0 Nonington, ToPreach orNot.25. r03KarlBarth,fheologische (1957), quoted Alhrl BarthReader, in R.J.Erler andR.Marquard, eds., fragenundAntwoften 183-184, (Grand 1986), 8-9. Rapids, Eerdmans, trans. G.W.Bromiley ltaEverything (1Corinthians glory, 10,31). Thetalse dichotomy between forHehassanctified themundane to bedone forGod's ought Forthe tobothpaganism andancient Judaism. forever abolished inChrist. Such thinking belongs andprofane hasbeen thesacred (Romans "what "nothing NASB; Acts 10'15, Esv) do not call c0mm0n" 14,14, in itself," and God has made clean, isunclean Christian, SecularUseofChurchBuildings,222-237. Foranin-depthdiscussiononthefallacyofthesacred/profanedisjunction,seeDavies, r05Scha{f, History oftheChrrstian Church,3,125-126.

But the concept is pagan,not Christian. It nrptures the New Testament realiry that everydaylife is sanctified by God.'oo Along with these mind-set changes came a new vocabulary. Christians began to adopt the vocabulary of the pagan cults. The title pontifex (pontiff, a pagan title) became a common term for Christian clergy in the fourth cenrury. so did "Master of ceremonies," and "Grand Master of the Lodge."l't All of this reinforced the mystique of the clergy as the custodiansof the mysreriesof God.tnt In short, by the end of the fourth cenrury on into the fifth, the clergy had become a sacerdoralcaste-a spirirually elite group of "holy men."'0uThis leadsus to the thorny subiectof ordination.

THEFALLACY OFORDINATION In the fourth cenrury theology and ministrywere the exclusivedomain of the priests. work and war were the domain of the lairy. What was the rite of passageinto the sacredrealm of the priest? Ordination.rt0 Before we examine the historical roots of ordination, let's look at how leadership was recognized in the early church. After beginning a church, the apostolic workers (church planters) of the first century would revisit that body after a period of time. In some of those churches, the workers would publicly acknowledge elders. In every case,the elders were already "in place" before they were publicly endorsed.ttt Elders naturally emerged in a church through the process of time. They were not appointed to an external office."t Instead, they

106 Dunn, fferyTestament fheology in Diatogue, IZl. r07Hanson, ChristianPriesthood[xamined,64.Termslikecoryphaeus(MasterofCeremonieslandhierophant(Grandlvla Lodge) were freely borrowed frompagan cultsandused fortheChristian clergy. Tertullian wasthefirstto usethetermsupreme p o n t i f f ( b i s h o p o f b i s h o p s ) t o r e f e r t o t h e b i s h o p o0f n RC oh maesi tni h wroi trtke n a t a b o u t A D 2 l 8 . T e r t u l l i a n , h o w e v e r . u s e s t yi s, w (Bruce, thetermsarcastically Spreading Flame,322). roEHanson, Christian Priesthood Examined, 64. '0slbid.,65-66;vonCampenhausen, Tradition andLifein theChurch.ZZZ-223. rr0Warkentin, )rdinatiln:A Biblical-Historicat View, 40,16l. 'r1See Acts13-19; 1 Corinthians; 2 Corinthians. | (Frank) trace thechronology ofwhen theaposfles visited thechurches theyplanted andwhentheyacknowledgedeldersinViola, ThelLntoldStoryoftheNewTestamentChurch'AnExtraordinaryGuidetollnderstandin (Shippensburg, theNewlestament PA:Destiny lmage, 2004). toBible commentator Alfred Plummer, theGreek "ordain" words translated intheNew "2 According Testament d0nothave soecial ecclesiastical meanings. None ofthemimplies theriteofordination "The ora special cerem0ny. Pastoral Episiles," inW.Robertson Nicoll, ed.,TheExpositor's Bible(New York, Armstrong, 1903), 219-221.

\vere recognized by virtue of their seniority and spiritual service to the church. According to the New Testament, recognition of certain gifted members is something that is instinctive and organic.'13Every believer has the discernment to recognize those within his or her church who are gifted to carry out various ministries. Strikingly, only three passagesin the New Testament tell us that elders were publicly recognized. Elders \Mereacknowledgedin the churches in Galatia (Acts 14:23). Paul had Timothy acknowledge eldersin Ephesus(1 Timothy 3:1ff.).He also told Titus to recognize them in the churchesin Crete (Tirus 1:5ff.). The word ordain (xrv) in these passagesdoes not mean to place into office."o It rather carries the idea of endorsing, affirming, and showing forth what hasalreadybeen happening.tttIt alsoconveysthe thought of blessing."uPublic recognition of elders and other ministries was typically accompaniedby the laying on of hands by apostolic workers. (In the caseof workers being sent out, this was done by the church or the elders.)"t In the first century the laying on of hands merely meant rhe endorsement or affirmation of a function, not the installment into an office or the giving of specialstatus. Regrettably, it came to mean the latter in the late secondand early third cenruries.t'8 During the third century ordinationtook on an entirely different meaning. It was a formalized Christian rite.ttn By the fourth cenrury the ceremony of ordination was embellished by qrmbolic garmenrs and solemn rirual.l2nOrdination produced an ecclesiasticalcastethat usurped the believing priesthood.

rr3Acts16,2; 1 Corinthians 16:18; 2 Corinthians 8:22; Philippians 2:22; 1Thessalonians 1:5,5:12; 1Timothy 3:10. '14Warkenttn,)rdrnation'ABiblical-Histuical /lery,4.TranslatorsoftheKJVhaveused ordainlor2IdiflerentHebrewandGreekwords Seventeenth-century ecclesiastical misunderstanding influenced thisp00r w0rd ch0ice. 'r5TheGreek "t0stretch word cheirotoneoin Acts14:23 literally means forth thehand" asinvoting. Hence, rtislikelythat theapostles laidhands onthose whom themajority ofthechurch deemed were already functi0ning asoverseers among them. Lr6Camobell. Elders. 169-11 0. r17 (2lmothy1:6). Acts13:2; 1l-imothy 4,14. Paul, worker, anolder alsolaidhands onTimothy, a younger worker LrB Warkenti n, 0rdination, A Biblical-Historical View, 104,1i I , 127,130.Warkenti n does a thorough study ontheNewTesta ment "laying "Ihe meaning ofthe onofhands" inchapters 9-11ofherbook. Herconclusion: laying onofhands hasnothing todowith (p.156). pastor, routrne installation intooffice inthechurch, whether aselder, deacon, ormissionary" lreTheearliestrecordoftheordinationriteisfoundintheApostolicTraditionofHippolytus(ca.215).Bythe (Warkentin, it abound 1rdrnation' A Biblical-Historical View, 25,4\1. r20Warkentin, 1rdination' A Biblical-Historical View. 104.

From where did christians get their pattern of ordination? They patterned their ordination ceremony after the Roman custom of appointing men to civil office. The entire process,down to the very words, came straight from the Roman civic world.ttt By the fourth century the terms used for appointmenr to Roman office and for christian ordination became synonymous.t" when Constantine made Christianity the religion of choice, church leadership structures were buttressedby political sanction. The forms of the old restament priesthood were combined with Greek hierarchy.',, Sadly, the church was secure in this new form-just as it is today. Soon ordination was viewed as a rite that resulted in an irrevocable position.t'* Augustine taught that ordination confers a ,,definite irremovable imprint" on the priest that empowers him to fulfill his priestly funcdons."t Christian ordination, then, came to be undersroodas that which constitutes the essentialdifference berween clergy and lairy. By it, the clergy were empowered to administer the sacraments.It was believed that the priest, who performs the divine service, should be the most perfect and holy of all Christians.'26 Gregory of Nazianzus (329-389) and chrysostom had such a high view of those occupying the priesthood that danger loomed for the clergy if they failed to live up to the holiness of their sen'ice."t "The priest, [chrysostom] observed,is ever judged by his parish as though he were an angel and not of the same frail sruff as the rest of men."ttt

How was the priest to live in such a state of pure holiness?How was he to be worthy to servein "the choir of angels"?The answerwas

12rHatch,1rganizationoftheEarlyChristianChurches,l29*l33.ThissametendencywaspickedupbyJudaismasearl century' proficient Jewish scribes whowere intheinterpretation oftheTorah andtheoraltraditions ordained menforoffice in theSanhedrin. These menwere viewed asmedrators ofthewillofGod toalloflsrael. The"ordained" oftheSanhedrin became so powerful thatbytheearlysecond century puttodeathanyone theRomans whoperformed Jewish ordination I Warkentin, Ordination. A Biblical-Historica I View, 16,21-23,25. r22Warkentin, Ordination: A Biblical-Histlrical /rew, 35.Ihisisevident fromtheApostolic (AD350-375). Constitutions 'r lbid.,45. '24Niebuhr perspectives,T5. andWillians, Ministry in Historical r25vonCampenhau sen,fraditiln andLifein theChurch.224. n6hid..227 . ', lbid.,22g. r28Niebuhr perspectives,jl, andWilliams, Ministry in Historical llg.

ordination. By ordination, the sffeam of divine gracesflowed into the priest, making him a fit vesselfor God's use. This idea, also known as "sacerdotal endow'ment," first appearsin the writings of Gregory of N y s s a( 330- 395 ). Gregory argued that ordination makesthe priest "invisibly but actually a different, better man," raising him high above the laity."e "The samepower of the word," writes Gregory "makes the priest venerable and honorable, separated.. . . While but yesterdayhe was one of the mass,one of the people,he is suddenlyrendered a guide, a president,a teacherof righteousness,an instructor in hidden mysteries."rr0 Listen to the words of one fourth-century document: "The bishop, he is the minister of the Word, the keeper of knowledge, the mediator between God and you in severalparts of your Divine worship. . . . F{e is your ruler and governor. . . . He is next after God your earthly god, who has a right to be honored byyou.""l Priestscame to be identified as the "vicars of God on the earth." To further show the priests' distinction from other people, both Regrettheir lifestyle and dresswere different from that of la1nnen.lr2 tably, this concept of ordination has never left the Christian faith. It is alive and well in contemporary Christianity. In fact, if you are wondering why and how the present-day pastor got to be so exalted as the "holy man of God," these are the roots. Eduard Schweizer, in his classicwork Church Order in the l{ew TbstamenLargues that Paul knew nothing about an ordination that confers ministerial or clerical powers to a Christian.lrr First-century shepherds(elders,overseers)did not receiveanything that resembles modern-day ordination. They were not set above the rest of the flock. They were those who servedamong them (seeActs 20:28,wasn,and 1 P et er 5: 2- 3.Nas n ). r2evonCampenhausen, Tradition andLifein theChurch,229. t3t 0ntheBaptisnot Christ:A Sermon andWilliams, Ministryin Historical of Nyssa. SeealsoNiehbur fortheDayo/lrghfsbySt.Gregory rndelibrTls. Thatis,something sacred hadentered a character upon therecipient 0rdination wasbelieved to confer Perspectives,75. Church3:489) View,42;SchaIt, History oftheChristian ABibltcal-Historical intohrm(Warkentin,1rdtnation: tlt Apostolic 11.4.26. Constitutions rr David (Chapel Press, 1972), 6. ofNorth Carolina Hill,TheUniversity D.Hall,TheFaithful Shepherd r33Schweizer, 207. Church 0rderin theNewTestament,

First-century elders were merely endorsed publicly by traveling apostolic workers as being those who cared for the church. Such acknowledgment was simply the recognition of a function. It did not confer specialpowers. Nor was it a permanent possession. The contemporary practice of ordination creates a special caste of Christian. Whether it be the priest in Catholicism or the pastor in Protestantism, the result is the same:The most important ministry is restricted to a few "special" believers. Such an idea is as damaging asit is nonscriprural. The New Testament nowhere limits preaching, baptizing, or distributing the Lord's supper to the "ordained." Eminent scholarJames D. G. Dunn put it best when he said that the clergy-lairy tradition has done more to undermine New Testamentauthoriry than most heresies.tr* since church office could only be held through the rite of ordination, the power to ordain becamethe crucial issuein holding religious authoriry. The biblical contexr was lost. And proof-texting methods \Mereused to justift the clergyllairy hierarchy. Perhapsthe best-known exampleis the early Catholics'use of Matthew 16 to justift the creation of a papal sysrem and the doctrine of apostolic succession.The result: Ordinary believers, generally uneducated and ignorant, were at the mercy of a professionalclergy.trt

THEREFORMATION The Reformers of the sixteenth cenrury brought the Catholic priesthood sharply into question. They attacked the idea that the priest had specialpowers to convert wine into blood. They rejected apostolic succession.They encouraged the clergy to marry. They revised the lirurgy to give the congregation more participation. They also abolished the office of the bishop and reduced the priest back to a presbyter."u 'io Dunn, rVery lestament Theology in Dialogue, 138ff., 126-12g. r35Warkentin, Ordination: A Biblical-Historicat View,45,5\ Hatch,1rganization of thetarly ChristianChurches, l 26*131.ordination grew intoaninstrument toconsolidate power. clerical Through it,theclergy could people lordover God's aswellassecular authorities. Theneteffect isthatmodern ordination setsupartificial baniers between Christians andhinders mutual mintstry. r36Hanson, Christian Priesthood txanined.82.

Unfortunately, however, the Reformers carried the Roman Catholic clergy/laity distinction straight into the Protestant movement. They alsokept the Catholic idea of ordination."'Although they abolished the office of the bishop, they resurrectedthe one-bishop rule, clothing it in new garb. The rallying cry of the Reforrnation was the restoration of the priesthood of all believers.However, this restoration was only partial. Luther, Calvin, and Zwineli affirmed the believing priesthood with respectto one'sindividual relationship to God. They righdy taught that every Christian has direct accessto God without the need of a human mediator. This was a wonderful restoration. But it was one-sided. What the Reformers failed to do was to recover the corporate dimension of the believing priesthood.They restored the doctrine of the believing priesthood soteriologically-i.e., as it related to salvation. But they failed to restore it ecclesiologically-i.e., as it related to the church.t'8 In other words, the Reformers only recovered the priesthood of the believer (singular). They reminded us that every Christian has individual and immediate accessto God. fu wonderful as that is, they did not recover the priesthood of all believers (collective plural). This is the blessedtruth that every Christian is part of a clan that shares God's Wrord one with another. (It was the Anabaptists who recovered this practice. Regrettably, this recovery was one of the reasonswhy Protestant and Catholic swordswere red with Anabaptist blood.)t'o While the Reformers opposedthe pope and his religious hierarchy, they still held to the narrow view of ministry that they inherited. They believed that "ministry" was an institution that was closeted among the few who were "called" and "ordained."touThus the ReformL3/While person's Io henevertheless heldto itsimportance, character, changes theordained Luther rejected theidea thatordination (Senn, wasnecessary forthecarrying outofpastoral duties ceremony isa riteofthechurch. Anda specral mind, ordination Luther's Christian Liturgy,297). r38rThepriesth00d priesthood person's it to neighbors, asinLuther; relation toGod andtoone's refers notonly toeach ofallbelievers function." John Dillenberger andClaude community withrespect toformal intheChrrstian refers also totheequality ofallpeople TheMacmillan Company, 1988), 61. York: lnterpreted through ltsDevelopnent(New Protestant Christianity, Y''lelch, t3eHall,FaithfulShepherd, What fhe Secret of theStrength: of theAnabaptiststory,seePeterHoover's S.Fora compelIingtreatment (Shippensburg, PA,Benchmark Press, 1998), TellThisGeneratronl Would theAnabaptists r40J.L.Ainslie, ([dinburgh, I & I Clark, 16th and 17th Cenfunes in Reformed Churches of the Ministerial 0rder the fheDoctrines of 1940),2.5.

ers still affirmed the clergy-lairy split. Only in their rhetoric did they state that all believers were priests and ministers. In their practice they denied it. So after the smoke cleared from the Reformation, we ended up with the same thing that the Catholics gave us-a selective priesthood! Luther held to the idea that those who preach neededto be specially trained. Like the Catholics, the Reformers believed that only the "ordained minister" could preach, baptrze,and administer the Lord's supper.totAs a result, ordination gave the minister a special aura of divine favor that could not be questioned. Thagically,Luther and the other Reformers violently denouncedthe Anabaptistsfor practicing every-member functioning in the church.'*, The Anabaptistsbelievedit was every Christian'sright to stand up and speakin a meeting. It \Masnor solely the domain of the clergy. Luther wasso opposedto this practice that he saidit camefrom "the pit of hell" and those who were guilry of it should be pur ro death.'4, In short, the Reformers retained the idea that ordination was the key to having power in the church. It was the ordained minister's dury to convey God's revelation to His people.tooAnd he was paid for this role. Like the catholic priest, the Reformed minister was viewed by the church asthe "man of God"-the paid mediator berweenGod and His people.'osFIe was not a mediator to forgive sins, but a mediator to communicate the divine will.touSo in Protestantism an old problem took on a new form. The jargon changed, but the error remained.

'arWarkentin, 1rdination: A Biblical-Historical View, 5l-Eg,6l-62. ra2 TheAnabaptists bothbelieved andpracticed Paul's injunction in i Corinthians 14,26, 30-31 thatevery believer hastherightto f u n c t i o n a t a n y t i m e i n a c h u r c hl nmLeuet ht ienrg' s. d a y , t h i s p r a c t i c eawsal sh kens oi tw z rne c h t - " t h e s i t t e r ' s r i g h t , ' ( H o o v e r , Secret of theStrenglr, 58-59). ra3Luther announced that"theSitzrechtwaslron thepitofhell"andwasa "perversion ofpubilc order. . . undermining respect for authority." Within 20years, passed over il6 laws were inGerman lands throughout Europe makjng this"Anabaptist heresy,, a capital (Hoover, offense Secret of theStrength, 59,198). Further, Luther feltthatif thewhole publiily church administered theLord's Supper it would bea "deplorable confusion." ToLuther's mind, oneperson musttakeonthistask-thepastorpaulAlthaus, Ife Theotigy of MartinLutherlPhiladelphia: Fortress Press, 1966), 323. raaWarkentin, 1rdination: A Biblical-Historical View, 105. '45lbidProtestants today speak of "theministry" asa mediatorial body setwithin thelarger body ofChrist rather thana function shared byall. ra6JustastheRoman Catholic clergy wasseen asthegatekeeper ofsalvation, theProtestant clergy wasviewed asthetrustee ofdivine revelation.Accordingtothe AugsburgConfessiilnofl530,thehighestofficeinthechurchwaslhepreachingoffice.lnancien Judaism, therabbi interpreted theTorah forthepeople. IntheProtestant church, theminister isregarded asthecustodian ofGod's (Warkentin, mysteries 1rdination : A BiblicaI-Hi storica I View. 16g).

In the seventeenth century Puritan writers John Owen (16161683) and Thomas Goodwin (1600-1680), like Luther and Calvin, viewed the pastorateasa permanent fixture in God's house. Owen and Goodwin led the Puritans to focus all authority into the pastoral role. To their minds, the pastor is given "the power of the keys." He alone read Scripture is ordained to preach, administer the sacraments,tot publicly,'o'and be trained in the original biblical languages,aswell as logic and philosophy. Both the Reformers and the Puritans held the idea that God's ministers must be competent professionals.Therefore, pastorshad to undergo extensiveacademictraining to fulfill their office.ton

TOPASTOR PRIEST FROM John Calvin did not like using the word priest to refer to ministers."o He preferred the term pnstor.tstIn Calvin's mind, pastlr was the highest word one could use for ministry. He liked it becausethe Bible referred toJesusChrist, "the great Shepherdof the sheep" (Hebrews Ironically, Calvin believed that he was restoring the New 13:20).1s2 in the person of the pastor!"' Testament bishop (episkopos) Luther also did not like using the word priest to define the new Protestant ministers. He wrote, "We neither can nor ought to give the name priest to those who are in charge of the Word and sacrament among the people. The reason they have been called priests is either becauseof the custom of the heathen people or as a vestige of theJewish nation. The result is greatly injurious to the church."tto So he too adopted the terms preacher,minister, andpastorto refer to this office. Zwingli and Martin Bucer also favored the word pa.stlr. They rr7John (London: 1947), 41,55,68,99; Huxtable James Clarke, ed.John ofa Gospel Church andltsGovernment, Owen, TheTrue Nature l'lorks,Il:309. Goodwin, 1rder,37,49, 56,59,61-69;Thomas Ainslie, Doctrines ofMinisterial ra8JonZens, (1981): "Building Review10, no.2 21-22. Baptist Refornation ManorOneAnother," UptheBody:0ne tls l1all,FaithfuI Shepherd,28-29. r50John (Philadelphia: Press, 1960), bk.4,ch.8, no.14. Westminster Religion Calvin, lnstitutes oftheChristian i5rPastoris prelerred "shepherd." hisBible thetermpastorin translation. William Tyndale which wasused totranslate fromtheLatin, prleslTyndale, that"pastor" was a Protestant, tooktheposition ol paslorvs. More overtheissue Tyndale debated SirThomas Refornerslor this exchange). Parker on the English Society Series exegetically conectlseeThe n2Aall,Faithful Shepherd,16. is3Sykes, I11. lld PriestandNewPresbyter, r54Luther, "Concerning lVorks,35,40. theMinistry," Luther's

wrote popular treatiseson it.rssAs a result, the term began to permeate the churches of the Reformation.ttu However, given their obsession with preaching, the Reformers' favorite term for the minister waspreacher.And this was what rhe common people generally called him.ttt It was not until the eighteenth century that the term pastorcame into common use, eclipsing preacber and minister.tssThis influence came from the Lutheran Pietists. Since then the term has become widespread in mainsrream Christianity.ttn Even so, the Reformers considered the pastor to be the functioning head of the church. According to Calvin, "The pastoral office is necessary to preservethe church on earth in a greater way than the sun, food, and drink are necessaryto nourish and sustainthe present life."tuo The Reformers believed that the pasror possesseddivine power and authority. He did not speakin his own name, but in the name of God. Calvin further reinforced the prima cy of the pastor by treating acts of contempt or ridicule toward the minisrer as serious public offenses.tut This should come as no surprise when you realize what calvin took as his model for ministry. He did not take the church of the '5s0neofthemostin{luential books during theReformation wasBucer's Pastorale. published Inthesamespirit,Zwingli a tractentiled ThePastor. rs6Calvin's church order of pastors withgoverning elders inGeneva became themostinfluential model during theReformation. lt became thepattern ofthePtotestant puritans churches inFrance, Holland, Hungary, andScotland, aswellasamong theEnglish (Niebuhr andtheirdescendants andY'lillians, Ministry in Historicat Perspectiyes, gave 115-117, 131). Calvin also risetotheidea thatthepastor andteacher were theonly two"ordinary" officers in Ephesians perpetually 4,11-12 thatcontinue inthechurch (Hall, Faithful Shepherd,28],. During theseventeenth century, thepuritans used thetermpaslolinsome oftheiipublished works. Seventeenth-century Anglican andPuritan works (local) onpastoral carerefened to parish (George clergy as"parsons" or"pastors.,' Herberl, (Mahwah, fheCountry Parson pastor andtheTemple NJ:Paulist Press, 1981) andRichard BaiIer,TheReformed lLatayetti, lN:Sovereign Grace Trust Fund, 2000), respectively. lsi l{iebuhr andV'lillians, Ministry in Historical Perspectives, 1i6."IheGerman Reformers alsoadhered tothemedieval usage and calfed ihepreacher (derived Pfarrer, i.e.,parson fromparochia-parish andparochuv-parson)." preachers whileLutheran are pastors called intheUnited States, theyarestillcalledPfarrerlhead oftheparish) inGermany. Given thegradual transition from priest pastor, Catholic to Protestant it wasnotuncommon forpeople tostillcalltheirnewProtistant bv the old oreachers Catholic titleslikepriest. I58Thewordpastorhas always appeared intheological literature dating asfarbackasthePatristic Period. Thewordchoice was youwished dependent onthefunction guided to highlight: A pastor in moral andspiritual ways. A priest officiated thesacraments. [ v e n s 0 , t h e t eprams t o r w a s n o t o n t h e l i p s o f t h e c o m m o n b e l i e v e r u n t i l a f t e r t h e R e f o r m a t i o n . rssNiebuhr andV'lillians, Ministry in Historical Perspectives, I 16.Thewordpniesl belongs totheCathglic/Anglican tradition, theword mtntslerbelongs totheReformed tradition, andthewordpaslorbelongs totheLutheran (p.viii),The andevangelical iradition Reformers didspeak oftheirminister aspaslor, preacher.Ihe buttheymostly paitorlaler calledhim word evolved to become the predominant terminChristianity forthisoffice. This wasduetothemainstreaming groups ofthese which sought distance from "highchurch" vocabulary. Ihetern ministerwas gradually introduced intotheEnglish-speaking worldbytheNonconformists and Dissenters. They wished "ministry" to distinguish theprotestant lromtheAnglican clergy. 160 Calvin, lnstitutes oftheChristian Religion, lV,3,2,p. 1055. 16rNiebuhr perspectives. andV'lilliams, Ministry in Historical I3B.

apostolic age. Instead, he took as his pattern the one-bishop rule of the second century.tu' This was true for the other Reformers as well.tu' The irony here is thatJohn Calvin bemoanedthe Roman Catholic Church becauseit built its practices on "human inventions" rather than on the Bible.'u*But Calvin did the same thing. In this regard, Protestants are just as guilty as are Catholics. Both denominations basetheir practices on human tradition. Calvin taught that the preaching of the Word of God and the proper administration of the sacraments are the marks of a true church.'utTo his mind, preaching, baptism, and the Eucharist were to be carried out by the pastor, not the congregation.t6uFor all the Reformers, the primary function of a minister was preaching. The preeminent place of preaching is best reflected in Luther's German Mass, which included three services on Sunday. At 5 or 6 a.m., a sermon was given on the Epistle of the day. At the main service at 8 or 9 a.ffi., the minister preached on the Gospel of the day. The sermon at the Vesper servicein the afternoon was basedon the Old Testament.r6T Like Calvin, Luther also made the pastor a separateand exalted office. While he argued that the keys of the Kingdom belonged to all believers,Luther confined their useto those who held offices in the church.tut"We are all priests," said Luther, "insofar as we are Chrisl i l " F o r h i s [ C a l vmi no' ds o ] flt h e m i n i s t r y g o e s b a c k t o t h et h e c tal tyo f ch eu e racrhl yosf e c o n d c e n t u r y r a t h e r t thhaensttor ti h pastor, Intheapostolic agethelocal wasunder thecharge notofa single butofa number of apostolic age. Christian community (elders) interchangeably, andbishops. lt wasonlyinthesecond century functionaries known ashenotes, aspresbyters thatthe community intoexistence, asintheEpistles oflgnatius. . . . lt wasthisstage ofthe single bishop orpastor oftheChristian came (Mackinnon intheearly tookashismodel" development oftheministerial office second-century church thatCalvin andthe , Calvin Reformation.8I-82\. rn James "The writes, Reformers accepted thesecond-century system ofaninstitutionalized ministry ofpastors H.Nichols alsogenerally orbishops to leadthelaityinworship. . . . They didn0tattempt t0 return totheageoftheapostles." Worship,2I). \Corporate 164 in Historical 111. Niebuhr andWilliams, Ministry Perspectives, r6sCalvin, Religion, lV;l:9,p. 1023. lnstitutes oftheChrrstian 166 "TheFullness 71. John H.Yoder, of Chrisl," Concern l7 (1969), 16/Niebuhr in ltistorical Preaching: ASample andWilliams, Ministry Perspectives, l3l, 133,135;"Powerful ofHowLuther Could Bring (1993), powerful, History12,no.3 27.Lutherwas anddramatic. Hecommunicated his Bible Characters loLiIe," Christian abrasive, preacher, Hewasa voracious ownperson inhissermons without superimposing himself onthemessage. delivering anestimated poetic, preached yethewasregarded 4,000 sermons. Hismessages were awe-inspiring, andcreative. Zwingli directly andnaturally, wasconsistent inhisexhaustive buthewasalways impersonal. Bucer waslongastoointellectual. Calvin expounding ofpassages, preaching forrambling. Protestant wasvery doctrinaire, being obsessed with"conect and wrnded andhada penchant Even so,early pure preachers primarily doctrine." Forthisreason, Reformation were Bible teachers. t68Hall.faithfulShepherd.S.

tians, but those whom we call priests are ministers selectedfrom our midst to act in our name, and their priesthood is our rninistry."'uu This was sacerdotalism,pure and simple. Luther broke from the Catholic camp in that he rejected a sacrificing priesthood. But in its place,he believedthat the sharing of God's Word belonged to a special order.tto The following are characteristic statementsmade by Luther in his exaltationofthe pastor:"God speaksthrough the preacher.. . . AChristian preacher is a minister of God who is set apart, yea,he is an angel of God, avery bishop sent by God, a saviorof many people,a king and prince in the Kingdom of Christ. . . . There is nothing more precious or nobler in the earth and in this life than a true, faithful parson or preacher."tTt Said Lutheq "we should not permit our pastor to speak christ's words by himself asthough he were speakingthem for his own person; rather, he is the mouth of all of us and we all speakthem with him in our hearts. . . . It is a wonderful thing that the mouth of every pasror is the mouth of Christ, therefore you ought to listen to the pastor nor as a man, but as God."ttt You can hear the echoesof Ignatius ringing through thesewords. Such ideasreveal a flawed view of the church. Luther felt the church was primarily a preaching station. "The Christian congregation," said Lutheq "never should assembleunless God's Word is preached and prayer is made, no matter for how brief a time this may be."t7'Luther believed that the church is simply a gathering of people who listen to preaching. For this reason,he called the church building a Mundhaus, which meansa mouth-house."oHe alsomade this alarming statement: "The earsare the only organs of a Christian."tT'tThese are the roots of Protestantism. i6sNiebuhr andWilliams, Ministry in Historical Perspectives, l 12.TheReformers plestJones. substituted thewordmrnrslerfor Historical Approach toEvangelical ltlorship, 141. r70B.A.Gerrish, "Priesthood andMinrstry intheTheology (1965), of Luther," church Hisfory 34 404-422. '7rNiebuhr perspecilyes, and\'lillians,Ministry in Historical ll4-115. 172 Althaus, Theology ofMaftin Luther,326. r73"Concerning the0rdering of DivineWorship in theCongregation ofMarlinLulherC.M.Jacobs, ,,, l,/orks ed,(philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1932), Vl,60. i74Niebuhr andWilliams, Ministry in Historical Perspectives,114, tts Luther's lVorks. 29'224.

OFSOULS THECURE Calvin, Luther, and Bucer believed that the two key functions of the pastor \Merethe proclamation of the Word (preaching) and the celebration of the Eucharist (Communion). But Calvin and Bucer addeda third element. They emphasizedthat the pastor had a duty to provide This is known as the "cure care and healing to the congregation.tTu of souls." Bucer wrote the preeminent book on this subject,entitled True Cure of rhe Souls,in 1538. The origin of "cure of souls" goesbackto the fourth and fifth cenWe find it in the teaching of Gregory of Nazianzus. Gregory furies.rTT called the bishop a "pastof)-a physician of soulswho diagnoseshis patient'smaladiesand prescribeseither medicine or the knife.ttt Luther's early followers also practiced the care of souls.ttnBut in Calvin's Geneva, it was raised to an art form. Each pastor and one elder were required to visit the homes of their congregants.Regular visits to the sick and those in prison were also observed.ttoFor Calvin and Bucer, the pastor \Masnot merely a preacher and a dispenser of the Sacraments.He was the "cufe of souls" or the "curate." His task was to bring healing, cure, and compassion to God's hurting p eople. t s t This idea lives on in the Protestant world today. It is readily seen in the contempofary concepts of pastoral care, pastoral counseling, and Christian psychology. In the present-day church, the burden of such care typically falls on the shoulders of one man-the pastor. (In the first cenrury it fell on the shoulders of the entire church and upon a group of seasonedmen called "elders.")"'

176 Row, 1951). Harperand York, Souls\New theCureof Historyof lVlcNeill,,4 JohnT. (McNeill, History ofthe r77Gregory dealonthe"cureofsouls" wrote a good theGreat andGregory Augustine, Chrysostom, ofNazianzus, Rule. Thisworkis still used ofPastoral caIledTheBook forpastors wrote a treatise theGreat InAD591,Gregory if Souts,100). Cure pastor the Western (p. a to was more of gwes Great Gregory the 109). of Nazianzus a greaidealtoGregory andtt today, in seminaries thananyoftheother church PoPes. penned inAD362. r7sMcNeill, oration, in hisSecond things these articulated 108. Gregory ofNazianzus History of theCureolsoals, r7e l b i d .1,7 7 . at eachhome visit I80Niebuhr ministers should that was issued anorder 136.In 1550, Perspectlyes, in Historical Ministry andV'lillians, leastoncea year. rsrThisbook (lvlcNeill, History ofthecureof souls,111). andLatinversions outin German came Connecting: Crabb's I82SeeViola, SeeLarry community. inChristian connectedness through healing comes Human Churcfi. Reinagining (Nashville, 2004). WPublishing, and0urRelationships ?urselves Healing

THEPASTOR.DRIVEN CHURCH In short, the Protestant Reformation srruck a blow to Roman Catholic sacerdotalism.It was not a fatal blow, however, but merely a semantic change.The Reformers retained the one-bishop rule. The pastor now played the role of the bishop. The bishop-driven church evolved into the pastor-drivenchurch. The pastor came to be regardedasthe local head of a church-the leading elder.'t'Asone writer put it, "rn protestantism, the preachers tend to be the spokesmenand representatives of the church and the church is often the preacher'schurch. This is a gre^t danger and threat to the Christian religion, not unrelated to clericalism."tta In their rhetoric the Reformers decried the clergy-laity split. But in their practice they fully retained it. As Kevin Giles says,"Differencesbetween Catholic and Protestant clergy were blurred in practice and theology. In both kinds of churches, the clergy were a classapart; in both, their special staruswas based on Divine initiatives (mediated in different ways); and in both, certain duties were reserved to them.ttls5

The long-standing, postbiblical tradition of the one-bishop rule (now embodied in the pastor) prevails in the Protestant church today. Tlemendous psychological factors make laypeople feel that ministry is the responsibiliry of the pastor. h's hisjob. He's the expertis often their thinking. The New Testamentword for minister is diakonos.rtmeans"servant." But this word has been distorted becausemen have professionalized the ministry. We have taken the word minister and equated it with the pastor, with no scriptural justification whatsoever.In like 183 lvlany Relormed churches "teaching" distinguish between elders and"ruling" elders. Teaching elders position occupy thetraditionai ofbishop orminister, while ruling elders handle administration anddiscipline, p0lity Thisformofcliurch wasbrought toNew England fromEurope lHall,Faithful Shepherd,g5). Eventually, duetotheunpopularity oftheoffice, therulingelders were dropped andthe teaching elder remained. IhiswasalsotrueintheBaptist churches oftheeighteenth andnineteenth centuries. 0ften these churches lacked thefinancial resources tosupport one"minrster." Inthisway, bytheendofthenineteenth century, theevangelical churches pastor" adopted the"single tradition. MarkDeuer, ADisplay of God's Glory(Washington, DC:Center forChurch Reform, 2001), 20; R E . HU p r i c h a r d , " T h e E l d e r s h i p i n M a r t i n B u c e r a o ihbnl C t rni sdhJB i caaltvsitnu,d" i e s J o u r n a l U u n e l s , i 9 9 6 ) , 1 4 9 , 1 5 4 . S 0 t h e pastor single tnevangelrcal churches evolved froma plurality ofelders intheReformed tradition. r8aNiebuhr andV'ltllians, Ministry in Historicat Perspectives, "lay-preacher" 114.Theso-called emerged outoftheevangelical revivals (p.205). oftheeighteenth century '8sKevin Giles, Patterns ofMintstry (New anongtheFirst Chrislans York: HarperCollins, lggl),195-196.

manner, we have mistakenlv equated preaching and ministry with the pulpit sermon, again without biblical justification.

ROLE BODY HOWTHEPASTORAL DAMAGES LIFE Now that we have unearthed the little-knov'n roots of the contemporary pastor,let's shift our attention to the practical effectsthat a pastor has on the people of God. The unscriptural clergy/lairy distinction has done untold harm to the body of Christ. It has divided the believing community into firstand second-classChris tians. The clergy/lairy dichotomy perpetuates an awful falsehood-namely, that some Christians are more privileged than others to serve the Lord. The one-man ministry is entirely foreign to the New Testament, yet we embrace it while it suffocatesour functioning. We are living stones, not dead ones. Flowever, the pastoral office has transformed us into stonesthat do not breathe. Permit us to get personal. We believe the pastoral office has stolen your right to function as a full member of Christ's body. It has distorted the reality of the body, making the pastor a giant mouth and transforming you into a tiny ear.'tt'It has rendered you a mute spectator who is proficient at taking sermon notes and passing an offering plate. But that is not all. The modern-day pastoral office has overthrown the main thrust of the letter to the Hebrews-the

ending of

the old priesthood. It has made ineffectual the teaching of 1 Corinthians 12-14, that every member has both the right and the privilege to minister in a church meeting. It has voided the messageof 1 Peter 2 that every brother and sister is a functioning priest. Being a functioning priest does not mean that you may only perform highly restrictive forms of ministry like singing songs in your pew, raising your hands during worship, setting up the PowerPoint 186 "Andif theywere question, intheformofa biblical where would thebody be?"(1Corinthians Toputthistragedy allonemember, 12:19. rruv).

presentation,or teaching a Sundayschool class.That is not the New Testament idea of ministry! These are mere aids for the pastor,s ministry. As one scholar put it, "Much Protestant worship, up to the present day, has also been infected by an overwhelming tendency to regard worship as the work of the pastor (and perhaps the choir) with the majority of the laity having very little to do but sing a few h)rmns and listen in a prayerful and attentive *ay.,,tt, We expect doctors and lawyers to serveus, not to train us to serve others. And why? Becausethey are the experts.They are trained professionals.Unforrunately, we look upon the pastor in the same way. Nl of this does violence to the fact that every believer is a priest. Not only before God, but to one another. But there is something more. The contemporary pastorate rivals the functional headship of Christ in FIis church. It illegitimately holds the unique place of centraliry and headship among God's people, a place that is reserved for only one Person-the Lord Jesus.Jesus Christ is the only head over a church and the final word to ir."t By his office, the pastor displacesand supplants Christ's headship by setting himself up as the church'shuman head. For this reason,we believethe presenr-daypastoralrole hinders the fulfillmenr of God's eternal purpose. why? Becausethat purpose is centered on making Christ's headshipvisibly manifested in the church through the free, open, murually participatory every-member functioning of the body."n fu long as the pastoral office is present in a particular church, that church will have a slim chance of witnessins such a glorious thing.

HOW THEPASTOR DAMAGES HIMSELF The contemporary pastor not only does damageto God's people, he does damageto himself. The pastoraloffice has a way of chewing up

mrnaryotLiturgy,2gz. r88lnthisregard(andcontrarytopopularopinion),thepastorisnol,,thecerebellum,thecenterforcommunrcatingmes functions, andconducting responses between theHead andtheBody." Heisnotcalled togive"authoritative communication ofthetruth fromtheHead totheBody." Andheisnotthe"accurate communicator oftheneeds fromtheBody totheHead,,' Thepastor isdescribed withthese inflated terms inDavid "The L.McKenna's Ministry's Gordian Knot,"Leadershiplwinter 19g0) 50-51. r8eSeeEphesians 3,8-11, Fora fulldiscussion ofthispurpose, seeFrank's bookGod's ultinatepassion

many who come within its parameters. Depression, burnout, stress, and emotional breakdown occur at abnormally high rates among pastors. At the time of this writing, there are reportedly more than Among 500,000 paid pastors serving churches in the United States.'no this massivenumber of religious professionals,consider the following statisticsthat testif' to the lethal danger of the pastoral office: ' 94 percent feel pressured to have an ideal family. - 90 percent work more than forty-six hours a week. ' 81 percent say they have insufficient time with their spouses. ' 80 percent believe that pastoral ministry affects their family negatively. ' 70 percent do not have someone they consider a close friend. ' 70 percent have lower self-esteemthan when they entered the ministry. ," 50 percent feel unable to meet the demandsof the job.tnt " 80 percent are discouragedor deal with depression. ,' More than 40 percent report that they are suffering from burnout, frantic schedules,and unrealistic expectations.tn' ' 3 3 percent consider pastoral ministry an outright hazard to the family.'e3 ' 33 percent have seriously considered leaving their position in the past year.t'o . 40 percent of pastoral resignations are due to burnout.tnt Most pastors are expected to juggle sixteen major tasks at once.tro41d many crumble under the pressure.For this reason, reoTheBarna (http'//www.barna.org). (September "AProJile Halfofthese 25,2001), Paslors," TheBarna Updale Group, ol Protestant (Larry "Flocks limes(uly2,2001). in Need ol Shepherds members Witham, have fewer than100active churches ," fhellt/ashington rsrH.B.London "lsthePastor's Family Safeat Home?" Pastors lL,Victor Books, 1993); at Risk(Wheaton, andNeilB.Wiseman, "Pastors Feel in l\tlinistry, but 22;IheBarna Group, Coniident Magazine(Septemberl0ctober 1999), Physician Leadership(Fa|lI992l; httpy'/www.barna.org. Interaction withOthers," TheBarna Update\uly 10,2006). inTheir Many Struggle reZCompilation fromFocus Pastors Gatherings. ofsurveys ontheFamily rs3Fuller (Pasadena, 1991). Fuller Theological Seminary, Institute ol Church Growth re4Witham, "Flocks in Need o{Shepherds." te5Vantage (June 1998), 2. Point, Denver Seminary re6TheBarna (September "AProfile vision, 25,200i).These tasksinclude casting Pastors," TheBarna Update Group, ofProtestant provrding preaching andplanning, raising money, serving theneedy, strategy leaders, andteaching, identifying andtraining resolving conflicts, managing sta{fandvolunteers, overseeing alladministration, church activities andprograms, organizing providing evangelizing theunsaved, inthecommunity, congregation care andcounseling, representing thecongregation indivtduals, thesacramenis, anddiscipling administering

1,400 ministers in all denominations acrossthe United Statesare fired or forced to resign each month.reTover the past fwenty years, the averagelength of a pastorate has declined from sevenyears ro just over four years!tn8 unfortunately, few pastorshave connected the dots to discover that it is their office that causesthis underlying turbulence.tooSimply put: JesusChrist never intended any person to sport all the hats a present-day pastor is expected to wear. He never intended any one person to bear such a load. The demands of the pastorate are crushing; they will drain any mortal dry. Imagine for a moment that you were working for a company that paid you on the basis of how good you made your people feel. What if your pay depended on how entertaining you were, how friendly you were, how popular your wife and children were, how well-dressed you were, and how perfect your behavior was? Can you imagine the unmitigated stress this would causeyou? Can you see how such pressurewould force you into playing a pretentious role-all to keep your authoriry, your prestige, and your job security? (For this reason,many pastors are resistant to receiving any kind of help.)'oo The pastoral profession dictates standards of conduct like any other profession, whether it be teacher, doctor, or lawyer. The profession dictates how pastors are to dress,speak,and act. This is one of the major reasonswhy many pastors live very artificial lives. In this regard, the pastoral role fosters dishonesry.Congregants tstfheChristian Cr7hen(November2000)reportedthatl,400pastorsleavethepastorateeachmonth.lnthesamevern, Thellashington linesrana series offivearticles byLarry Witham onthe"clergy crisis" thatissweeping America. Witham reported, Very fewofthe clergy inthiscountry areyoung. 0nly8 percent are35oryounger. 0f the70,000 students enrolled inthenation's 237accredited theological seminaries, onlya thirdwantto leada church asa pastor Thepastorate draws a greater number ol older candidates. In likemanner, a clergy shortage hashitmost mainIne Protestant "While churches inCanada. it maybepersonally enriching tominister to a flock, it'salsodaunting-for nota lotof money-tomeet public expectations asa theologian, counselor, speaker, adminiskator andcommunityorganizerallinone"(DouglasTodd,"Canada'sCongregationsFacingClergyShortage," ChristianCenturyl}clober 1 0 , 2 0 0 1 13 ,) . rs8Datadrawn fromPastorPoll surveys conducted byTheBarna Group fromlg84through 2006. 'ee| (Frank) promotron once readthefollowing lora pastors' resource "Manworks book, fromsunto sun,buta pastor's workis nevet done. That's because hemustwearsomany different hats:preacher, teacher, counselor, administrator, worshrp leader, and oftentimes fixerofthefurniture justtheresource toolForpastors who'd likea handwithsome ofthese hats,we. . . have foryou." 200 Fora firsthand psychological pressures account ofthe pastorate, ol themodern seeC.Welton Gaddy, A Soul l)nderSiege: Surviving (Philadelphia' Clergy Depression Westminster, 1991).

expect their pastor to always be cheerful, completely spiritual, and available at a moment's call. They also expect that he will have a perfectly disciplined family. Furthermore, he should never appearresentful or bitter.'n' Many pastors take to this role like actors in a Greek drama.tu' Basedon the scoresof personal testimonies we have heard from erstwhile pastors, many-if not most-pastors cannot stay in their office without being corrupted on some level. The power-politics endemic to the office is a huge problem that isolates many of them and poisons their relationship with others. In an insightful article to pastors entitled "Prevenring Clergy Burnout," the author suggestssomething startling. FIis advice to pastors gives us a clear peek into the power-politics that goes with the pastorate.'o'He implores pastors to "fellowship with clerW of other denominations. These personscannot harm you ecclesiastically, becausethey are not of your official circle. There is no political string they can pull to undo yon."'oo Professionallonelinessis another virus that runs high among pastors. The lone-ranger plague drives some ministers into other careers. It drives others into crueler fates.tot All of these pathologies find their root in the history of the pastorate. It is "lonely at the top" becauseGod never intended for anyone to be at the top-except His Son! In effect, the present-day pastor tries to shoulder the fifty-eight New Testament "one another" exhortations all by himself.'noIt is no wonder that many of them get crushed under the weight.''7

20'Larry "First-Class Burkett, Christians, Second-Class East Citizens," Hillsborough Christian Voice(February 2002), 3. r c 2N o t a pl l a s t o r s p l a y t o t h i s r o l e . B u t t h e l e w w h o m a n a g e t o r e s i s t t h i s i n c r e d i b l e p r e s s u r e s e e m t o b e t h e e x c e 203 percent percent Alarmingly, 23 ofProtestant clergy havebeen firedat leastonce, and41 ofcongregations have firedat leasttwo pastors, p printedin G.LloydRed Surveydone byLeadershi ige/sClergy Killers'GuidanceforPastorsandCongregations Under Attack (Philadelphia: Westm inster/John Knox, 1997). 20rJ.Grant "Preventing Swank, Clergy Burnout," Mlnlsfry(November 1998), 20. 205 "TheLonely Larry Yeagley, Pastori' Ministry(Seplenber 2001), 28;Michael L HillandSharon P Hill,TheHealing ofa Warrior' A Protocol forthePrevention andRestoration of Ministers Engaging in Destructive Eehavior(Cyberbook,2000l. 206 (Romans (1Corinthians (Galatians Forexample' Love oneanother 13:8); care foroneanother 12:25); serve oneanother 5:13); edify (Romans (Ephesians (Hebrews oneanother 14,19); bear withoneanother 4'2,rxlv); exhort oneanother 3'13), etc. 20tSearching (Winter Together23, no.4 1995) discusses thisissue at length.

c0NcLust0N The contemporary pastor is the most unquestioned fixture in fwentyfirst-century Christianiry. Yet not a strand of Scriprure supports the existenceof this office. Rather, the present-day pastor was born out of the single-bishop rule first spawned by Ignatius and Cyprian. The bishop evolved into the local presbyter. In the Middle Ages, the presbyter grew into the Catholic priest. During the Reformation, he was rransformed into the "preacheq" "the minister," and finally "the pasto1"-the person upon whom all of Protestantism hangs. To boil it down to one sentence: The Protestant pastor is nothing more than a slightly reformed Catholic priest. (Again, we are speaking of the office and not the individual.) Catholic priests had sevenduties at rhe time of the Reformation: preaching; the sacraments;prayers for the flock; a disciplined, godly life; church rites; supporting the poor; and visiting the sick.'otThe Protestant pastor takesupon himself all of theseresponsibilities-plus he sometimes blessescivic events. The famed poetJohn Milton pur it bestwhen he said,"New presbyter is but old priest writ larger"20e In other words, the contemporary pastor is but an old priest written in larger lettersl

>delving DETPER L Whileyounotethat theearlychurchreceivedoversightfromchurchplanterswhodidnlt stay longlern in anyonechurch,wasn'tthat largelyhecaasetrainedleaderswererare-a situation still true in nany partsof the worldeventoday-and hadto be sharedhy a nunberol churches? No. Church plantersdeliberatelyleft so that the churchcould function under the headshipof Christ. If a church planter staysin a church,the membersnarurally look to him to lead.Every-memberfunctioninsis hindered.This is still true todar,'. 208 publishing Johann Gerhard in Church Ministryby Eugene F,A.King(St.Louis, Concordia House, 1993), l8l 2 0Fs r o m M i l t o n ' s l 6 5 3 p o e m " 0 n t h e N eCwoFnos rcci e n r scoefu n d e r t h e L o n g P a r l i a m e n t . "

The pattern throughout the entire New Testament is that church planters (apostolic workers) always left the church after they laid the foundation. For more details, see The Nonnal Cbrktian Church Life bv Watchman Nee (Anaheim: Livine Stream Ministry 1980).

2. lames 3:l says, "Not many of you should hecone teachers in the church, tor we who teach will be iudged mnre strictly" (nr). First Corinthians | 2:27-31 clearly states that the Holy Spirit has gifted every person differently-nqt

everynneis gifted as an apostle, prophet, 0r teachef and

eachbelieverhasa differentfunction.0on'tthese Scripturessupporttheidea that 0od callsonly some to preach, teach, and minister to the church at large? Yes,absolutely.We agree that there are teachers,preachers,prophets, apostles,evangelists,and even shepherdsin the church ofJesus Christ. The contemporary pastoral office, however, is not what these texts envision. In fact, since pastors today are generally expected to take on so many roles, they often must operate outside their giftedness. That is unfaiE both to thern and to those within the body who possess these very gifts and are not permitted to use them.

S. ttlhileyou characterize ordinationas a formal Christianrite withpaganr00ts, this processensures that church leaders have a prnper grasp of the Scriptures and publicly cnnnit thenselves to building up the church. 0oesn't ordinatinn, therefore, serye as an impoftant safeguardfor those within a church? This question is basedon the assumption that the modern clergy systemis the model for Christian ministry. As we have shown, the early Christians knew nothing of a clergy. And they certainly did not know anything about an ordained clergy. Apostolic workers acknowledged local elders in some churches. (Acts 20:28, 1 Timothy 3, and Titus i describe the qualities of these elders.) And churches sent out apostolic workers to do the work of church planting. But these practices have few points of contact with modern ordination ceremonies,which elevatesome Christians above others.

4. Whatdo you mean whenyou say that "many-if nnt mlst-pastnrs

cannnt stay in their office

withoutbeing clrrupted on snne level"? Snne 0f the nost godly,giving people I knoware pastors whl wurk incredihly hard tor the Kingdon. We know many hard-working, godly, and giving pastors also. But we also know countless pastors who have admitted, often late in their careers,that they \4/erecorrupted by the office on some level. Some have personally confessedto us, "It didn't

affect me for a number of years, but after a while, it began to change me without my realizing it." They explained how they becamepeople pleasers,tryrng to play to their "audience" and maintain a particular image. This observation has nothing to do with a pastor's motives. It has to do with the powerful influence of an unbiblical system. All that aside, the real question is, should we support an office and a role that has no basisin the New Testament? If the modern pastoral office and role is a Godinspired development, then we should support it. But if it is not, we should not be surprised to learn it has harmful effects on those who fill the role. 5. ttlhat wouldynu say t0 pastlrs whl read this chapter and feel that you are attacking then pers0nally? It is not in our hearts to demean any pastor or minister. We believe that most of themare called of God, love God, and are servants to His people (see p. 106). Yet we understand that some pastors may feel attacked when reading this chapter. We suggestthat, in some cases,that may be becausetheir identity is so tied up with their position, which isn't surprising considering the leadership structure and system we have created and passed down through the years. Pastors who are secure in their office or role should not feel threatened as they read this book. Wre do not claim to be infallible in our conclusions. We simply ask that our readers be open to considering them.

'l93rrlouollse stloqulnu aq]'qclnqs l0l dnssalpoqMsuerlsljr{c lue}sa}o]d-uou }0laqunuaqlpp?aMll 'qcrnqc .eotilas Bururour r(epun5 ro1,,dn ssolp,, saqclnq3 aqlursgueBet8uoc qcrnqc iuelsa]old Sn 000'0Zt ]sohl ple,{autl\ e utlajedde uouruoo ajesutrls-lpuesloqs a3truas pueaal}oc aqlato}aq slnuqSnop sopnlcut ^llestdA qcnSuorldacxa I 0snodsa su0lieulurouop-0au aq1areprer{aul1 leql0lqslo/tl aqlaltlsu0tlpututouoo ]0 tlljo]lPnseo

Jo speJPunH dr{^\ uonsonb ol sruoasouo ou lng r.rlJrnqr 8ur -uroru.{epung puenB 01 seqlolr tsaq rreqt uo tnd plro^\ eqr lnoqSnorql stuaserord Jo suorTlnu'0 NINuol,lliVfi Nn S AUIrlI

8!ZSNV|SS0]03 NtSnSUVT J0lnvd..'lsuq3teus 'p;rolr oql sluorutpnjoql teue 'ueu u0utpBll pue lou eql roue l0 ;o 'lreceputenpuefqdosolrqd qtnotq nofigrods ueu ,tuelsel ete,lag,, ssvN'97:97 iln] NIISIUHC SnslfEuolu; punoteIle,l ol eltl orl,rltosorlulo 3te,neg,, ,.'seqoJ

WIlgoUd lHI

dn0Nrur^o :srltruso3

0NINUoru AV0NnS ;;ii 't:. i

riilr nl:: 'i,0,,,

thousandsof pastorswear specialgarb that separatesthem from their congregants.And no one seemsto care. Admittedly the dress has become more casual in a number of churchesover the past few decades.A person dressedin denim canwalk into the sanctuariesof many churches today without getting dirry looks. Yet dressingup for church is still a common practice in many churches. In this chapter,we will explore the origin of "dressing up" for church. We will also trace the roots of the clergy'sspecialattire.

DRESSIN UG PF O RC H U R C H The practice of dressing up for church is a relatively recent phenomenon.' It began in the late-eighteenth cenrury with the Industrial Revolution, and it becamewidespreadin the mid-nineteenth cennrry. Before this time, "dressing up" for social events was known only among the very wealthy. The reasonwas simple. only the well-to-do aristocrats of society could afford nice clothing! Common folks had only two setsof clothes: work clothes for laboring in the field and less tattered clothing for going into rown.3 Dressing up for any occasionwas only an option for the wealthiest nobility.a From medieval times until the eighteenth cenrury dress was a clear marker of one's social class.In places like England, poor people were actually forbidden to wear the clothing of the "better" people.t This changed with the invention of mass textile manufacnrring and the development of urban society.6Fine clothes became more affordable to the common people. The middle classwas born, and those within it were able to emulate the envied aristocrary. For the first time, the middle class could distinzuish themselves from the 2 Dressing "decently" goesbackto around forchurch service thethirdcentury. Clement ofAlexandria 050-215)putit thisway: "Woman andmanaretogoto church decently attired, withnatural step,embracing silence . . . letthewoman observe thisfurther. Letherbeentirely ("Going covered, unless shehappens to beat home." to Church," Thelnstrucfo4 bk.3.ch.I 1.) 3 MaxBarsis,fheConmon york:Unger, (New Manthrough theCenturies 1973). a Leigh "AChurch EricSchmidt, Going People lsa Dress-Loving ?eople,,, Church Historl(59), 38-39. 5 lbid. 6 James Hargreaves invented the"spinning in 1754, creating iiner, more colorful clothing 1enny" thatwasaffordable tothemasses. Elizabeth (London: Ewing, Everyday Dress 1650-1900 Batsford, 1984), 56-5i.

peasants.T To demonstrate their newly improved starus,they could now "dressup" for social eventsjust like the well-to-do.t Some Christian groups in the late eighteenth and earlynineteenth centuries resistedthis cultural trend. John Wesley wrote againstwearing expensive or flashy clothing.o The early Mei:hodists so resisted the idea of dressing up for church that they turned awayanyone who wore expensiveclothing to their meetings.tuThe early Baptists also condemned fine clothing, teaching that it separatedthe rich from the poor.tt Despite these protests, mainstream Christians began wearing fine clothes whenever they could. The growing middle classprospered, desiring bigger homes, larger church buildings, and fancier clothing." As the Victorian enculruration of the middle classgrew, fancier church buildings began to draw more influential people in society.t' This all came to a headwhen in 1843,Horace Bushnell,an influential Congregational minister in Connecticut, published an essay called "Taste and Fashion." In it, Bushnell argued that sophistication and refinement were attributes of God and that Christians should emulate them.taThus was born the idea of dressing up for church to honor God. Church members now worshipped in elaborately decorated buildings sporting their formal clothes to honor God."

Bushman, Refinement ofAnerica, 313. Henry Warner Bowden andP C.Kemeny, History' A feader(Nashviller eds., Anerican Church Abingdon Press, 1971), 87-89.Dress published andhierarchy were closely connected incolonial America. inPhiladelphia A pamphlet anonymously in lT22enIitled fhe Miraculous Power of Clothes, andDignityof theTaylors' BeinganEssay Clothes MakeMensuggested ontheh/ords, thefollowing, Social status, andpower were station, displayed, expressed, andsustained through dress. Theconnection between dress and power. hierarchy incolonial society invested withsymbolic clothes Ihismind-set eventually seeped intotheChristian church. (London: Rupert Davies, A History of theMethodist in Great Church Britarn Epworth, 1965),193;Nehemiah Curnock, ed' Journals "agospel ofWesley(London: Epworth Press. 1965), 193. Wesley's hasbeen teaching onclothing called ofplainness." Hismain plainly, message wasthatChristians ought todress neatly, Wesley andsimply. spoke onthissubject sooJten thatheiscredited "Cleanliness (Phinehas forcoining thephrase isnexttogodliness." However, hebonowed it froma rabbi Ben-Yair, Song of Songs, Midrash Rabbah. 1.1,9). r0 Davies, History of theMethodist 197. Church, I' Schmidt, "AChurch Going People lsa Dress-Loving People," 40. 12Bushman, Refinement ofAmerica, 335,352. '3 lbid.,350.Denominationswithagreaternumberofwealthymembers(Episcopal,Unitarian,etc.)begansel programs. families tofundelaborate "0ntopofpewcosts, worshippers hadtowear inkeeping church building clothes withthe splendor ofthebuilding, andthestyle ofthecongregation became banier formany. aninsurmountable Acentury earlier a common putting genteel farmer lor could dress up church by ona bluecheck shirt. Inthe atmosphere ofthenewbeautiful was churches, more reouired." '4 tbid.,328,331. 's 1bid..350.

In 7846, a Virginia Presbyterian named William Henry Foote wrote that "a church-going people are a dressloving people."toThis statement simply expressedthe formal dress ritual that mainsrream Christianshad adoptedwhen going to church. The trend wasso powerful that by the 1850s,even the "formal-dress-resistant"Methodists got absorbedby it. And they, too, began wearing their Sunday best to church.tt Accordingly, as with virtually every other acceptedchurch practice, dressingup for church is the result of Christians being influenced bv their surrounding culture. Today, many Christians "suit up" for Sunday morning church without ever asking why. But now you know the story behind this mindlesscustom. It is purely the result of nineteenth-century middle-classefforts to become like their wealthy aristocrat contemporaries,showing off their improved statusby their clothing. (This effort was also helped along by\fictorian notions of respectabiliry.)It has nothing to do with the Bible, JesusChrist, or the Floly Spirit.

SOWHAT'S WRONG WITHIT? What's the big deal about "dressing up" for church? It is hardly a burning issue.Ffowever, it is what dressing up for church represents that is the burning issue. First, it reflects the false division berween the secular and the sacred.To think that God caresone whit if you wear dressythreads on Sunday to "meet Him" is a violation of the New Covenant. We have accessto God's presenceat all times and in all circumstances. Does He really expectFIis people to dressup for a beaurypageanton Sundaymorning? Second, wearing attractive, flashy clothes on Sunday morning screamsout an embarrassingmessage:that church is the place where L 5 S c h m r d "t ,A C h u r c h G o i n gP e o p l les a D r e s s - L o v iPn eg o p l e 3 , "6 . L r B u s h m a nR, e f i n e m eonftA n e r i c a , 3 I 9".T h ee a r l yM e t h o d i s kt sn e wt a s h i o n a b l e d r e s sw a st h ee n e m ya,n dn o wt h ee n e m w y as e e r ec o n c e r n eodn t h eS a b b a t h w i n n i n g .S" c h m i dwt r i t e s", P e o p lw . . . t o d r e s st h e m s e l v ei nst h e i rb e s tc l o t h e sS; u n d a b y e s tw a s s n de v a n g e l i c awl sh oi n s i s t e od n p l a i nd r e s sn o n e t h e l em a l r e a dpy r o v e r b i aEl .v e np i e t i s t a s sa d es u r et h a tt h e i rb o d i e w s e r eg r a v e l y , C h u r c hG o i n gP e o p l les a D r e s s - L o v iP a n dd e c e n t lcyl o t h e d("S c h m i d"t A ne g o p l e4 , "5 ) .

Christians hide their real selvesand "dress them up" to look nice and pretry.'8Think about it. wearing your Sunday best for church is litde more than image management. k gives the house of God all the elementsof a stageshow: costumes,makeup, props, lighting, ushers, specialmusic, master of ceremonies,performance, and the featured program.to Dressing up for church violates the realiry that the church is made up of real people with messyproblems-real people who may have gotten into a major-league bickering match with their spouses just before they drove into the parking lot and put on colossalsmiles to cover it up! wbaring our "sunday best" concealsa basicunderlying problem. It fosters the illusion that we are somehow "good" becausewe are dressing up for God. It is a srudy in pretense that is dehum antzing and constitutes a false witness to the world. Let's face it. fu fallen humans, we are seldom willing ro appear to be what we really are. We almost always rely on our performance or dressto give people a certain impression of what we want them to believe we are. Nl of this differs markedly from the simpliciry that marked the early church. Third, dressing up for church smacks against the primitive simplicity that was the sustaining hallmark of the early church. The first-cenrury Christians did nor "dress up" to attend church meetings. They met in the simpliciry of living rooms. They did not dress to exhibit their social class.In fact, the early Christians made concrete efforts to show their absolute disdain for social class distinctions.to In the church, all social and racial distinctions are erased.The early Christians knew well that they were a new species on this

'8 Godlooksattheheart;Heisnotimpressedwiththegarbwewear(1Samuel16:7;Luke11:39;lPeter3:3-5) (John spirit, notin physical outward forms 4,20-24). .e christian smith,"0urDressed (September/October, upSelves," voices in theM/derness lggT),2. 'ZOInhisbookAntePacem: Archaeological fvidence of Church LifeBefore Constantine, Graydon Snyder states thatthereareabout thirtyextant letters written byChristians before Constantine. According tothese letters, theChristians typically dropped their general family name, whtch indicated theirsocial "brother" status. They alsocalled oneanother and"sister." Graydon Snyder, e-mail messages to Frank Viola, 0ctober 12and14,2001, andJulv10.2007.

planet.ttFor this reason,Jameslevelsa rebuke to those believerswho were treating the rich saints better than the poor saints. He boldly reproves the rich for dressing differendy from the poor.t' And yet, many Christians are under the false delusion that it is "irreverent" to dress in informal clothing when attending a Sunday morning church service.This is not dissimilarto how the Scribesand the Phariseesaccusedthe Lord and His disciplesof being irreverenr for not following the tradition of the elders (Mark 7:l-13). In short, to say that the Lord expectsHis people to dressin fine clothingwhen the church gathersis to add to the Scriptures and speak where God has not spoken." Such a practiceis human tradition at its best.

THEGARB OFTHECLERGY Let's now shift gearsand look at the development of the clergy attire. Christian clergy did not dress differently from the common people until the coming of Constantine.24 Contrary to popular opinion, clergy apparel(including the "ecclesiasticalvestments" of the high church tradition) did not originate with the priestl;. dress of the Old Testament. It rather has its origin in the seculardressof the Greco-Roman world." Flere is the story: Clement of Alexandria argued that the clergy should wear better garments than the laity. (By this time the church liturgy was regarded as a formal event.) Clement said that the minister's clothes should be "simple" and "white."2u

" TheearlyChristianssawthemselvesasanewcreation,anewhumanity,andanewspeciesthattranscends a n db a r r i e( r1sC o r i n t h i 1 a0 n :s3 2 C ; o r i n t h i5a:n1s7G; a l a t i a3n: 2 s 8E; p h e s i a 2n : 1s5Cr o l o s s i3a:n1s1 ) . 22James 2:1-5. Thispassage alsosuggests thata person wearing fashionable clothing tothechurch meeting wastheexception, not thestandard, 23Deuteronomy 4'2;Proverbs 30,6; Revelation 22,18. 7a TheCatholic Encyclopedia 1913 0n-Line Editior, s.v."Vestments," http://www,newadveni.org/cathen/15388a.htm; Encyctopedia "Sacred (1994-1998). Britannica 0nline,s.u. Rights Ceremonies: TheConcept andForms of Ritual' Christianity" Shortly before Constantine, clergymen wore a cloak offinematerial when administering theEucharist. "Vestments." "0rigin" "The Catholic Encyclopedz, s.v. Under priestly the entry reads, Christian vestments drd not originate in the " dress ofthe0ldTestament, theyhave. rather, developed {romthesecular dress oftheGraeco-Roman world." See alsoJanet lVayo, / History offcclesiastical Dress York: "Aconsideration Holmes & Meier Publishers, 1984), 11-12.Mayo writes, lNew ofecclesiastical vestments willreveal thattheyhadtheirorigins insecular Roman dress. Theviewthatvestments were ofLevitical origin andcame l aet en rt isd e a . " F o r ha irsatroer y o l t h e r e l i g i o u s c o s t u m e , s e e A m e lT f r o m J e w i s h p r i e s t l y gj saar m i ahM eo Qtut G a kuemr m ' Ae r e , (Philadelphia: Study in Costune Ferris andLeach, 1901). Note thatthevestments ofthepriesthood inthe0ldTestament were types garments (Hebrews andshadows ofthespiritual thatChristians areclothed withinChrist Jesus 10,1; Colossians 2:16-17. 3'10-14; Ephesians 4:24; 1 Peter 5,5;Revelatron 19,8). 26"0nClothes," fhelnstructor, bk.3,ch,11.

White was the color of the clergy for cenruries. This cusrom appearsto have been borrowed from the pagan philosopher Plato who wrote that "white was the color of the gods." In this regard, both Clement and Terrullian felt that dyed colors were displeasing to the Lord." with the coming of constantine, distinctions berween bishop, priest, and deaconbeganto take roor." When Constantinemoved his court to Byzantium and renamed it Constantinople in AD 330, the official Roman dresswas gradually adopted by the priests and deacons.toThe clergy were now identified by their garb, which matched that of secularofficials.'u After the Germanic conquests of the Roman Empire frorn the fourth century onward, fashions in secular dress changed. The flowing garments of the Romans gaveway to the short tunics of the Goths. But the clergy,wishing to remain distinct from the lairy, continued to wear the archaic Roman costumeslt' The clergy wore these outdated garments during the church service following the model of the secular courr ritual.rt when la),'rnen adoptedthe new style of dress,the clergy believedthat such dresswas "worldly" and "barbarian." They retained what they considered to be "civilized" dress.And this is what becamethe clerical attire.33 This practice was supported by the theologians of the day. For example, Jerome (ca.342-420) remarked that the clergy should never enter into the sanctuary wearing everyday garments.'o From the fifth cenrury onward, bishopswore purple.,t ln the sixth

'?/ lbid.,bk2,ch.11;Mayo, A History of Ecctesiasticat Dress, 15. 28 Mayo, History ofEcclesiasticat Dress, 14-15. zs lbid.,Latourette,AHistoryofChristianity,2Il;Brauer,Thelr/estninsterDictionaryofChurchHislorl(Philadelphia,TheWe P r e s1s9, 7 1 ) , 2 8 4 . 30"Thebishop's dress wastheancient robeofa Roman magistrate." Hatch, 1rganization oftheEarly Christian Churches, 164. Thebishop's dress indicated a specific caste structure. lt included a white fringed saddlecloth ornappula,flat black slippers or campagi, andrdones orwhitestockings. Thiswasthedress o{theRoman magistrates. Johnson, History ofChristianity, I33. 3) Senn, "sacred Christian Worship andltsCultural Setting,4l; RightsCeremonies," Encyclopedia Britannica 0nline. 32Eugene professor TeSelle, ol church history andtheology, Vanderbilt University, ine-mail message toFrank Viola, January 18,2000. 33Mayo, History of[cclesiastical Dress, 15;Jones, Historical Approach toEvangelical Vlorship,1.Il . 3alerome saidthatGodishonored if thebishop wears a white tunicmore handsome thanusual. Frank Senn, liturgical scholar, in e-maal message t0 Frank Viola, "Against July18,2000. See alsoJerome, Jovinianus" bk.2.34lVicene andPost-Nicene Fathers, series 2,vol.6)and"Lrves oflllustrious Men," ch.2 (Nicene andPost-Nicene Fathers, series 2,vol.3). 150ollins andPrice, TheStory of Christianity,25,65.

and seventhcenturies,clergy garb becamemore elaborateand costly.'u By the Middle Ages, their clothing acquired mystical and syrnbolic meanings." Special vestments were spawned around the sixth and seventh centuries. And there grew up the custom of keeping a special set of garmentsin the vestry to put over one'sstreet clothes." During the seventh and eighth centuries, the vestments were acceptedassacredobjectsinherited from the robesof Levitical priests in the Old Testament.re(This \Masa ratronahzationto justi$z the practice.) By the rwelfth cenrury the clergy also began wearing street clothes that distinzuished them from everyone else.on I

CHANGED WHATTHEREFORMATION During the Reformation, the break with tradition and clerical vestments was slow and gradual.o'In the place of the clergy vestments, the Reformers adopted the scholar'sblack gown.*' It was also known as the philosopher'scloak, asit had been worn by philosophersin the fourth and fifth cenruries.o'So prevalent was the new clerical garb that the black gown of the secular scholar becamethe garment of the Protestantpastor.u' The Lutheran pastor wore his long black gown in the streets. He also wore a round "ruff" around his neck that grew larger with time. It grew so large that by the seventeenth century the ruff was

36)ones,Historical goesintogreatdetailonthe Dress Approach IUorship, 116-117Mayo's History of fcclesiastical toEvangelical headdress was vestments each stage ofhistory ineach tradition. Nodistinctive ofeachpiece oftheclerical thr0ugh devel0pment girdle years, tliasBenjamin andthe wasnotknown untiltheeighth century. Sanford, ed.,A Concise worn forthefirstthousand 1890), Knowledge\New York' Charles L.Webster & Company, 943. Cyclopedia ofReligious 3t Mayo, (d.around 440)wasthefirstto ascribe symbolic interpretati0ns t0 parts Dress, 27;lsidore ofPelusium History ofEcclesiastical priestly garbwasgiven meanings century intheWest andtheninth century Theentire symbolic around theeighth ofthevestmenis. (Catholic giving sotheycouldnotresist tncyclopadr,a, s.v."Vestments,"). TheMedievals hada loveaffairwithsymbolism, intheEast "spiritual" inliturgical churches. religious meanings. These meanings arestillalive today allthevestments 38 Senn, Thevestry, wasa special room inthechurch building where the V'lorshrp andltsCultural Setting,41. orsacristy, Christian vessels were kept. clerical vestments andsacred 3e Mayo, Dress,27. History of Ecclesiastical oc 0ollins Story of Christianity,25,65. andPrice, at Mayo,HistoryofEcclesiasticalDress,64.ZwingliandLutherquicklydiscardedthegarmentsoftheCatholicpri Shepherd,6. 42Zwingli gown, intheautumn of 1523. Luther began towearit intheafternoon of wasthefirsttointroduce thescholar's inZurich l4T).SeealsoGeorge Marsden, TheSoul oftheAmerican andWilliams, Ministry in Historical Perspectives, 0ctober 9, 1524(Niebuhr (New York, Press, 1994), 37. fromProtestant Establishment to Established Nonbelief 0xfordUniversity University' 4 3H . l . M a n o u , A H i s t o r y o f E d u c a t i o n i n A n t i q u i t y \ N e w Y o r k , S h e e d a n d W a r d , 1 9 5 6 ) , 2 0 6 . " T h e p h i l o s o p h e r cloth." SeealsoSmith,FronChrist toConstantine, I05. cloa k,whichwasshortanddarkandmade ofcoarse aaNiebuhr was"clerical streetwear" rnthesixteenth century andWilliams, Ministry in Histortcal Perspectives, l4T.Theblackgown 42). Christian tlorshipandltsCultural Setting, lSenn,

called "the millstone ruff."ut (The ruff is still worn in some Lutheran churches today.) Interestingly, however, the Reformers still retained the clerical vestments.The Protestant pastor wore them when he administered the Lord's Supper.+u This is still the casetoday in many protestant denominations.Just like Catholic priests, many pastors will put on their clerical robes before lifting the bread and the cup. The garb of the Reformed pasror (the black gown) symbolized his spiritual authoriry.+7 This trend continued throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth cenfuries. Pastors alwayswore dark clothing, preferably black. (This was the traditional color for "professionals"such as lawyers and doctors during the sixteenth century.) Black soon became the color of every minister in every branch of the church.otThe black scholar'sgown evenrually evolved into the "frock coat" of the 1940s.The frock coar was later replaced by the black or grey "lounge suit" of the twentieth cenrury.+e At the beginning of the rwentieth cenrury many clerglirnen wore white collarswith a tie. In fact, it was consideredhighly improper for a clergyrnan to appear without a tie.s' Low church clergy (Baptists, Pentecostals,etc.) wore the collar and necktie. Fligh church clergy (Anglicans,Episcopalians,Lutherans, etc.) adopted the clerical collar-often dubbed the "dog collar."t' The origin of the clerical collar goes back to 1865. It was not a Catholic invention asis popularlybelieved.Itwas invented bythe Anglicans.t'Priests in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries traditionally wore black cassocks(floor-length gannents with collars that stood straight up) over white garments (sometimescalled the alb). a5 Chadwick,Reformation, 422-423. ab Mayo,History of Ecclesiastical Dress,66. ai BowdenandKemeny, AmericanChurchHistory,8g. tB Mayo,Historyof Ecclestastical Dress, 77 78. 4 tbid.,118 s tbid..94. 5 r l b i d .9, 4 ,1 1 8 . 52 NiebuhrandWillians,MinistryinHistoricalPerspectives,164.Accordingto T h e L o n d o n l l n e s ( M a r1c4h, Z 0 0 Z J , t h e c l e r i c a l c o l l a r w a si n v e n t ebdyt h e R e vD . r .D o n a l d M c L e oodf G l a s g o w A.p o p u l abr e l i e ifs t h a tt h ec l e r i c acl o l l a w r a si n v e n t ebdyt h e C a t h o l i c C o u n t e r - R e f o r m at toi o pn r e v e npt r i e s t fsr o mw e a r i n g l a r g er u f f sl i k eP r o t e s t a np ta s t o rw s o r e( C h a d w l c R k ,e f o r n a t i o n , 4 2 B 3 )u, tj t s e e m st 0 h a v ec o m ei n t ob e i n gw e l la f t e rt h i s .

In other words, they wore a black collar with white in the middle. The clerical collar was simply a removable version of this collar. It was invented so that priests, both Anglican and Catholic, could slip it over their street clothes and be recognizedas "men of God" in any place! Today, it is the dark suit with a tie that is the standard atrire of most Protestant pastors.Many pastorswould not be caught dead without itl Some Protestant pasrorswear the clergy collar as well. The coller is the unmistakable q.nnbol that the person wearing it is a clergynan.

IS SPECIAL CLERGY ATTIRE HARMFUL? A specially attired clergy is an affront to rhe spiritual principles that govern the house of God. It strikes at the heart of the church by separating God's people into two classes:"professional" and "nonprofessional." Like "dressing up" for church, clerical clothing-whether it be the elaboratevestments of the "high church" minister or the dark suit of the evangelical pastor-is rooted in worldly culrure. The distinctive garb of the clergy goes bdck to the fourth cenrury when clergymen adopted the dressof Roman secularofficials. The Lord Jesusand His disciplesknew nothing of wearing special clothing to impress God or to distinguish themselvesfrom God's people.t' Wearing special garb for religious purposes was rarher,a characteristicof the Scribesand Pharisees.s4 And neither Scribe nor Pharisee could escapethe Lord's penetrating gazewhen He said, "Beware of the teachersof the law. They like to walk around in flowing robes and love to be greeted in the marketplaces and have the most important seatsin the s),rnagogues and the places of honor at banquets" (Luke 20:46,Nrv).

s3 Luke 7r25; 2 Corinthians 8:9.lt appears thatthenicest given clothes thatJesus owned while 0nearth were tohimin mockery-Luke 23:11. Recall garments, thattheSonofGod entered thisearth notin kingly (Luke butwrapped inswaddling clothes 2:7). Note that John theBaptist isthemost (Matthew extreme case whodidnotseek ofthose to impress Godbytheirclothing 3:4). 54Matthew 23,5: Markl2:38.

>delving DEEPER l. fou inply thatpeopleshouldneverbe encouraged to dressup for church;howeyelfor me,d0givehodthe respect ingso serves asa reninderthatweshould Hedeserves. ln thissense, isn't goodclothesto churcha positivething? wearing If you feelthat dressingup for churchgatheringsis a positivething andyou cando it unto the Lord with pure motives,then by all meansdo so.But we shouldbe careful not to judgeor look downupon thosewho do nor dressup for suchgatherings. 2. Do you helieve that dressing up for church is inherently wrlng, 0r do you think it is a hunaninventedpractice that can be redeened?

il; i,t,',',

The Jatter. Unlike some of the other traditional practices that we have traced in this

.liil

book, we believe this one is an extrabiblical practice that can be redeemed (seeanswer

:f;'

above).There is nothing inherently wrong with wearing dressyclothes to a Christian

,'

gathering. fu with all our religious traditions, we simply believe it is importanr ro ask why we do it and get in touch with our morives behind it.

!'rl:1

MUSIC: CLERGY SETTOMUSIC "Thehallmark of an authentic evangericalism is nottheuncritical repetitionof old traditions, butthe willingness to submiteverytradition, however ancient,to freshbiblicalscrutinyand,if necessary, reform." _,OHNSTOTT, TWENTIETH-CENTURY BRITISH MINISTER AND BIBTE SCHOTAR "Therealtroubleis notin factthatthechurchis toorichbutthatit has become heavilyinstitutionalized, witha crushing investment in maintenance.lt hasthe characteristics of the dinosaur andbattleship. lt is saddledwitha plantanda programme beyondits means,so that it is absorbed in problems of supplyandpreoccupied with survival. Theinertiaof the machineis suchthatthefinancialallocations, the legalities, the channelsof organization, the attitudesof mind,are all set in the directionof continuing andenhancing the statusquo. lf onewantsto pursuea coursewhichcutsacrossthesechannels, thenmostof one'senergiesare exhausted beforeoneeverreaches theenemylines." -JOHNA.T.ROBINSON, TWENTIETH.CENTURY ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT SCHOLAR

serviceand you'll find it will usuCHIJRCH WALKlNTOANY0l"lRl$TIAN hyrnns, choruses,or praise and worship of the singing with begin ally songs.One person (or a team of people)will both lead and direct the singing. In more traditional churches, it will be the choir director or the music minister. (In some churches, this role is even played by the senior pastor.) Or it may be handled by the choir itself. In contemporary churches,it will be the worship leader or the praise and u'orship team. Leading up to the sermon, those who "lead worship" select the songsthat are to be sung. They begin those songs.They decide how those songs are to be sung. And they decide when those songs are over. Those sitting in the audience in no way, shape,or form lead the singing. They are led by someone elsewho is often part of the clerical staff-or who has similar stature. This is in stark contrast to New Testament teaching and example. In the early church, worship and singing were in the hands of all of God's people.'The church herself led her own songs.Singing and leading songs was a corporate affatr, not a professional event led by specialists.

T H EO R I G I NOSFT H EC H O I R This all began to changewith the rise of the clergy and the advent of the Christian choir, which datesback to the fourth cenrury. Shortly after the Edict of Milan (AD 313), the persecution of Christians ceased.During Constantine's reign, choirs were developed and trained to help celebratethe Eucharist. The practice was borrowec from Roman custom, which began its imperial ceremonieswith processionalmusic. Specialschoolswere established,and choir singers were given the status of a second-string clergy.' The roots of the choir are found in the pagan Greek temples

I Ephesians passages. "speaking inthese and"oneanother" toyourselves" thewords 3:16. Note 5,19; Colossrans 2 Liemohn, in Protestant Worship,S. andChoir The1rgan

and Greek dramas.'\\ ill Durant sratesit beautifully:"In the Middle Ages, as in ancient Greece, the main fountainhead of drama was in religious liturgy. The Mass itself was a dramatic spectacle;the sanctuary a sacredstage;the celebrantswore symbolic cosrumes;priest and acolytes engaged in dialogue; and the antiphonal responsesof priest and choir, and of choir to choir, suggestedprecisely that same evolution of drama from dialogue that had generated the sacred Dionysian phy."o with the advent of the choir in the christian church, singing was no longer done by all of God's people but by clerical staff composed of trained singers.sThis shift was partly due to the fact that heretical doctrines were spread through hymn singing. The clergy felt that if the singing of hymns was in their control, itwould curb the spread of heresy.6But it was also rooted in the ever-growing power of the clergy as the main performers in the christian drama.t By AD 367, congregationalsinging was altogether banned. It was replaced by music from the trained choirs.s Thus was born the trained professional singer in the church. Singing in Christian worship was no\Mthe domain of the clergy and choir. Ambrose is credited for creating the first postapostolic Christian hlirnns.oThese h).nnnswere modeled on the old Greek modes and

3 TheGreekshadtrainedchoirstoaccompanytheirpaganworshjp(H,V,l.parke,The0raclesofApoiloinAsiaMinor[Lo Helm, 19851, 102-103) plays, Greek both tragedy andcomedy, peyser, were (Marion accompanied byorchestras Bauer andEthel rgow MusicGrewlNewYork: G.P Putnam's york, Sons, 19391, 36,45;Elizabeth Rogers, ily'usr.c ihrough theAgeslNew G.p putnamsons, 19671' 87;Carl Sha ulk,KeyWords in Church Music Louis: Concord ii PublishingHouse, LSt. t glsi 6q,Qua sten,I4usrb and Worship in Pagan andChristian Antiquity, T6;AlfredSendrey, Musicin theSociat andReligious LifeofAntiquitylRutherford, NJ:Fairleigh Dickinson tiniversity Press, 19141,327,412). There were typically between fifteen people andtwentyJour (Claude intheGreek choirs Calane, Ch1ruses 0f Y1ung W1men tnAncient GreecelLanham, MD,Rowman & Litilefield, Z00I),21J.Some have triedto argue thattheChristians borrowed ch0irs andchanting lromtheJewish synag0gue. Butthisishighly unlikely asthethird-andfourtncentury Christians bonowed littleto nothing fromtheJews. lnstead, theydrew heavily from iheirsunounding Greco-Roman culture. Interestingly, Greek music haditsgenesis Inthe0rientandAsiaMinor (Rogers, Music through theAges,gS). a Durant, AgeofFaith,1027. 5 Liemohn, 0rgan andChoir in Protestant t4lorship, 8-g.Upuntilthefourth century, c0ngregational singing wasa characteristic feature ofChristian worship. 6 EdwardDickinson,ThestudyoftheHistoryofMusic(Newyork:charlesScribner'sSons,1905),16,24. 7 Bauer andPeyser, HowMusic Grew,lI-jZ. 8 Rogers, Music through theAges, I08.IheCouncil (ADca.367)forbade ofLaodicea allothers to singin church besides thecanonical singers Thisactwastoensure thatthequality ofsinging could bemore homogeneous andcontrollable bythose directing the worship(Davies, TheNewllestminsterDictionaryafLiturgy,l3l;ArthurlVlees, ChoirsandChoralMaslc[Newyork,Greenioodpress, 19691,25-26). ' Ambrose's hymns were orthodox. TheArians plentifully used hymns to promote theirheretical (Arians teachings ab0ut Jesus. believed thatJesus wasa creature created bvGod.)

calledby Greek names.'oAmbrose also createda collection of lirurgical chants that are still used today in some Catholic churches.ttThe lirurgical chant is the direct descendantof the pagan Roman chant, which goesback to the ancient Sumerian cities." Papal choirs began in the fifth century." When Gregory the Great becamepope near the end of the sixth century he reorganized the Schola Cantorum (school of singing) in Rome. (This school was founded by Pope Sylvesteqwho died in AD 335.)'o With this school, Gregory establishedprofessionalsingerswho trained Christian choirs all throughout the Roman Empire. The singers trained for nine years. They had to memorize every song that they sang-including the famous Gregorian chant.tt Gregory wiped out the last vestigesof congregational singing, believing music was a clerical function and the exclusiveright of trained singers. choirs, trained singers, and the end of congregational reflected all the cultural mind-set of the Greeks. Much like singing oratory (professional speaking), the Greek culrure was built around tained

an audience-performer dlmamic. Tragically, this trait was carried over from the temples of Diana and the Greek dramas straight into the Christian church. The congregationof God's people becamespectators not only in spoken ministry but in singing as well.'o Regrettably, the spirit of Greek spectatorshipstill lives in the contemporary church. Christian boys' choirs also go back to the days of Constantine. Some still exist. Most were created from orphanages.ttThe Vienna

'. BauerandPeyser,HowMusicGrew,Tl."IheGreekmusrcalsystemwastheprecursorofthato'ftheearly TheStudy oftheHistory of Rome, tothelVliddle Ages andmodern times"(Dickinson, is unbroken lromGreece, through lineofdescent AD200.Ambrose simply made hymn writing a hymn isdated around Actually, theearliest fulltextwehave ofa Christian Music,9). practice Barry Leisch, [heNewllorship: Straight Greek idioms. inthechurch. Christran music at thistimedrewfrompopular common (Grand Book House, 1996). 35. Rapids, Baker Talk onMusic andtheChurch rr Rogers, Music through theAges,106. 12BauerandPeyser,HowMusrcGreryT0; "Fromwordswhichhavesurvivedweknowthateach Rogers, MusicthroughtheAges,6L (between priest practiced inthetechniques ofsoloandresponse andchoir) and well-organrzed liturgies chanted temple [Sumerian] (choir ofMusic,25. to choir)." SeealsoDickinson oftheHistory antiphony , TheStudy 13Dickinson, of Music, 18. Study of theHistory ia Rogers, 1992), 43; TheStory of Christran Music(lxIord, LionPublications, theAges,ID9: Andrew Wilson-Dickson, Music through History of Church Music,28 Appleby, r5 BauerandPeyser,HowMusicGrew.T3-75;Rogers,MusicthroughtheAges,l09,Allsingingatthistimewasw instru ments. i6 Dickinson, of theHistory ofMusic,14. Study t] lheCatholic in Church Shaulk, KeyWards Music,64-65. http'//www.newadvent,org/cathen/03693b.htm; Encyclopedia, s.v."Choir," (SanFrancisco: s.v."Chotr" Harper & Row Harper's Encyclopedia ofRehgious Education, lrisV.Cully andKendig Brubaker Cully, eds., Publishers.1971).

Boys choir, for example,was founded in Vienna, Austria, in 1498.The choir sang exclusively for the court, at Mass, and at private concerts and state events." The first boys' choirs were acrually establishedby paganswho worshipped Greco-Roman gods."'Thesepagansbelieved that the voice of young boys possessed specialpowers.ro

THEFUNERAL DIRGE ANDPROCESSION Another form of music with pagan roots is the funeral dirge. It was brought into the Christian church in the early third cenrury. As one scholar put it, "The pagan cult of the dead was too much a part of the past lives of many Christians, formerly pagans,for them simply to be able to replace pagan dirges and funeral music with psalmody."" During the days of constanrine, Roman betrothal practices and funeral processions\Mereadapted and transformed into Christian "funerals."22 This was borrowed from paganpractice.2tTheso-called funeral dirge that is observed and accepted by Christians also came out of paganism.'ok was brought into the Christian church in the early third cenrury. Terrullian was opposed to Christian funeral processionsimply becauseit had pagan origins.25 Not only did the funeral procession emerge out of paganism; so did the funeral oration. It was the common practice of pagansin the Roman Empire to hire one of the town's eloquent professorsto speak at the funeral of a loved one. The speakerfollowed a little handbook for such occasions.He would work himself up to a passionatepitch and then say of the deceased,"He now lives among the gods, ffaversing the heavensand looking down on life below."'u It was his iob to LEhttp://www.bach-cantatas.com/BioAViener-Sangerknaben.htm. Fora discussion onthepagan origin ofwomen's choirs, seeQuasten, MusicandWorship rnPagan andChristian Antiquity,Tl-86. re Parke, 1racles ofApollo in Asia Minor,102-103: "Thepagans Quaslen, Music andlt/orship,87ff. frequenfly usedboys choirs intheir worship, especially onfestive occasions." 20Quasten, Music andlllorship,St. , 1 t b i d . , 8166, 0 f f . 2?Senn, Christian l/orship andttsCultural Setting,4l. Senn alsoexplains howRoman practices betrothal wereincorporated into Christian weddings. 23See chapter 3. 2aQuasten, Music andlVorship,163. r t b i d1 . ,6 4 - 1 6 5 . 26MacMullen, Christianizing theRoman Empire. \l-13.

comfort the loved ones of the deceased.This role is filled today by the contemporary pastor. Even the words of the oration are strikingly similar!

THEGONTRIBUTION OFTHEREFORMATION The major musical contribution of the Reformers was the restoration of congregational singing and the use of instruments.John Huss (1372-1415) of Bohemia and his followers (called Hussites) were among the first to bring both back into the church." Luther also encouragedcongregational singing during certain parts of the service." But congregational hymn singing did not reach is peak until the eighteenth century during the Wesleyan revival in England.'n In Reformation churches, the choir remained. It both supported and led congregational singing.'uAbout 150 years after the Reformation, congregationalsinging becamea generally acceptedpractice.stBy the eighteenth century the organ would take the place of the choir in leading Christian worship." Interestingly, there is no evidence of musical instruments in the Christian church serviceuntil the Middle Ages.rrBefor:ethen, all singing during the service was unaccompanied by musical instruments.to

2' Jones, Historical Approach toEvangelical Vlorship,257 . TheHussites created thefirstProtestant hymnbook in 1505in Prague. See alsoTerry, Evangelrsn: A Concrse History,68. 18)ones, Historical Approach toEvangelical V,lorship,257.During Luther's day,some srxty hymnbooks werepublished. More specifically, Luther augmented congregational singing aspartoftheliturgy. Helefta Latin l\4ass, which wassungbythechoir intowns and universitres, anda German Mass, which rvas sungbythecongregation invillages andruralplaces. These twomodels were merged practice inLutheran inthesixteenth toeighteenth TheReformed centuries. were opposed tobothchoral music andcongregational (versified) hymns. They approved only thesinging ofmetrical Psalms andother biblical canticles. From theirperspective, choirs (Frank were andhymns Roman, SoLutheran useofthemdemonstrated a haltbaked reform Senn, e-mail message t0 Frank Viola, November 18.2000). 2sJones, Historical Approach toEvangelical U/orship,?51. Ihehymns oflsaac Watts. John Wesley, andCharles Wesley were widely used. Hymn writing andsinging swept allFree Churches ontwocontinents during thistime. 30Liemohn, 1rgan andChoir rnProtestant Worship, 15.John F.White remarks that"tothisdaythereremains considerable confusion of good whatthefunction exactly ofthechoir isrnProtestant worship, isnosingle andthere rationale fortheexistence ofthechoir in (Protest " p Proiestantism i and Church Architecture,186). ant Worsh 3r Liemohn, 0rganandChoirin Protestant l'/orship, 15-16. r lbid., playparts 19.Intheseventeenth century, theorgan would against theunison singing ofthecongregation, thusdrowning out thepeople. Geneva churches toreouttheorgans fromtheirchurch buildings because theydidnotwantworship to bestolen fromthe (Wilson-DicNson, people Story of Christian Musrc,62,76-77). Aswiththesteeple andother embellishments, evangelical churches imported eventually organs fromtheAnglicans during the1800s to keepupwiththecompetition. Bushman, frefinement ofAmerica, 336-337. 33Ferguson. EarlyChristians Speak, I51. 3 aC h u r c h f a t h e r s l i k e C l e m e n t o f A l e x a n d r i a ( o f t h e t h i r d c e n t u r y ) , A m b r o s e , A u g u s t i n e , a n d J e r o m e ( o f t h e allopposed using musical instruments intheirworship. Like Calvin later on,theyassociated instruments musical withpagan ceremoniesandRomantheatricalproductions.lienohn,1rganandChoirinProtestantllorship,2;Quasten, MusicandV,/orship,64.

The church fathers took a dim view of musical instruments, associating them with immoraliry and idolatry.'5 calvin agreed,viewing musical instruments as pagan. Consequently, for two centuries, Reformed churches sang psalms without the use of instruments.ru The organ was the first instrument used by post-Constantinian Christians.tt organs were found in Christian churches as early as the sixth century. But they were nor used during the Mass until the twelfth century. By the thirteenth cenrury the organ became an integral part of the Mass.st The organ was first used to give the tone to the priests and the choir.'n During the Reformation, the organ became the standard instrument used in Protestant worship-except among the Calvinists, who removed and demolished church organs.ooThe first organ to be purchased by an American church was in 1704.1t The first Protestant choirs began flourishing in the mid-eighteenth century.a2Specialseatswere assignedto choir members to show their specialstatus. At first, the function of the choir was to set the pitch for congregational singing. But before long, the choir began to contribute special selections.as Thus was born special music by the choir as the congregation watched it perform. By the end of the nineteenth cenrury the children's choir made its appearancein American churches.* By this time, it becamecustomary for the choir in nonlirurgical churches to play special music. (This practice was eventually carried over to liturgical churches as well.)ot 35 Ferguson, EarlyChristians Speak, I57. 36Jones, Historical Approach toEvangelicat Worship,255-256.1he published Genevan Psalte4 in 1522,wastirestandard hymnbook for Reformed churches in Europe andthelJnited States forover200years. 37lbid., 256. 38Liemohn, 0rganandChoirin Protestant lt/orship, 4. 3 el b i d . , 3 . { lbid., 3,32-33. Wesleyans preferring forbade organs in 1796, thebass violastheonlylegal instrument inworshrp. Butorgans were years installed (pp.9i-92).TheLutheran twelve laterinWesleyan churches organ became anindispensable feature of Lutheran worship. lronically, theLutheran organ music tradition wasJounded bya Dutch Calvinist named JanPieterszoon Sweelinck intheearly (Senn, seventeenth century Christian Liturgy, 534). 4r Thechurch wasTrinity Church in NewYork. Fora discussion onthefirstorgans usedinAmerica, seeLiemohn, \rganandChoir in Protesta nt lt/orsh ip, I I 0-1I 1, a2 lbid.,I l3; Whit e,Protesta nt ltlorsh ip andChurch Arch itect ure.!10. a3 Liemohn, 0rganandChoirin Protestant ltlorshrp, lI5. 44 lbid.,125.TheFirstPresbyterian Church in Flemington, NewJersey, iscredited withbeing thefirsttoorganize a children's choir. { lbid.

The location of the choir is worth noting. In the late sixteenth century the choir moved from the chancel (clergy platform) to the rear gallery where a pipe organ was installed.ouBut during the Oxford Movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, the choir returned to the chancel. It was at this time that choir members began wearing ecclesiasticalrobes.o'By the 1920sand 1930s,it was customary for American choirs to wear these special vestments to match the newly acquired neo-Gothic church buildings.otThe choir in their archaic clerical clothes were now standing with the clergy in front of the peoplelon

THEORIGIN OFTHEWORSHIP TEAM In many contemporary churches, whether charismatic or noncharismatic, the choir has been replaced by the worship team.tu Such churches have sanctuaries that boast few religious q.'rnbols (except possiblybannersor flags). At the front of the stage is a simple podium, some plants, amplifiers, speakers,and lots of wires. The dress is usually casual.Folding chairs or theater seatstFpically are used in place of pews.The standard worship team includes an arnplified guitar, drums, keyboard, possibly a bassguitar, and some specialvocalists.Words are usually projected onto a screen or a bare wall by an overhead (or video) projector or by PowerPoint slides. The songs are rypically selected before the worship service.There are rarely songbooks or hymnals. In such churches,worship means following the band'sprescribed songs.The praise and worship time typically lastsfrom twenry to forry minutes. The first songs are usually upbeat praise choruses.stThe worship team will then lead a lively, hand*clapping, body-swaying,

a6Senn, Chnsfian Liturgy,490. a7Liemohn, 0rganandChoir in Prztestant Wlrship, 127;Wilson-Dickson, Story ofChristian Music,137. a8 Senn, Chnslanlt/orship andltsCultural Setting,49. a sA . M a d e l e y R i c h a r d s o n , C h u r c h M u s l c ( L o n d o n , L o n g m a n s , G r e e n , & C 0 . , 1 9 1 0 ) , 5 7 . s 0D e n o m i n a t i o n s l i k e t h e V i n e y a r d , C a l v a r y C h a p e l , a n d H o p e C h a p e l h o l d t h e m a r k e t s h a r e f o r t h e s e s o r denominational andnondenominational churches have adopted thesame style ofworship. 5rTherecoveryofsingingchoruses0fScripturewasbroughtinbytheJesusmovementofthel9T0s.David Your Life(Colorado Springs: Waterbrook Press, 1999), 6-7.

hand-raising, (sometimesdancing) congregarioninto a potpourri of individualistic, gentle, worshipful singing. (Typicalll', the focus of the songsis on individual spiritual experience.First person singular pronouns-d

me, nty-dominate a good number of the songs.t' fn some contemporary churches, the trend is moving more toward corporate,

first person plural lines-zue ) r.ts,nur.This is a wonderful shift.) fu the band leavesthe stage,ushers passthe offering plates. This is usually followed by the sermon, and the pastor dominatesthe rest of the service.In many churches,the pastor will call the worship team to refurn to the stageto play a few more worshipful songs ashe winds up his sermon. "Ministry time" may ensue as the band plays on. The song liturgy just described works like clockwork in the typical charismatic and nondenominational church. But where did it come from? In 1962,a group of dissatisfiedBritish church musiciansin Dunblane, Scotland, tried to revitalize traditional Christian songs. Led by Congregational minister Erik Routley, these arrists were influencedby Bob Dylan and SydneyCarter. George ShorneyJr. of Hope Publishing Company brought their new sryle to the United States. These new Christian h)rmnswere a reform, but not a revolution. The revolution came when rock and roll was adaptedinto Christian music with the coming of theJesusmovement. This reform set rhe stagefor the revolutionary musical changesto take root in the Christian church through Calvary Chapel and the \Aneyard." The origin of the worship team goes back to the founding of Calvary Chapel in 1965.Chuck Smith, the founder of the denomination, started a ministry for hippies and surfers. Smith vrelcomed the newly converted hippies to rerune their guitars and play their now redeemed music in church. He gave the counterculrure a stage for their music-allowing them to play Sunday night performances and 52Thismaps perfectly withthebaby boomers self-focus. 53Since theadvent ofcontemporary Christran music. the"worship wars" have begun, constituting a divisive lorce thatfrasbalkanized Christian churches into"old-styled{raditional-music lovers" vs."new-styled-contemporary-music lovers." Nota fewchurches have been splintered rightdown themiddle whatformofmusic over istobeused during thechurch service. Contemporary vs.traditi0nal music hasbecome theroot, stem, andbranch ofthenewsectarian, plagues Christian tribalism that themodern church.

'3u13urs uerlsuqC funJuao-ls.r] alerodJoc gl:t suerssolo3 pue6l:gsuersoqdl aqjl0Joleljoqlarnldee l0 ornleu 6q '(9002 'fulsrurt :lJ 'alltnsaureC) {uoutrlsal saalog luaser6 u y3 u 1 n q p g l 0 0 q ^ u u ru o s u M o r a q l a ] r j / u p u e s B u o s uuMeoorsauq?l p sB r les au lq O l o d n o r i e m o q ^ l l e J t l c e l d |u t8eql d x a ( I u e l l ) 'qolnqc 'SurBurs qcrqM pueasrerd pasnluoo al0qM aq]0l sBuolaq drqsrorn aq]qJrM aqo11ou 1ofulsrurur lq8no ]eq]la^aMoH u a q l u r e l a l u a u a ^ a J 0 ' a J l d s u l ' 1 r n r l s u t ' a B e r n o c u a 0 l a c u a r p n e u e r o l S u r u r o p a d s u e r o r s n u rrpEa l u o l e l q l r M

uor{ \ '}da,vta,r (eart'u,$.optes a,r eJeql '.uol,{qBflJo sJoArJegt dfl,, puB JBsrlsnPl^rPur 6('a^rtJolqns uBqt reqtBr al?rodror flasuatur sr seqJrnqJgJns ur SurSursoql'Eur -toaru r{rrnqf, c ur Suos q8norr.{]drqspeaqs,tsrJrlJ aruouedxe ot qsr.{4. orl.&\IF roJ olqBlrB^epu8 alqrssodsr lr leql sr s.naupooS eql 'qrrnqr IeuoDnlrtsur ,4tBP-uJapouaql ur aJuouadxe aJEJB sr tr re^ {8,^&aqr {q 'paddrqsro,tt suer}srrr{J Lrnluac-tsrlJ aqt ,{,\oq.,(pJexesr sn{I 'luaserd roPBelelqrsh ou qrl,t\ puB sasned3uo1 rnoqtr,tt senurluoJ drqsJo.r\os pue (8uos Jor{loue sur8aq asla euoauos uaql 'ur suror euo&e^a pu8 Suos E suBts euoauos 'rrruetr.tpsnorrol8 srqt poJueuedxae^eq tcr{t soqJJnqJsnorerunu qtr,{. 'ureel e.\eq o1 roJ SuDeelu talu aq] ol ureql Sulrq pue sSuosu,r\o I IIE raq ro srg etrr.r\ ot ue^e-]slrqf snsaf;o drqspeaq aql repun sSuos pBolol ooJJJotsrspue JerporqLra,rg :eur88rul,,,{lsnoauBtuodsSuose ser{JJnr{Jr{]Ltt poJeqlBE lJels o1pouIBJlueeq sEL{Jsqurerud-ra,raoJar{,{4. lfuelrl lSoIulB JoC 'uBrJrlaJoeql ou ruB (4uetg) 1 e^8rl I SJEa,,( 'passeJdxooq o] LDsrurur srqf roJ teltno uE aq pporls areqt puy'eldoad qpo3Jo IIEJo spuegarp ur sSuolaqSurSurs 'aldrcurrd tuaruetsal lr\el{ ol Surprocru }Br{t an8re ;o Lnsrunu eqr plno,r\ a^UsSuos SulpualJo &lsruru eq] ur atBdrrruBdot po.4(1.ollB erB osoqr fluo puV,r'dFlsJo.,lr.alerodroJ ueqt tuau ((tnJ ol{t e{eru,, or{.t,r. -urelJotueo{rl eJou souroJeqeJrAJas aqtJo lueuela srql (patualerJr{l (poJunouue 'pelertrur dq ptl pue aq,{1uouec s8uosdrqsro,vtuorl!\ '(,Lrx'71- : s.rarqaH) rno.{ Surs II Z ,,,sosreJd III,raI [ersap44e]uoue8a;8uor erp Jo aruaserd aqr ur ls-raqro-rqdur or erueu;no{ erelrep IIIrd L 'sdesall 'sJerporq uroqt IIEJot peuleqsstou sr snsaf og dpue; eruesaqt Jo e.re.{1oqepuur ore oqa asoql pue /1oq uaru sa1e{uog,{r euo aqt Wofl,, 's.{ess,tra;qaFlJo rellr,r eqr '(depor u.^d.orDl alnrl sr rlrli{.r\) .\rtsrurur sFITJO 'reqrcC srl{ o} sSuosasrcrd8ur -Euts olul uerlltarq srH Surpual;o Lnsrurru s11Idlpcgrceds-tsrl{J

we remembered Zion. We hanged our harps upon the willows in the midst thereof. For there they that carried us awaycaptiverequired of us a song; and they that wastedus required of us mirth, sayrng,Sing us one of the songs of Zion. How shall we sing the Lono's song in a strange land?" . . . "When the Lono rurned again the captivity of Zion we were like them that dream.Then was our mouth filled with laughteEand our tongue with singing: then saidthey among the heathen,The Lono hath done great things for them" (Psalm 137:l-4;126:1-2).

>delving NEEPER |. Youexposethe "paganrnots" of the church choir;yet I don't seewhythat in and of itselfnakes it less valuable.I don't have the gitt of singing but appreciate that those wholove music and are gifted in that area take the time and etfort to prepare to lead ne into worshipthroughsong. Your thoughts? \\b also appreciate those who are musically gifted and who can use their musical tirlents to bless others. Howel,er, to relegate the song selectionsin every church srtherins to a selectfeu'(i.e., a choir or worship team) disallowsthe rest of the body tiorn prrticipatinq in this rninistry. This contradicts Scriprure. As Paul says,"every trnc oir-,ru harh a psalm" in the gathering (1 Corinthians l4:26; see also Ephesians , 5l:9 i r n dC o l o s s r a n3s:l 6 ) .

2. Currentlymy pastor and the worshiptean leader choosemusic that correspondswith the norning's message.I nay not "clnnect" with everysongchosenbat don't seehow that wouldhe any ditferent it everynnepresent were invited to chooseand lead a song. If one has never seen a group of Christians choosing and leading their own songs spontaneously under Christ's headship, it is difficult to grasp what this would look like. Suffice it to say that there is a world of difference between having a select group of people pick the songs and having every believer participate in initiating songs. It is the difference between passively following one person (or a srnall group) and everyone actively participating together spontaneously.

3. ln the Oldfestanent period (see I Chronicles2i:5,30;25:l-31,2 Chronicles7:6),00dinstituted "professional" worship leaders amlng the Leviticalfanilies who led public worship and wrote

nany 0f the Psalns (e.g., thosebyAsaphand the descendantsof Korahl 0o you think thisprovides a hiblical basisfor a valid nusic ministry? Whyor whynot? We believe these passagesactually support our point. The Old Testament priesthood was restricted to a select group of people-the

Levites. In the New Covenant, that

selective priesthood has been done away with, and every Christian has been made a priest unto God. We are not part of the Levitical priesthood; we are priests after the order of Melchizedek (Hebrews 5-7). Christ is our High Priest, and every believer is a priest under Him (1 Peter 2:5, 9; Revelation 1:6).Therefore, ro our minds, these passagesshow that every Christian has the right to participate in "leading worship" under Christ's headship.

4. 0o you feel it's wrnng fnr a Christian to sing a soll in a church gathering 0r tor a band to play a song and lead a group of believers into worshipfulsinging? Not at all. We are simply arguing that if these things eclipse, make void, and completely replace the ministry given to every believer to lead and participate in singing praise and worship songs to the Lord, we should consider the possibiliry that \1.emav have squelched a God-ordained ministrv of the church.

CLERGY SALARIES: SORE SPOTS ON THEWALLET "Unlikeso many,we do notpeddlethe Wordof Godfor profit." -PAUL0FTARSUS lN2 C0RINTHIANS 2:17.tuv from themassof thepopulation of theEmpire, "Thechurch,embracing the Caesarto the meanestslave,and livingamidstall its institutions,received intoherbosomvastdeposits from of foreignmaterial the worldandfrom heathenism. . . . AlthoughancientGreeceand paganism Romehavefallenforever,the spiritof Graeco-Roman is notextinct.lt still livesin the naturalheartof man,whichat thisday as muchas everneedsregeneration bytheSpiritof God.lt livesalso in manyidolatrous andsuperstitious usages of theGreekandRoman churches, againstwhichthe purespiritof Christianity has instinctivelyprotested fromthe beginning, andwill protest, till all remains of grossandrefinedidolatryshallbe outwardly as well as inwardly overcome, andbaptized notonlywithwater,butalso andsanctified withthespiritandfire of thegospel." -PHItIPSCHAFF. NINETEENTH-CENTURY CHURCH HISTORIAN

'*'WILLA MAHROBG0ll?Yetyou rob me. Butyou ask,"How do we rob you?" In tithes and offerings. You are under a curse-the whole nation of you-because you are robbing me. Bring the whole tithe into the storehouse,that there may be food in my house. Test me in this,' says the Lono Almighry 'and see if I will not throw open the floodgates of heaven and pour out so much blessing that you will not have room enough for it"' (Malachi 3:8-10, Nrv). This passageseemsto be many Christian leaders'favorite Bible text, especiallywhen gving is at low tide. If you have spent any time in the contemporary church, you haveheard this passageread from the pulpit on nrunerous occasions.Consider some of the rhetoric that goeswith it: "God has commanded you to faithfully give your tithes. If you do not tithe, you are robbing God Almighry, and you put yourself under a cufse." "Your tithes and offerings are necessaryif God's workwill go on!" ("God's work," of course, includes pay'lng the pastoral staff and footing the monthly electric bill to keep the building afloat.) What is the result of this sort of pressure?God's people are persuaded to give one-tenth of their incomes every week. When they do, they feel they have made God hrppy.And they can expect Him to blessthem financially. When they fail, they feel they are being disobedient, and they worry that a financial curse looms over them. But let's take a few stepsbackward and ask the penetrating question: "Does the Bible teach us to tithe? And . . . are we spirirually obligated to fund the pastor and his srafP" The answer to these two questions may shock you.

IS TITHING BIBLICAL? Tithing does appearin the Bible. So, yes, tithing is biblical. But it is not Christian. The tithe belongs to ancient Israel. It was essenrially their income tax. Never do you find first-cenrury Christians tithing in the New Testament. Numerous Christians do nor have the foggiest idea about what

the Bible teachesregarding the tithe. So let's look at it. The word tithe simply means the tenth part.' The Lord instituted three kinds of tithes for Israel as part of their taxation system.They are: ' A tithe of the produce of the land to support the Levites who had no inheritance in Canaan.' ' A tithe of the produce of the land to sponsorreligious festivals inJerusalem. If the produce was too burdensomefor a family to carry to Jerusalem, they could convert it into money.' A tithe of the produce of the land collected every third year for the local Levites, orphans,strangers,and widows.o This was the biblical tithe. God commanded Israel to give 23.3 percent of their income every year,not 10 percent.sThese tithes consistedof the produce of the land-which included the seedof the land, the fruit of the land, and the herd or the flock. It was the product of the land, not money. A clear parallel can be seenbetween Israei'stithing systemand the modern taxation system present in America. Israel was obligated to support their national workers (priests), their holidays (festivals),and their poor (strangers,widows, and orphans) with their annual tithes. Most modern tax systemsservea similar purpose. With the death ofJesus,all ceremonial codesthat belonged to the Jews were nailed to Christ's cross and buried, never to be used again to condemn us. For this reason,we never seeChristians tithing in the New Testament, just as \^redon't see them sacrificing goats and bulls to cover their sins. Paul writes, "\A,{henyou were dead in your transgressionsand the uncircumcision ofyour flesh,He madeyou alive together with Him, having forgiven us all our transgressions,having canceledout the certificate lnthe0ldTestament, theHebrew wordfor"tithe"is naaser, whichmeans a tenthpart.IntheNew Testament, theGreek wordis dekate,which agarn means a tenth. Theword isnottaken tromthereligrous world, butfromtheworld ofmathematrcs andfinance. Leviticus 27:30-33: Numbers 18,21-31. "thefe$ival Deuteronomy 14,22-21 . Thisrssometimes called tithe." Deuteronomy 1428-29,26,i2-13. historian Jewish losephus scholars thisisa thirdtitheused andother believe ina different way (Carlisle, fromthesecond. Stuart Munay, Beyond fithing UK:Paternoster Press, 2000), 76,90;"What ls a llthe?"Questions about Iithing, Generous Giving, http,//www.generousgiving,org/page,asp?sec=43&page=589. percent yearly Iwenty years peryearGod (Nehemiah and10percent every three equals 23.3percent commanded allthree tithes 12:44; Malachi Hebrews 3'8-12; 7,5).

of debt consistingof decreesagainstus, which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross. . . . Therefore no one is to act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day-things which are a mere shadowof what is to come; but the substancebelongsto Christ."u Tithing belonged exclusively to Israel under the Law. When it comes to financial stewardship,we see the first-century Christians giving cheerfully according to their ability-not

dutifully out of a

command.t Giving in the early church was voluntary.' And those who benefitedfrom it were the pooq orphans,widows, sick, prisoners,and strangers. \Ve can hear someonemaking the following objection right now: "But u'hat about Abraham? FIe lived before the Law. And we seehim tithing to the high priest Melchizedek (Genesis1117 -20). Does this not overturn your argument that the tithe is part of the Mosaic Law?" No, it does not. First, Abraham's tithe was completely voluntary. It was not compulsory. God did not command it as FIe did with the tithe for Israel. Second,Abraham tithed out of the spoils that he acquired after a particular battle he fought. FIe did not tithe out of his own regular income or property. Abraham's act of tithing would be akin to you winning the lottery or a mega jackpot, or receiving a work bonus, then tithing it. Third, and most important, this is the only recorded time that Abraham tithed out of his 175 years of life on this earth. We have no evidence that he ever did such a thing again. Consequently,if you wish to use Abraham as a "proof text" to argue that Christians must tithe, then you are only obligated to tithe one timelt' 6 Colossians NAsB; 2,13-14, 16-17, seeals0Hebrews 6-10. / Thrs you-according isvery from2 Corinthians clear 8,3-12, 9,5-13. Paul's word ongiving isthis,Give asGodhasprospered toyour ability andmeans. 8 Gough, EarlyChristians,S6. s "How WeChristians Worship," Christian History12, no.1 (1993), 15. r0 Thesame istrueforJacob. According toGenesis 28,20-22, Jacob vowed totithet0theLord. ButlikeAbraham's tithe, .Jacob's tithe (and practice. wascompletelyvoluntary. Andasfarasweknow, it wasnota lifetime llJacob began tithing regularly thiscannot be proven), years pass quote "Tithing hewaited fortwenty to hestarted ! To Murray, before Stuart appears t0 bealmost incidental tothe (ofAbraham stories andJacob) andnotheological significance isaccorded tothispractice bytheauthor."

This brings us back to that oft-quoted text in Malachi 3. What wasGod sayingthere?First, this passagewas directedto ancientIsrael when they were under the Mosaic Law. God's people were holding back their tithes and offerings.Consider what would happenif a large portion of a country's citizens refused to pay their taxes.This would be viewed as a form of stealing by many, and in some countries, those unwilling to pay would face consequences." In the same way, when Israel held back her taxes (tithes), she One who instituted the tithing system. The Lord then commanded His people to bring their tithes into the storehouse.The storehousewas located in the chambers of the Temple. The chamberswere set apart to hold the tithes (which were

was stealing from God-the

produce, not money) for the support of the Levites' the poor, the strangers,and the widows.t' Notice the context of Malachi 3:B-10.In verse 5, the Lord savs that He will judge those who oppressthe widow, the fatherless,and the stranger.FIe says,"So I will come near to you for judgment. I will be quick to testi|/ againstsorcerers,adulterersand perjurers, against those who defraud laborers of their wages,who oppressthe widows and the fatherless,and deprive aliens of justice, but do not fear me" (Nrv). The widows, fatherless,and strangerswere the rightful recipients of the tithe. BecauseIsrael was withholding her tithes, she was guilty of ignoring the needs of these three groups. Herein is the heart of God in Malachi 3:B-10:He opposesoppressionof the poor. FIow many times have you heard pastorspoint this out when they preachedon Malachi 3? In scoresof sermonsI have heard on tithing, I was never told what the passagewas actually talking about. That is, tithes were given to support the widows, the fatherless,the strangers, and the Levites (who owned nothing). r r N o t et h a ts o m eb e l r e vpea y r n tga x e si s n o ta l e g a o s , ea r es i m p l yu s i n gt h i sa s a n i l l u s t r a t i oann d l b l i g a t i oinn c e r t a i nc o u n t r i e W n o t h i n gm o r e . r z N e h e m i a1h2 , 4 4i,3 ; i 2 - 1 3 ;D e u t e r o n o m 1 4y' 2 8 - 2 9 , 2 6 : 1 2 .

SALARY OFTHETITHEANDTHECLERGY THEORIGIN The New Testament ufges believersto give according to their ability. Christians in the early church gave to help other believersaswell asto support apostolicworkers, enabling them to travel and plant churches.t' One of the most outstanding testimonies of the early church has to do with how generousthe Christians were to the poor and needy.'aThis is what provoked outsiders,including the philosopher Galen, to watch the awesome,winsome power of the early church and say: "Behold how they love one another."r5 In the third century Cyprian of Carthage was the first Christian writer to mention the practice of financially supporting the clergy. He arzued that just as the Levites were supported by the tithe, so the Christian clergy should be supported by the tithe.r6But this is miszuided thinking. Today, the Levitical systemhas been abolished.We are all priests now. So if a priest demandsa tithe, then all Christians should tithe to one another! Cvprian's plea was exceedinglyrare for his time. It was neither picked up nor echoed by the Christian populace until much later.'- Other than Cyprian, no Christian writer before Constantine ever used Old Testament referencesto advocatetithing.t8 It was not until the fourth century three hundred years after Christ, that some Christian leadersbegan to advocatetithing as a Christian practice to support the clergy.tnBut it did not become widespread among Christians until the eighth century.'n According to one

13Helping 8'1-15, 9:i-12:I llmothy 16,1-4; 2 Corinthians Corinthians 15,25-?8;1 24:17; Romans 11,2/-30, believers: Acts6,1-7, other Philipptans 1,16; 16;5-11; 2 Corinthians planters' 9,1-14, 15,23-24; i Corinthians Acts15,3; Romans church 5,3-16. Supporting in stxverses 0neoutofevery between thewallet andtheheart. connection 1:5-8. There isa close Titus 3,13-14; 3 John 4,14-18; parables twelve have todowithmoney. intheNewTestament, 0t thethirty-eight have to dowithmoney. Mark, andLuke lVlatthew, r4 Atellingandmoving generosity Worship Evangelism is found in Kreider, and Christian account o{third-andtourth-century historical andlan,Lost History ofChristianity,T5, inJohnson, charity testimony ofChristian 20.SeealsoTertullian's in Pre-Chfistendory Heritage,5I-56. L5Tertullian,Apology3g,T;RobertWilken,TheChristiansastheRomansSawlhem(NewHaven,CT,University '6 Cyprian, Tithing,104. Beyond Epistle 65.1;Murray, r7 Munay, Speak,86. Ferguson, Early Christians Titning,104-105; Beyond r8 lVlunay, (pp.112-117). ofhiswritings insome tithing tothepoor advocated fithing,112. Chrysostom Beyond 1, lbid.,107,TheApostotic system (c.380) fromthe0ldTestament Levitical byargurng tithingtofundtheclergy support Constitutions ( p p1 1 3 - 1 1 6 ) . A u g u s t i n e a r g u e d f o r t i t h i n g , b u t h e d i d n o t p r e s e n t i t a s t h e n o r m , l n f a c t , A u g u s t i n e k n e w t h pious practiced in fifth century, butit the by some Christians Tithing was position tithing, in his support of church ofthe thehistoric (pp.117-121). practice a widespread wasbynomeans 20 Hatch.Growth lnstitutions,102-112. of Church

scholar, "For the first seven hundred years they ftithes] are hardly ever mentioned."t' Charting the history of Christian tithing is a fascinating exercise." Tithing spread from the state to the church. Flere's the story. In the seventh and eighth cenruries, leasing land was a familiar characteristic of the European economy.The use of the tithe, or the tenth, was commonly used to calculatepalrnents to landlords. fu the church increasedits ownership of land acrossEurope, the 10 percent rentcharge shifted from secular landlords to the church. Ecclesiastical leadersbecamethe landlords.And the tithe becamethe ecclesiastical tax. This gave the 10 percent rent charge new meaning. It was creatively applied to the Old Testament law and came to be identified with the Levitical tithell Consequently,the Christian tithe asan institution was basedon a fusion of Old Testament practice and a common systemof land-leasingin medieval Europe.to By the eighth century the tithe became required by law in many areasof Western Europe.25But by the end of the tenth century the tithe as a rent charge for leasing land had all but faded. The tithe, however, remained and it came to be viewed as a moral requirement supported by the Old Testament. The tithe had evolved into a legally mandatory religious practice throughout Christian Europe.tu To put it another w^y, before the eighth century the tithe was practiced asa voluntary offering.rTBut by the end of the tenth century it had devolved into a legal requirement to fund the state churchdemanded by the clergy and enforced by the secular authorities!28

2 r l b i d .1,0 2 . 22Munay itsentire history in Beyond Tithing, ch.4-6. traces 23Hatch, prove fortheuse Decretals thattrthes evolved lromrentpayments lnstitutions, l03.Thepseudo-lsodorian Growth of Church some of withthepayment asrent, about which Iands. in855states thatthis"decree deals oftithes ofchurch TheCouncil ofValence (pp. payment general Christians" 104-105). See lands slack, andthenurges their byall thelessees ofchurch appear tohave been fithing,138. alsoMunay, Beyond z aB e y o n d f i t h i n g , I 3 T . M u n a y w r i t e s , " M a n y a s p e c t s o i C h r i s t e n d o m e m e r g e d f r o m l u s t s u c h a f u s i o n o f b i b l i c a l a wrthRoman andpagan instituttons andideas." 0ldTestament moti{s andpractices '?slbid., in 119and194(p.139); Durant, it obligatory throughout hisenlarged kingdom 134. Charlemagne tithing andmade codified AgeofFaith,764. 26Munay, Tithing, Eeyond 111,140. 2TTheexceptiontothiswasinGaulduringthesixthcentury.TheSynodofToursin56Tmadetithingmandatoryin giving onChristian withexcommunication. Fora short butdetailed discussion in 585threatened those whorelused totrthe o{Macon in Pre-Christendon,34-35. inthepatristic seeKreider, ['/orship andEvangeltsn church, 28Munay, worked olthetithing system. nthing,2, 140. Theologians andlegrslators outthedetails Beylnd

Today, the tithe is no longer a legal requirement in any nation.2e Yet the obligatory practice of tithing is as much alive today as it was when it was legally binding. Sure, you may not be physically punished if you fail to tithe. But in many ministries you will either be told or be made to feel that you are sinning. In fact, in some churches,ifyou are not a tither, you will be barred from holding a ministry position. A friend of mine was considered for eldershipin one well-known congregation.Howeveq becausehe believed in giving anon),rnously(he didn't use checks),he was barred from being an elder. The reason?FIe rvastold that the church had to know who was obeying God by tithing and who wasn't. This was the across-the-boardpolicy of that particular denomination. Only tithers could be elders. As far as clergy salariesgo, ministers were unsalaried for the first three centuries. But when Constantine appeared,he instituted the practice of paying a fixed salary to the clergy from church funds and municipal and imperial treasuries.r"Thus was born the clergy salary a harmful practice that has no root in the New Testament.,' There is no doubt that it is irnperative for believersto support the Lord's work financially and to give generously to the poor. Scripture enjoins both, and the Kingdom of God desperatelyneeds both. The issueunder scrutiny in this chapter is the appropriatenessof the tithe as a Christian "law" and how it is normally used: to fund clergy salaries, operational costs,and church building overhead.

A BURDEN ONTHEPOOR If a believer wishes to tithe out of a personal decision or conviction, that is fine. Tithing becomes a problem when it is represented as God's command, binding upon every believer.

Strikingly, theChurch of England didaway withthetitheasa legalrequirement (Murray, asrecently asthe1930s Beyond lithing, 3 6). C B Hassel l, History oftheChurch of God, fromCreation toADl88S(Middletown, NY:GilbertBeebe's Sons Publishers. l 386). 314-392.472;Smith, FromChristtoConstantine,l23.TheMontanistsofthesecondcenturywerethefirsttopaytheirle thispractice didnotbecome widespread untilConstantine camealong(Smith, From Christ toConstanilne, 193). Fora response passages tothose biblical (pastor) thatsome haveusedtodefend clergy salaries, seeYiola, Reinagining Church.

Under the Old Testament system, tithing was good news to the poor. Howeveq in our day,mand^tory tithing equalsoppressionto the poor." Not a few poor Christians have been thrown into deeper poverty becausethey have felt obligated to give beyond their means.They have been told that if they do not tithe, they are robbing God and breaking His command." In such cases,the gospel is no longer "good news to the poor."'o Ratheq it becomes a hear,yburden. Instead of liberry it becomesoppression.We are so apt to forget that the original tithe that God establishedfor Israel was to benefit the poor, not hurt them! Conversely, contemporary tithing is good news to the rich. To a high earner, 10 percent is but a paltry sum. Tithing, therefore, appeasesthe consciencesof the prosperouswithout impacting their lifestyles.Not a few wealthy Christians are deluded into thinking they are "obeying God" becausethey throw 10 percent of their income into the offering plate. But God has a very different view of giving. Recall the parable of the widow's mite: 'Jesus saw the rich putting their gifts into the temple treasury. He also saw a poor widow put in two very small copper coins. 'I tell you the truth,' he said, 'this poor widow has put in more than all the others. Nl these people gave their gifts out of their wealth; but she out of her poverty put in all she had to live on"' (L uke 2l: l- 4, Nr v ) . Sadly, tithing is often viewed as a litmus test for discipleship. If you are a good Christian, |ou will tithe (so it is thought). But this is a bogus application. Tithing is no sign of Christian devotion. If it were, the first-century Christians in the churches that Paul raised up would be condemned as being undevoted becauseall available evidence shows that they did not tithe! rs 3 2N o t t o m e n t i o n t h e o v e r l o o k e d c o m p l e x i t i e s o f t i t h i n g . C o n s i d e r t h e f o l l o w i n g , D o e s o n e t i t h e o n n e t o r g r o s s ? Munay lsrael toour apply? details theignored complexities oftrying to import thebiblical system oftithing aspracticed byancient years, gleanings, Ina system tithing made sense andhelped todistribute the culture today. ofjubilee Sabbaths, andfirstfruits, (seeBeyond nation's wealth. Today, it oftenleads injustices lithing,ch.2). to gross 33Munay (Beyond powerfully lithing,S-10,35-3U. demonstrates thattithingendsuphurting thepoor 34Matthew (alluv). 11,5; Luke 4:18, 7,22; 1:26-29; 2,5-6 1 Corinthians James 35Paulplanted puttheLawonthem(see T0say approximately fourteen They were Gentile. Paulnever Galatians). churches. allheavily grain thattheGentile churches thatPaulplanted tithed isanargument fromsilence, andit runsagarnst theentire ofhislaw{ree (Galatians gospel. includes ToPaul's mind, if someone tithed, hima debtorto dothewhole law,which circumcision 5,3). thatmade

One of the lingering roots behind the sustainedpush for tithing in the church today is the clergy-salary Not a few pastors feel that they must preach tithing to remind their congregation of its obligation to support them, their operational costs, and their programs. Regrettably, the promise of financial blessing or rhe fear of a financial curse has been employed too often as an incentive to ensure that the tithes keep rolling in. In this way, tithing today is sometimespresentedasthe equivalent of a Christian stock investment. Pay the tithe, and God will give you more money in return. Refuseto tithe, and God will punish you. Such thoughts rip at the heart of the good news of the gospel. The samecan be said about the clergy salary.It, too, has no New Testament merit. In fact, the clergy salaryruns againstrhe grain of the entire New Covenant.toElders (shepherds)in the first cenrury were not salaried.ttThey \ reremen with an earthly vocation.rtThey gave to the flock rather than taking from it. It was to a group of elders that Paul uttered thesesoberingwords: "I have not covetedanyone'ssilver or gold or clothing. You yourselves know that these hands of mine have supplied my own needs and the needs of my companions. In everyrthingI did, I showed you that by this kind of hard workwe must help the weak,remembering the words the LordJesus himself said:'It is more blessedto give than to receive"' (Acts 20:33-35,Nrv). Giving a salary to pastors elevatesthem above the rest of God's people. It createsa clerical castethat turns the living body of Christ into a business.Since the pastor and his staff are compensatedfor ministry they are the paid professionals.The rest of the church lapses into a state of passivedependence. If all Christians got in touch with the call that lies upon them to 36See Acts20:17-38. Note thatthese arePaul's lastwords totheEphesian elders, thinking hewould never seethemagain-so theyare ( 1nTth e s s a l o n2ira9n1; sP e t e5r, 1 - 2 ) . significa 37See j. Kistemacher, (Grand Simon NewTestanent Connentary: Acts Rapids, Baker Book House, 19g0), 137,140; Rolland Allen, (Grand Missionary Methods: St.Paul's or0urs? Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 50;Watchman Nee,fheNornalChristian Church Life (Anaheim, CA'Living Stream Mlinistry, 1980), 62-63, 139-143; R.C.H.Lenski, Connentary onSt.Paul's [pistles to limothy (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1937), 683;andR.C.H.Lenskl, Conmentary onSt.Paul's Epistle totheGalatians (l\4inneapolis: (Grand Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 303-304; I F.Bruce, The Book of Acts Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 389.395. r8 TheNew plain. Testament references toelders makes this lnaddition, 1Timothy 3,7says thatanoverseer mustbewellthousht ofin thecommunity. Thenatural implication olthisisthatheisregularly employed insecular work.

be functioning priests in the Lord's house lancl thev were permitted arise:"What on to exercisethat call), the questionwould in-rrnr'tiiatelv earth are we paying our pastor forl?" But in the presenceof a passivepriesthoocl,such questionsare never asked.'oOn the contrary when the church functions as she should, a professional clergv becomes unnecessary.Suddenly, the thought That is thejob of thepnstlT"looksheretical. Put simply, a professional clergy fosters the pacifying illusion that the Word of God is classified(and dangerous) material that only card -carrying experts can handle.o" But that is not all. Paying a pastor encourageshim to be a man pleaser.It makeshim the slaveof men. His meal ticket is attachedto how much his congregation likes him. Thus he is not able to speak freely without the fear that he may lose some heavy tithers. (Many a pastor has confessedthis very thing to us.) A further peril of the paid pastorateis that it producesclergywho feel "stuck" in the pastoratebecausethey believe they lack employable skills.o'I (Frank) personally know a good number of pastors who felt convicted to leavethe ministry.Nl of their schooling and training had been dedicatedto studying and preaching the Bible. While theseskills are noteworthy, they are of limited appeal in the secular job market. The major hurdle they now face is forging a new career to support their families. A friend of mine, an ex-pastor himself, is writing a booklet on how pastors can find emplognent and enter new careers after leaving the clergy system.His ideas are not basedon theory. He and others like him have fleshed them out. Even so, it is exceedinglydifficult for many contemporary pastors to acknowledge the lack of scriprural support for their office simply becausethey are financially dependent upon it. As Upton

3eAccording "0uropportunity in much theministry oftheordinary Christian thesame toElton Trueblood, fora bigstepliesinopening ug m a n n e r t h a t 0 u r a n c e s t o r s o p e n e d B i b l e r e a d i n g t o t h e o r d i n a r y Cnh0r inset isaenn.sTeo.dt ho et hi ni sam eu a rnast i o n o f a n e w position in rmplications whrch Reformation inanother it means Relormatron the ofthe while thelogical completion oftheearlier perV &o Bcr ca t 1 hr o9 en5 r sl2N1e. 3 t a k e n w e r e n e i t h e r f u l l y u n d e r s t o o d n o r l o y a l l y f o l l o w e d " ( Y o uHr a 1 rt h w2Y)o. r | 1 0T h e w o r d s o f j e s u s c o m e t o m i n d : " W o e t o y o u e x p e r t s i n t h e l a w , b e c a u s e y o u h a v e t a k e n a w a ! t t e i e ! l c k n Nrv). a l T h e G r e e k s s p o k e p u b l i c l y f o r a f e e . J e w i s h r a b b i s l e a r n e d a s k i l l a ni d p taryn,0t h Nee r ; . 1 " ? - 'c. rosusl ed rnuocltneatschci se w s :tehnaat P s aaC m o d e r n p r e a c h e r h a s a d o p t e d t h e G r e e k c u s t o m r a t h e r t h a n t hoefJ' le' :wr si s: sh'c: :u,sr :t C om u hristian.

Sinclair once said, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it." No wonder it takes a person of tremendous courage and faith to step out of the pastorate. A number of my (Frank's) ex-pastor friends have admitted that they were part of a religious systemthat subtly but profoundly injured them and their families.o'Unfortunately, most of us are deeply naive about the overwhelming power of the religious system.It is a faceless system that does not tire of chewing up and spitting out its own.a'

ANDTHECOLLECTION PLATE USHERS Despite these problems, collecting tithes and offerings is now a part of almost every church service.How did the practice of usherspassing collection platestake shape?This is another postapostolicinvention. It began in 1662, although alms dishesand alms chestswere present before then.+o The usher originated from Queen Elizabeth I's (1533-1603) reorsanization of the lirurgy of the Church of England. Ushers were responsiblefor walking people to their seats(in part to ensure that resen'ed spots weren't taken by the wrong people), collecting the offering, and keeping records of who took Communion. The predecessorof the usher was the church "porter," a minor order (lesser clergr,) that can be traced back to the third century.otPorters had the a ?I ' v e d e t a i e d a n u m b e r o f t h e s e e f f e c t s i n c h a p t e r 5 , u n d e r " H o w t h e P a s t o r D a m a g e s H i m s e l f . " a3lVany pastors professional arecompletely unaware ofwhattheyaregetting intowhen theyenter ministry. I have a young friend who pastor. recently resigned frombeing a lVlethodist Hetoldme,"l hadnoideawhatI wasgetting intountilI gotintoit.lt deeply hurt llkeI hadever mywile.lt wasnothing imagined." ThiswasnotthefirsttimeI heard these words. According t0Eugene Peterson, "American pastors areabandoning theirposts, leftandright, rate. They andatanalarming arenotleaving theirchurches and jobs. getttng pastors] other Congregations stillpaytheirsalaries. . . . But[these areabandoning theircalling." l1lorking theAngles' TheShape lntegrrty(Grand ofPastoral Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 1. aaJames "almsdishes," plates Anglican Plate\London: TheC0nn0isseur, Gilchrisl, Church 1967),98-101. Early offering werecalled (lvlichael partofchurch Thesilver almsdishdidnotappear asa normal furnishing untilafter theReformation Clayton, The Collector's pany,19711, Dictionary of theSilverandGoldof GreatBritainandNorthAnericalNewYork,TheWordPublish ingCom l l ). Accord ing toCharles CoxandAlfred Harvey, theuseofalmsboxes, collecting boxes, andalmsdishes isalmost entirely a post-Reformation practice. Inmedieval times, church burldings hadalmschests witha slotinthelid,Inthefourteenth century, thealmsdish appeared. lntheseventeenth century, almsbasins began tobepassed around bydeacons orchurchwardens. J.G.Davies, ed., ANew DictionaryofLiturgyandil/orship(London:SCMPress,1986),5-6;CharlesOman, EnglishChurchPlale59l-.1830(London,0xford Press, University 1957); J.Charles CoxandAlfred Haruey, English FurniturelEP Publishing Church Limited, 1973), 240-245; David "Fund-Raising, C.Norrington, TheMethods Used intheEarly Church withlhose in English Compared Used Churches Today," fQ70, no.2 (1998), 130. Norrington's entire article isa worthwhile read. Heshows thatpresent day"soliciting" methods inchurch have no (pages analog intheNew Testament 115-134). q5 TheCatholic Encyclopedia, s.v."p0rter, doorkeeper," http://www.newadvent.orglcathen/12284b.htm.

dury of locking and opening the church doors, keeping order in the building, and providing general direction to the deacons.ou Porters were replacedby "churchwardens"in England before and during the Reformation period.+iAfter the churchwarden came the usher.

CONCLUSION As we've seen, tithing, while biblical, is not Christian. JesusChrist did not teachit to His disciples.os The first-cenrury Christians did not observeit. And for three hundred years,followers of Christ did not do it. Tithing did not become a widely acceptedpractice among Christians until the eighth century though thev gave generously-often well above 10 percent of their resources-from the beginning. Tithing is mentioned only four times in the New Testament. But none of theseinstancesapply to Christians.*uTithing belongedro the Old Testamentera where a taxation sysremwasneededto support the poor and a specialpriesthood that had been set aparr to minister to the Lord. With the coming ofJesus Christ, there has been a "change of the law"-the

old has been "set aside" and rendered obsolete by the new (Hebrews 7:12-18;B:13,Nrv). We are all priests now-free

to function in God's house. The La*, the old priesthood, and the tithe have all been crucified. There is now no Temple curtain, no Temple tax, and no specialpriesthood that stands berween God and man. You have been set free from the bondageof tithing and from the obligation to supporr the unbiblical clergy system.M^y you, like the first-centuryMacedonian Christians, give freely, out of a cheerful heart, without guilt, religious obligation, or manipulation . . . generouslyhelping those in need (2 Corinthians B : 1 - 4 :9 : 6 - 7 \ .

a 6P r o f e s s o r J o h n M c G u c k i n , e - m a i l m e s s a g e i o F r a n k V i o l a , S e p t e m b e r 2 3 , 2 0 0 2 . J h e w o r d u s h e r c o m e s f r o m A people a person whoguides intocourt orchurch. Professor Eugene A.Teselle, e-mail message t0Frank Viola, September 22,2002. a/ CoxandHaruey, English Church furniture,245. aEInlVlatthew 23,23, Jesus waschallenging theinconsistency ofthePharisees andteachers oftheLaw. Hewasnotprescribing guidelines forHisdisciples. a sM l u r r a y h a n d l e s a l l f o u r i n s t a n c e s i n d e t a i l , p r o v i n g t h a t t h e y a r e n o t p r o o f t e x t s f o r C h r i s t i a n s t i t h r n g . H e a l s o s -rrghteousness toJesus, islinkedto lega tithrng lismandseif rather than a model toimitate(see Beyond Tithing. ch.3).

>delvingDEEPER l. Youseen to assune that many pastorsencouragetithing anong their menbers sinply hecause they want to be surethey will get paid-and havemoneyto fund their prograns. lsn't it just as Iikely that pastorsencouragegiving becauselesusand the apostlePaul encouragedit? Canyou elaborate on whatattitude churchesshould have towardgiving? Actualll', both are true. Many pastors have confessedthat their salary is a strong influence.We also know that other pastorshave different motives. As for your other question, Christians who wish to tithe are free to do so. And if they do not wish to tithe, they are free not to do so. Paul outlines the proper attitude of gir,ing when he writes, "Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver" (2 Corinthians 9:7, Ntv).

2. First finothy 5:l 7 saysthat "elders whodo their work well shouldhe respectedandpaid well" (nLr). Dlesn't thissupportthe idea of payingpastors?lf not, whatdo you think thispassageneans? To begin with, this passagedeals with elders, not with the modern pastoral office. J'he acrual Greek saysthat the elders who care for God's people well are worthy of clouble honor. The New American Standard, the KingJarnes \rersion, and the New International Version translate the text with the words doublehonor. In verse 18, Paul quotes the Old Testament to buttress his argument. Just as the u'orking ox deservescorn, and just as the laborer deservespayment, the elder who caresfor God's people well deserves"double honor," that is, greater respect. So the critical question becomes,what does "double honor" mean? Does it mean a clergy salary an honorarium, or simply greater respect? First, the specific Greek words that the New Testament uses for pay or wages are not used in this text. Rather, the Greek word for honor in this passagemeans to respect or value someone or something. The same word is used four times in 1 Timothy. In every case,it means respect. Second, all Christians are called to honor one another (Romans 12:10). It would be absurd to take this to mean that all believers are to receive payment from one another. Agair., those elders who serve well are to receive msls fr6n61-61 greater respect. Third, the fact that respect is what Paul had in mind is borne out by verse 19. Paul goes on to say that the elders are not to be accused(dishonored) unless there are two or three v'itnessesto confirm an accusation.

Granted, double honor may have included free-will offerings as a token of blessing from time to time (Galatians 6:6). But this was not the dorninating thought. Scripture tells us elders desen-ehonor (respect), not a salary. Consequentlv, 1 Tirnothv -5is pert'ectly consistent with Paul's words to the elders recorded in Acts 20:33-35. There he told the elders in Ephesusthat he did not take money from God's people but instead supplied his own needs. Paul then told the elders to follow his exarnple in this. That passagealone argues against the idea of a hired clergy or a paid pastoral staff. Strikingly, 1 Timothy 5:17-lB and Acts 20:33-35 u'ere addressedto the same group of people-the elders in Ephesus.Thus there is no contradiction. Becausethe elders were local men, thev were not biblicallv sanctioned to receive full financial support like itinerant apostleswho traveled from region to region to plant churches (1 Corinthians 9: 1-l 8). Paul was an itinerant apostolic worker. Therefore, he had a legitirnate right to receive full financial support from the Lord's people (see I Corinthians 9). But he intentionally waived that right whenever he worked li.ith a group of Christians ( 1 C o r i n t h i a n s9 : 1 4 - 1 8 ;2 C o r i n t h i a n s l 1 : 7 - 9 ; 1 2 : 1 3 - 1 8 ;1 T h e s s a l o n i a n 2 s :6-9; 2 Thessalonians 3:8-9). We wonder v'hat would happen if more ministers today would follow in the steps of Paul. Paul's argument in i Timothy 5:17-18 is simply this: Just as the working ox deservesfood and the working employee deservespa\rrnent, the elders who serve well should receive double respect. (In 1 Corinthians 9, Paul usesthis same analogy. In that text, however, Paul is speaking of apostolic v'orkers rather than local elders, and he makes it clear that finances rather than honor are in viev..)

LORD'S SUPPER: DILUTI NGTHE SACRAMENTS "Manyinstitutions andelements of institutions whichhavesometimes beenthought to belongto primitive Ghristianity belong,in fact,to the Mi ddl eA ges . " -EDWINHATCH. NINETEENTH-CENTURY ENGTISH THEOLOGIAN "The Protestant clergyhaverescuedthe Biblefromthe darknessof papallibrariesandhavescattered it abroadoverthewholeearth.They haveexaltedit in thehighest termsof humanpraise.Theyhavestudied, commented, andexplained, nayeventortured everyword,phrase, and expression in theoriginalandtranslations, for everypossibleinterpretation.Theresultis thatGhristianity is smothered in theology andcriticism:thetruthsof revelation arewire-drawn andspunandtwistedinto the mostfantastical shapeshumanfancyor humanlogiccandevise. A systemof technicalDivinighasbeenconstructed whichrivalsthe complexity of all themachinery of theRomish church." -STEPHEN COLWEIL. NIT{ETEENTH.CENTURY AUTHOR OF NEWTHEMES FORTHEPROTESTANT CLERGY

ff0uNTtg$$ nS$K$ have been written on the two Protestant sacraments: baptism and the Lord's Supper. However, little to nothing exists in print to trace the origin of how we practice them today. In this chapter, we will seehow far afield we have gotten in our practice of water baptism and the Lord's Supper.

THEWATERS DILUTING OFBAPTISM Most evangelicalChristians believein and practice believer'sbaptism asopposedto infant baptism.' Likewise, most Protestantsbelieveand practice baptism by immersion or pouring rather than by sprinkling. The New Testament as well as early church history stand with both of thesepositions.2 FIowever, it is typical in most contemporary churches for baptism to be separatedfrom conversion by great lengths of time. Many Christians were savedat one age and baptized at a much later age.In the first century this was unheard of. In the early church, converts were baptized immediately upon believing.'One scholarsaysof baptism and conversion,"They belong together.Those who repented and believedthe Word were baptized. That was the invariable pattern, so far as we know."a Another writes, "At the birth of the church, converts were baptized with little or no delay."' In the first century water baptism \Masthe outward confession of a person'sfaith.u But more than that, it was the way someone came to the Lord. For this reason, the confession of baptism is vitally linked to the exerciseof saving faith. So much so that the New Testament writers often usebaptismin place of the woilfaitb

and link it to being

' Though wecan'toffer a detailed examination ofwhatScripture teaches about baptism inthischapter, consider thatfroma jointogetherr (1)faithandrepentance infant theological standpoint, baptism divorces twothings thattheScriptures consistently and(2)water baDtism. '? Baptisn intheGreek canhave a number of meanings depending onthecontext inwhich it is used. lmmersion lbaptiz,) (Ferguson, practice Ages intheWest wasthecommon oftheChristian church untilthelateMiddle Early Christrans Speak, 43-s1). 3 A c t2 s ' 3 7 - 4 1 ; 8 : I 2 I ' f . , 2 7 - 3180::94'41-841; 86;: 1 4 - 1 5 , 3 11-83,381;;9 : 1 - 5 ; 2 2 : 1 6 . a Green, in theEarlyChurch,153. tvangelism s David "Beginnings," (}xford: I WrighI, fheLionHandbook oftheHistory of Christianity LionPublications, 1990), seethesection on "lnstruction forBaptism." 6 Augustine called baptism a "visible word"\fractates ontheGospel According toSaint John,LXXX,,3l.

"saved."tThis is becausebaptism was the earlv christian's initial confession of faith in Christ. In our day, the "sinner's prayer" has replaced the role of \Mater baptism as the initial confessionof faith. Unbelievers are told, "Say this prayer after me, acceptJesus as your personal Savior, and you will be saved."But nowhere in all the Nevi'Testamentdo we find any person being led to the Lord by a sinner'sprayer. And there is not the faintestwhisper in the Bible about a "personal" Savior. Instead, unbelievers in the first century w.ereled to Jesus christ by being taken to the \Matersof baptism. Put another \May,water baptism was the sinner's prayer in century one! Baptism accompanied the acceptanceof the gospel. For example,when Lydia heard Paul preach the gospel, she believed and was immediately baptized with her household (Acts 16:14-15).In the same way, when Paul led the Philippian jailor and his household to the Lord, they were immediately baptized (Acts 16:30-33).This was the New Testamentpattern (seealso Acts 2:41; 8:12,35-37). Baptism marked a complete break with the past and a fulI enrrance into Christ and FIis church. Baptism was simultaneously an act of faith as well as an expressionof faith.s So when did baptismget separatedfrom receivingChrist? It began in the early second cenrury. Certain influential Christians taught that baptism must be precededby a period of instruction, prayer,and fasting.eThis trend grew worse in the third cenrury when young converts had to wait three years before they could be baptized! If you were a baptismal candidate in this era, your life was meticulously scrutinized.'oYou had to show yourself worrhy of baptism by your conduct.'r Baptism became a rigid and embellished rirual that borrowed much fromJewish and Greek culrure-elaborate with

i Mark16:16; Acts2:38; Acts22,16; andI Peler 3,21aresome exarnpies. 8 Iheimportance ofwater baptism intheChristian faithisdepicted 1xg61iy Chrstian341nn6r'r Grabar, Christian lconagraphy Princeton University Press, 1968]). [Princeton, s Ferguson, [arlyChristians Speak,33. r0 Wright, "Beginnings. Lion Handbooh oftheHistory ofChristianlfl sectr0" :r- nsifJ.tci fo,Baptrsm. p0ints Wright outthatbythe fourth century, theclergy tookover theinstructions forconverts andtheI s-.: ti:ar: r.:stialty responsible fortheteaching and disciplinethatprecededbaptism.Thisistheprecursorforthepre0aDtsrs:3:s,.!'!!i-i,itegastorrnman churches, From thesecond century onward, baptisms n0rmaliy t00x-ra-,o :: [:s::- -=': ' s :-: .]'grnofLentlsnilh,FronChrist to Constantine, 157\. It Ferguson, Early Christians Speak,35.

blessingthe water, fulI disrobing, the uttering of a creed, anointing oil with exorcism, and giving milk and honey to the newly baptized person.t'It had devolvedinto an act associatedwith works rather than with faith. The legalismthat accompaniedbaptism led to an evenmore startling concept: Only baptism forgives sins.If a person committed sin after baptism, he could not be forgiven. For this reason,the delay of baptism became quite common by the fourth cenrury. Since it was believed that baptism brought the forgivenessof sins, many felt it was best to delay baptism until the maximum benefitscould be obtained.t' Therefore, some people, like Constantine,waited until they were on their deathbedsto be baptized.'o

SAVIOR ANDA PERSONAL PRAYER THESINNER'S As stated earlier, the sinner's prayer eventually replaced the biblical role of water baptism. Though it is touted as gospel today, this prayer developed only recently. D. L. Moody was the first to employ it. Moody used this "model" of prayer when training his evangelistic coworkers.'5But it did not reach popular usageuntil the 1950swith Billy Graham's Peacewitb God tract and later with Campus Crusade for Christ's Four Spiritual Laws.'uThere is nothing particularly wrong with it. Certainly, God will respond to the heartfelt prayersof any indi-

r, lbid, 35-36;W.R.Halliday, York, Publishers, 1970), 313.The Christianity Cooper Square ThePagan Background ofEarly lNew ("catechumens" giving to becalled, fromwhich Thenewconvert astheycame wasborrowed frompaganism. ofmilkandhoney TheThursday beforehand thecandidate hadtobe Passover orPentecost. isderived) wastypically baptized ona Sunday catechisn outanydemons. Bytheendofthe bythebishop todrive Hespent Friday andSaturday infasting, andthenhewasexorcised bathed. Dixpoints outthattheintroduction ofthecreed intheWest. Gregory uniform baptismal ceremony second century, thiswasa fairly Thecreed wasmade upofa series ofthree century withthebaptismal creed. begins inthefirsthalfofthesecond inChristianity questions TheCouncil ofAD325canied thecreed a step{urther. withthethree Persons oftheTrinity. ofNicaea dealing respectively outside ot it (Dix,TheShape withinthechurch rather thana testoffaith{orthose intoa testoffellowship forthose Thecreed evolved Norrington, foPreach orNot,59). of theLiturgy,485; r3 Ferguson, Early Speak,60. Christians ra Green, Evangelisn in thetariyChurch,156. r5 C.L.Thompson,TtnesofRefreshing,BeingaHistoryofAnericanRevivalswithfheirPhilosophyandMethod (Dissertation, "The Analysis" Southern Prayer' AnHistorical andTheological 1878); Paul H.Chitwood, Sinner's Censer Co.Publishers, Theological Louisville, KY, 2001). Baptist Seminary, i6 Hereistheclassic"Sinner'sPrayer"thatappearsinlheFourSpiritualLawslracl,"LordJesus,lneedYo me Thank You forlorgiving mysinsandgiving YouasmySavior andLord. {ormysins. I open thedoor ofmylifeandreceive cross wantmetobe."lnthefirstcentury, water baptism methekindol person You life.Take control ofthethrone ofmylife.Make eternal ofthisprayer, wasthevisible testim0ny thatpublicly demonstrated theheart

vidual who reachesour ro Hinr in faith. Floweveqit should not replace water baptism as the ounr.ardinstrument for conversion-initiation. The phraseperslttol Str"'iot' is yet another recent innovation that grew out of the ethos of nineteenth-cenruryAmerican revivalism." It originated in the mid- 1800sto be exact.lsBut it grew to popular parlance by Charles Fuller (1887-1968). Fuller literally used the phrase thousands of times in his incredibly popular Otd Fashioned. Reaiz:al Hour radio program that aired from 1937 to 1968. His program reached from North America to every spot on the globe. At the time of his death, it was heard on more than 650 radio stationsaround the world.'e Today, the phrase personalsaaior is used so pervasively that ir seemsbiblical. But consider the ludicrousnessof using it. Have r-ou ever introduced one of your friends by such a designationi "This is my'personal friend,' Billy Smith." In Jesus christ, you and I have received something far grearcr than a personal Savior. We have received Jesus Christ's ven- o\\ n relationshipwith His Father! According to New Testamentteaching. what the Father was toJesus Christ, JesusChrist is to you rnrj :::: Becausewe are now "in christ," the Father lovesus and treerr i\ ..-.. asHe doesHis own Son. In other words, we shareand parric::.,:, Christ's perfect relationship with His Father.20 This relationship is corporate just as much as it is in,.l:..:.:.. '., christians sharethat relationship togerher.In this res.ir.i. r.'.:.. r .personalSaaiorreinforcesa highly individualistic Chri:r:.,::.: , I - :.-New Testamentknows nothing of a 'Just-me-and-Jc.,., ( .--.:..:i.in faith. Instead,christianity is intenselycorporate.Chr:.:,.::-..:-, rr .rlite lived out among a body of believerswho knou' (-hr:.: r,ggshsl 25 Lord and Savior. I7 See chapter 3 fora discussion ofcontributions fromFinnev, Moodv. andothers. 18Thephrase isabsent lromthe"lVaking ofAmerica" databise {rom1800-1857. lt begr^: r::-i "; - I358rnthe Ladies R e p o s i t o r y , " a p e r i o d i c a l p u t o u t b y t h e M e t h o d i s t E p i s c o p a l C h lurr: ceh, edsuirrinnggltyh, el 8m5i8di-s1t 8 sarthatCharles h0 e0 ye Finney concluded hisprayer revivals, which arenowsofamous. See http://www.answers.com/topic/charles-eJuller. " 20John 17,23, 20:21; Romans 8:15; Galatians 4:6;Ephesians 1:4-6. Fora fuller djscussron 0nthist0pic, seeBillFreeman's lheChurch (Scottsdale, /sCfrlst AZ:lVlinistry Publicatjons, 1993), ch.3.

THELORD'S SUPPER Rivers of blood have been shed at the handsof Protestant and Catholic Christians alike over the doctrinal intricacies related to Holy Communion." The Lord's Supper,once precious and living, becamethe center of theological debate for centuries. Tlagically, it moved from a dramatic and concretepicrure of Christ's body and blood to a studv in abstractand metaphysicalthought. We cannot concern ourselveswith the theological minutiae that surround the Lord's Supper in this book. But clearly Protestants(as well as Catholics) do not practice the Supper the way it was observed in the first century. For the early Christians, the Lord's Supper was a festivecommunal meal.ttThe mood was one of celebrationand joy. When believers first gathered for the meal, they broke the bread and passedit around. Then they ate their meal, which then concluded after the cup was passedaround. The Lord's Supper was essentiallya Christian banquet.And there was no clergynan to officiate." Today, tradition has forced us to take the Supper as a tonguetickling thimble of grapejuice and a tiny, tastelessbite-sizecracker.The Supper is often taken in an atmosphere of solemnity. We are told to remember the horrors of our Lord's death and to reflect on our sins. In addition, tradition has taught us that taking the Lord's Sopper can be a dangerous thing. Thus many contemporary Christians would never take Communion without an ordained clergyman present. Often, they point to 1 Corinthians lI:27-33. In verse 27,the apostlePaul does warn believersnot to participatein the Lord's Srpper "unworthily." In this instance, however, he appearsto have been speaking to church members who were dishonoring the Supper by

2L0neofthebetter-known figures killed forhisviews ontheLord's Supper wasThomas Cranmer. wasnamed Cranmer archbishop of byHenry Vlll,buthisgreatest in{luence was{eltduring reign ofHenry's Vl.Later, Canterbury thebrief son,Edward during thereign of Mary, wascharged withseditron fordefending Protestant Cranmer sacramental theology. Hewasburned atthestake inMarch Queen 1556(Douglas, Who's Who tnChristian History,179-180). 22SeeEricSvendsen, lheTable of theLord{Atlanta, NTRF, 1996); F.I Bruce, Frrst andSecond Corinthians, NCB(Lond0n: 0liphant, (Philadelphra: IheWorldliness 1971), 110;White, of Worsiip, 85;William Barclay, fheLord's Supper Westminister Press, 1957), 100-107; l. Howard lVlarshall, LastSupper Supper(Grand Rapids, [erdmans, i980);Vernard Eller, ln Place andLord's ofSacranents (Grand Rapids' terdmans, 1972), 9-15. 23Barclay, Lord's Supper,102-103. TheLord's wasonce intothespecial Supper a "lay"function, butit eventually devolved dutyofa oriestlv class.

not waiting for their poor brethren to eat u rrh thenr, aswell as those who were getting drunk on the wine.

TRUNCATING THEMEAL So why was the full meal replaced u'ith a ceremony including only the bread and the cup? Here is the ston'. In the first and early second cenruries,the early Christians called the Lord's Supper the "love feast."'* At that time, they took the bread and cup in the context of a festive meal. But around the time of Tertullian, the bread and the cup began to be separatedfrom the meal. By the late second century, this separationwas complete." Some scholarshave argued that the Christians dropped the meal becausethey wanted to keep the Eucharist from becoming profaned by the participation of unbelievers.'uThis may be partly true. But it is more likely that the growing influence of pagan religious rirual removed the Supper from the joyful, down-to-earth, nonreligious atmosphereof a meal in someone'sliving room.tt By the fourth century the love feastwas prohibited among Christians!28 With the abandonment of the meal, the terms breakingof bread and Lord'sSupperdisappeared.'nThe common term for the now truncated ritual (just the bread and the cup) was the Eucharist.s}Irenaeus (130-200) was one of the first to call the bread and cup an offering." After him, it began to be called the "offering" or "sacrifice." The altar table where the bread and cup were placed came to be

2alt wascalledlhe Agape. )udeI:12. 25Dix,Shape oftheLiturgy,23; Ferguson, Early Christians Speak,82-84,96-97, 127-130. Inthefirstandearlysecond the centuries, Lord's Supper seems to have been taken intheevening asa meal. Second-century sources show it wastaken only onSundays. Inthe Didache,IheEucharistisstillshowntobetakenwiththe,4gapemeal(lovefeast).SeealsoDavies, SecularUseofChurchBuildings, 22. 26Svendsen. Table of theLord.57-63. 2/ ForthepaganinfluencesontheevolvingChnstianMass,seeEdmundBishopsessay"TheGenrusoftheRo Christian Worship,86-227; Jungmann Liturgy,123, 130-144, 291-292i Smith, From Christ 173;Durant, toConstantine, , Early Caesar andChrist, 599-600, 618-619, 671-672. zEltwasprohibltedbytheCouncilofCarthageinAD39T.Barclay,Lord'sSupper,60;CharlesHodge,FirstCorinthr (Minneapolis, Crossway Books, 1995), 219;R.C.H.Lenski, Thelnterpretation of I and2 Corinthians Augsburg Publishing House, 1963).488. 2s Gough, TheEarlyChristians, I00. m lbid., 93.Eucharistneans"thanksgiving." 3i TadW.Guzie, Jesus andtheEucharist(NewYorkr Paulist Press, 1974), 120.

seen as an altar where the victim was offered." The Supper was no longer a community event. It was rather a priestly ritual that was to be watched at a distance.Throughout the fourth and fifth centuries, there \Masan increasing senseof awe and dread associatedwith the table where the sacredEucharist was celebrated."It becamea somber ritual. The joy that had once been a part of it had vanished.r+ The mystique associatedwith the Eucharist was due to the influence of the pagan mystery religions, which were clouded with superstition.r5 With this influence, the Christians began to ascribe sacred overtones to the bread and the cup. They were viewed asholy objects in and of themselves.tu Becausethe Lord's Supper became a sacred ritual, it required a sacred person to administer it.r7 Enter now the priest offering the sacrificeof the Mass.ttHe was believedto have the power to call God down from heaven and confine Him to a piece of bread.rn Around the tenth cenrury the meaning of the word body changed in Christian literature. Previously, Christian writers used the word bodyto refer to one of three things: (1) the physical body ofJesus, (2) the church, or (3) the bread of the Eucharist. The early church fathers saw the church as a faith communiry that identified itself by the breaking of bread. But by the tenth cenrury there was a shift in thinking and language. The word bodywas

il lbid. 3 3W r r t e r s a s e a r l y a s C l e m e n t o f A l e x a n d r i a , T e r t u l l i a n , a n d H i p p o l y t u s ( e a r l y t h i r d c e n t u r y ) b e g a n t o u s e l a n presence generally ofChrist inthebread wasmade andwine. Butnoattempt atthatearly stage toargue fora physical realism that "changed" (Cyril thebread andwrne intofleshandblood. Later, some writers tastern of.lerusalem; Serapion, bishop ofThmuis; and Athanasius) introduced a prayer t0theHoly Spirit totransform thebread andwineintothebody andblood. Butit wasAmbrose of power Milan(latefourth century) whobegan to locate theconsecratory rnthereciting ofthewords ofinstitution. Thewords "Thisis (inLatinhocestcorpus mybody" meum) werebelieved tocontain inthemthepower totransform thebread andthewine(Jungmann, fheMass oftheRoman Rite,52,203-204iDix, The Shape oftheLiturgy,239,240-2451. Incidentally, Latinstarted in North Africa in t h e l a t e l 0 0 s a n d s p r e a d s l o w l y t o w a irtdwRaosm c oem u nmt iol n b y t h et eh ne d3 o0 f0 s . B a r d T h o L mi p t usrogni e, tshoef l l / e s t e r n (Cleueland: Church Meridian Books, 1961), 27. 3 aI h i s s h i f t i s a l s o r e f l e c t e d i n C h r i s t i a n a r t . T h e r e a r e n o g l o o m y v i s a g e s o f J e s u s b e f o r e t h e f o u r t h c e n t u r y ( G message toFrank Viola, 0ctober 12,2001; seealsohisbook,4nfe Pacem). 35Guzie, ,/esus andtheEucharist, IZL 3 6T h i s o c c u n e d i n t h e n i n t h c e n t u r y . D e f o r e t h i s , i t w a s t h e a c l o f t a k i n g t h e E u c h a n s t t h a t w a s r e g a r d e d a s s a c a mannamed Radbert wrote thefirsttreatise thatapproached theEucharist bylocusing directly onthebread andwine. Allthe writers Christian before Radbert described whatChristians weredoing when theytookthebread andwine. They describedlhe action oftaking theelements. Radbert wasthefirstto{ocus exclusively ontheelements themselves-the bread andthewinethatsaton thealtartable(Guzie, lesus andtheEucharist,60-61, 121-123). 3t Dunn, Newlestament Theology in Dialogue, 125-135. 38Thisstarted around thefourth century. 3s Hans0n. Priesthood Christian Examined.80.

no longer used to ref-erto the church. It w-asonly used to refer to the Lord's physical bodv or the bread of the Eucharist.oo Consequentlv. the Lord's Supper became far removed from the idea of the church conring together to celebrarethe breaking of bread.*tThe vocabulary change reflected this piactice. The Eucharist had ceasedto be part of a joyful communal meal but came to be viewed as sacred on its own-even as it sat on the table. It became shrouded in a religious mist. Viewed with awe,it was taken with glumnessby the priest and completely removed from the communal narure of the ekklesia. All of these factors gaverise to the doctrine of transubstantiation. In the fourth century the belief that the bread and wine changed into the Lord's actual body and blood was explicit. tansubstantiarion, however, \Masthe doctrine that gave a theological explanation of how that change occurred.o'(This doctrine was worked out from the eleventh through the thirteenth cenruries.) \A,/iththe doctrine of transubstantiation,God's people approached the elements with a feeling of fear. They were reluctant e\.en to approach them.arWhen the words of the Eucharist \,\,'ere urtered, ir was believed that the bread literally became God. Nl of this rurned the Lord's Supperinto a sacredritual performed by sacredpeople and taken out of the hands of God's people. So deeply entrenchedu-asthe medieval idea that the bread and cup were an "offering" that er-en some of the Reformers held to it.* While contemporary Protestant Christians have discarded the Catholic nltizn that the Lord's Supper is a sacrifice, they have continued to embrace the Catholic prncticeof the Supper. Observe a Lord's

a0Guzie, Jesus andtheEucharist,125-121. aiFormanyslavesandpoorfolks,theLord'sSupperwastheironerealmeal.lnterestingly,itwasnotuntil (Barclay, thattheconcept offasting theLord's Supper began toemerge Lord's Supper,100). a ' ?G o u gEha, r l y C h r i s tlilal -n1s1, 2 . T h e f u l l - b l o w n d o c t r i n e o f t r a n s u b s t a n t i a t i 0 n i s c r e d i t e d t o T h o m a s A q u i n a s . l n t h L u t h e r b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e " o p i n i o n 0 f T h o m a s " s h o u l d h a v e r e m a i n e d a n o p i n i o n a n dCn ho rt ibset ci aonm e c h u r c h d o g m Liturgy, 307). ar Hatch, Growth ofChurch lnstitutions,2l6. Transubstantiation wasdefined asa doctrrne intheLateran Council inAD1215 as theresu lt of 350yearsofcontroversy peof theLiturgy, overthedoctri nein theWest\Dix,Sha 630;Hanson, Christian Priesthood fxanined,79; Philip SchaII, History of theChristtan Church,T Rapidsr Eerdmans, 1994], 614). IGrand 44Jones, Historical Approach toEvangelical l'lorship,1,43.

Supper service(often called "Holy Communion") in most Protestant churches and you will observe the following: The Lord's Supper is a bite-size cracker (or a small piece of bread) and a shot glassof grape juice (or wine). As in the Catholic church, it is removed from the meal. ' The mood is somber and glum, just as it is in the Catholic church. ' Congregants are told by the pastor that they must examine themselves with regard to sin before they partake of the elements,a practice that came fromJohn Calvin.os ' Like the Catholic priest, many pastorswill sport clericalrobes for the occasion.But always,the pastor adminisrersthe Supper and recitesthe words of institution, "This is my body," before dispensingthe elementsto the congregation.+6 With only a few minor rweaks, all of this is medieval Catholicism through and through.

SUMMARY Through our tradition, we have evacuatedthe true meaning and power behind water baptism. Properly conceived and practiced, \Materbaptism is the believer's initial confession of faith before men, demons, angels,and God. Baptism is a visible sign that depicts our separationfrom the world,ot our death with Christ, the burial of our old man,otthe death of the old creation,ooand the washing of the Word of God.t" Water baptism is the New Testament form of conversioninitiation. It is God's idea. To replace it with the human-invented sinner's prayer is to deplete baptism of its God-given testimony.

a 5W h i t P e ,r o t e s t a n t l V o r s h t p , 6 6 . F i i s t C o r i n t h i a n s l l ' 2 7 - 3 3 i s n o t a n e x h 0 r t a t i 0 n t o e x a m i n e o n e s e l f w i t h r e s p rather anexhortation toexamine oneself inthearea oftaking theSupper rna "worthy manner." TheCorinthians were dishonoring the Supper, fortheywere notwaiting getting fortheirpoor brethren toeatwiththem, andtheywere drunk onthewtne. a6Matthew 26'25-21; lVark 14;21-23; Luke 22,18-20. a/ Acts2,38-40r 1 Corinthians l0:1-2. 4 ER o m a6n:s3 - 5C:o l o s s i2a,n1s1 - 1 2 . as 1 Peter3'20-21. 50Acts22:16: Eohesians 5:26.

In the same vein, the Lord's Supper.u'hen separatedfrom its proper context of a full meal, rurns into a stranqe,pagan-like rite.tt The Supper has become an empry rirual ofllciated by a clergl'rnan, rather than a shared-life experience enjor-edbv the church. It has become a morbid religious exercise,rather than a joyous festival-a stale individualistic ceremony, rather than a meaningful corporate event. As one scholar put it, "It is not in doubt that the Lord's Supper began as a family meal or a meal of friends in a private house . . . the Lord's Supper moved from being a real meal into being a symbolic meal . . . the Lord's Supper moved from bare simplicity to elaborate splendor . . . the celebrationof the Lord's Suppermoved from being a lay function to a priestly function. In the New Testament itself, there is no indication that it was the specialprivilege or duty of anyone to lead the worshipping fellowship in the Lord's Supper."" When Israel had departed from God's original thought, the prophet cried: "Thus saysthe Lono, 'Stand by the ways and seeand ask for the ancient paths, where the good way is, and walk in it; and you will find rest for your souls"' (]eremiah 6:16, Nasn).In the same way, can we shun the vain traditions of men and rerurn to the ancient paths . . . those holy traditions that were given to us by Jesus Christ and His apostles?sr

>delvingIIEEPER L Whilethe sinner'sprayernay not he foundin theBible,sayingit witha fellowbelieverwhenI connitted mylife to Christhelpedne understand whatI wasdoing:acknowledging my utter brokenness Areyou sayingit is wrong beforeQodandrecognizingmy needfor forgiveness. to pray the sinner'sprayeror nerely that it shouldnot take theplaceof baptisnas a puhlic acknowl edgnentof conversion?

5 r E d u a r d S c h wTehi zeeCr h , u r c h A s t h e B o d y o f C h r i s t ( R i c h m o n d , Vi 9 Ai,iJ o: h a n: K a -n:o- x P r e s s . '7 Barclay, Lord's Supper, 99-102. t r T h e N e w T e s t a m e n t r e p e a t e d l y e x h o r t s u s t o h o l d f a s t t o t h e a p o s t o l i c t r a d i st ito3nng0rtvl ee ar 'p. -o' s. 't.l.e- -s' - : , . = , - s - (1Corinthians 11,2, 16;2Thessalonians 2:15,3'6). See Viola, Rermaginrng Churchf0r cei3:

The latter. We are merely saying that it should not replace water baptism as the biblical mode of conversion-initiation.

2. irlhile ynu expressyour cnncern that the tern personal Savior undernines the truth that our relatinnship is just as nuch cnrpnrate as individual, dnesn't this phrase also renind us 0f the necessityof makingnur lwn confessionsof faith and not assumingthat merelybeingpart of a church gives us a ticket to heaven? We certainly should make our own confessions of faith. The early Christians confessedJesusas Lord and Savior.Many Christians today feel this is sufficient. Therefore, they do not feel compelled to insert the word personalbefore it.

i. fhe apostle Paul's wordsin I Corinthians I l:23-26, in which he reminds believers of lesus' words wheninstitutingtheLord'sSuppeIseemto emphasizecnnmuninnas a tine to rememberChrist's sacriticial death. Natarally,then, manybelieyers useit as a tine to cnnfess their sinand remenber 0od'smercy. lt is hardly an "empty ritual" as ynu describe it. Yoarthoughts? We agree that the Lord's Supper is not an empry ritual for all Christians. At the same time, we regret that so many churches have lost the focus the first Christians had when they celebrated communion. The early Christians took the supper in an atmosphere of joy and celebration. By it, they proclaimed Christ's victorious death and His future coming. They also took it as a full meal in fellowship with the bodv of Christ, the church. This is the way it was handed down to us by Jesus and the apostles.Therefore we ought to ask ourselves:Is stripping the Lord's Supper from the meal and making it a somber occasion a development or a departure? Have we improved upon what Jesus and the apostles passeddown to us, or have we strayed from it?

EDUCATION: THE SWELLING CRANIUM "WhathasAthensto do withJerusalem?" -TERTULLIAN, THIRD.CENTURY THEOLOGIAN no thoughtChurchhadno NewTestament, "'ThePrimitive no stereotyped Themenwhotook outtheology, traditions. Ghristianity to the Gentileworldhad no specialtraining, o nl ya gr eatex per ienc e -i nw h i c h' a l l ma x i msa n d p h i losophies werereducedto the simpletask of walkingin the lightsincethe lighthadcome."' _8. H.STREETER, THEOTOGIAN AND TWENTIETH.CENTURY ENGLISH BIBTICAL SCHOLAR

lf* THf MINP$of most Christians.formal Christian education qualifies a person to do the Lord's work. Unless a Christian has graduated from Bible college or seminary he or she is viewed as being a "para"-minister. A pseudo Christian

worker. Such a person cannot preach, teach, baptize, or administer the Lord's Supper sincehe or she has not been formally trained to do suchthings...right? The idea that a Christian worker must attend Bible college or seminary to be legitimate is deeply ingrained-so much so that when people feel a "call" of God on their lives, they are conditioned to begin hunting for a Bible college or seminary to attend. Such thinking fits poorly with the early Christian mind-set. Bible colleges, seminaries,and even Sunday schools were utterly absent from the early church. Nl are human innovations that came hundreds of years after the apostles'death. How, then, were Christian workers trained in the first century if they did not go to a religious school? Unlike today'sministerial training, first-cenrury training was hands-on,rather than academic.It was a matter of apprenticeship,rather than of intellectual learning. It was aimed primarily at the spirit, rather than at the frontal lobe. In the first century those called to the Lord's workwere trained in two ways:(1) They learnedthe essentiallessonsof Christian ministry by living a sharedlife with a group of Christians. In other words, they were trained by experiencingbody life asnonleaders.(2) They learned the Lord's work under the tutelage of an older, seasonedworker. Remarking about the first-century church, Puritan John Owen writes, "Every church was then a seminary in which provision and preparationwas made."t Echoing thesewords, R. Paul Stevensstates, "The best structure for equipping every Christian is already in place. It predatesthe seminary and the weekend seminar and will outlast both. In the New Testament no other nurfuring and equipping is offered than the local church. In the New Testament church, asin the ministry ofJesus,people learnedin the furnace of life, in a relational, living, working and ministering context."l In stark contrast, contemporary ministerial training can be I John Hebrerrys, lL;Crossway Books, 1998), Owen, Alister McGrath andJ.L Packer, eds.(Wheaton, 131 2 R.PaulStevens, 46.Note llberairng theLaity(Downers Grove, lL:InterVarsity Press, 1985), thatihesewords cannot besaidol the modern institutional They rather church. apply toallfirst-century-styled churches.

describedby the religious talk of Job's miserable comforters: rational, objective, and abstract.V.ry little is practicai, experiential, or spiritual. A complete examination of the methods by which Christian workers were trained in the first century is beyond the scope of this book. However, a small chorus of books have been dedicatedto the subject.' In this chapter, we will trace the origin of the seminary the Bible college, and the Sunday school. We will also rrace the history of the youth pastor. And we will discusshow each of these is at odds each is basedupon the educationalsystem

with the way of Christ-for of the world.o

FOUR STAGES OFTHEOLOGICAL EDUCATION Throughout church history there have been four stagesof theological education.They are: episcopal,monastic, scholastic,and seminarian (pastoral).5Let's briefly examineeach one: Episcopal. Theology in the patristic age (third to fifth cenruries)was called episcopalbecausethe leading theologiansof the daywere bishops.uThis systemwas marked by the training of bishops and priests on how to perform the various rituals and liturgies of the church.T

Among (Grand themareViola, SoYou Want toStarta House Church?; Robert E.Coleman, fheMaster PlanofEvangelism Rapids: (New Fleming H.Revell, 1993); A.B.Bruce, fheTraining of theTwelve Canaan, CT:Keats, 1979); andGene Edwards, 0verlooked Christianity(Sargent, GA:Seedsowers, 1997). Thefollowing books byWatchman Neearealsoworthnoting. They contain messages given to hisyounger coworkers during Nee's worker trainings: fheCharacter of God's l'/orknan, The Ministry ofGod's V'lord, andfhe Release oftheSpirilSecond Timothy 2:2refers totheconcept 0ftrainrng workers Christian thatisexemplified intheGospels and Acts. Foraninsightful discussron (Carol ontheeducational aspect oftheworldsystem, seeWatchm anNee's Love NottheWorld Stream, lL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1978). Robinson, NewReformation,60-65. Robinson argues thatpatristic theology waswritten bybishops, medieval theology waswritten by professors, university Reformed theology waswritten bypastors, andthetheology ofthe"newReformation" willbewritten byandfor "theology people people thewhole ofGod. A forthewhole ofGod" {ocuses ontheconcerns andexperiences notjust ofallChristians, job(clergy). group theconcerns andexperiences ofa specialized doing a specialized Contemporary scholars likeR.Paul Stevens in (Grand Abolition of theLaityand1therSixDays andRobert Banksin r?eenyisloning [heological Education Rapids' Eerdmans, 1999) h a v e w r i t t e n m u c h o n t h i s b r a n d o f t h e o l o g y . A i s o , H a r o l d H . R o w d o n ' s a r t i c l e " T h e o l o g i c a/ ol E xducationinHisto (Carlisle, EvangelicaT gives UK,Paternoster Press, 75-87, 1971), anoverview oftheological education throughout history. Augustine gathered (Rowdon, "Theological wasonesuchperson. Agroup ofclergy around himinthefifthcentury fortraining Education inHistorical Perspective," 75). Episcopal schools didnottakeonanacademic prospective character priests totrainclergy untilthesixth century. Belore then, would learnunder thedirection oftheirbishops howto perform rituals andconduct liturgies. Edward J.Power, / Legacy ofLearning: A (Albany, History of Western Education StateUniversity ofNewYork Press, 1991), 108. 98,

Monastic. The monastic stage of theological education was tied to the asceticand mystical life. It was taught by monks living in monastic comrnunities (and later cathedral schools).tMonastic schools were founded in the third cenfury. These schools sent missionaries to uncharted territories after the fourth century.o During this stage,the Eastern church fathers becamesteepedin Platonic thought. They held to the misguided view that Plato and Aristotle were schoolmasterswhose techniques could be used to bring men to Christ. Though they did not intend to lead people ^stray, their hear,yreliance on these pagan philosophers severelydiluted the Christian faith.'o Since many of the church fathers were pagan philosophers and orators prior to their conversions, the Christian faith soon began to take on a philosophicalbent.JustinMarryr (100-165),one of the most influential Christian teachersof the second century "dressedin the garb of a philosopher."" Justin believed that philosophy was God's revelation to the Greeks.He claimed that Socrates,Plato, and others had the samestanding for the Gentiles asMoses had for theJews.t2 After AD 200, Alexandria became the intellectual capital of the Christian world as it had been for the Greeks. A specialschool was formed there in AD 180. This school was the equivalent of a theological college." In Nexandria, the institutional study of Christian doctrine began.'*Origen (185-254), one of the school'searly and most influential teachers,was deeply influenced by pagan philosophy. He was a colleague of Plotinus, the father of Neoplatonism, and drew much from his teaching. According to Neoplatonic thought, an individual must ascendthrough different stagesof purification in order to attain 8 Before thetwelfth century, theonly education intheWest wasprovided bymonastic andcathedral schools. e lVlarr0u, History in Antiouity,329. of Education '0 Inhisbook, (Grand Ascension andEcclesra Rapids, Eerdmans, i999),Douglas Fanow exposes howGreek thinking tookholdot theology through 0rigen andthenAugustine andhowit inevrtably many affected areas ofchurch life. rr Eusebius, TheHistory oftheChurch,lV,II,8. 12Boggs, ChristianSaga, l5l;Hatch. lnfluenceofGreekldeasandUsages,126-127. 13Some sayit wasfounded byPantaenus, theteacher ofClement ofAlexandria. Others sayit wasfounded byDemetrius. B.H.Streeter, (New The Primitive Church York, ThelVlacmillan Company, 1929), 57;James Bowen, A History of llestern tducation 1 (New York: St. "Theological Martin's Press, 1972),240i Rowdon, Education inHistorical Perspective," 76. 'o Bowen, History of Western fducation 1:240; Collins andPrice, Story of Christianity,25.

to onenesswith God." Origen was the first to organize key theological concepts into a systematic theology.tn Of this period Will Durant has observed:"The gap between philosophy and religion was closing, and reason for a thousand years consentedto be the handmaidenof theology."tt Edwin Hatch echoes these thoughts, saying, "Within a century and a half after Christianity and philosophy first came into closestcontact, the ideas and methods of philosophy had flowed in such mass into Christianity, and filled so large a place in it, as to have made it no less a philosophy than a religion."t8 After Origen's death, Christian schools disappeared.Theological education reverted back to the episcopal form. Bishops were trained by personal contact with other bishops.toThe sum and substanceof clerical learning at this time was the srudy of Gregory the Great's pasGregory taught bishopshow to be good pastors.t'Brtoral theology.2o the mid-eighth century bishops' schoolswere founded. In the tenth century cathedralsbegan sponsoringtheir own schools.t' Scholastic. The third stage of theological education owes much to By 1200, a number of cathedral schools the culture of the university.'?s had evolved into universities. The University of Bologna in Italy was the first university to appear.The University of Paris came in a close second, followed by Oxford.'o The University of Paris becamethe philosophical and theological

thought directly through flourished 245and529,andit influenced Christian DuranI, Caesar andChrist,6t0. Neoplatonism between prevalent Philip inCatholic thought. See anideaisstillvery Origen, Clement ofAlexandria, Augustine, andPseudo-Dionysius. Such NeoplatonismandChristianity,92S0rdinaryGeneralMeetingoftheVictorialnstitute,vol.8T(Suney,UK:The S.Watson, Institute),1955. Pastor's Notes 5, no.2: 7. Duranl, Caesar andChrist, 611. Halch,lnfluence of Greek ldeasandUsages,125. History inAntiquity,329. Manou, of Education History Schaff, of theChristian Church,4,400. office. work, waswritten inAD591.lt isa drscussion ontheduties o{thebishop's Gregory's Book ofPastoral Rule, schools. Dame wasoneoJtheearliest cathedral Douglas, iler Twentieth Encyclopedia ofReligious Knowledge, 289.Notre Century HistoryofWesternEducation2,ll1r.Afterll00,thecathedralschoo TheUniversityofParisgrewoutofacathedralschool.Bowen, learning. foradvanced forboys anda higher school expanded, being broken upinto"grammar schools" (Bowen, {orthemedieval which wasthetermused craftguilds Iheworduniversitycomes from,themedreval Latinuniversitas, Historyof Weste rn Education2:109). t/,lestern (NewYork, For drscussion on the origin o{ theuniversity Barnes & Noble, 1967), 128. a William Boyd, fheHistory of tducation fheMedieval VanNostrand, 1966). system, seeHelen Wieruszowski, Unlrrersrly(Princeton,

center of the world at that time.ts (It would later become the seed of the Protestant seminary.)ruHigher education was the domain of the clergy.:r 41d the scholar was viewed as the guardian of ancient wisdom. The present-day university grew from the bishops' responsibility to provide clerical training." Theologywas regarded asthe "Queen of Sciences"in the university.'nFrom the mid-twelfth century to the end of the fourteerrth century, sevenw-one universities were established in Europe.ro Contemporury theology cut its teeth on the abstractionsof Greek philosophy.t' University academicsadopted an Aristotelian model of thinking that centered on rational knowledge and logic. The dominating drive in scholastic theology was the assimilation and communication of knowledge. (For this reason,the Western mind has always been fond of creedal formulations, doctrinal statements, and other bloodlessabstractions.) One of the most influential professorsin the shaping of contemporary theology was Peter Abelard (1079-1 142). Abelard is partly responsible for giving us "modern" theology. His teaching set the table and prepared the menu for scholasticphilosophers like Thomas Aquinas (1225-127+)." Distinguished by Abelard, the school of Paris emerged as the model for all universities to follow.r'Abelard applied Aristotelian logic to revealedtruth, though even he understood the tension bet'weenthe

25 Bowen, Education 1:110. History of [Uestern 26ThewordsemrnarycomesfromtheLatin ChristianityinAnerica,l0Tll. seninarium,meaning"seedbed"(Reid,ConciseDictionaryof 2/ Collins ofChristianity,112. andPrice, Story 28Rowdon, "Theological metropolitan bishop to 79.TheLateran Council of 1215exhorted every in Historical Perspective," Education church. wastaught inevery cathedral ensure theology r lbid. 30Power, l49.Thehistoryofuniversitydegreesisquiteinteresting.Peoplewhopassedacademicstan LegacyolLearning, doctors.Doctormeans"onewhoteaches."ltcomesfromdoctrlnawhichme calledmasfers.Lawyerswerethefirsttobecalled werecalled The "learning," whowanted recognition bachelors(p.153). Eager students isa masferwho teaches. A doctor,Ihen, gavelectu ly whoat li rstIivedin private restothebachelors I n ity.Masters hadultimatecontrooftheu ivers cathed raI chancellor (Rowdon, "Theological in Historical Perspective," 79).The Education hiredrooms, thenlaterin hallslenttothembythernasfers power, of 1270. lt represented thevarious subject divisions "strength, appeared around means andability," wordfacultywhich mceet do r e i e r t o t h e g r o u p o f s c h o l a r s i n e a c h s u b j e c t . B o w t h e m e d i e v a l g u i l d . T h e w o r d f a c u l t y e v egnul ui ladlal ynrdecpal a York' H. Holt, 1923), i7. Ihe of Universities(New Homer Haskins, Rise Education2:111; Charles A History of Western 3r Stevens, 12-13;andSIeuens, Abolitton of theLaity,lD-22. 1therSixDays, 32D.W.Robertson, (New 1972), xiv, York: TheDialPress, Abelard andHelolse 33Bowen, Education2,109. History of ll/estern

two: "I do not wish to be a philosopher,if that meansI contradict St. Paul; I do not wish to be a disciple of Aristotle, if that meansI separate myself from Christ." He also gavethe word theologtthemeaning it has today. (Before him, this word was only used to describepagan beliefs.)'o Taking his cue from Aristotle, Abelard mastered the pagan philosophicalart of dialectic-the logical disputation of truth. He applied this art to the Scriptures.tsChristian theological education never recoveredfrom Abelard'sinfluence. Athens is still in its bloodstream. Aristotle, Abelard, and Aquinas all believedthat reasonwas the gateway to divine truth. So from its beginnings, Western university education involved the fusion of pagan and Christian elements.i" Martin Luther had it right when he said,"What elseare the universities than places for training youth in Greek glory."" Although Luther was a university man himself, his critique was aimed at the practice of teaching Aristotelian logic at the university level.r' Seminarian. Seminary theology grew out of the scholastictheologn' that was taught in the universities. As we have seen, this theologv was based on Aristotle's philosophical system.r')Seminary theology was dedicatedto the training of professionalministers. Its goal was to produce seminary-trainedreligious specialists.It taught the theology-not

of the early bishop, monk, or professor-but of the profes-

sionally "qualified" minister. This is the theology that prevailsin the contemporary seminary. One of the greatest theologians of this century Karl Barth, reacted against the idea that theological education should be relegatedto an elite classof professionalorators. He wrote, "Theology is not a private reserve of theologians. It is not a private affair of 14 Tothe disgustof manyin his day,Abelardcalledoneof his booksChristianfheology Abelardand Heloise, xii-xiii). lRobertson. 3 5 T h i s s h o u l d n ' t b e c o n f u s e d w i t h t h e a p p r o a c h 0 f t h e a p o s t l e P a u l , w h o m a y h0agv recut s0 er edaGsr0enew kiththeGreeksand r h e t o r itco c o m m u n i c aw t ei t ht h e mb u t d i d n o tu s ed i a l e c t i(cG r e elk0 g r ct)0 u n d e r s t a n3Nr n l ; 1 p r pSl c r i p t u r e . 36 Marsden,Soulof theAnericanUniversity,34. 37 lbid..35. il lbid.,36. ForLuther'sideas0n education, seeBoyd,Hrstory of l'lestern[ducation.]$$fi l:;r rB , .;irer s coworker Melanchthon ( w h i c hh a sp a g a nr o o t sa) n dP r o t e s t a n t i si nmt h ee d u c a t i oonf N l i " : ' ^ i , ' : : : c o m b i n ehdu m a n i s m 3 e R o w d o n" T , h e o l o g i cEadl u c a t i oi n H i s t o r i c a Ple r s p e c t i v e7,9".

professors.. . . Nor is it a private affair of pastors. . . . Theology is 'laiqt' is one of the worst in a matter for the church. . . . The term the vocabulary of religion and ought to be banished from Christian conversation."ao Concerning the seminary we might say that Peter Abelard laid the egg and Thomas Aquinas hatched it. Aquinas had the greatest influence on contemporary theological training. In 1879, his work was endorsed by a papal bull as an authentic expressionof doctrine to be studied by all students of theology. Aquinas's main thesis was that God is known through human reason. He "preferred the intellect to the heart as the organ for arriving at truth."*' Thus the more highly trained people'sreason and intellect, the better they will know God. Aquinas borrowed this idea from Aristotle. And that is the underlying assumption of many-if

not most-contemporary

seminaries.

The teaching of the New Testament is that God is Spirit, and as such, He is known by revelation (spiritual insight) to one's human spirit.+ZReason and intellect can causeus to know about God. And they help us to communicate what we know. But they fall short in giving us spiritual revelation. The intellect is not the gateway for knowing the Lord deeply. Neither are the emotions. In the words of A. W. Tozer: "Divine truth is of the nature of spirit and for that reason can be received only by spiritual revelation. . . . God's thoughts belong to the world of spirit, man's to the world of intellect, and while spirit can embrace intellect, the human intellect can never comprehend spirit. . . . Man by reason cannot know God; he can only know about God. . . . Man's reason is a fine instrument and useful within its field. It was not given as an organ by which to know God."*' In short, extensiveBible knowledge, a high-powered intellect, and razor-sharp reasoning skills do not automatically produce spiritual men and women who knowJesus Christ profoundly and who can

a0Barth,lhealogische quoted in Erler KarlBarthReader,S-9. Fragen andAntworten,175, 183-184, andMarquard, ar Durant, AgeofFaith,964. a'?lohn4,23-24;1 Corinthians 2:9-16. a3 Gems (CanpHill,PA,Christian Publications, 1969), 36-37. fromTozer

impart a life-giving revelation of FIim to others.**(This, by the way, is the basisof spiritual ministry.) As BlaisePascal(1623-1662) once put it, "It is the heart which perceivesGod, and not the reason."*t Today, Protestants and Catholics alike draw upon Aquinas's work, using his outline for their theological studies.ouAquinas's crowning work, summa Theologica(Tbe sum of All Theolog,),is the model used in virtually all theological classestoday-whether Protestant or Catholic. Consider the order in which Aquinas'stheology is laid out: God Tiiniry Creation Angels Man The Divine Government (Salvation,etc.) The Last Endot Now compare this outline to a typical systematic theologv textbook used in Protestant seminaries: God Unity and Tlinity Creation Angelology The Origin and Character of Man areT.Austin-Sparks, 44Thistopicisfarbeyond onthesubject great uptheScriptures thatopen resources Four ofthisbook. thescope Fellowship Chri$ian York' Man(New Nee,TheSpiritual Watchman (Pensacola, n.d.); Publications, FL:Testimony What lsMan? Lifeonthe 1999); andRuthPaxson, publishers, lVlinistry, Stream Living PlanofRedemption God's \Anaheim, Mary McDonough, 1g77); (Grand Kregel, 1996). Rapids, Plane Highest see intellect, reason and o5 pins6es#424. ofhuman thebounds beyond canbeencountered onhowGod discussion Foranoutstanding 1999) NavPress' Springs' spirituality l}olorado theHeart ofChristian YourSoul'Restoring Demarest's Salrsly Dr.Bruce hada a6,,Thomas in hislife,Thomas 23.Later no.4 (1990), History9, Christian lheotogiae," Work onSumma Concludes Aquinas "All declaredr thatThomas wassoprofound Theexperience tohisspirit. hisintellect lt wentbeyond withtheLord. experience spiritual of this experience to me."After revealed towhathasbeen . , . compared butstraw seems t0 menothing hithert0 wratten thatI have hispen Helaiddown completed. wasnever Sunnafheotogica Hismammoth writing. gave upallofhisvoluminous Thomas Christ, vol 19, World, Eooks oftheWestern Great "AndI nowawaittheendof mylile"lsunnaTheologica. 6, 1273, saying, onDecember of Christianity,Il3). Stoty andPrice, Aquinas l, vi;Collins Thomas A1Sunnafheologica, uii.

Soteriology (Salvation,etc.) Eschatology:The Final Stateu' Without a doubt, Aquinas is the father of contemporary theolow.onHis influence spread to the Protestant seminaries through the Protestant scholastics.s. The tragedy is that Aquinas relied so completely on Aristotle's method of logic chopping when he expoundedon holy writ.5' In the words of will Durant, "The power of the church was still adequateto secure,through Thomas Aquinas and others, the transmogrifi cation ftransformation] of Aristotle into a medieval theologian." In another book Durant saysthat "he began a long seriesof works presentingAristotle'sphilosophy in Christian dress."t'Aquinas also quotes from another pagan philosopher profusely throughout his samma Theologica.t'Regardlessof how much we wish to deny it, contemporary theology is a blending of Christian thought and pagan philosophy. So we have four stagesof theological education: episcopal,the theology of the bishops;monastic, the theolow of the monks; scholastic,the theology of the professor;and seminarian,the theology of the professionalminister.5+ Each stageof christian education is and alwayshas been highly

'8 Henry protestant C Thiessen, /eclrres in Systenatic fheology(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 197g). v.Anystandard systematic theology textfollows thissame template. Allofit wasderrved fromAquinas. 'i Aquinas s theological system continues togetreinlorced. Forinstance, most Protestant seminaries inAmerica andEurope iollow whatisknown astheBerlin lVlodel oftheological education. Thismodel started inBerlin rn1800. lt wasanoutgrowth of ghtened en1 rationalism thatreinforced theology asa cerebral exercise. Most modern semrnaries usethismodel today \Vantage Parnt: fheNewsletter "Asa legacy ofDenver Seninary, June1998, 4).According to Dr.Bruce Demarest, oftheeighteenth-century 'reason' Inlightenment, evangelicals often extol asthekeythatunlocks theknowledge ofGod. Theology thenbecomes anjntellectual 'ln undertaking-an activity ofthemindandforthemind. Morton Kelsey observes that Proiestantism, Godbecame a theological 'left-brain'approach rdea known rather bytnference thana reality known byexperience.'Through a tothefaith,God easily becomes anabstraction removed fromlived experience. A.W.Tozer noted thateven (forexample, asmany scientists iose GodinHisworld Carl (Satisfy Sagan), somany theologians loseGodin HisWord" Your Soul,95-96). ' Francis (Reformed) (Lutheran) Turretin andMartin Chemnitz were the leading two Protestant scholastics. ' going Thetermlogicchopping denotes to greatlengths t0 force thelogicofanargument to{it a particular idea.lf youdoubt that Aquinas didthis,simply readhis SunnaTheologica. Aquinas relied heavily upon Aristotelian logic andphilosophyto support his theological views. Aquinas alsowrote c0mmentaries onAristotle s work. According to Durant, Aquinas Aristotle's knew works more thoroughly thananyother medieval thinker except forAverroes. Fora fulldiscussion philosophical onhowAquinas Aristotle's adopted system, seeDouglas, l,/hos l'/hoin Cnrrstian History,30-34, andDurant, AgeofFaith,96l-978. 1?Durant, (New Story ofPhilosophy York, Washington Square Press, 1952), 104;Durant, Ageoffaitf,962.TheFrench chairof philosophy at Parrs upbraided Thomas fortarnishing philosophy Christian theology withthe ofa pagan. i3 Aquinas quotes Pseudo-Dionysius, a Neoplatonist, over100tjmes in hisSunrma lheologica. Aquinas nodoubt thought thatthe Dionysius hequoted wasthemanthatPaul (Acts converted toChrist when inAthens 17,34). lt wasnot,however. Pseudo-Dionysius wasa Neoplatonist whoIived much later thanDtonysius theAreopagite. a Afifthbrandoftheologycalled"laytheology"ora"theologyforthewholepeopleofGod"isbeingchampioned scholars. See footnote 5 inthrschapter

intellectual and study driven.tt As one scholar put it, "Whether a school was monastic, episcopal, or presblterial, it never separated teaching from religious education, from instruction in church dogma and morals. Christianiry was an intellecrualreligion."56As products of the Reformation, we are taught to be rationalistic (and very theoretical) in our approach to the Christian faith.tt

SEMINARIES THEFIRST For much of the medieval age, clerical education was minimal.st At the time of the Reformation, many Protestant pastorswho converted from Roman Catholicism had no experience in preaching. They lacked both training and education. fu the Reformation progressed,however, provisions were made for uneducated pastors to attend schools and universities. Protestant ministers were not trained in oratory. They were instead trained in exegesisand biblical theology. It was assumedthat if they knew theology, they could preach. (This assumption accounted for the long sermons in the sixteenth cenfury, which often lasted two or three hours!)to This rype of theological training produced a "new profession"the theologically trained pastor. Educated pastors now wielded tremendous influence, holding doctor's degreesin theology or other By the mid-sixteenth century academictides that gavethem prestige.oo most Protestant ministers were university trained in some way.ut So from its inception, Protestantism promoted a well-educated clergy, which became the backbone of the movement.62Throughout

s5Theexception with mystics along thewritings oftheChristian studied form.Some monastic schools is perhaps the"monastic" Aristotle andPlato. 56Marrou, 3S University, of theAnerican Marsden, Soul in Antiquity,343; History oftducation 5 7C o n s i d e r t h e f o l l o w i n g q u o t e : " C h r i s t d i d n o t a p p o i n t p r o f e s s o r s , b u t l o l l o w e r s . l f C h r i s t i a n i t y . . . r s n o t r e d u p by livingandcanonlybeexpounded ts message about for a person Christianity Christianity, it,thenhedoesnotexpound expounding Kierkegaard). in men's lives"(Sgren realized being sBMarsden, University,3S, Soulof theAmerican 5s Niebuhr in Historical Perspectives,l33. andWillians,Ministry m tbid., 144. 6r lbid.,142. 62 Marsden, University,3T. Soulof theAnerican

Protestant lands, the clergy were the best educatedcitizens. And they used their education to wield their authority.ur While Protestant ministers were sharpening their theological savry, about one-fourth of the Catholic clergy had no universiry training. The Catholic church reacted to this at the Council of Tient (1545-1 563). In order for the church to fight the new Protesrant Reformation, it had to better educare its clergy. The solution? The founding of the very first seminaries.6a The Catholics wanted the learning and devotion of their priests to match that of the Protestant pastors.utTherefore, the Council of Trent required that all cathedral and greater churches "maintain, to educate religiously, and to train in ecclesiasticaldiscipline, a certain number of youths of their city and diocese." So we may credit the founding of the seminary to the Catholics in the late sixteenth century. The origin of the first Protestant seminary is clouded in obscurity. But the best evidence indicates that the Protestants copied the Catholic model and establishedtheir first seminary in America. It was establishedin Andover, Massachusetts,in 1808.66 Christian education in the United Stateswas just as Aristotelian and highly systematizedas it was in Europ".u' By 1860, there were sixty Protestant seminarieson American soil.u8This fast-pacedgrowth was largely the result of the influx of converts produced during the Second Great Awakening (1800-1835) and the perceivedneed to train ministers to care for them.on

tr tbid.,37. 6aReid,ConciseDictionaryof ChristianityinAnerica,309; Durant, Reformation,932. Irentmadeprovisionforaseminaryineach diocese. (London: A.G.Dickens, Reformation andSociety in Sixteenth-Century Europe Hartcourt, Brace, & World, Inc.,i966),189; 0ollinsandPrice, Story of Christianity, l49. 6s Rowdon, "Theological Education in Historical Perspective," 81. 66Reid,ConciseDrctionaryofChristianityinAmerica,ll3.JohnCalvinestablishedtheGenevaAcademyinl55g,b technically a seminary. While theAcademy wasused totraintheologians, it wasnotconceived originally asa theological school. lt gavea totaleducation (Calvin's to nonclergy aswell.lnterestingly, Theodore Beza right-hand pedigree man)traced thescholasiic o{ theGeneva Academy totheGreeks whointurnreceived their"truephilosophy" fromtheEgyptians. lt wasargued thatthiswasgood, sinceMoseswaseducatedinallthewisdomoftheEgyptians(RobertW.Henderson, fheTeaching0fficeintheReformedTradition Westminster Press, 19621, 51-61). lPhiladelphia, 67John (New Morgan, Godly Learning York: Cambridge Press, University 1986), 107.American seminary education wasalsodominated philosophy "common bytheScoitish sense" ofThomas Reid. Later, liberal seminaries came to preler G.W.F.Hegel, whileconservative seminaries $uckwithReid. 68 Reid,Concise Dictionary of Christianity in America,113. 6 ' l b i d .1,1 3 .

Before Andover Seminary was foundecl, the Protestants had Yale (1701) and Harvard (1636) to train their clergy. Ordination was granted upon completing a formal examination brzgraduation.i')But in time, these universitiesrejected ortl-rocloxChristian beliefs. (Harvard, for example,adopted Unitarianism.)t' The Protestantsno longer trusted an undergraduateeducation at Yale and Harvard, so they establishedtheir own seminariesto do the iob themselves.Tr

BIBLE COLLEGE The Bible college is essentiallya nineteenth-century North American evangelicalinvention. A Bible college is a crossbetween a Bible institute (training center) and a Christian liberal arts school. Its students concentrate in religious studies and are trained for Christian service.The founders of the first Bible collegeswere influenced by L ondon pas t or sF L G. Gu i n n e s s(1 8 3 5 -1 9 1 0 )a n d C harl esS purgeon ( 1834- 1892) . In response to the revivalism of D. L. Moodl', the Bible college movement blossomedin the late nineteenth and earlv nr-entieth centuries.The first two Bible collegeswere the Missionary Tiaininq Institute (Nyack College, New York) in 1BB2and Moodv Bible Institute (Chicago) in 1886.?rTheir focus \Masto train ordinary laypeople to become "full-time" Christian workers.to What led to the founding of the Bible college?From the midnineteenth cenrury little attention had been given to traditional Christian values as an integral part of higher education. Liberal theology had begun to dominate state universitiesacrossAmerica. In the face of these elements,the demand for missionaries,parachurch leaders, and ministers provoked the creation of the Bible collegeto equip "the

rc Warkentin, View, 75. A Biblical-Historical 1rdination, rr Unitarianism Christian beiiefs andother orthodox thedivinity ofJesus, denies thelrinity, / 2 T h e f i r s t C a t h o l i c s e m i n a r y t o h i t Awm ae se r isctaanbsl iosi hl e d i n B a l t i m o r e i n l T 9 l . R e r d , C o n c t s e D i c t i o n a r y o f C h r i s t i a n 101l. Anerica. /3 ThelVloodyBiblelnstitutewasformallyconstitutedjnl889(VirginiaBrereton,'ThePopularEducator,"Ch 119901:28). tt Reid,ConciseDictionaryofChristianityinAnerica.42-43;Harper'stncyclapedraofReitgtausEducation.6l.

called" with a Bible education.-tToday, there are over four hundred Bible schoolsand colleeesin the United Statesand Canada.tu

SUNDAY SCHOOL The Sunday school is also a relatively recent invention, born some 1,700yearsafter Christ. A newspaperpublisher named Robert Raikes (1736-1811)from Britain is creditedwith being its founder.'7In1780, Raikes establisheda school in "Scout Alle1.," Gloucester, for poor chilclren.Raikes did not begin the Sunday school for the purpose of relieious instruction. Instead, he founded it to teach poor children the btrsicsof education. Raikeswas concerned with the low level of literacy and morality among common children. Many of the children who attended his school were the victims of social and employer abuse.Because the children could not read, it was easy for others to take advantage of them. Although Raikes was an Anglican layman, the Sunday school took off like wildfire, spreading to Baptist, Congregational, and Methodist churchesthroughout England.Ts The Sunday school movement came to a peak when it hit the United States.The first American Sunday school began in \,4rginia in 1785." Then tn 1790,a group of Philadelphiansformed the Sundav School Society.Its purpose was to provide education to indigent children to keep them off the streetson Sunday.tt'h the eighteenth and nineteenth cenruries,many Sunday schools operated separately from churches.The reason:Pastorsfelt that layrnen could not teach the Bible.*'In the mid-1800s, Sunday schoolsspread far and wide r5 Harper'sEncyclopedia of ReligiousEducation.61. 76 'BibleCollegelVlovement," (GrandRapids:BakerBookHouse,2001). fhe Evangelical Dictianary of ChristianEducation 't Harper's Encyclopedia of Religrous Education.625. MosthistoricalbookscreditRaikeswith beingthe fatherof the Sundayschool.But 0 t h e r sa r es a i dt o h a v eb e e nf o u n d e rasl o n gw i t hR a i k e sH, a n n a h s .L a q u e u r . l V l o raen dS a r a hT r i m m ebr e i n ga m o n gt h e m( T h o m aW Religionand Respectability: SundaySchools and llorkrngClassCulture,1780-1850LNew Haven,Cl YaleUniversity Press,1g761, 21) I t h a sa l s ob e e ns a i dt h a t R e vT. h o m aS s t o c ko f G l o u c e s tgear v eR a i k etsh e i d e ao f S u n d aey d u c a t i o(np .2 2 ) . '8 Harper's fncyclopedia of Religious Education,625. TheSundayschoolgrewas partof the evangelical revivalof the 1780sand i790s ( L a q u e uR r ,e l i g i oann dR e s p e c t a b i l i t y . 6W 1h ) .e nR a i k e d s i e di n 1 8 1 1t,h e r ew e r e4 0 0 , 0 0 0 c h i l d r ea n t t e n d i nS g u n d asyc h o o lisn G r e a t (Chicago, Britain.C. B.Eauey. Historyof ChnstianEducatron MoodyPress,1964),225-227. te lerry, [vangelism:A ConciseHistory, I80. 80 Harper'sEncyclopedra of ReltgiousEducation,625. E) Ierry,[vangelism:A ConcrseHistory,781r

throughout America. In 1810,the Sundayschool began to shift from being a philanthropic effort to help poor children to an evangelical mechanism. D. L. Moody is credited with popularizing the Sunday school in America.'2Under Moody's influence, the Sundayschool becamethe primary recruiting ground for the contemporary church.*t Today, the Sunday school is used both to recruit new converts and to train young children in the doctrines of the faith.'o Public education has taken over the role for which Sundayschool was designed.tt It should be noted that the nineteenth century was an era of institution building in America. Corporations, hospitals,asylums,prisons, as well as children's establishmentslike orphanages,reform schools, and free public schoolswere formed during this time.tt'The Sunday school was just another such institution.8TToday, it is a permanent fixrure in the traditional church. fu a whole, we don't view the contemporary Sunday school as an effective instirution. According to some studies, Sunday school attendancehas been on the decline over the last two decades.tt Describing the way of the early church, one scholar says,"There is no evidence to suggest that teachers divided groups on the basis of age and sex.The responsibility of the child's early education and, in particular, religious education lay with the parents. . . . No special arrangements seem to have been made for children by the early church. The Christian school was a long way off (around AD 372)the Sunday School even more so."to

82 Brereton, "Popular iorover1,500 Moody's Sunday school ministry cared Educator," 28;Collins andPrice, Story ofChnstianity,187. children. 83AnneM.Boylan,SundaySchool'TheFornationofanAnericanlnstitutionlT90-1880(NewHaven,CT:YaleUniver program Healso within theSouthern Baptist Convention. Thiswasthecase Flake school 167. by1880. Arthur developed theSunday popularizedSundayschoolgrowthprinciplesthatwereadoptedbyotherdenominations.(Terry, Evangelisn,AConciseHistory,ISl\. NewfwentiethCenturyEncyclapediaofRehgiousKnowledee,T96-198. SeealsoElmerTowns,"SundaySchoolMovement," e lbid.,1i0;Reid, Dictionary inAmeilca,33I. Concise of Christianity 85 Pastor's Notes 4, no.i (Worcester' History Institute, 1991), 6. Christian 86Boyfan, Sunday 1. School, 87In1824, llnion ln intheUnited States. withtheAmerican Sunday School there were 48,681 children inSunday schools af{iliated (Boylan, grew lJnion comprising School wasfounded in 1824, Sunday Scfoo{ 11).TheAmerrcan Sunday 1832, thatfigure to301,358 (Reid, Dictionary Missionary Society Concise 724schools, including 68inPhiladelphia. In1970, theUnion wasrenamed theAmerican ol Christianity in America. lSlr. 88BobbyH.\Nelch,EvangelisnthroughtheSundaySchool'AJourneyofFaith(Nashville,LifewayPress.l99T).0th atiendance hasbeen stable over thelastdecade. 8eNorrington, foPreach orNot,59.

THEYOUTH PASTOR The youth pastor began appearing in churches long after Sunday schools,largely becausesociety did not recognize or cater to the needs of this age group until the twentieth century.nuh 1905, G. Stanley Hall popularized the concept of the "adolescent" as distinct from the young adult and the older child."' Then in the 1940s, the term teenagerwas born. And for the first time a distinct youth subculture was created. People ages thirteen to nineteen were no longer simply "youths." They were now ttteenagers. tto'

After World War II, Americans developed great concern for the voung people of our nation. This concern spilled over into the Christian church. \truth rallies in the 1930s laboring under the banner "Youth for Christ" spawned a parachurch organization by the same name around 1945.e3 With new understanding and concern for the "teenagers,"the idea that someone needed to be employed to work with them emerged. Thus was born the professional youth minister. The youth pastor beganworking in large urban churchesin the 1930sand 1940s.n0 Calvary Baptist Church in Manhattan had one of the very firstyouth pas* tors. Moo$t Montbljt magazinewrote about him in the late 1930s.ut The majoriry of youth ministers in this era, however, worked for the emerging parachurch organizations that filled the Christian landscape.nu By the early 1950s,thousandsof professionalyouth min-

e0Wanen (Chicago, Benson andMarkH.Senter lll, TheConplete Eook of Youth Ministry Moody Press, 1987), 66. e' MarkSenter lll, TheConrng Revolution in Youth Minrstry(Chicago, Victor Books, 1992), 93. e2Michael V.Uschan, fhe1940s, Cultural History oftheUSthrough theDecades Lucent Books, 1999), 88;Mary Helen \SanDiego: (New Dohan. OurOwnl{ords York: Alfred Knopf, 1974), 289. 33MarkSenterlll,TheYouthforChnstMovenentAsanEducationalAgencyandltslnpactuplnPrltestantChurch Arbor: University 0fMichigan, 1990), 7-8.0npages 26ff., Senter drscusses thesocial andhrstorical factors thatcreated a ralto{ youth (YFC) organizations. Billy Graham became Youth lorChrist's traveling evangelist. Inthe1950s, YFC established Bible clubs (Reid, across thecountry Concise Dictronary ofChristianity inAnerica,377). lnManhattan, thecharismatic Lloyd Bryant appears youth to bethe{irstto organize regular rallies. Christopher Schlect, Critique ofModern Youth Minrstrl(Moscow, lD'Canon Press, i995).8. sa Calvary (1932), Baptist (1948), Church inlvlanhattan Vista Community Church inNorth SanDiego County andlvloody Memorial (1949) "youth Church inChicaeo allhired directors." AsYoung LifeandYFC clubs flourished inthecountry inthe1930s and40s, youth smaller churches began employing ministers Coning Revolution in Youth Ministry,142). lSenter, es lVark Senter, e-mail message toFrank Viola, September 22,1999. e6Young (1945), (1954), Life(1941), Youth forChrist (1960). Fellowship ofChristian Athletes Youth witha Mission Sentel Comlng "AHistorical Revolutron in Youth Ministry,2l-28,141.i MarkSenter, Framework forDoing Youth Ministry," Reaching a Generation for (Chicago' Chzsl Moody Press), 1997.

isterswere meeting the spiritual needsoir oung people,who now had their own music, dress,literature, lanzuaqe.and etiquette.otDuring this time, the Christian church began to seqregateteenagersfrom everyone else. From the mid-1950s to the end of the 196Cs,the youth pastor became an establishedpart of evangelicalchurches. (The position took off a bit more slowly in the mainline denominations.)e8 By the end of the 1980s,youth ministry's shift from the parachurch organizations to institutional churcheswas pretty well complete. Today, youth pastors are part of the professional clergy. Their position is built on the contemporary church's misguided choice to honor a division that was born in secular culture less than a century ago-namely, the division berween teenager and everyone else. Put another way, the youth pastor did not exist until a separate demographicgroup calledteenagersemerged.In so doing, we created a problem that never before existed-what to do for (and w-ith) the young people. It is not at all unlike the problem we createdwhen a new classof Christian-the

"la).Tnen"-was invented. The question "How do we equip the laity?" was never askedbefore the institutional church made them a separateclassof Christian.

EXPOSING THEHEART OFTHEPROBLEM The Greek philosophers Plato and Socratestaught that knor,r'ledgeis virtue. Good dependson the extent of one'sknowledge. Hence, the teaching of knowledge is the teaching of virtue.ee Herein lies the root and stem of contemporary Christian education. It is built on the Platonic idea that knowledge is the equivalent of moral character.Therein lies the great flaw. Plato and Aristotle (both disciples of Socrates)are the fathers of contemporary Christian education.'uo To use a biblical metaphor, e7Schlect, Critique ofModern Youth Ministry,6. e8Senter, ConingRevolution in Youth Ministry,142. ' g rW i l l i a m B o y d a n d E d m u n d K i n g , T h e H i s t o r y o f V ' / e s t e r n B E ad runceast & i oNn 0( LbaenBh 10a 90m 9k5s, M ), , 2 D8, r00Power, Legacy of Learning,29-116.

present-dayChristian education,whether it be seminarian or Bible college, is serving food from the wrong tree: the tree of the knowledge of good and evil rather than the tree of life.'n' Contemporary theological learning is essentiallycerebral.It can be called "liquid pedagogy."r0r lve pry open people'sheads,pour in a cup or rwo of information, and close them up again. They have the information, so we mistakenly conclude the job is complete. Contemporury theological teaching is data-transfer education. It moves from notebook to notebook. In the process,our theology rarely gets below the neck. If a student accurately parrots the ideas of his professor,he is awarded a degree.And that means a lot in a day when many Christians obsessover (and sometimes deifz) theological degreesin their analysisof who is qualified to minister.r0l Theological knowledge, however, does not prepare a person for ministry.'ooThis does not mean that the knowledge of the world, church history theology, philosophy, and the Scriptures is without value. Such knowledge can be very useful.totBut it is not central. Theological competence and a high-voltage intellect alone do not qualifu a person to servein God's house. The fallacy is that men and women who have matriculated from seminary or Bible college are instantly viewed as "qualified." Those rvho have not are viewed as "unqualified." By this standard,many of the Lord's choicestvesselswould have failed the test.106 In addition, formal theological training does not equip srudenrs for many of the challengesof ministry. According to the Faith Communities Today (FACT) study released by Hartford Seminary in r0rTime willnotpermit andspace ustoexplain themeaning ofthetwotrees. Fora fuller discussi0n, seeWatchman Nee, lheNornal Christian Life.ch.7. r02Pedagogy istheartandscience ofteaching. 103 (Marsden, 0neofthekeyproblems inChristianity isthatit inherited therntellectual standards 0ftheancient world Soul ofthe Anerica n University,34). r0aKeep in mindthatJoseph Stalin attended liflisTheological Seminary fromages14to 19(Adam B.Ulam, Sta/rn theManandHisEra Viking York: Press, 19]31, 18-22;AlanBullock, Hitler andStalin' Parallel LiveslNewYork' Knopf, 19921, [New 6, 13). r05Paul washighly ofTarsus educated, andhewasvitaltothespread ofearly Christianity. Peter, 0nthe0ther hand, wasuneducated. 'How r06 "The getsuch Jesus andlhetwelve apostles were allunlearned men: Jews were amazed andasked, didthisman[Jesus] "Now (lohn learning without having studred?"' 7'15, rutv); when theysawtheboldness ofPeter andJohn, andperceived thattheywere (Acts unlearned andignorant men, theymarveled; andthey tookknowledge ofthem, thattheyhadbeen withJesus" 4:13). Some noted Christians used ofGod whonever received formal theological training include A,W.Iozer, G.Campbell Morgan, John Bunyan, C.H.Spurgeon, D.L.lvloody, andA.W.Pink. Inaddition, some ofthegreatest Bible inchurch expositors history, suchasWatchman Nee, Stephen Kaung, andT,Austin-Sparks, were notseminary trained.

Connecticut, seminary graduatesand clergyrnen who had advanced degreesscoredlower in both their abiliry to deal with conflict and in demonstrating a "clear senseof purpose" than did the nonseminary graduates.tot The survey showed that clergy with no ministerial education or formal certificate program scored the highest on tests that revealed how well one dealswith conflict and stress.Bible coliege graduates scoredslightly lower. Seminary graduatesscoredthe lowestl The major finding of the studywas that "congregationswith leaders who have a seminary education are, as a group, far more likely to report that in their congregationsthey perceivelessclaritv of purpose, more and diff'erentkinds of conflict, lessperson-to-personcommunication, lessconfidencein the future and more threat from chanqes in worship."108 All of this indicates that a person who matriculates fronr thc theory-laden seminary or Bible college has been gir.en little to ncr hands-on experiencein the crucible of body life. By body'life, u-e zrre not referring to the common experienceof being in an instinrtional church setting. We are referring to the rough-and-tumble, m€ss)'r raw, highly taxing experienceof the body of Christ where Christians live as a close-knit community and struggle to make corporate decisions together under Christ's headship without a stated leader over them. In this regard, the seminary is spirirually stultifzing on some pretfy basiclevels. The approach taken by serninariesis also self-referential.It sets its own criteria for who should minister and on what terms. It then often judgesthosewho do not think the criteria are particularly useful or important. But perhaps the most damaging problem of the serninary and Bible college is that they perpetuate the humanl'r devisedsystem in which the clergy live, breathe, and have their being. That systemr 0 /T h i ss t u d yw a sb a s e do n m o r et h a n 1 4 , 0 0 0c o n g r e g a t i ofnr os mf o r t y - o nder { f e r e ndte n o m i n a t i oannsd" f a i t hg r o u p s .l"t u s e dt w e n t y s i xd i f { e r e nstu r v e y sT.h ef / C I s t u d yi s c o n s i d e r et od b et h e m o s tc o m p r e h e n s il vo eo ka t l J S .r e i g i o nT. h ef i n d i n g sa r ep u b l i s h eadt httprilwww.fact. hartsem.ed u. Lo8f,4CIstudv,67.

along with every other outmoded human tradition addressedin this book-is protected, kept alive, and spread through our ministerial schools."'' Instead of offering the cure to the ills of the church, our theological schools worsen them by assuming (and even defending) all of the unscriptural practicesthat produce them. The words of one pastor sum up the problem nicely: "I came through the whole systemwith the best education that evangelicalism had to offer-yet I really didn't receivethe training that I needed . . . sevenyearsof higher educationin top-rated evangelicalschoolsdidn't prepare me to (1) do ministry and (2) be a leader.I began to analyze why I could preach a great sermon and people afterwardswould shake my hand and say, 'Great sermon, Pastor.' But these were the very people who were struggling with self-esteem,beating their spouses, struggling asworkaholics,succumbingto their addictions.Their lives weren't changing. I had to ask myself why this great knowledge I was presentingdidn't move from their headsto their heartsand their lives. And I began to realize that the breakdown in the church was actually basedon u'hat we learnedin seminary.We were taught that if you just eii-e people infcrmation, that's enough!""0

>delvingnEHFER l. lf you do not believe seminariesprovide the right environnent for the educationof Christian leaders, can yla give specifics on how you believe Christian workers should be prepared for Christianservice? This is a very big topic. But in short, the way that Jesus Christ trained Christian workers was to live v'ith thern fbr a period of years. It v'as "on the job" training. He mentored His disciples at close range. They also lived in community together. Jesus did the work, they watched, and then they went on a trial mission which He

r0e lronically,Protestantsarenotedfortheircriticalreflectionondoctrine.Buttheyhavenotappliedthatcrit practices. church rri Dr.Clyde quoted McDowell, in Vantage Point: The Newsletter ofDenver Seninary, June1998.

critiqued.Eventually,Hesentthemout,andthcrelrrietlonthev'crrkthemselves. Paul of Tarsus followed the same pattern, trainins (-hristian *'orkers in the ciryof Ephesus.They were part of the communin' in Ephesus.they watched Paul, and eventually, they were sent out to do the vi'ork.

2. Canyou elahnrate on ynur statement that "the intellect is not the gateway for knowing the Lord deeply.lleither are the enotions"? Ilow does lzzer's observationthat we can nnly ohtaindivine truth through spiritual revelation affect how we shoutdgo about providing Christian training? Those who train others in Christian work should be familiar with those spiritual

:: ",' .

'.: .." ., ,,; . ':t''

realities that ffanscend intellect and emotion. Consequently, spiritual formation,

,,

spiritual understanding, and spiritual insight are vital ingredients in training for

:.',

spirirual service. This includes spending time with the Lord, learning to bear His cross, living in authentic communiry sharpening one's spiritual instincts, and discerning how to hear God's voice and be guided by Him inwardly.

,. r,il "

; :, 3. Ttlhatare your recnmnendations 0n hnw the church should instruct our children and ynuth? The New Testament is absolutely silent on this question, though it seemsto suggest that the responsibility for the moral teaching of children falls on the shoulders of the parents (seeEphesians6:4 and 2 Timothy 1:5, 3:15). That said, our suggestion is to let the creative juices of each local assembly discover new and effective ways to minister to the younq ones.

,,; i,: ,lj

pue ueu0Uu! r.lloqqornqcaql pellecfiep-olst leqn uoll luete#tp fuaaos-fituetlsurl3anrllrutrd ut .etselcgf,aql se ururoul spll leq/l s n J olS ult e p l c n ll o a Is e l e q l 0 l l l a s l tp e s s al ppe pup [l l nl ssaccns qoteasal dl8urpruarun seq luauelsalmapsrear{ 001 ro 0g Weleqlul,, UV'l0H 3S CllslUlvdAUnINlS-HIIllNltv\I'N0SNVI{ OUVHOtUpue {lrea aql eql suotlnltlsut aql lqFnoqt .,'qornqc }o l0 guaudo;enap 'uoua;tq4 puelstopun eql 0l 0lqeaq le^oulleqsa^ ol Ja$e'leql pue snlrl 0l {qlourl ol sallsrdlleJolsed eql qilrnEurpuapuesueuouqllm ';ne4;oslsileloqlueqlpueslovuorllpue'pll; uagrrm Euruur8eq aram sladsogeqlleql 'eunsse0l sn peslplnonpaluasard l ou oJeluauel -sel n eNaqll0 sI00qaqlqctqr ut taptooqlsB'eunsseamll .ueutJl erel luauelsall 0Naqll0 sl00qaqlqstqnurtaptoaqltaqueual0l st lt lueuelsell^eNoqlu! r{rlsrurru u;,, lelluessa 1olcalqnsaqlEur;pueq

IlZZndn VS0rt

v IoN rlsts sr .IN]IAIVISII

lHI

/l,l]NlHI

0NrHSvouddv

studyof the New camps.. . . Thisinsight-whichan unprejudiced Protestant Testament andthe cryingneedof the churchhavehelpedus to reach-may fellowship of Jesus asfollows:the NewTestament'Ecclesia,'the be expressed to dowiththecharacter of persons andhasnothing Christ,is a purecommunion misleading to identifyanysingleoneof aboutit; it is therefore of an institution whichare all markedby an institutional developed churches, the historically withthetrueChristian communion." character, _EMILBRUNNER. THEOTOGIAN TWENTIETH-CENTURY SWISS

Wh{Yl$ $TT*'IATWH f;hlftl$TlAfl$ can follow the same rituals every Sunday without ever noticing that they are at odds with the New Testament?'The incredible power of tradition has something to do with it. As we have seen,the church has often been influenced by the surrounding culture, seemingly unaware of its negative effects. At other times, it has, quite properly, recognized overt threats-such as heretical teachingsabout the person and divinity of JesusChrist. But in an effort to combat those threats, it has moved away from the organic structure that God wrote into the church's DNA. But there is something eise-something more fundamental that most Christians are completely unaware of. It concerns our New Testament. The problem is not in what the New Testament says.The problem is in how we approachit. The approach most commonly used among contemporary Christians when studying the Bible is called "proof texting." The origin of proof texting goes back to the late 1590s.A group of men called Protestant scholasticstook the teachings of the Reformers and systematized them according to the rules of Aristotelian logic.' The Protestant scholasticsheld that not only is the Scripture the Word of God, but every part of it is the \Arord of God in and of t Thischapter at 0glethorpe University inAtlanta, Georgia, Frank Viola delivered ata house church conference isbased ona message onJuly29,2000. 2 Fora discussion (Grand Rapids, Baker B00k H0use, Elwell's Evangehcal Dictionary of fheology onProtestant scholasticism, seeWalter (Lutheran) (Reformed) were thetwomainshakers among theProtestant Francis Tunetin andMartin Chemnitz 1984), 984-985. 1116and209respectively). Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, scholastics \Elwell,

itself-irrespective of context. This set the stagefor the idea that if we lift a verse out of the Bible, it is true in its own risht and can be used to prove a doctrine or a practice. When John Nelson Darbv emerged in the mid-1800s, he built a theology basedon this approach.Darby raised proof rexting to an art form. In fact, it was Darby who gave fundamentalist and evangelical Christians a good deal of their presently acceptedteachings.'All of them are built on the proof-texting method. Proof texting, rhen, became the common way that we contemporary Christians approach the Bible. fu a result, we Christians rarely, if ever, get to see the New Testament as a whole. Rather, we are served up a dish of fragmented thoughts that are drawn together by meansof fallen human logic. The fruit of this approach is that we have strayed far afield from the principles of the New Testament church. Yet we still believe we are being biblical. Allow us to illustrate the problem with a fictitious story.

MEETMARVIN SNURDLY Marvin Snurdly is a world-renowned marital counselor. In his twenty-year career as a marriage therapist, Marvin has counseled thousands of troubled couples. FIe has an Internet presence.Each day hundreds of couples write letters to Marvin about their marital sob stories. The letters come from all over the globe. And Marvin answersthem all. A hundr';d years pass,and Marvin Snurdly is resting peacefully in his grave. He has a great-great-grandsonnamed Fielding Melish. Fielding decides to recover the lost letters of his great great grandfather. But Fielding can find only thirteen of Marvin's letters. Out of the thousandsof letters that Marvin \Mrotein his lifetime, just thirteen have survived! Nine were written to couples in marital crisis. Four were written to individual spouses.

3 Dispensationalism andthepretnbulational rapture arejusttwoofthem. Thevery I LeftBehind successfu series isbutltupon these t e a c h i n g s ( s e e T i n e , J u l y 1 , 2 0 0 2 , 4 1 - 4 8 ) . F o r t h e f a s c i n a t i n g o r i g i n o f D a r b y s p r e t r i b ul nl ac trieodniablldeo c t r i n e , s e e M Cover-Uo.

These letters were all written within a twenty-year time frame: from 1980to 2000. FieldingMelish plansto compile theselettersinto a volume. But there is something interesting about the way Marvin wrote his letters that makes Fielding's task somewhat difficult. First, Marvin had an annoying habit of never dating his letters. No days,months, or years appear on any of the thirteen letters. Second, the letters only portny half the conversation. The initial letters written tc Marvin that provoked his responsesno longer exist. Consequently, the only way to understand the backdrop of each of l{arvin's letters is by reconstructing the marital situation from \Ian'in's response. Each letter was written at a different time, to people in a different culture, about a different problem. For example, in 1985, llarvin wrote a letter to Paul and Sally from \4rginia, who were experiencing sexualproblems early in their marriage. In 1990,Marvin wrote a letter to Jethro and Matilda from Australia, who were having problems with their children.In 1995, Marvin \Mrotea letter to a wife from Mexico who was experiencing a midlife crisis. Unfortunately, Fielding has no way of knowing when the letters were written. Take note: twenty years-thirteen

letters-all

written to differ-

ent people at different times in different cultures-all

experiencing

different problems. It is Fielding Melish's desire to put thesethirteen letters in chronological order. But without the dates,he cannot do this. So Fielding puts them in the order of descending length. That is, he takes the longest letter that Marvin wrote and puts it first. He puts Marvin's second longest letter after that. He takes the third longest and puts it third. The compilation ends with the shortest letter that Marvin penned. The thirteen letters are arranged, not chronologically, but by their length. The volume hits the presses and becomes an overnight best seller. One hundred years pass,and The CollectedWorksof Mantin Snurdly

compiled by Fielding Melish standsthe test of time. The work is still very popular. Another one hundred years pass,and this volume is being used copiously throughout the Western u,orld. The book is translated into dozens of languages.Marriage counselors quote it left and right. Universities employ it in their sociology classes.It is so widely used that someonegets a bright idea on how to make the volume easier to quote and handle. What is that idea?It is to divide Marvin's letters into chaptersand numbered sentences(or verses).So chaptersand versesare added to The CollectedWorksof Marvin Snurdly. But by adding chapter and verse to these once living letrers, something changes that goes unnoticed. The letters lose their personal touch. Instead, they take on the texrure of a manual. Different sociologists begin writing books about marriage and the family. Their main source?The CollectedWorks of Maruin Snurdly. Pick up any book in the twenty-fourth century on the subject of marriage, and you will find the author quoting chapters and versesfrom Marvin's letters. It usually looks like this: In making a particular point, an author will quote a verse from Marvin's letter written to Paul and Sally. The author will then lift another verse from the letter written to Jethro and Matilda. He will extract another verse from anorher letter. Then he will sew these three versestogether and upon them he will build his particular marital philosophy. Virtually every sociologist and marital therapist that authors a book on marriage does the same thing. Yet the irony is this: Each of these authors frequently contradicts the others, even though they are all using the samesource! But that is not all. Not only have llan-in's letters been turned into cold prosewhen they were originallv livinq, breathing epistlesto real people in real places,they have becornea \\ eapon in the handsof agenda-drivenmen. Not a few authors on marriaqe beein employing isolated proof texts from Marvin's work to hammer a\\-a\-at those who disagreewith their marital philosophy.

How is this possible?How are all of these sociologistsconrradicting each other when they are using the exact same source? It is becausethe letters have been lifted out of their historical context. Each letter has been plucked from its chronological sequenceand removed from its real-life setting. Put another way, the letters of Marvin Snurdly have been rransformed into a seriesof isolated,disjointed,fragmentedsentences-so anyone can lift one sentencefrom one letter, another sentence from another letter, and then paste them together to create the marital philosophy of his or her choice. An amazing story is it not? Well, here is the punch line. Whether vou realize it or not, this is a description of your New Testament!

THEORDER OFPAUUS LETTERS The New Testament is made up mostly of the aposdePaul'slefters; in fact, he wrote two-thirds of it. FIe penned thirteen letters in about a fwenty-year time span. Nine letters were written to churches in different cultures, at different times, experiencing different problems. Four leffers were written to individual Christians. The people who received those letters were also dealing with different issuesat different rimes. Take note: twenty years-thirteen letters-all written to different people at different times in different cultures-all

experiencing

different problems.* In the early second cenfury someone began to take the letters of Paul and compile them into a volume. The technical term for this volume is "canon."t Scholarsrefer to this compiled volume as "the Pauline canon." The New Testament is essentially this compilation with a few letters added after it, the four Gospels and Acts placed before it, and Revelation tacked on the very end. At the time. no one knew when Paul's letters were written. o SeeDonald (Downers Guthrie's flelry Testament Introductlon, revised edition Grove, lL:InterVarsity Press, 1990), Fora good discussion "IheProcess, onhowwegotourBible, seeChristian Hrstory 13,no.3,andRonald Youngblood, HowWeGot0urBible," Christianity Tod ay(February 5, 1988), 23-38. 5 Bruce, Paul'Apostle oftheHeartSetfree,465. Scholars referto Paul's canon asthe"Pauline corpus," Tolearnabout thehistory of (Downers theNewJestament canon, see[ [ Bruce, TheCanon ofScriplure Grove, lL:InterVarsity Press, 1988), ch.8-23.

Even if they had, it would not have matterecl.There was no precedent for alphabetical or chronological ordering. The first-century Greco-Roman world ordered its literarure according to decreasing length.u Look at how your New Testament is arranged.What do you find? Paul'slongest letter appearsfirst.t It is Romans. First Corinthians is the second longest letter, so it follows Romans. Second Corinthians is the third longest letter. Your New Testament follows this pattern until you come to that tiny little book called Philemon.8 In 1864,Thomas D. Bernard delivereda seriesof talks as part of the Bampton Lectures. These lectures were published in 1872 in a book entitled Tbe Progressof Doctrine in the l{ew hstament.In the book, Bernard argued that the present order of Paul's letters in the New Testament was divinely inspired and commended. This book becamevery popular among Bible teachersof the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. As a result, virtually every theological text, exegeticaltext, or biblical commentary written in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries follows the present chaotic order, which blinds us from seeing the entire panoramic view of the New Testament. Canonical criticism is big among seminarians.This is the study of the canon as a unit in order to acquire an overall biblical theology. What is needed today is a theology built, not on the present canon and its misarrangement, but on the chronological narrative of the New Testament church. Here is the present order as it appearsin your New Testament. The books are arrangedaccording to descendinglength: Romans 1 Corinthians 2 Corinthians Galatians

6 Jerome lVlurphy-0'Connor, PaultheLetter-V,lriter(Collegeville, MN: TheLiturgical r)ress. lgg5ri21 120Thispractice isknown as stichometry. 7 ForathoroughdiscussionontheorderofthePaulinecanon,seeMurphy-0'Connor,PaultheLene"flrrler.ch. 8 Hebrews does notappear tobePauline, soit wasnotpartolthePauline corpus.

Ephesians' Philippians Colossians 1 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 1 Timothy 2 Timothy Titus Philemon What, then, is the proper chronological order of these letters? According to the best availablescholarship,here is the order in which they were written:to Galatians 1 Thessalonians 2 Thessalonians 1 Corinthians 2 Corinthians Romans Colossians Philemon Ephesians Philippians 1 Timothy Titus 2 Timothy

THEADDITION OFCHAPTERS ANDVERSES In the year 1227, a professor at the University of Paris named Stephen Langton added chapters to all the books of the Bible. Then e Ephesians gloss. isactually a hairlonger thanGalatians, were misananged butthebooks duetoa scribal Thisisnotsurprising since thedifference in length issoslight(Murphy-O'Connor, PaultheLetter-ll/riter,124). '0 SeeGuthrie's (Grand NewTestament lntroduction, revised F.F.Bruce's lheleilersofPaul,AnExpanded edition; Paraphrase Rapids, Eerdmans. 1965): F.F.Bruce's Paul'Aoostle of theHeartSetFree.

in 1551, a printer named Robert Stephanus(sometimescalledRobert Estienne) numbered the sentencesin all the books of the New Testament." According to Stephanus'sson, the verse divisions that his father createddo not do serviceto the senseof the text. Stephanusdid not use any consistent method. While riding on horseback from Paris to Lyons, he versified the entire New Testament within Langton's chapter divisions.l2 So verseswere born in the pagesof holy writ in the year I 55 1.tl And since that time God's people have approached the New Testament with scissorsand glue, cutting and pasting isolated, disjointed sentencesfrom different letters, lifting them out of their real-life setting, lashing them together to build floatable doctrines, and then calling it "the Word of God." Seminariansand Bible college students alike are rarely if ever given a panoramic view of the free-flowing story of the early church with the New Testament books arranged in chronological order.toAs a result, most Christians are completely out of touch with the social and historical events that lay behind each of the New Tesrament letters. Instead, they have turned the New Testament into a manual that can be wielded to prove any point. Chopping the Bible up into fragments makes this relatively easyto pull off.

HOW WEAPPROACH THENEWTESTAMENT We Christians have been taught to approach the Bible in one of eight ways:

rrNormanGeislerandWilliamNix,AGenerallntroductionoftheBible:RevisedandExpanded(Chicago,MoodyPre 451;Bruce Metzger andMrchael Coogan, The0xford Conpanion totheBible(New York: 0xford University Press, 1993), ig. 12H.vonSoden,DieSchriftendesNewenTestamentes(GotIingen,Germany,Vandenhoek.lgl2),1,484;Connolly, Book,154.One Bible historian made "l thisremark about Stephanus's versification oltheNew Testament' thrnk it hadbeen better done onhisknees ina closet." 1 3T h e v e r s i f i c a t t o n o f t h e H e b r e w B i b l e o c c u n e d i n l 5 T l . T h e o d o r e B e z a p u t S t e p h a n u s s v e r s e s r n h i s v e r s i o n o (1565), place whichgave themthepreeminent thattheyhave KurtGalling, today. ed, DieReltgnn tnderGeschichte undder Gegenwaft,3rd ed(Tubingen, Germany: J.C.B.Mohr, 1957), 3'114. 14Inmany seminaries andBible colleges, thestory oltheearly istaught ina 'church hrstory" church while class thebooks oftheNew Testament aretaught inan"NTstudies" class. Andrarely dothetwainmeet. lf youdonotbelreve me,trythis,Thenext timeyoumeet a s e m i n a r y s t u d e n t ( o r g r a d u a t e ) , a s k h i m o r h e r t o r e h e a r s e l o r y osuetrheeseoni et ivr e n ch t sr fornooml o Pgaiucla' s w r i t i n g o f Galatians tohiswriting ofRomans.

You look for versesthat inspire you. Upon finding such verses, you either highlight, memorize, meditate upon, or pur them on your refrigerator door. You look for verses that tell you what God has promised so that you can confessit in faith and thereby obligate the Lord to do what you want. You look for versesthat tell you what God commands you to do. You look for versesthat you can quote to scarethe devil out of his wits or resist him in the hour of temptation. You look for versesthat will prove your particular doctrine so that you can slice-and-dice your theological sparring partner into biblical ribbons. (Becauseof the proof-texting method, a vast wasteland of Christianity behavesas if the mere citation of some random, decontextualizedverse of Scripture ends all discussionon virtually any subject.) You look for verses in the Bible to control and/or correct others. You look for versesthat "preach" well and make good sermon material. (This is an ongoing addiction for many who preach and teach.) You sometimescloseyour eyes,flip open the Bible randomly, stick your finger on a page, read what the text says, and then take what you have read as a personal "word" from the Lord. Now look at this list again. Which of these approacheshave you used?Look again: Notice how each is highly individualistic. Nl of them put you, the individual Christian, at the center. Each approach ignores the fact that most of the New Testament was written to corporate bodies of people (churches),not to individuals. But that is not all. Each of these approachesis built on isolated proof texting. Each treats the New Testament like a manual and blinds us to its real message.It is no wonder that we can approvingly

nod our headsat paid pastors,the Sundavnrorninq order of worship, sermons,church buildings, religious dress.choirs, worship teams, seminaries,and a passivepriesthood-all u-ithout wincing. We have been taught to approach the Bible like a jigsaw puzzle. Most of us have never been told the entire story that lies behind the letters that Paul, Peter,James,John, and Jude wrote. We have been taught chapters and verses,not the historical context.tt For instance, have you ever been given the story behind Paul's letter to the Galatians?Before nodding, seeif you can answer these questions off the top of your head: Who were the Galatians? What were their issues?When and why did Paul write to them? What happened just before Paul penned his Galatian treatise?Where was he when he wrote it? What provoked him to write the letter? And where in Acts do you find the historical context for this letter? Nl of these background matters are indispensablefor understanding what our New Testament is about. Without them, we sirnply cannot understand the Bible clearly or properly.'u One scholar put it this way, "The arrangement of the letters of Paul in the New Testament is in general that of their length. When we rearrange them into their chronological order, fitting them as far as possibleinto their life-setting within the record of the Acts of the Apostles,they begin to yield up more of their treasure;they become self-explanatory, to a greater extent than when this background is ignored."17 Another writes, "If future editions fof the New Testament]want to aid rather than hinder a reader'sunderstanding of the New Testa* ment, it should be realized that the time is ripe to causeboth the verse and chapter divisions to disappearfrom the text and to be put on the margin in as inconspicuous a place as possible. Every effort must be made to print the text in a r,r'ayr,r'hichmakes it possible

r5 SomeofushavebeentaughtalittleaboutthehistoricalbackgroundoftheBible.Butitrslustenoughtoinoculateusfro furtherand gettingthe wholestory. 16 [ F,Bruce,ed.,TheNewlnternational BibleConmentary(Grand Rapids,Zondervan, 1979).]C,05 r7 G.C. D. Howley in "TheLettersof Paul,"Newlnternational EtbleComnentary,1095

for the units which the author himself had in mind to become apparent."18 You could call our method of srudying the New Testament the "clipboard approach." If you are familiar with computers, you are aware of the clipboard component. If you happen to be in a word processor,you may cut and paste a piece of text via the clipboard. The clipboard allows you to cut a sentence from one document and paste it into another. Pastors, seminarians,and laymen alike have been conditioned by the clipboard approach when studying the Bible. This is how we justifizour man-made,encasedtraditions and passthem offas biblical. It is why we routinely miss what the early church was like whenever we open up our New Testaments.We seeverses.We do not see the whole picture. This approach is still alive and well today, not only in instirudonal churches but in house churches as well. Let me use another illustration to show how easily anyone can fall into it-and effects it can have.

the harmful

MEET JOE HOUSECHURCH Joe Housechurch grew up in the institutional church. For the last ten years,he has been dissatisfiedwith it. Yet he has a heart for God and sincerelywants to be used by Him. When Joe picks up a book on house churches,he has a crisis of conscience.He ends up learning some amaztngthings. Namely, that there is no contemporary pastor in the New Testament. There are no church buildings. There is no paid clergy, and church meetings are open for all to share. All of these discoveriesrockJoe's world, so much so that he leaves the institutional church (after facing the fury of the pasror, by the way). You see,Joe makes the mistake of sharing these "great revela-

18vonSoden, DieSchriften desNewen Testanentes,4S2

tions" with other people in his church. \\1en the pastor getswind of it,Joe finds himself in the pastor'scrosshairsand is called a heretic. After licking his wounds,Joe picks up his Neu'Testament, never realizing that the cut-and-paste approach still lives in his brain. The "clipboard mentality" was never extracted from his thinking. And he is blissfully unaware of it-as are most Christians. Joe begins looking for the ingredients to start a New Testament church. So he begins to do what most Christians are conditioned to do when seeking God's will. He cherry-picks verses out of the New Testament, ignoring the social and historical background of those VETSCS.

Joe comesacrossMatthew 18:20:"Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."Joe keeps reading and discoversin Acts 2:46 that the early Christians regularly "met in homes" (Nrr). Joe gets a revelation. "Nl I have to do is open up my house, have two or three people gather here, and voila! I have planted a New Testament church!" So the next Sunday,Joe opens his home and starts a "house church" based on the New Testament (so he thinks). Soon he has another revelation: "I am a church planter like Paul. I started a house church just like he did." Joe does not realize that he has just lifted two sentencesfrom two documents-completely out of historical context-and sewn them together to do something that has no root in Scripture. Matthew 18:20 is not a recipe for founding a church. That passageis dealing with an excommunication meeting! Acts 2 :46 is simply a report of what the early Christians did. Yes, the early Christians met in homes.And it is highly recommendedthat we meet in homes today.t'But opening up one'shome and inviting people to meet there does not make a church. Nor does it make the owner of the home a church planter. The churches that were planted in the first cenrury were planted ts SeeViola,ReinaginingChurch.

out of blood and sweat.The people who planted them did not leave the synagogue on Saturday and decide they were going to plant house churches on Sunday. Every man in the New Testament who was involved in planting churches was first an ordinary brother in an already existing church. And in time that man-after a lot of tribulation and exposure in a church that knew him very well-was recognized and sent with the approval of that church. This is a consisrenr pattern throughout the New Testament.20 \bu can prove anything with verses.Birthing a church that maps to New Testament principles takes a whole lot more work than opening up your house and having people sit on comfz couches to drink java, eatcookies,and talk about the Bible. What do we mean by a New Testament-sryled church? It is a group of people who know how to experienceJesusChrist and express FIim in a meeting without any human officiation. Such a group of people can function organically together as a body when they are left on their own after the church planter leavesthem. (This does not mean that church planters never return. There are many times when they are needed to help the church. But after planting a church, church planters should be absent more than they are present.) The one who plants a New Testament-styled church leavesthat church without a pastor, elders, a music leader, a Bible facilitator, or a Bible teacher.If that church is planted well, those believerswill know how to senseand follow the living, breathing headshipofJesus Christ in a meeting. They will know how to let Him invisibly lead their gatherings. They will bring their own songs, they will write their own songs, they will minister out of what Christ has shown no human leader present! What is described here is

them-with

not armchair philosophy. I (Frank) have worked with churches that fit this bill. To equip people to do that takes a lot more than opening up your house and saying,"Come, let's have Bible study." 20 SeeViola,So Youll/ant to Starta HouseChurch?

Let's go back to our story. Joe Housechurch nou' has what he considersa New Testamentchurch. As in all snrall groups like Joe's, the issueof leadershipis raised.What doesJoecloi FIe getshis cherry picker out and begins looking for verseson leadership.He stops at Acts 14 and is arrestedbyverse 23.It sa\-s,"Paul and Barnabasalso appointed eldersin every church" (Nrr). Joe gets another revelation! The word of God declaresthat euery l{ew Testamentchurcb has elders, he muses. Therejbre,our hor.rse chtu"chneedselders!(Joe makes this discovery only rwo weeks after opening up his home.) After lifting that verse out of context, Joe appoints elders. (Joe happensto be one of those elders,by the way.) What is the historical context of Acts 14? fivo church planters, Paul and Barnabas,are sent out from their home church in Antioch. Before this sending, both men had already experiencedchurch life as brothers, not leaders(Barnabasin Jerusalemand Paul in Antioch). Acts 14:23 is part of a description of what took place after these two church planters were sent out. They are in south Galatia. The two men have just planted four churches. Now they are returning to visit those churches six months to one year after those churches were planted. Paul and Barnabasrerurn to each of the Galatian churches and "publicly endorseold men" in each church." Joe has rnade another, more subtle mistake while interpreting this passage.The verse saysthat Paul and Barnabasappointed elders in every church. Joe takes this to mean that every genuine church has elders. Yet this text saysno such thing. The verse is referring to an event in south Galatia during the first century. "Every church" means every church in south Galatia in AD 49!" Luke is tallcing about the four churches that Paul and Barnabasjust planted. Do you see the problem that we run into when v'e blithelv lift versesfrom their historical setting? The truth is, Joe Housechurch is totallr- outside biblical bounds. First, he is not an itinerant church planter. (-I-heseare the men who 2r SeeViola,ReimaginingChurch 2 2 A n t i o co h f S y r i aa n dC o r i n t h a dn oe l d e r sa s f a r a s w ec a nt e l l

acknowledgedelders in the first century.) Second,his church is far too young to have elders.InJerusalem, it took at least fourteen years for eldersto emerge.ButJoe Housechurch has his verse,so he is "standing on Scripture" (in his irnagination). Later, the issueof giving money comesup. SoJoe parks at 1 Corinthians 16:2, "On the first day of each week, you should each put aside a portion of the money you have earned" (Nrr). Based on this verse,Joe institutes a rule that everyone in his house church should give money to the church fund on Sunday morning. Again, Joe has taken a passageout of context and built a practice upon it. First Corinthians 16:2 is dealing with a onetime request. It was written about AD 55 to the church in Corinth. At the time, Paul was collecting money from all the Gentile churches that he had planted. Paul had one goal for this: He wanted to bring that collection to the brothers and sistersinJerusalem who were going through severepoverty. Paul was saying to the Corinthians, "By the way, when I come and visit, I want that money up front to bring to Jerusalem. So every Sunday when you come together, would you please graduallv lay asidea portion of vour earningsto createa relief fund?" First Corinthians 16'2, therefore, has nothing to do with a perfunctory rirual of taking up an offering every Sunday morning.t' Next Joe's house church begins to discussthe question of the church's mission. Naturally, Joe takes out his cherry picker and seeks versesthat will yield an answer.He stops at Matthew 28:19, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations." He cross-referencesthis to Mark 16:15,which says:"Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel." He continues on to Acts 5:42: "They ceasednot to teach and preach JesusChrist." Joe muses to himself, Our missionis topreachthe gospel.That is why we exist. Wy shucks,if God did not want us to preachthe gospelHe would hauekilled us ajier wegot saaed!So the only reasln we breathelxygen-the only reasonwhy we baaehousechurches-is topreachthegospel.This is what '?3Wefullysupport (notpastor giving regularly totheneeds ofthechurch salaries orchurch buildings, mindyou). Butyoucannot use thisverse tomake a lawoutofa Sunday morning ofiering.

the lt{ew Testamentsays.I just rend it. And if ue don't preach the gospel regularly, then we are sinning against God! Once again, Mr. Joe Housechurch has lifted three versestotally out of context. In Matthew 28:19 and Mark 16:15,Jesusis sending His apostles.And in Acts 5:42, these same apostlesare preaching the gospel. In the original Greek, the "Great Commission" reads: "F{aving gone on your \May. . . " Therefore, it is a prophecy ("having gone"), not a command ("Go").to The Lord did not command the apostlesto "go." He told them that they would be going. There is a valuablepoint here. Unlike Christians today, the early Christians did not shareChrist out of guilt, command, or duty. They shared FIim becauseHe was pouring out of them, and they could not help it! It was a sponraneous, organic thing-born

out of life, not guilt.

Joe's thought processesabout the church's mission have been shaped by two things: nineteenth-century revivalism (seechapter 3), and the clipboard approach to the Bible.

THENETEFFECT OFTHECLIPBOARD APPROACH Let's step back and analyzeJoe'sstory.Joe has grossly mishandled the New Testament. Is his motive pure? Yes. Does he have a heart for God? Yes. Did this keep him from misapplying Scripture? No. Joe has come to the New Testament as many of us were taught to do-with

scissorsand glue, ready to cut, paste, and create a basisfor our favorite doctrines and practices. The net effect of the clipboard approach is tragic. It has produced a raft of present-day churches that have no scriptural basis upon which to exist. flVe speakof the institutional church aswe know it today.) But more, it has generatedscoresof mechanicalpro forma "house churches" that are lifeless,colorless,and sterile. Recall the vision that Ezekiel had of the valley of dry bones (seeEzekiel 37). The Lord took Ezekiel to a vallev of bones, and 2aKennethS.Wuest,IhelVervfestanent'AnExpandedfranslation(GrandRapids,terdmans 19611

the living, breathing Word of God came forth to resurrect those bones. The Scripture saysthat bone \Masput upon bone. The bones were clothed with sinew and flesh. And when the breath of God came into them like a rushine wind. those dead bones became a mighty army. Many contemporary house church "planters" can be described as men who have come to the valley of dry bones with glue, needle, thread, and New Testament verses in hand. They have taken the bones and glued them together. They have put thread through the sinew and stitched flesh upon it. Then they have stood back and said, "Look, a New Testament church built on the New Testament. We have elders,we meet in a house,we do not have a hired clergy, we take up a collection every Sunday,and we preach the gospel." But there is no rushing mighty wind! The church ofJesus Christ cannot be started.It cannot be welded together. There is no blueprint or model that we can tease out of the New Testament by extracting verses and trying to imitate them mechanically.The church ofJesus Christ is a biological, living entity! It is organic; therefore, it must be born. We do well to pay attention to the way that churches were raised up in the first century. I believe that Scripture holds for us enduring principles on this score. If you count all the churches mentioned in the New Testament, you'll find about thirty-five. Every one of them was either planted or aided by a traveling church planter who preached only Christ. There are no exceptions. The church was raised rlp as a result of the apostolic presentation of JesusChrist. There are more versesto back this principle up than there are for meeting in homes. There are more versesto back that up than there are for open, participatory meetings.There are more versesto back that up than there are for taking a collection on Sunday morning. The book of Acts is a record of churchesbeing planted by extra-local workers in Judaea, South Galatia, Macedonia, Achaia, fuia Minor, and Rome. The epistles are letters written by apostolic workers to

churches in crises, to individuals, and ro those they were training for spiritual ministry. The principle of the extra-local church planter dominatesthe New Testament.25 And aswe have seen,there is much more Scripture to support this practice than there is for all the unscriptural things we do in the contemporary church-including hiring a pastor. The pattern of extralocal workers planting and helping a church pervadesthe entire New Testament.And it is one that is deeply rooted in divine principle.2u

A PRACTICAL REMEDY what, then, is the antidote to the clipboard approach to the New Testament? What is the remedy that will bring you into a living expression of the body of Christ for our time? The antidote besins with understanding our New Testament. we have been conditioned to come to the New Testament*'ith a microscopeand extract versesto find out what the eariv Christians did. we need to abandonthat whole mentaliry step back, and take a fresh look at the Scriptures. We musr become familiar v'ith the u'hole sweeping drama from beginning to end. We need to learn to vier.vthe New Testament panoram ically, not microscopically. E E Bruce, one of the greatestscholarsof our time, once made a riveting statement. He said reading the letters of Paul is like listening to one end of a phone conversation.ttThanks to recent biblical scholarship, \Mecan now reconstruct the entire sagaof the early church. In other words, we can hear the other side of the conversation! Frank,s book Tbe Llntold Story of the l\,lewTbstantentChurch reconstructs both sides of the conversation, creating one fluid narrative of the early church. To learn the story of the early church is to be forever cured of the cut-and-paste,clipboard approach to the New Testament.Learning 25 Io seethis principle emergetn Scripture chronologically, seeViola,TheLtntoldStoryof the NewTestanent Church. 26 SeeViola,So You Wantto Starta HluseChurch?which is a detaileddiscussion on the fourwaysthat churcheswereplantedin the f i r s tc e n t u ray n dt h e s p i r i t u apl r i n c i p l et sh a t g o v e r n et d hem. 27 [ [ Bruce,Answers (GrandRapids:Zondervan. to Quesirbns 1972).93.

the story will lay bare the spiritual principles that are in God Himself and that are consistent throughout all of the New Testament. We consistently miss these principles becauseof the way we approach the Bible and becausePaul's letters are not arranged chronologically. When we learn the story our versesmust bow and bend to it. No longer are we able to take a verse out of context and say,"Look, we are supposedto do this." Many of the versesthat we Christians routinely pull out of the Bible will simply not yield. More significantly, approaching the Bible in this way enablesus to see the passionand unity with which the first Christians lived as they sought to faithfully follow and represent their Lord Jesus.And what was that passion? That is the question we turn to in the final chapter.

>delvingDEEPER l. Are you saying it is always dangerousto handle Scripture topically, either in individual study or whitepreparing to teach on sone specific issue?0r doyou think, if Christianstook the tine to gain a panoranic understandingof Scripture, they could avoid the dangersof proof texting? Topical srudies can easily lead one astray if the particular texts that are part of the "topic" are not understood in their historical contexts. For that reason, it is best to begin with the narrative of Scripture, seeing the whole fluid story in its historical conrexr. Once that foundation is laid, topical studies can prove quite meaningful.

2. Is "organic church" a synonyn fnr "house church"? lf not, what is the distinction? No, it is not a synonym. Some house churches are organic, while others are not. A number of present-day house churches are glorified Bible srudies. Many others are supper-fests (the meetings revolve around a shared meal and that is about it). Some house churches are just as institutionalized as traditional churches-with

a

living room pulpit and chairs arranged in rows so attendees can listen to a fortyfir'e-minute sermon. Organic church lif'e is a grassroots experience that is marked by face-to-fhce comnuniry every-member functioning, open-participatory meetings, nonhierarchical leadership, and the centrality and supremacy of Jesus Christ as the functional

leader and head of the group. Put another wa1,,orsanic church life is the o,experience" of the Body of Christ. In its purest form, it is the fellowship of the triune God broughttoearthandexperiencedbyhumanbeings.

3. What are the signs of a healthy organic church? lYhat are the signs of an unheatthy lrganic church? Some of the signs of a healthy organic church are: ' the building together of sisters and brothers into a close-knit, Christ-centered community . the transformation of character in the lives of the members o meetings that expressand reveal Jesus Christ and in which every member functions and shares ' community life that is vibrant, thriving, authentic, and where the members grow to love one another more and more ' a community of believers who are magnificently obsessedwith their Lord, and who are neither legalistic nor libertine in their lifestyle The signs of an unhealthy organic church are similar to the problems the apostle Paul pointed our to the church in Corinth: o a perversion of the grace of God to be a license to sin . a sectarian and elitist attitude o self-centerednessamong members Since organic churches are face-to-face communities, they experience the whole gamut of problems that Christians face in close-knit relationships. Those problems are dealt with in Paul's letters. Healthy churches survive those problems and become stronger after passing through them. Unhealthy ones typically do not survive them.

. :.1"

>A SECOND GLANCE ATTHESAVIOR: JESUS, THE REVOLUTIONARY i iil; .

"A trueradicalmustbea manof roots.In wordsthatI haveusedelsewhere,'Therevolutionary can be an "outsider"to the structurehe wouldseecollapse: indeed,he mustsethimselfoutsideof it. Butthe radicalgoesto therootsof hisowntradition. Hemustloveit: he must weepoverJerusalem, evenif he hasto pronounce its doom."' -JOHNA.T.ROBINSON. TWENTIETH-CENTURY ENGLISH NEW TESTAMENT SCHOLAR

"lf Christianity is to receivea rejuvenation it mustbe by othermeans thanany now beingused.lf the churchin the secondhalf of tthe twentiethl centuryis to recoverfromthe injuriesshesutfered in the firsthalf,theremustappeara newtypeof preacher. Theproper,rulerof-the-synagogue typewill neverdo. Neitherwill the priestlytypeof manwhocarriesouthisduties,takeshispayandasksno questions, nor the smooth-talking pastoraltypewho knowshowto makethe christianreligionacceptable to everyone. All thesehavebeentried

andfoundwanting.Anotherkindof religiousleadermustariseamongus. He type,a manwho hasseenvisionsof Godandhas mustbe of the old prophet Whenhe comes(andI prayGodtherewill not hearda voicefromthe Throne. our smirkto everything be one but many)he will standin flat contradiction protest and denounce holdsdear.He will contradict, ing,smoothcivilization of a largesegment in the nameof Godandwill earnthe hatredandopposition of Christendom." ANDAUTHOR -A. W.TOZER, MINISTER AMERICAN TWENTIETH-CENTURY JESUSCHfiISTl$ NSTfiilLY the Savior,the Messiah,the Prophet, the Priest, and the Kitg.He is also the Revolutionary.Yet few Christians know Him assuch. Doubtlessly, some readershave struggled with this thought while reading this book: Why doyou haaeto besonegatiaeabout the contempurarychurch?Jesusis not a critical persln. h is so n'nlike our Lord to talk aboutwbat is wrong with the church.Let'sfocusan tbepositiae and ignorethe negatiae! Such sentiments reveal complete unfamiliaritywith Christ asrevolutionary teacher-radical prophet-provocative preacher-controversialist-iconoclast-and the implacableopponent of the religious establishment. Granted, our Lord is not critical or harsh with FIis own. FIe is full of mercy and kindness, and FIe loves His people passionately. Flowever, this is precisely why He is jealous over His bride. And it is why He will not compromise with the entrenched uaditions to which His people have been held captive.Nor will He ignore our fanatical devotion to them. Consider our Lord's conduct while on earth. (Matthew Jesuswas never a rabble-rouser nor a ranting rebel l2:I9-20). Yet He constantly defied the traditions of the scribes and Pharisees.And He did not do so by accident,but with great deliberation. The Phariseeswere those who, for the sakeof the "truth" asthey saw it, tried to extinguish the truth they could not see.This explains why there was always ablizzard of controversy between the "tradition of the elders" and the actsof Jesus.

Someone once said that "a rebel arre*prs to change the past; a revolutionary attempts to change the hrrure." JesusChrist brought drasticchangeto the world. Change to man's'ie*-of God. Change to God's view of man. change to men's'ieri'oi\\'ornen. our Lord carne to bring radical change to the old order of things, replacing it with a new order.t He came to bring forth a new covenant-a new Kirgdom-a new birth-a new race-a neu'species-a new culture-and a new civilization.t As you read through the Gospels, behoid your Lord, the Revolutionary. watch Him throw the Phariseesinto a panic by intentionally flaunting their convenrions. Numerous times Jesushealed on the Sabbath day, flatly breaking their cherished tradition. If the Lord wanted to placate His enemies, He could have waited until sunday or Monday to heal some of thesepeople.Instead,He deliberately healed on the Sabbath,knowing full well it would make His opponents livid. This pattern runs pretry deep. In one instance,Jesus healed a blind man by rnixing clay with spittle and putting it in the man's eyes. Such an act was in direct defiance of the Jewish ordinance that prohibited healing on the Sabbath by mixing mud with spittle!' yet your Lord intentionaily shattered this tradition publicly and with absolute resolve. Watch Him eat food with unwashed hands under the judgmental gaze of the Pharisees,again intentionally defting their fossilized tradition.a In Jesus,we have a man who refused to bow to the pressuresof religious conformity. A man who preached a revolution. A man who would not tolerate hypocrisy. A man who was not afraid to provoke passages Thefollowing throw lightonChrist s revolutionary nature, l\4atthew 3:i0-12,10:34-38;Mark2:Zl-22; Luke 12,49; John 2tI4-17 , 4:21-24. Thechurch ofJesus Christ isnota blending ofJewandGentile. lt isa newhumanrty-a newcreati0n-that transcends both Jewand (tph.2;15). Gentile Theekklesia isa biologically newentity onthisplanet . . . it isa people whopossess divine life(1Corinthians ,,the 10:32; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 3,28; Colossians 3,11),tventheChristians ofthesecond century spoke 0fthemselves as newrace" and"thethirdrace." See Clement o{Alexandria, Stronata.at Mtscellanies. book 6.ch.5."We whoworship God ina new way,asthethirdrace, areChristians"; Episile toDiognetus, ch.I, "thlsnewrace" "Toheala blindmanontheSabbath IntheMishnah it isstatedr rtrsprohrbrted t0lnlect wrne rnhiseyes. lt isalsoprohibrted tomake mudwithspittle (Shabbat andsmear it onhiseyes" 108,20) According "One totheMishnah, should bewilling y0ur towalkfourmiies ir 't.leric ,rasn i0waier hands rather thantoeatwith (sotah,4b); unwashed "Hewhoneglects hands" hand lyashrng s asie *:: s e ri.;rd€i.ei' rchalah,.1. 5g,3),

those who suppressedthe liberating gospel He brought to set men free. A man who did not mind evoking anger in His enemies,causing them to gird their thighs for battle. What is the point? It is this: JesusChrist came not only asMessiah,the Anointed One of God, to deliver His people from the bondage of the Fall. He came not only as Savior,paylng a debt He did not owe to wash awaythe sins of mankind. He came not only asProphet, comforting the afflicted and afflicting the comfortable. He came not only as Priest, representingpeople before God and representingGod before people. He came not only as King, triumphant over all authoriry principality, and power. He also came as Revolutionary tearing apart the old wineskin with a view to bringing in the new. Behold your Lord, the Revolutionary! For most Christians, this is a side ofJesus Christ they have never known before. Yet we believe it explainswhy exposing what is wrong with the contemporary church so that Christ's body can fulfilI God's ultimate intention is so critical. It is simply an expressionof our Lord's revolutionary nature. The dominating aim of that nature is to put you and me at the center of the beating heart of God. To put you and me in the core of His eternal purpose-a purpose for which everything was created.t The early church understood that purpose.They not only understood God's passion for His church, they lived it out. And what did such body life look like? Consider the brief glimpse below:u . The early Christians were intensely Christ-centered. Jesus Christ was their pulse beat. He was their life, their breath, and their central point of reference.He was the object of their 5 SeeViola, purpose. ontheeternal fora discussion Passtbn Ultinate God's (Colorado 6 Thesubject Church Frank's book Reimagining However, inthisbook. becovered thatit cannot church iss0broad oftheorganic practices Testament church. oftheNew provides lookattheorganic a thorough, Scripture-based 2008) David C.Cook, Springs,

worship, the subject of their songs, and the contenr of their discussionand vocabulary.The Nev'Testament church made the LordJesus Christ central and supremein all things. The New Testament church had no fixed order of worship. The early Christians gathered in open-participatory meetings where all believerssharedtheir experienceof Christ, exercised their gifts, and sought to edift one another. No one was a spectator.Nl were given the privilege and the responsibiliry to participate.The purpose of thesechurch meetingswastwofold. It was for the mutual edification of the body. It was also to make visible the LordJesus Christ through the every-member functioning of His body. The early church meetings were not religious "services."They were informal gatherings that were permeated with an atmosphere of freedom, spontaneiry and joy. The meetingsbelongedtoJesusChrist and to the church; they did not serve as a platform for any particular ministri'or gifted person. The New Testamentchurch lived as a face-to-facecommuniry'. While the early Christians gathered for corporate worship and mutual edification, the church did not existto merelymeet once or twice a week. The New Testament believers lived a shared life. They cared for one another outside of scheduledmeerings. They were, in the very real senseof the word, family. Christianity was the first and only religion the world has ever known that was void of ritual, clergy, and sacredbuildings. For the first 300 yearsof the church'sexistence,Christians gathered in homes. On special occasions, Christian workers would sometimes make use of larger facilities (like Solomon's Porch fJohn 10:23,Acts 3:11] and the Hall of T]'rannus [A.tr 19:9]). But they had no concept of a sacred edifice nor of spending large amounts of money on buildings. Nor would they ever call a building a "church" or the "house of God." The only sacred

building the early Christians knew was the one not made with human hands. The New Testament church did not have a clergy. The Catholic priest and the Protestant pastor were completely unknown. The church had traveling apostolic workers who planted and nurtured churches. But these workers were not viewed as being part of a special clergy caste. They were part of the body of Christ, and they seruedthe churches (not the other way around). Every Christian possesseddifferent gifts and different functions, but only Jesus Christ had the exclusiveright to exerciseauthority over His people. No man had that right. Eldering and shepherding were just two of those gifts. Elders and shepherdswere ordinary Christians with certain gifts. They were not special offices. And they did not monopolize the ministry of the church meetings. They \ rere simply seasonedChristians who naturally cared for the members of the church during times of crisis and provided oversight for the vvhole assembly. Decision making in the New Testament church fell upon the church planters

shoulders of the whole assembly.taveling

would sometimes give input and direction. But ultimately, the whole church made local decisionsunder the lordship ofJesus Christ. It was the church's responsibility to find the Lord's mind together and act accordingly. The New Testament church was organic, not organizational. It was not welded together by putting people into offices, creating programs, constructing rituals, and developing a topdown hierarchy or chain-of-command structure. The church was a living, breathing organism. It was born, it would grow, and it naturally produced all of what was in its DNA. That would include all the gifts, ministries, and functions of the body of Christ. In the eyesof God, the church is a beautiful

woman. The bride of Christ. She \\'asa colony from heaven, not a man-made organization from earth. Tithing was not a practiceof the Neu-Testamentchurch. The early Christians used their funds to support the poor among them, as well as the poor in the u'orld. They also supported traveling itinerant church planters so thar the gospel could be spread and churches could be raised rp in other lands. They gave according to their abiliry not our of guilt, d,try, or compulsion. Pastor/clergy salaries were unheard of. Every Christian in the church was a priest, a minister, and a functioning member of the body. Baptism was the outward expressionof Christian conversion. When the early Christians led people to the Lord, they immediately baptized them in water as a restimony to their new position. The Lord's Supper was an ongoing expression whereby the early Christians reaffirmed their faith in Jesus Christ and their onenesswith His body. The Supper was a full meal which the church enjoyed together in the spirit and atmosphereof joy and celebration.It was the fellowship of the body of Christ, not a token ritual or a religious rite. And it was never officiated by a clergy or a specialpriesthood. The early Christians did not build Bible schoolsor seminaries to train young workers. Christian workers were educated and trained by older workers in the context of church life. They learned "on the job." Jesusprovided the initial model for this "on-the-job" training when FIe mentored the Tivelve. Paul duplicated it when he trained young Gentile workers in Ephesus. The early Christians did not divide themselvesinto various denominations.They understood their onenessin Christ and expressedit visibly in every city. To their minds, there was only one church per ciry (even though it mar- have met in many

different homes throughout the locale).If you \4rerea Christian in the first century you belonged to that one church. The uniry of the Spirit was well guarded. Denominating themselves("I am of Paul," "I am of Peter," "I am of Apollos") was regarded as sectarianand divisive (see 1 Corinthians 1:12). We believetheseare some aspectsof God's vision for every church. In fact, we have written this book for one reason:to make room for the absolute centraliry supremacy,and headship of Christ in His church. Fortunately, more and more Revolutionaries today are catching that vision. They recognize that what is needed is a revolution within the Christian faith-a complete upheavalof those Christian practicesthat are contrary to biblical principle. We must begin all over again, on the right foundation. Anything lesswill prove defective. And so our hope asyou finish this book is threefold. First, we hope that you will begin asking questions about church as you presently know it. How much of it is truly biblical? How much of it expresses the absolute headship of Jesus Christ? FIow much of it allows the members of FIis body the freedom to function? Second,we hope you will share this book with every Christian you know so that they too can be challengedby its message.And third, we hope you will pray seriouslyabout what your responseshould be to that message. If you are ^ disciple of the Revolutionary from Nazareth . . . the radical Messiaht who lays FIis axe to the root . . . you must eventually ask a specific question. It is the same question that was asked of our Lord's discipleswhile He walked this earth. That question is: "Why do your disciplesbreak the tradition of the elders?"(Matthew 15:2).

"root." issomeone thatgoes totherootororigin A radical, therelore, whichmeans fromtheLatin radix, derived Iheword radicalis torboth terms intheepigraph A.I Robinson's definition See John anda revolutionary. Christ wasbotha radical Jesus ofsomething. thischapter. ihatbegins

>delvingDEEPER l. Whyare you so critical of the charch?0od loves the church. lt angersne that you're sojudgnental about it. This question is a good example of the problem we are trying to exposein this book. Namely, many Christians are confused about what the Bible means when it usesthe word churcb. The word churcb refers to God's people. More specifically, it refers to the gathered communiry of those who followJesus. It does not refer to a sysrem, a denomination, a building, an institution, or a service. We have written this book because we love the church very much. And we want to see her function in a way that brings glory to God. The institutional church system and structure are not biblical. And as we have argued, they hamper God's people from functioning the way God intended. When Martin Luther challenged the institutional church of his day, it made many people angry. As a matter of fact, if Luther had not had the support of Frederick the Wise and his armies, he would have been killed for his beliefs (like many other Reformers were). Today, Protestants look back on Luther and hail him as a hero. Luther loved God and the church, but he strongly disagreed with the church system thar surrounded him, arguing that it was not biblical. And he had the courage to prophetically declare that disagreement in public. (By the way, Luther was far stronger in his rhetoric than we have been. If you think this book has been difficult to absorb, try reading some of Luther's diatribes against the church system of his day.) In short, it is becauseof our love for the church and our desire to see God's people set free that we have written this book. And it is our hope that God v'ill use it to help change the course of church history.

2. Yousay that in a healthy nrganic church, each week "every nenber hascontributed sonething of Christ in the gathering." 0oas that nean that every weeh every believer in the gathering is expectedt0 share sone vay in which Christhas been rcvealed to hin or her? Howdo you ensurc that an unbeliever0r sonenne with a poor grasp 0f Scripturedoesn'tget up and speak falsehood? Also,don't sone attendeesiustteel pressuredintocontributing,evenit they really havenothing to otfer that particular norning? If the church is properly equipped, these problems rareh' occur. Paul's instruction to "let the others pass judgment" (1 Corinthians 1.1:29,NASB) when someone

.i.;::

ministers in the meeting goes a long way toward providing a safety net for healthy participatory meetings. Note that it takestime for a church to be equipped to conduct an open meeting. And herein lies the role of church planters. Their job is to equip the members to function in a coordinated way. That includes encouraging those who rarely participate to function more and those who tend to dominate the meeting to function less. It also involves showing God's people how to fellowship with the Lord in such a way that they will have something to contribute in every meeting. In addition, the fear that someone will say something "false" in a meeting should never compel us to replace open participatory meetings with servicesdirected by someone from the clergy. Like Paul, we should trust God's people enough that if someone does share something amiss in a meeting, the church will take this as an opportunity to highlight and magniS' the truth. The amazing thing is that when God's people are properly equipped, they do just that.

3. lf Christwere t0 send a nessage to the institutional church today (much as he did to the early churches in Revelation 2-J), what do you think he would say? Would he ltfer any words 0f c0nnendation? It would be highly presumptuous to answer such a question with any certainty. And since the institutional church is not a monolith, what Christ would say would no doubt vary from church to church. Yet we suspect He would probably say some of the same things He said to the churches in Revelation 2 and 3, as they apply to all Christians in every age. He would also probably have a great deal to commend about certain churches. Perhaps He would commend some for caring for the lost and faithfully preaching the gospel to them. He might commend others for standing with the widows, orphans, and the oppressed.Maybe He would commend others for their faithfulness to follow His teachingswithout compromise. At the same time, He would probably address specific shortcomings in each church, just as He did in Revelation. In addition, He would probably give a rebuke to those churches where God's people have been suppressed,manipulated, abused, and silenced into doing certain things. And there's a good chance He would give a word of correction to the Lord's people for allowing themselvesto be treated in this way. fu He said in days past, "The prophets prophesy lies, the priests rule by their own authority, and my people love it this way. But what will you do in the end?" (feremiah 5:31, Nrv).

V

s) r+r F}

(D =

ct r!

trL

. ,,,.i!ir i;",,,i' irl 1f {!i1.,,,ii,"j;1i;,,n',",;, "Nowwhentheyheardthis,theywerepiercedto theheart,andsaidto Peterand the restof the apostles,'Brethren, whatshallwe do?"' -ACTS2:37,Hnsg "Andyouwill knowthetruth,andthetruthwill setyoufree." -JESUSCHRIST lNJOHN 8:32,tttt

RTAN I NG T HI $S S O KTAK T SSOU R A GT . Such courageis required not becauseof what the book says,but becauseof what you, as a follower of Christ, should do in responseto what you have read. Is it possiblefor a believer to know the truth and ignore it? Yes,as evidencedby the litde stepsaway from God's plan for the church that Christians have consistently taken over the past two millennia. Is it appropriate for us to move away from God's plan for His church? Absolutely not. Is it acceptableto simply acknowledgethat we have taken manywrong turns in the pastwithout realigning with God's plan in the present?Of coursenot. One of the distinguishing marks of Christians is their integrity. We demonstratethat integritv by following our Lord, regardlessof what others do, just becauseHe is Lord. F{aving read this book, you must make a decision: Will vor act upon what you have read, or will you simplv be infomted by it?

Many people find themselvesin a real dilemma today. They want to be the church, as God intended, but they are not exactly sure how. Especially in a day when unbiblical expressionsof the church are the norm. To put it in a question: Now that you have discovered that the institutional church is not scriptural, what is the next step? What should you do now? Here are some areasto ponder and pray over:

A NEWAPPROACH TOWORSHIP If you are like many Christians, you view worship as something you do on Sunday morning (and possibly Wednesday night) when the worship team or the worship minister leads the congregation into songs of "praise and worship." Or . . . it's when you are at home singing to a worship CD or tape. The New Testament, however, paints a very different picture of worship. First, worship is extremely important to God. Thus, it should be a lifestyle,not an event (seeRomans 12:1).Second,from the beginning of the Old Testament when God gave the law to Israel and throughout the New Testament era, worship was very much ^ c0rp0ra.teexercise.It was not the exclusivedomain of the individual. Third, God has given us specific instructions on how to worship Him. Recall when Kirg David wanted to bring the Ark of the Covenant toJerusalem.Israel respondedto his desireand brought the holy Ark to the chosen ciry on a wooden cart. As the cart headed toward the Holy City, Israel danced, sang, celebrated with music. That is, they worshipped! And they worshipped with great fervor and passion. It was a wonderful celebration. But tragedy struck, and God ended the celebration(see2 Samuel6:1-15). Why did this happen?It is becausethe people had violated the Lord's prescribed will on how the Ark was to be carried. God had a specificway in which He was to be worshipped, and He didn't compromise that expectation.

Even though the hearts of God's people \4rereright and even though David's intentions were pure, the error was that they didn't "inquire of him about how to fworship] in the prescribed way" (1 Chronicles 15:13,Nrv). God made clear through Moses that the Ark of the Lord's presencewas to be carried upon the sanctified shoulders of Levitical priests.It was never to be placed on a wooden cart. David got it right the second time around and placed the Ark on the shouldersof the Levites,just asGod prescribed.God was pleased. Consider David's sobering words about Israel'smistake the first time around: "It was becauseyou, the Levites, did not bring it up the first time that the Lono our God broke out in anger against us. We did not inquire of him about how to do it in the prescribedway" (1 Chronicles 1 5 : 1 3N , rv). Israel's error was that they didn't seek God according to "the prescribed way." That is, they didn't worship God according to His way. They worshipped Him in their own way. It's important to note that Israel borrowed the idea to place the holy Ark on a wooden cart from the heathen Philistines! (See 1 Samuel6:l-12.) In the same way, God has not been silent about how He wishes to be worshipped. He wishes to be worshipped in spirit and in truth (]ohn 4:23). "In truth" simply means in reality and according to His way. Regrettably, however, the holy vesselsof the Lord are still being carried on wooden carts. You have already read the story in this book.

GROWTH TOSPIRITUAL A NEWAPPROACH The early church produced followers of Christ who turned their world upside down. Even today, these first-cenrury Christians have much to teach us about how we are to live aswe grow in Christ. Tiue discipleshipis about bearing fruit for the Kingdom of God basedon the development and activation of Christlike character.True discipleship is knowingJesus Christ and allowing Him to live His life in us.

It's unfortunate that we have made Christian discipleship an academic exerciseaswell as an individual pursuit. Across the country we have defined "success"in spirirual fonnation in terms of the quantity of knowledge received and retained. We often measure this in terms of programs or coursesof srudy that have been completed. We have lost sight of the authentic aim of discipleship in favor of impra*ical, passiveoutcomes that do not reshapewho we are and how we live. )btJesus never told us that "He who dies with the most religious knowledge, wins." Nor did He ever make discipleshipan individual task accomplishedsolely through personalsweatand toil. Jesus spent His life equipping others to live a life for God and showing them firsthand what that looked like. He began with a corumuniry of twelve men and a handful of women who lived a shared life together. And that communiry expanded into communities all over the Roman world. Those communities were the early churches. Jesus' approach to affecting lives was interactive and hands-on. His lectures were few and far berween and alwaysled to implementing the point of the lessonin the rrenches of life. His perspectivewas drawn from the big picrure of God's Kingdom-that is, based upon a worldview that was shaped by a comprehensive understanding of God's ways and His desiredoutcomes. How does this translateinto practical,personalaction? v.ry simple. The school of chrisr is none other than the community of the believers-rhe ekklesiaof God. We learn Christ from one another and with one another in a close-knit, shared-life communiry where every member is free to share the Lord with their brothers and sisters,just as the first-cenrury Christians did. According to Paul, Jesus christ is someone to be learnedin the believing communiry (Ephesians4:20). It is in that community that we "learn Christ" to be better disciples,It's in that community that we learn Christ to be parents, children, husbands,and wives. It's in that communicy where every member learns Him togetheq hears Him together, and follows FIim together. There is no substitute for that. The Christian life was never meanr

to be lived outside of Christian community. And that is precisely what the church is in the biblical sense. . . a shared-life community under Christ's leadership.

RESOURCES TOMANAGING A NEWAPPROACH With our lives so packedwith activity and commitments, we naturally appreciate responsibilities that are easy to remember and quick to fulfill. Tithing may well fit into that category (even though it has no New Testament support-see chapter 8). As we have seen, handling God's resources is not something to be taken lightly. Nor is it an obligation that can be satisfied by simply writing a check that satisfiesa legalistic limit and then forgetting about it. Being part of a family includes protecting the family's resources. It is no different with the family of God. The tangible resources of God's Kingdom have been placed at our disposal.We have the privilege of investing those resources-not just our money, but our time, possessions,ideas,relationships, skills, spiritual gifts, and so forth-to produce positive results for the Kingdom. The progressof God's work dependsto some extent upon how we utilize the ample resourcesthat He has entrusted to us. You are, in effect, a portfolio manager for the Kingdom of God. Is investing your money, effort, expertise,relational capital, and creativiry in constructing more religious buildings the best investment for His Kingdom? Is investing 3 percent of your total household income-that's the averagedevoted by Americans to religious activiry of any type-sufficient to advanceHis work?t Can you justifz giving money to an organrzattonto take care of the needsof the poor asyour only involvement in the lives of the impoverished? Like every investor, you will be seduced by opporrunities that are likely to produce good outcomes as well as by other opporrunities that will squander giving is year, people's Arecent review ofdonations organizations. TheBarna tracks tochurches andothernonprofit Every Group "Americans at HasDeclined." Thatreport canbeaccessed toChurches inthereport Donate Billions toCharity, ButGiving described httpy'/www. barna.org.

resources.Every choice you make has eternal consequences.How you choose to allocate the Kingdom's resourceswill affect the lives of many people. Although the notion of giving God one-tenth of what you have is perceived as a stretch by most believers, keep in mind that you have been freed from such a target. Instead, God has given you the checkbook and told you to invest it in whatever ways will bring about the best outcomes for His glory and purposes.And, of course,you will be evaluatedfor how wisely you invested those resources. It has often been said that you can tell a person's priorities by examining his or her checkbook. If someone were to examine your checkbook-as well asyour schedule and personal goals-what messagewould he or she receive?

A NEWLOOK ATYOUR IDENTITY our studies have shown that most Americans are struggling to clarifi' their identity. They tend to see themselves as unique individuals, Americans, members of their family, occupational professionals, consumers,and then as followers of Christ-in that order of priority. In the minds and hearts of most Americans-even those whose beliefs classifr them as "born-again Christian5"-lhsil identiry as a follower of Christ pales in importance in comparison to the other roles they embrace. oddly, most of the born-again Christians consider themselvesto be servants of God and to have been transformed by their faith in Christ. Clearly, there are some missing connections in this self-evaluation.' Perhaps the confusion is due to the enormous number of interactions and responsibilities that people take on each day. Maybe it has to do with the disjointed, topical teaching that most of us receive from our churches It may even be attributable to the lure of competing perspectivesand images bombarding us from the ever-present media. 2 Thisresearch isdescribed in greater (Nashville' detailin Think Likelesus byGeorge Barna Integrity Publishers, 2003).

But the bottom line is really quite simple. You are a priest of God, a minister of the LordJesus Christ, and a member of His glorious body. Through your declaration of allegiance to Jesus and your stated desire to live with FIim forever, you have a responsibility to be afunctioning priest, ministeq and member of the body. The organtzed church has moved down a crooked path over the past two thousand years. The only way to get it back on track is for each of us to begin prayerfully exploring the original plan that God had for His people and then to be willing to respond faithfully to that plan. In this way, the Revolution that has begun to take root in our day will spread far and wide. And God wili get what He has always been after.

Y F

Ro € {rF * T

'Tl

ii$

l:j .li,i t;:1..::i:

N It

z, ;r(

l. I belong to an institutional church. lf I attendedan organic church neeting this week, how wouldthe experiencebe ditferent fron that of ny charch service? In organic church life, the meetings look different every week. While the brothers and sisters in an organic church may prayerfully plan the focus of their own meetings (for instance, they might set aside a month for the body to concentrate on Ephesians 1), they do not plan a specific order of worship. Instead, everyone is free to function, share, participate, and minister spiritually during gatherings, so the creativity expressedin them is endless. Participants do not know who will stand up and share next nor what they will share. There might be skits; there might be poems read; there might be new songs introduced and sung; there might be exhortations, testimonies, short teachings, revelations, and prophetic words. Because everyone is involved and people contribute spontaneously,boredom is not a problem. The most meaningful meetings are generally those in which everyone participates and functions. Jesus Christ is the center of the meeting. He is glorified through the songs, the lyrics, the pravers, the ministry and the sharing. The meeting is completely open for the Holy Spirit to reveal Christ through each member as He seesfit. In the words of I Corinthians 1426, "every one of you" contributes something of Christ to the gathering. In organic church life, the corporate church meeting is an explosive outflow of what the Lord revealed of Himself to each member during the week. These feafures are virtually absent in the typical institutional church service.

s

(e l-

It !t

z, H'

ct m (3

fr ci:t m ttrt !t

n z, !t

2. Sone havesuggestedthat much of the structure and hierarchy within present-daychurchesgrew out of the need to protect againstpotential cults and heresiesin the early church. llhat are the safeguardsagainst these dangersin organic churches? Actuallv, we believe that, as a result of our fallen nature, people always move to adopt hierarchy and top-down relationships becausethey give human beings a sense of control and securiry. Yet history teaches us that hierarchical organizations do not curb heresy. In fact, the testimony of church history is that they can foster and increaseit. When the leaders of a denomination or movement embrace a heresy, it becomes perpetuated throughout all the churches connected to that denomination or movement. On the contrary when the autonomous nature of every church is preserved,the spreading of error is more likely to be localized. When a church is autonomous, it is difficult for an ambitious false teacher to seize control of unrelated churches. By the way, virtually all the major cults are hierarchical organizations. Qr{otice we said "major" cults. We recognize that some cults are headed by a single leader who dominates all decisions and squelchesany dissension. Sometimes these figures even claim to be leading a "house church." Yet any church headed by a person who is (1) dictatorial and (2) advanceshis own wisdom over that of Scripture is most certainly not headed by Christ and must be avoided at all costs.) For the reasonsoutlined above, we believe hierarchical structures neither curb heresy nor prevent cultism. The only safeguardagainst heresy in a church is believers' mutual subjection to one another under the headship of Christ. And this requires face-to-face community and relationships that are centered on Christ. The body of Christ has been in existence for two thousand years. That said, mutual subjection not only includes subjection to one another in a local fellowship, but subjection to the truth that the general body of Christ has agreed upon throughout the ages. In this way, the historic creeds can be helpful guideposts to keep a church on track when it comes to the essentialteachinss of our faith.

3. Whyare ynu cnnvinced that the first-century nndel of church is the one we must tollow? 0ar twenty-firstcenturywlrld is so ditferent from that of the first Christians. We believe the Bible, not human tradition, is the divine zuide for Christian faith and practice-including

church practice.

The Bible is not silent on how the church ofJesus Christ functions. The New Testament gives a clear theology of the church. It also gives concrete examples of how that theology fleshesitself out.

Becausethe church is a spiritual organism, not an institutional organization, it is organic. (Evangelicalsare in agreement that the church is an organism. Throughout the New Testament, the church is always depicted bv living images-for

example,

one new man, a body, a bride, a family, a living temple made up of living stones.) And becausethe church is organic, it has a natural expression-as all organisms do. For that reason,when a group of Christians follow their spiritual DNA, they will gather in a way that matches the DNA of the triune God-for

they possessthe same

life that God Himself possesses.While we Christians are by no means divine, we have been privileged to be "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). Consequently, the DNA of the church is marked by the very traits that we find in the triune God; namely, mutual love, mutual dependence, mutual dwelling, mutual fellowship, and authentic community. As theologian Stanley Grenz once said, "The ultimate basisfor our understanding of the church lies in its relationship to the nature of the triune God himself." That said, the idea that the church should adapt to the present culture raises more questions than it answers. For example, which church practices should be discarded or adapted to the present culture and which are normative and should never be changed? The DNA of the church produces certain identifiable features. Some of them are: the experience of authentic communiry a familial love and devotion of its members one to another, the centrality ofJesus Christ, the native instinct to gather together without ritual, every-member functioning, the innate desire to form deepseated relationships that are centered on Christ, and the internal drive for openparticipatory gatherings. We believe that any church practice that obstructs these innate characteristicsis unsound, and therefore, unbiblical. While the seed of the gospel will naturally produce these particular features, how they are expressedwill look slightly different from culture to culture. For instance,I (Frank) once planted an organic church in the country of Chile. The songs these believerswrote, the way they interacted with each other, the way they sat,what they did with their children, all looked different from organic churches born in Europe and the United States.However, the samebasic featuresthat reside in the DNA of the church were all present. And institutional church forms never appeared. Healthy organic churches never produce a clergv system, a single pastor, a hierarchical leadership structure, or an order of worship that renders the majority passive.To our minds, such things rupture the church's genetic code and violate her native expression.They also run contrary to Neu.Testament principles.

By Constantine's day,when the church becamemore concerned about its status in culrure than its DNA, the form of the church began changing dramatically from what it was in the first cenrury. New Testament scholar F, F, Bruce wisely writes, "\Arhen the church thinks more of her stanrs than of her service, she has taken a wrong path and must immediately retrace her steps."l In this connection, we feel the church must retrace her steps and return to her biblical roots. Put another way: Should we follow a model of church that is rooted in New Testament principle and example, or should we follow one that finds its origins in pagan traditions? That is the ultimate question that this book should lead us to address.

4. Yousaid the frinity is noted for its nutuality. Yetdon't lohn 14:28and I Corinthians ll:3 teach that there is a hierarchy in the 0odhead? No. These passageshave in view the Son's temporal relationship as a human being who voluntarily submitted Himself to His Father's will. In the Godhead, the Son and Father experience communality and murual submission. It is for this reason that biblical orthodoxy rejects the eternal subordination of the Son of God. It instead acceptsthe temporal subordination of the Son in His incarnation. fu theologian Kevin Giles says,"Historic orthodoxy has never accepted hierarchical ordering in the Tiinity."2 To paraphrase the Athanasian Creed, the Son is only inferior to the Father in relation to His rnanhood; He is equal with the Father in relation to the Godhead.

5. Throughoutchurch history, varinuspenple and mlvenents have called fnr a return to the llew festamentnodel 0f church gyvernanceand practice. 0o you seeynurselvesas part of lne 0f thesemovementsor snnething completelynew? God has always had a people who have stood outside the institutional church. Historians have called them "the radical reformation." Some historians have called them "the trail of blood" becausethey were persecuted savagelyfor theirutrrl"..'

(Eerd 1990),247, mans, Gra ndRapids, F.I Bruce, A Mindfort'lhatMatfers (Downers Grove, lL' thefriniU& Subordinallonlsm Rapids: Zondervan,2006); Giles, ./esus andlheFather(Grand SeeKevin Zondervan, 1997), Appendix. 101(Grand Rapids, Press, 2002); Gilbert Bilezikian, Comnunity lnterVarsity ThePilgrinChurch Service, lg65);E.H.Broadbent, Gospel Literature IheTorch of theTestinony(Bonbay: SeeJohnW.Kennedy, (Grand (Grand Rapids' Eerdmans, andTheir Yerduin, TheReforners Stepchildren Folio Press, 1999); andLeonard Rapids: Gospel 1964),

These Christians, in every age, refused to confbrr.n to the institutional church of their day. They believed that the institutional church u'as a departure from, not a development of, the church thatJesus established.These nonconformists fiercely stood for the centrality ofJesus Christ, the every-member functioning of His body, the priesthood of all believers, and the oneness of the body of Christ. They held that torch high, and they were abusedby their fellow Christians as a result. We (the authors) stand in that lineage.

6. Youtalk about how Christiansare "cnnditinned t0 read the Bible with the lenshandedto then hy the Christiantradition to whichwe helong." Howcan I be sureylu are nlt alsl interpretingthe Bible to fit your own thoughtsand experiences? Every Christian who has ever lived interprets the Bible through the lens of his or her own experience and thoughts. We are no exception. IJowever, there is a strong consensusamong evangelicalscholars that the early church did not have a clergy, did not meet in sacredbuildings, did not take the Lord's Supper outside of a full meal, did not have a fixed liturgy, and did not dress up for church meetings. In addition, the fact that the modern institutional church derived many of its practices from Greco-Roman paganism cannot be disputed. (This book provides the historical documentation.) In short, we Christians have made acceptableand normative church practices that the lrlew Testament neither teaches nor exemplifies. And we have abandoned those church practices that were acceptableand normative in the New Testament. So the question really boils down to this: Are the practices of the instirutional church (the clergy/laity system, salaried pastors, sacred buildings, the order of worship, etc.) God-approved developments to the church that the New Testament envisions? Or are they an unhealthy departure from it? That is the question that we would like every reader to prayerfully consider.

7. Whileynu attribute church practices like the building of sanctuaries and the rise of the clergy to pagan intluences, don't humans naturally begin to lrganize and adapt to the surrounding

culture? If we obey our fallen nature, yes, we humans will organize and adapt to the world. One of the genius strokes of our God, however, is that He built into the DNA of the body of Christ people whose ministries were given to prevent this from happeni n g . ( S e e 1 C o r i n t h i a n s 3 : 5 - 1 5 ; 1 2 : 2 8 - 3 1 ;E p h e s i a n s . l : 1 1 - 1 6 A ; c t s 1 3 - 2 1 . )T h e s e were itinerant apostolic workers who planted churches, left them on their own,

then visited them periodically to equip, recenter, and encourage them. One of their raskswas to keep the churches from experiencing entropy. They also kept foreign elements out so that churches could grow healthy and remain true to their organic nature. Paul of Thrsus was such an itinerant worker, and his letters illustrate beautifully the role of such people. Llnfortunately, during the persecutions of the first and second century the itinerant ministry died out. Nonetheless, it has been restored since then within organic churches. This particular ministry is an important check to keep them from gravitating toward the surrounding culture and adopting its values.

8. Vrlhileyou fault traditional churches for naking nembers passivespectatlrs, I not only attend Sundaynorning service, hut I helong to a church small grnup that soundsa lot like the organic church experience. Weworship,study dod's Wordtogether,and turn to one another fnr suppurt whenwe face challengesand crises.In ny view,I havethe bestof both wnrlds. If you feel that what you have described is the best of both worlds, then by all means, stay where you are. However, many of us have concerns about both. We have observed that most small groups attached to an institutional church have a leader present who is the head of the meetings. Thus to our minds, such meetings are directed by a human head who either controls or facilitates it. I (Frank) have been in countless small group meetings of this nature across denominational lines. Never did I seea meeting that was completely under the headship ofJesus Christ in which all members came to that meeting; to share their Lord with their sisters and brothers freely and without human control or interference. Nl the gatherings operated more like a Bible study or traditional prayer meeting rather than a free-flowing, open-participatory gathering that is envisioned in the New Testament whereJesus Christ is made visible by the every-member functioning of I{is body. I have met with some of the founders of the small group movement in the instirutional church, and they tried to defend the idea that someone must lead such gatherings. I disagree.If God's people are properly equipped, they can have meetings that have no leader butJesus Christ. Nl that to say there is a huge difference between the typical small group that is attached to an institutional church and the organic church that is envisioned in the New Testament. Nevertheless, if a person feels comfortable with the former model of church, we believe he or she should remain in it until the Lord shou's another Dath.

9. Sone Christiansare naturally drawn to traditionalforns like liturgy and choral music, whichhelp then connect with both 0od and the bodyof Christ throughthe ages.Doyou helieve the Holy Spirit will not work through those forns-or

if He does, that it is not Hispreferred means of drawing

othersto Hinselt? How wouldyou hack up that clain through Scripture? We believe that the question "Can you prove from the Bible that the Holy Spirit will not work through a certain traditional practice?" is really the wrong one to ask since it cannot be answered honestly. It is an unprovable tenet because Scriprure never addressesit. The question we should be asking is: "What does the Word of God teach about church practice?" We can be certain that God does not endorse any church practice that violates New Testament principles. For instance, we believe the clergy/lairy distinction violates the New Testament principle of the priesthood of all believers (seechapter 5). To our minds, if we are willing to abandon all traditions that conflict with God's Word, the question that will dominate our thinking is: "What does the Word of God teach regarding His church-its

purpose, its function, and its expression?"

This question provides a useful grid by which to discern whether or not a church structure is enhancing or stifling New Testament principles. Again, if a church structure violates a New Testament directive, then it should be challenged. And this is what we want our readers to be asking and exploring. Having said this, we do not doubt that God can, and undoubtedly does, v'ork through practices invented by humans, that have no scriprural basis.That God still works through people in the institutional church is beyond dispute. Both authors owe our salvation and baptism to people laboring in the instirutional church. But just becauseGod may use His people in a particular system does not mean that He approves of that system. Remember, God used and even blessedIsrael at a time when she rejected His will to be their only king. They instead wanted to follow the other nations and have an earthly king. God granted their request. And He still loved and used His people despite their rejection of His revealed will.

| 0. lsnT nach 0f our problen with church the fact that so nften we go with the attitude of "What will I get out of it?" rather than "Hlw can I honor andglorily Eod throughny wlrship?" Wouldn't regaining the prnper perspective of worshipnake all the difference? No, not really. This question assumestwo things: first, that the only reason for a church gathering is for individual Christian worship, and second, that church is a place to "go." (Go back and read the question carefullv.) Both assumptions are without scriptural merit, yet they are imbedded in the Christian mind-set as a result

of years of religious tradition. The New Testament knows nothing of a "worship service." And people cannot "go" to church. They are the church. The early church met for the purpose of displaying Jesus Christ through the every-member functioning of Christ's body. The goal was to make Christvisible and to edifr the whole church in the process.Mutual edification through murual sharing, mutual ministry, and murual exhortation was the aim. To our thinking, what would make all the difference is if God's people were equipped and then encouraged to have meetings where every member shared the Christ they had encountered that week, freely and openly, as I Corinthians 14:26, 3 I and Hebrews 10:25 exhort. The result: God would be seen and thus glorified. Consider your physical body. When every member of your body functions, your personality is expressed.It is the same way with Christ. When each member of His body shares his or her portion of Christ, then Christ is assembled(see 1 Corinthians l2-l+). This dpramic is similar to putting together a jigsaw puzzle.When all the pieces are fitted together, we see the whole picture. But if only a few pieces are visible, we cannot understand the whole picture. It is not without significance, then, that the Greek v'ord translated "church" (ekklesia)in the New Testament actually means "assembly." The church meeting is for the purpose of reassemblingJesusChrist on the earth. I (Frank) have been in so many New Testament-styled meetings that I have lost count. But I can tell you that there is nothing quite like them. I will rehearseone quick story to give you the flavor of the responsesuch a meeting can produce. One of the brothers in an organic church I was a part of brought an unbelieving friend to one of our meetings. We met in a large living room. In the meeting, every member sharedhis or her experiencewith the Lord that week.JesusChrist was revealed,exalted, shared, declared, made known, and testified to by each member of the body. The meeting was so full of life that there were no pausesand no silence. We heard from our Lord from every member of the body in that room. The flow of the Spirit was undeniable. A common theme emerged in the gathering, though no agenda had been establishedfor it. fu the meeting was winding down, the unbeliever fell to his knees in the middle of the living room and cried out, "I want to be saved! I have seen God herel" This man was not prompted or asked to do this. There was no "altar call" or "salvation invitation." It just happened. This is one of the things that occurs organically whenJesus Christ is made visi-

ble through His Body (see I Corinthians 14:24-25).I have watched this phenomenon take place numerous times in such gatherings-not

to mention the transformation I

have seen such meetings produce in believers.

| |. Yourbookreally disturbsme hecauseI think somepenplemayleavetheir churchesafter finishing it. I'm particularly cnncernedahnut the reader who decides to drop out of his or her church and then fails to cnnnect with another hody of helievers. We hope that this book will give God'.speople pennission to follow the guidance of the Holy Spirit, wherever that may lead them. No one should feel pressured to remain in a particular q?e of church if he or she feels the Lord is leading him or her out of it. And no one should feel pressured to leave, either. With that in mind, the advice we would offer to those who feel called to leave the institutional church is threefolcl. 1) Leave quietly and do not take anyone else with you. In other words, do not cause division. 2) Resist becoming bitter against the institutional church. If you have been hurt by people in it, take your pain ro rhe cross. Flarboring bitterness is like taking poison and waiting for the other person to get sick. Few things are as lethal. 3) Actively seek Christians to fellowship with around Jesus Christ. The Web site http://r.r'ww.housechurchresource.orgprovides resourcesfor those interested in organic church life and puts people in contact u'ith churches that are exploring fresh ways to be faithful to the New Testament vision of -lake church. the time to visit such churches (they all differ) and get connected. And ifyou feel so led, relocateto be part ofone.

For answet'st0 mzre of tbe most commonlyaskedquestionsabout the book, aisit wruw.p aganchristi anity. org.

Y

CN F -

r{ d

st II

C' +r

c, I I

"what historyteachesus is that menhaveneverlearnedanythingfromit." _ G.W.F.HEGEI, NINETEENTH.CENTURY GERMAN PHITOSOPHER

The following summary is neither completenor detailed. I,{ote that att of tbe practicescoaeredare postbiblical,postapostolic, and mostly inflaenced.by pagan cubure.

CHAPTER 2: THECHURGH BUILDING The Charch Building-First constructed under Constantine around AD 327.The earliest church buildings were patterned after the Roman basilicas,which were modeled after Greek temples. fhe Sacred Spac+-Christians borrowed this idea from the pagans in the second and third centuries. The burial places of the martyrs were regarded as "sacred." In the fourth century church buildings were erected on these burial places, thus creating "sacred" buildings. The Pastor's Chair-Derived from the cathedra, which was the bishoplschair or throne. This chair replaced the seat of the judge in the Roman basilica. Tax'Exempt Sfafus for Churches and Christian Clergy-Emperor Consrantine gave churches tax-exempr status in AD 323. He made clergy exempr from paying raxes in AD 3 13, a privilege that pagan priests enjoyed. Stained'OlassWindows--First introduced by Gregory of Tours and broughr to perfect i o n b y S u g e r( 1 0 8 1 - 1 1 5 1 ) ,a b b o t o f S t . D e n i s . Gothic Cathedrals-Twelfth century. These edifices were built according to the pagan philosophy of Plato.

oq I I

rl|

-

CN

The Steepte--Rooted in ancient Babylonian and Egyptian architecrure and philosophy, the steeple was a medieval invention that was popularized and modernized by Sir Christopher Wren in London around 1666. The Pulpit-Used in the Christian church as early as AD 250. It came from the Greek ambo, whichwas a pulpit used by both Greeks and Jews for delivering monologues. The Pew-Evolved from the thirteenth through the eighteenth centuries in England.

0FWORSHIP 3: THE0RDER CHAPTER TheSundayMorninglrder of Worship-Evolvedfrom Gregory'sMassin the sixth century andthe revisionsmadeby Luther,Calvin,the Puritans,the FreeChurchtradition, andthe Pentecostals' the Methodists,the Frontier-Revivalists, TheCentralityof the Putpitin the 0rder of Worshiry-Martin Luther in 1523' Two CandtesPlacedon Topof the "ComnunionTable"and lncenseBurning*Candles wereusedin the ceremonialcourtof Rornanemperorsin the fourth century.The Communiontablewasintroducedby Ulrich Zwingli in the sixteenthcentury. Takingthe Lord'sSupperQuarterty-lJlrich Zwingli in the sixteenthcentury. TheCongregationStandingand Singing Whenthe Clergy Enters-Borrowed from the ceremonialcourt of Romanemperorsin the fourth century.Broughtinto the Protestant liturgy byJohn Calvin' Comingto Churchwitha SomberneyerentAttitude-Basedon the medievalview of piety. Broughtinto the ProtestantservicebyJohn CalvinandMartin Bucer. New and Guiltover Missinga SundayServlce-seventeenth-cenrury Condemnation EnglandPuritans. Puritans' TheLOng"PastoralPrayer"PreCedingthe SermOn--Seventeenth-century The pa storal Prayer Uttered in El izab ethan Engtis h-Eighteenth-cenrury Methodists. The Goatof Alt Preachingto Win Individuat Souls-Eighteenth-centuryFrontierRevivalists. Methodists and popularizedby The Altar Call-Instituted bv seventeenth-century CharlesFinne,v. TheChurchButtetin(written titurgyL-Originatedin 1884with Albert BlakeDick'sstenmachine. cil duplicating ',Solo,, SalvationHymn,Doar-to-DootWitnessing,and EvangelisticAdvertising/ The ng-D. L. Moody. Campaigni by Car*-Inventedby AbsalomB. Earle(1812-1895)and popularized The Decision D. L. Moody. Bowing Headswith EyesCtosedand Raisingthe Hand in Responseto a Salvatian Message-Billy Graham in the twentieth century'

"TheEvangelizationof the Worldin 0ne Eeneration"slogan-John Mott around 1888. Soloor ChoralMusic Playedduringthe 0ffering-:Twentieth-cenrurypentecostals.

CHAPTER 4: THESERM0N TheContenporarySernon-Borrowed from the Greek sophists,who were mastersat oratoryandrhetoric.John ChrysostomandAugustinepopularizedthe Greco-Roman homily (sermon)andmadeit a centralpart of the Christianfaith. The0ne'HourSernon, SermonCrib Notes,and the Four-PaftSernon 0ufline-*Seventeenth-centuryPuritans.

CHAPTER 5: THEPAST0R The Single Bishop (predecessor of the contemporary pastorl-Ignatius of Antioch in early second cenrury. Ignatius's model of one-bishop rule did not prevail in the churches until the third cenrury. The "Covering" Doctrine-Cyprian of Carthage, a former pagan oraror. Revived under Juan Carlos Ortiz from fugentina and the "Fort Lauderdale Five" from the United States,creating the so-called "shepherding-Discipleship Movement" in the 1970s. Hierarchical Leadership-Brought into the church by Constantine in the fourth century. This was the leadership style of the Babylonians, Persians,Greeks, and Romans. Clergy and Laity-The

word laity frrst appears in the writings of Clement of Rome (d. 100). Clerg'first appears in Tertullian. By the third cenrury Christian leaders g.ere universally called clergy. Contemporary 0rdination-Evolved from the second cenrury to the fourth. It lyas taken from the Roman custom of appointing men to civil office. The idea of the ordained minister as the "holy man of God" can be traced to Augustine, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Chrysostom. The fitle "Pastor"-Catholic priests who became Protesrant ministers were not universally called pastors until the eighteenth century under the influence of Lutheran Pietists.

CHAPTER 6: SUI{DAY MORN|NG C0STUMES Christians Wearing Their "sunday Best" lor Church-Beean in the late-eighteenth cenrury with the Industrial Revolution and became widespread in the mid-nineteenth cenrury. The practice is rooted in the emerging middle-class effort ro become like their wealthy aristocrat contemporaries. Clergy Aftir*-Began in AD 330 when Christian clergy starred wearing the garb of Roman officials. By the twelfth cenrury the clergy began wearing everyday streer clothes that distinguished them from the people.

The Evangeticat PaStOr'sSur?-A descendantof the black scholar'sgown worn by Reformation ministers, the black lounge suit of the twentieth century became the typical costume of the contemporary pastor. The Clerical (Backwards) Collar-Invented

by Rev. Dr. Donald A{cleod

of Glasgow

in 1865.

0FMUSIC 7: MINISTERS CHAPTER The Choir-Provoked by Constantine's desire to mimic the prof'essionalmusic used in Roman imperial cerernonies.In the fourth century the Christians borrowed the choir idea from the choirs used in Greek dramas and Greek temples. The Boys Choir-Began in the fourth century borrov'ed from the boys choirs used by the pagans. Funeral Processions and 0rations--Borrov'ed from Greco-Roman paganism in the third century. The Worship Tean-Calvary Chapel in 1965, patterned after the secular rock concert.

SALARIES ANDCLERGY 8: TITHING CHAPTER Tithing-Didnot become a widespread Christian practice until the eighth century. The tithe was taken from the 10 percent rent charge used in the Roman Empire and later justified using the Old Testament. Ctergy Sataries-Instituted

by Constantine in the fourth century.

The Cottection Ptate-The alms dish appeared in the fourteenth century. Passing a collection plate began in 1662. The llsher-Began v'ith Queen Elizabeth I (153 3-1603). The predecessorof the usher is the church porter, a position that can be traced back to the third century.

SUPPER ANDTHEL0RD'S 9: BAPTISM CHAPTER tnfant Baptisrn-Rooted in the superstitious beliefs that pervaded the Greco-Roman culrure, it was brought into the Christian faith in the late second cenrury. By the fifth century it replaced adult baptism. Sprinkling Replacing lmmersion-Began in the late Middle Ages in the Western churches. Baptism Separated from Conversiofl-Began in the early second century as a result of the legalistic view that baptism was the only medium for the forgiveness of sins. The "sinner's Pnyer"-Originated with D. L. Moody and made popular in the 1950s through Billv Graharn'sPeaceuith God tract and later with Campus Crusade for Christ'.s Four Spiritltal Laws.

Use of the Tern "Personal Savior"-spawned in the mid- 1800s bv the Frontier-Revivalist influence and popularized oy Charles Fuller (1887-1968). The Lord's supper condensed fron a Full "Agape" Meal to 1nly the cup and the BreadThe late second century as a result of pagan ritual influences.

CHAPTER 10:CHRISTIAN EDUCATI0N The Catholic Seminary-:yhe first seminary began as a result of the Council of tent (1545-1563). The curriculum was basedon the teachingsof Thomas Aquinas, which was a blending of Aristotle's philosophy, Neoplatonic philosophy, and Christian doctrine. The Protestant Seminary-Began in Andover, Massachusetts,in 1808. Its curriculum, too, was built on the teachings of Thomas Aquinas. The Bihle College-Influenced by the revivalism of D. L. il{oody, the first rwo Bible colleges were rhe Missionarv taining Institute (Nyack College, New york) in lgg2 and Moody Bible Institute (Chicago) in 1886. The Sunday School--Created by Robert Raikes from Britain in 1780. Raikes did not found the Sunday school for the purpose of religious instruction. He founded it to teach poor children the basicsof education. The Youth Pastor-Developed in urban churches in the late 1930sand 1940sas a result of seekingto meet the needsof a new sociologicalclasscalled "teenasers."

CHAPTER 11: REAPPROACHING THENEWTESTAMENT Paul's LettersComhinedinto a Canonand Arrangedaccordingto DescendingLengIhEarly secondcentury. ChapterNumbersPlacedin the New Testament-Universiryof ParisprofessorStephen Langtonin 1227. versesAddedto New Testanentchapters-PrinterRobertstephanusin 155l.

Y

x (D +r I I

oe F

rt

(D

cn I I

--

e) Ir

-

Fr I r-

e, rl:

Abelard, Peter, French scholastic philosopher and shaper of modern theologv

(1079-rr42) (33e-3e7) Aquinas, Thomas, Italian theologian and philosopher who wrore Srtmmn Tbeoloqic,T; he was the first to articulate the doctrine of transubstantiation (1225-I27 +) Aristotle, Greek philosopher (38+-322 BC) Arnobius of Sicca, early Christian apologist in Africa (d. 330) Athanasius, theologian and bishop of Alexandria (296-373) of Hippo,

bishop of Hippo and influential theologian and w'riter

(3s930) Barth, Karl, Swiss Reformed theologian (1886-1968) Bezt, Theodore, John Calvin's "right-hand man" (l 5 l9-1605) Bruce, E E, British Bible scholar (1910-1990) Brunner, Emil, Swiss theologian (1889-1966) Bucer, Martin, Gennan Reformer (1491-1551) Bushnell, florace, Congregationalist rninister (1802-l 876) Calvin, John, French Reformer (l 509-l 564) Carlstadt, Andreas, German Reformer ( I 480- I 54 1) Charlemagne, Emperor of the Holy Rornan Empire (ca.742-814) Chemnitz, Martin, Lutheran theologian who was part of the "Protestant Scholastics"

(r522-1586)

Ir

-

I I

Ambrose, bishop of Milan who created the first postapostolic hymns and chants

Augustine

-

cn +

o I

Chrysostom, John, Christian orator from Constantinople (347 407) Clement of Alexandria, Christian teacher who united Greek philosopohy with Christian doctrine and the first to use the phrase "going to church" (150-215) Clement of Rome, bishop of Rome who first used the terrrr laity in contrast with clerg (died about 100) Constantine I, emperor who promoted Christianity throughout the Roman Empire (ca.285-337) Cyprian of Carthage, bishop of Carthage, theologian, and writer (ca. 200-258) Cyril ofJerusalem, bishop ofJerusalem who introduced a prayer for the Holy Spirit to transform the elements of the Eucharist (3 1.5-386) Darby, John Nelson, one of the founders of the Plymouth Brethren movement who built his theology on "proof-texting" (1800-1882) Dick, Albert Blake, inventor of stencil duplicating (1856-1934) Dow, Lorenzo, Methodist evangelist who invited people forward to receive prayer ,1777-1834) Durant, Will, American historian, writeq and philosopher (1885-1981) Earle, Absolom 8., inventor of the "decision" card (1812-1895) Edwards, Jonathan, Congregational minister and theologian (1 703-1 7 58) Elizabeth I, queen of England who reorganized the liturgy of the Church of England (1s33-1603) Eusebius, bishop of Caesareaand early church historian (ca. 260-ca. 340) Finney, Charles, American evangelist who popularized the "altar call" (I792-187 5) Foote, William Henry

Presbyterian minister (1794-L869)

Fuller, Charles, American clergl.rnan and radio evangelistwho popularized the phrase "personal savior" (l 887-1968) Goodwin, Thomas, (1600-1680)

Puritan preacher, writer, and chaplain to Oliver Cromwell

Gregory of Nazianzus, Cappadocian church father who developed the idea of the priest as a "holy man" (329-389) Gregory of Nyssa, Cappadocian church father who developed the idea of "sacerdotaL endowment" (330-395) Gregory of Tours, bishop of Tours who introduced colored glass into church buildings (538-593) Gregory the Great, pope who shaped the Mass (540-604) Guinness, H. G., London pastor (1835-1910) Gutenberg,Johann,

printer of the Bible (1396-1468)

Hastings, Thomas, composer who worked with charles Finney (17g4-1g72) Hatch, Edwin, English theologian and historian (1g35-lgg9) Hippolytus,

Roman priest who wrote that the bishop has power to forgive sins

(r70-236) ffuss, John, Bohemian Reformer (137 2-l4l 5) Ignatius of Antioch, bishop of Antioch who elevated the "bishop" above other elders ( 35 - 1 0 7 ) Innocent I, pope who made infant baptism mandatory @.4I7) frenaeus, bishop of Lyons and theologian who wrote about apostolic succession (1 30-200) Isidore of Pelusium, monk and writer who ascribed symbolic interpretations to priestly vestmenrs (d. ca. 450) Jerome, Latin church father and creator of the Latin Vulgare; he advocatecl special robes for the clergy (342420) Justin Martyr, influential christian reacher and apologist (100-165) Kierkegaard, soren, Danish philosopher and theorogian (1g13-1g55) Knox, John, Scottish Reformer (l 5 l3-l 572) Lactantius, Latin Christian apologist and reacher of rhetoric (ca. 240-ca. 320:) Langton, Stephen, professor of the Universiry of Paris and later Archbishop of Canterbury; he added chapters to the Bible (ca. Il50-1228) Leo I (Leo the Great), pope who establishedthe primary of Rome (d. 440) Luther, Martin, German Reformer (1483-1546) Moody, D. L., influential American evangelist (1937-1gg9) More, Hannah, cofounder of Sunday school (1745-l g3 3) More, Sir Thomas, English lawyer, author, and sratesman(147g_1535) Mott, John, American Methodist and founder of the Student Volunteer Movemenr for Foreign Missions (1865-1955) Newton,

John, Anglican clergyman and author of the hymn ,,Amazing Grace,,

(r72s-1807)

Origen, Christian scholar and theologian who organized doctrinal conceprs into systematic theology (185-254) Owen, John, English theologian and puritan writer (1616-16g3) Pascal, Blaise, religious philosopher and mathematician (r 623-l 662) Plato, Greek philosopher (427-347 BC) Plotinus, founder of the influential pagan philosophy of Neoplatonism (205-270) Radbertus, Paschasius(Radbert), French theologian (7 90-g6 5)

Raikes, Robert, English philanthropist and Anglican layman who founded and prom o t e d t h e S u n d a ys c h o o l( 1 7 3 6 - 1 8 1 1 ) 'lll, Anglican bishop and writer (1919-1983) Robinson, John A. Routley, Erik,

English Congregationalist minister, composer, and hymn writer

(r917-1982) Schaff, Philip, Swisstheologian and historian (1819-1893) 'fhmuis who introduced a prayer for the Holy Spirit to transform Serapion, bishop of the elements of the Eucharist (d. after 360) Simons, Menno, Anabaptist leader (1496-1561) Siricius, pope who required that clergy be celibate (3 34-399) Smith, Chuck, founder of Calvary Chapel and the "worship team" concept (1927- ) Socrates, Greek philosopher (470-399 BC) Spurgeon, Charles, British Reforrned Baptist preacher (1834-1892) Stephanus, Robert (Estienne), Parisian scholar and printer who added versesto the New fbstament (1503-1 559) Stephen I, pope who argued for the preeminence of the Roman bishop (d. 257) Stock, Thomas, Gloucester minister who may have given Robert Raikes the idea of S u n d a ys c h o o l( 1 7 5 0 - l 8 0 3 ) Suger, abbot of St. Denis who introduced glasswith sacredpaintings (1081-1151) Sunday, Billy, Arnerican evangelist ( I 862-1 93 5) Ternrllian, theologian and apologist from Carthage who first used the term clerg, to set apart church leaders (160-225) Tiimmeq

Sarah, cofounder of Sunday school (1741-1810)

Turretin, Francis, Sw-issReformed pastor and theologian who was part of the "Protestant Scholastics" (1623-I 687) Tyndale, William, English Reformer and scholar who translated the Bible into English (ca. 1494-1536) Watts, Isaac, prolific English hvmn writer (1674-1748) Wesley, Charles, English Methodist who is remembered for his hymns (1707-1788) Wesley, John, English Methodist evangelist and theologian (1 703-1 79 I ) Whitefield,

George,

English evangelist during the First Great Awakening

(r7t4-1770) (193+1997) Movement Wimber,Johr, leaderof theVineyard Wren, Sir Christopher,

architect of London cathedrals who popularized the steeple

(r632-1723) Zwingli, [Ilrich,

Swiss Reformer (1484-1531)

V

g g

"Thegreatest advances in human civilization havecomewhenwerecovered what wehadlost:whenwelearned thelessons of history." _WINSTON CHURCHILT

Adams,0oug.MeetingHouseto cam.pMeeting.Austin, TX: The SharingCompany,l9gl. Ainslie,l. L. TbeDoctrines ofMinisterialOrderin theRefwmedChu.rches of the16tbandITth Centuries. Edinburgh:T.& T, Clark, 1940. Allen, Roland.MissionaryfuIethods: st. Paut'sor ours?Grand Rapids:Eerdmans,1962. Althaus,Paul.TheTheologof Martin Luther Philadelphia:Fortresspress,1966. Andrews,0avid. Cbristi-Anarchy. Oxford: Lion publications,1999. Anson,PeterE Churcbes: TheirPlanandFumisbing.Milwaukee:BrucePublishingCo., 1948. Appleby,DavidP.Historyof ChurchMusic.Chicago:Moody press,1965. Aquinas,lhomas.SummaTheologica. Nlen, TX: ThomasMore publishing,l9gl. Atkerson,Steve.Touarda HouseCburchTbeology. Atlanta: New TestamentRestorationFoundation, 1998. Bainton,Roland.HereI stand:A Life ofManin Lutber.Nashville:Abingdon press,1950. Banks,Robeft.Paul'sIdeaof Community.Peabody,MA: Hendrickson,1994. ReenaisioningTheological Edacation: Exploringa Missional Ahematiaeto Curyent|lodels.Grand Rapids:Eerdmans,1999. andlulia Banks.Thecburch comesHome.Peabody,MA: Hendrickson,199g. Barclay,willian. communicating theGospel. Sterling:The Drummond press,196g. TbeLord\ Su.pper. Philadelphia: WestminsterPress,1967. Barna,0eorge, Reuolution. Carol Stream,IL: TyndaleHouse,2005. Barsis,Max.TheComm.on Man throughtheCenturies. New york: Unger, 1973. Barth,Karl. "TheologischeFragenund Antworten." In Dogmatics in Outline.tanslated by G. T, Thomson.London:SCM Press,1949. Bauer,Marion,and EthelPeyser.How MusicGrezr'.New york G. p. putnam'sSons,1939. Baxter,Richard.TlteReform.ed Pastor.Lafayette,IN: sovereignGraceTi-ustFund, 2000. Bede,A Historyof tbeEnglisbChurchandPeople. Translatedby Leo Sherley-Price.New York:Dorset Press,1985. Benson,Warren,and Mark H. SenterIII. The Com.plete Bookof YoutbMinistry. Chicago: Moody Press,1987. Bercot,Davidw. A Dixionary of Early cbristianBetiefs.Peabody,MA: Hendrickson,199g. Bernard,ThomasDehaney.TheProgrusof Doctrinein the Newnttament.New York:AmericanTiact Society,1907. Bishop,Ednund."The Genius of the Roman Rite." 1z Studiesin Ceremonial:Essays lllustratioeof EnglishCeremonial. EditedbyVernon Staley.Oxford:A. R. Mowbrav,1901.

-t

c, oq rt

qI Eqr -

-

Boettner, Loraine. Roman Catbolicism.Phillipsburg, NJ: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1962. Boggs, Norman Tower. Tbe Christian Saga. Neu' York The Macmillan Company, 193 1. Bowden, Henry Warner, and P. C. Kemeny, eds. Arnerican Chu.rch Historl'/:A Reader.Nashville: Abingd o n P r e s s ,1 9 7 1 . Bowen, James.A Historl of WestemEducatiott.Vol. 1. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1972. Boyd, Wittiam. The History oJ-WestemEducation. New York: Barnes & Noble Books, 1967. Boylan, Anne M. Sunday School:The Formation oJ'an American Institutiott 1790-1 880. New Haven, CT: Yale Universitt'Press, 1988. Bradshaw, Paul F. The Searcbfor the Origins of Christian Worship. New York: Oxford Llniversiry P r e s s .1 9 9 2 . Brauer, lerald C., ed. The Westm.insterDictionary of Church Histort,. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, t97 t. Bray, Gerald. Documentso.fthe English Rejbrmation. Cambridge: James Clarke, 1994. Brilioth, Yngve.A Brief History of Prenching. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1965. Broadbent, E. H. The Pilg'im Cburch. Grand Rapids: Gospel Folio Press, 1999. Bruce, A. B. The Training of the Tiuelae.Nevu Canaan, CT: Keats Publishing Inc',1979. Bruce,F,F,TheCanottofScripture.DownersGrove, IL:Inter!'arsiryPress, 1988. Fit'st and SecondCorintbzazs(New Century Bible Commentary). London: Oliphant, 1971. Tbe Letters of Paul: An Lrpanded Paraphrnse.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965. -t

ed. The l{eu, International Bible Clm.mentaly.Grand Rapids: Zonden'an,1979. Tbe l,lew lttte,'nationalClrTtmentaryon the Neu Testament.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986. Paul: Apostle of tbe Heart SetF'ree.Grand Rapids: Eerdrnans, 1977 . The SpreadingFlame. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1958.

Bntnner, Emil. The Misunderstanding of the Church. London: Lutterworth

Press, 1952.

Bullock, Alan. Hitler and Stalin: Parallel Lipes. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1992. Burgess, Stanley M., and Qary B. Mchee, eds. Dictionary of Pentecostaland Charivmatic Moaements. Grand Rapids:Zonden'an, 1988. Bushman, Richard. The Refinement of America. New York: Knopf, 1992. Calame, Ctaude. Chontsesof Young Women in Attcient Greece.Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2 0 01 . Calvin, lohn. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1960. Campbell, R. Atastair. The Eltlers: Senioriry witbin Earliest Christianiry. Edinburgh: T, & T. Clark,

r994. Case, Shirley t. Tbe Social Origins of Christianity. New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1975. Casson,Lionel. EuerydayLife in ,4ncientRome.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998. Castle, Tony.Liues of Famous Christians. Ann Arbor, MI: Servant Books, 1988' Chadwick, 0wen. The Reformation. London: Penguin Books, 1964.

Chitwood, Paul H. "The Sinnert Prayer: An Historicai and Theological Analysis." unpublished dissertation, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary',2 00 1. clowney, Paul and reresa clowney. Erploring churches. ()rand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982. Cobh, Gerald. London City Chttrches.l,ondon: Batsford, 1977. Colenan, Rohert E. The fuIaster Plan of Euangeliwt. Grand Rapids: Fleming FI. Revell Co., 1993. Collins, Michael, and Matthew A. Price. The Stotl of Christinnity. New York: DK Publishin g, 1999. Connolly, Ken. The Indestructible Book. Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1996. Craig, Kevin. "Is the Sermon Concept Biblical?" SearchingTitgether15, no. l-2 (1986). Cross, E 1., and E. A. Livingstone, eds. The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church.3rd ed., New York: Oxford Universiqr Press, 1997. Cullmann,0scar. Early Christian Worship. London: SCI,I Press, 1969. Cully, Iris V., and Kendig Brubaker Cully, eds. Harper's Enryclopediaof ReligiousEducation. San Francisco:Harper & Row Publishers,197L Cunninghan, Colin. Snnes oJ-Witness. Gloucestershire, UK: Sutton Publishine, 1999. Curnock, Neheniah, ed. Joumals of ll/esley.London: Epu,.orth Press, 1965. Davies, Horton. Christian Worship: Its Historl and ilfeaning. Ner.v York: Abingdon Press, 1957. LVorshipand Theolog in England: I 690-I I t 0. Princeton: Princeton Universirv Press, 196 1. Davies, l. G.The Early Christian Cburth: A Historl of Its First Fiae Cettturies. (lrand Rapic'ls: Baker Book House, 1965. -

A AiewDictionary of Liturg and Worship.London; SC_NIPress, 1986.

-

The Nezu Westminster Dictionanl of Liturg

and Worship. Philadelphia: \\-esrminster Press.

1986. The Seutlar Useof Cburch Buildings. New York: The Seabury Press, 1968. The WestminsterDictionary of Worchip.Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1972. Davies, Rupert. A History of the Methodist Church in Great Britain. London: Epworth Press, 1965. Dawn, Marua l. ReachingOut witbout Dumbing Down: A Tbeolog of Worship the Tirn-of-the-Century Jbr Culture. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995. Dever, Mark.A Display of God'sG/0ry. \4rashington, DC: Cenrer for Church Reform,200l. Dickens, A. G. Refomtation und Socie4tin Sixteenth-Century Europe. London: Hartcourt,

Brace, &

World.Inc.. 1966. Dickinson, Edward. The Study of tbe History of Music. Nev'York:

Charles Scribner'.s Sons, 1905.

Dillenberger, tohn, and Claude Welch. Protestttnt Cbristianity: Interpreted through Its Deuelopment. New York: The Macrnillan Company, 1988. Dix, Gregory.The Shapeof the Liturgy. London: Continuurn International Publishing Group, 2000. Dodd, C. H. Tbe ApostolicPreaching and hs Deuelopmenirr.London: Ifodder and Stoughton, 1963. Dohan, Mary Helen. Our Own Words.New lbrk

Alfred A. Knopf, 197.1.

Douglas, l. D. l,lew Twentieth Century Enryclopediaof ReligiousKttouledge. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House,1991.

Who's Wo in Cbristian History. Carol Stream, IL: Tyndale House Publishers, 1992,

,i li.i

Duchesne, Louis. Christian Worsbip: bs Origin and Etolution

New York: Society for Promotinpl

Christian Knowledge, 1912. Early History of the Christian Church: From Its Foundation to tbe En.d of the Fifth Century. London: John Murray, 1912. Dunn, tames D. G, New Tistament Theolog in Dialogre. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1987. Dunn, Richard R,, and Mark H. Senter lll, eds. Reaching a Generation for Christ. Chicago: Moody Press, 1997. Durant, Will. The Age of Faith. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1950. Caesarand Clnsr New York: Simon & Schuster, 1950. The Refonnatioz.New York: Simon & Schusteq 1957. Eavey, C, B. Hixory of Christian Education. Chicago: Moody Press, 1964. Edershein, Alfred. The Life and Times of Juus the Messiah. Mclean,

!A: MacDonald

Publishing

Cornpany, 1883. Ehrhard, tim. The Dangers of the Inaitation System.Parkville, MO: Christian Communicators \A/orldwide, 1999. Eller, Vernard. In Place of Sacraments.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1972. Elwell, Walter. Evangelical Dictionary of Theolog. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1984. Evans, Craig A. "Preacher and Preaching: Some Lexical Observations." Journal of the Euangelical TheologicalSociety24, no. 4 (December 1981). Evans, RobertE One and Holy: Tbe Church in Latin and Patristic Thought. London: S.P.C.K., 1972. Ewing, Elizaheth. Eueryday Dress:1650-1900. London: Batsford, 1984. Ferguson, Everett, Early Christians Speak:Faitb and Life in the First Three Centaries, 3rd ed. Abiiene, TX: A.C.U. Press,1999. -t

ed. Enryclopediaof Early Christianity. New York: Garland Publishing, 1990.

Finney, Charles. Lectureson Reuiual. Minneapoiis: Bethany House Publishers, 1989. Fox, Robin Lane. Pagansand Cbristians. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1987. Foxe, tohn. Foxe'sBook of Manyrs. Old Thppan, NJ: Spire Boola, 1968. Fremantle, Ann, ed. A Ti"easuryof Early Christianity. New York: Mking Press, 1953 . Fronke, DeVern. The Uhimate Intention. Indianapolis: Sure Foundation, 1998. r.

Furst, Viktor, The Arcbitecture of Sir Christopher Wren. London: Lund Humphries,

.'":

Halling, Kurt, ed. Die Religion in der Geschicbteu.nd der Gegenwarr, 3rd ed. Tirbingen, Germany:

'fl ;.:

J'C'B'Mohr,

:.L 't.i

1956.

1957'

Geisler, Nornan, and Wittian Nix.A General Inn'odaxion of the Bible: Reuisedand Expanded. Chicago: MoodY Press,1986' iilchrist, lanes. Anglican Cburch Plate.Lond.on: The Connoisseur, 1967.

l.ii

Giles, Kevin. Pattertts of Ministry amvngtbe First Christiani. New York: HarperCollins,

.:ul ',",:l)..

Giiley, lary. Tbis Link

1991.

Cburch Went to Market: The Cburch in the Age of Entenainment. Webster,

NY: Evaneelical Press. 2005.

0onzalez, tusto L. The Story of Christianity. Peabody, MA: Prince Press, 1999. hough, l, E, Churcb, Delinquent and Society.Melbourne: Federal Literarure Commirtee of Churches of Christ in Australia, 1959. Eough, Michael. The Early Christians. London: Thames and Hudson, 1961. Grabar, Andre. Christian lconography.Princeton: Princeton University Press, I 968. Grant, F. W. Nicolaitanism. or the Riseand Growth of Cleriq,. Bedfbrd, PA: MWTB,

n.d.

Erant, Michael. Tbe Foundet"sof the Westem World: A Historl of'Greercand Rome. New York: Charles Scribner'.sSons, 1991. Grant, Robert M. The ApostolicFatbers:A New Tiqnkation and Com.me7tant,6 vols. New York: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1964. Early Christianity and Society.San Francisco: Harper & Row Publishers, 1977. Ereen, loel 8., ed, Dictionary of Juus and the Gospek.Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsiq' Press, 1992. Green, Michael. Euangelivn in the Early Church. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1970. Greenslade, S. L. Shepherding the Flock: Problems oJ'PastoralDisciptine in tbe Early Church and in the YoungerChurchesTbd.a1,. London: SCM Press, 1967. Summere, Amelia Mott. The Qtuker: A Study itt Costtrne. Philadelphia: Ferris and Leach, 1901. Guthrie, Donald. I'lew TestarnentIntroduction. rer''. ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsiry Press, 1990. Guzie, Tad W.Jews and the Eu.cbarist.New York: Paulist Press, 1974. Hall, 0avid D, The Faithfirl Shepherd.Chapel I{ill:

'I'he

Universiry of North Carolina Press, I 972.

Hall, Eordon L. The Sawdust Ti'ail: The Story of American Eaungel\m. Philadelphia: I{acrae Smith Company, 1964. Halliday, W. R. The Pagm Backg'ound of Early Chrktianity. New York: Cooper Square Publishers, 1970. Hamilton, Miehael S. "The Tiiumph of Praise Songs: How Guitars Beat Out the Organ in the Worship Wars." Christianity Today(JuW 12, 1999). Hanson, Richard. The Christian, Prievhood Etamined. Guildford, UK: Lutterv'orth

Press, 1979.

Hardman, Oscar.A Histoty of Christian Worship. Nashville: Parthenon Press, 1937. Haskins, Charles Honer. The Riseof Llniaersities.New York: H. Flolt, 1923. Hassell, C. B. Histora of the Church oJ'God,fi'om Cr"eationtoAD

1885. Middletown, NY: Gilbert

Beebe'sSons Publishers,1886. Hatch, Edwin, The Growth of Church Instittttions. London: Hodder and Sroughton, 1895. -

The Infhrcnce of Greek ldeas and Usagesupon tbe Christian Chu.rch.Peabody', I4-A: Hendrick-

son,1895. The Organization of tbe Early Cbristian Churches. London: Longmans, Green, and Co., I 895. Havass, Zahi, The Pyramids of Ancient Egrpr. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Museun of Narural History 1990. Hay, Alexander R. The Neu, Tistament Orderfor Church and Missionary. Audubon, NJ: Nev'Tbstarnent Missionary Union. 1947.

:;

-

Wbat Is Wrong in tbe Church? Audubon, NJ: New Testament Missionary lJnion, n.d.

Henderson, Rohert W. Tbe TeachingOfice in the Refomred Tiadition. Phtladelphia: Westminster Press, 1962. Herhert, Eeorge. The Counnl Parson and the Tbmple.Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 1981. Hislop, Alexander. Two Babylons.2nd ed. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1990. Hodge, Charles. First Corintbiazs. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1995. HooYer, Peter. The Secretof the Snength: Wbat Would tbe Anabaptists nil This Generation? Shippensburg, PA: Benchmark Press, 1998. Howe, Reuel L. Pamms in Preaching: Clerg and Lahy in Dialogue. New York: Seabury Press, 1967. lacobs, C. M., trans. Worksof Martin Luther. Philadelphia: Muhlenberg Press, 1932. lohnson, Paul. A History of Christianhy. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1976. lones, llion T.A Historical Approach to Euangelical Worship. New York: Abingdon Press, 1954. lungnann, losef A. Tbe Early Liturgt: Tb tbe Time of Gregory tbe Great. Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press,1959. The Mass of the Roman Rite, aol. 1. New York: BenzigeE I 95 1. Kennedy, lohn W. The Tbrch of tbe hstimony. Bombay: Gospel Literature Sewice, 1965. Kierkegaard, S/ren. "Attack on Christendom. " In I Kerkegaard Anthologl, edited by Robert Bretall. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1946. King, Eugene E A. Cburch Ministry. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1993. Kistenaker, Simon l. New nstumentt Commentary: Acts. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1990. Klassen, W., l. L. Burkholder, and lohn Yoder. The Relation of Elders to the Priesthood of Belieuers. Washington, DC: Sojourners Book Service, 1969. Klassen, Walter. "New Presblter Is Old Priest Writ Large." Concern17 (1969). Kopp, David. Praying the Biblefor Your Life. Colorado Springs: Waterbrook,

1999.

Krautheiner, Richard. Early Cbristian and Byzantine Architectttre. London: Penguin Books, 1986. Kreider, Alan. Worship and Eaangelistn in Pre-Christendom. Oxford: AIain/GROW

Liturgical Study,

t995. Larimore, Walter, and Rey. Bill Peel. "Critical

Care: Pastor Appreciation."

Physician Magazine,

September/October 1999. Latourette, Kenneth Scott. A History of Christianity. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1953. :,1' l,: '..'

Leisch, Barry. The New Worsbip: Straigbt Thlk on Music and the Church. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1996' Lenski, R. C. H. Clmmentary on St. Paul\ Epistle to the Galatians. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

;.'

.i .,:,. ::,i,i,i liL.

1937. The Interpretation of I and 2 Corinthians. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1963. Lienohn, Edwin. The Organ and Cboir in Protestant Worchip. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1968.

Lietzmann, Hans. A History of the Early Church, vol. 2. New York The Wbrld Publishing Company' 1953. Lightfoot, !. B, "The Christian Ministry."

In Saint Paul's Epistle to the Philippians. Wheaton, IL:

Crossway Books, 1994. Illustrated Bible Dictionaty. Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, Lockyer, Herbeft Sr., ed. lttrelson's 1986. Mackinnon, lanes. Caluin and tbe Reformation. New York: Russell and Russell, 1962. MacMullen, Ramsay. Cbristianizingtbe Roman Ernpire: AD 100400. London: Yale University Press, 1984. MacPherson, Dave. The IncredibleCouer-Up.Medford, OR: Omega Publications, 1975. Marrou, H. t. A Hixoty of Edacation in Antiquity. New York: Sheed and Ward, 1956. Marsden, George. The Sou.lof the American Llniuersity: From Protestant Establishment to Established l{onbelief, New York: Oxford University Press, 1994. Marshall, l. Howard. Last Snpper and Lord\ Sapper.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1980. New Bible Dictionary. 2nd ed. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Fellowship , 1982. Maxwell, Wiltian D. An Ou.tline of Christian Worship: hs Deuelopmentsand Fonns. New York: Oxford University Press, 1936. Mayo, lanet. A Historl of EcclesiasticalDress.New York: Flolmes & Meier Publishers, 1984. McKenna, Dayid L. "The Ministry's Gordian Knot." Leadership SVinter 1980). Mc\eitt, lohnT.AHistorloftheCureof

Souh.NewYork:Harper&RowPublishers,

1951.

Mees, Arthur. Choirs and Choral Music. New York: Greenwood Press, 1969' Metzger, Bruce, and Michaet Coogan. The Oxford Com.panionto the Bible. New York: Oxford LIniversity Press,1993. Middteton, Arthur Pierce. New Wine in Old Winesklzs. Wilton, CT: Morehouse-Barlow

Publishing,

1988. Milter, ilonatd E. Reinaenting American Protestantism. Berkeley: Universiry of Berkeley Press, 1997 ' Morgan, lohn. GodlyLeaming. New York: Cambridge Universiry Press, 1986. Maryknoll, Muller, Karl, ed. Dictionaty of Mission: Tbeologt, History, Perspectiaes.

NY: Orbis Books,

1997. Murphy-0'Connor, lerome. Paul the Letter-Writer Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1995. Munay, Iain H. The Inaitation System.Edinburgh: Banner of Tiuth tust, Reaiaal and Reaiaaliyn: The Making and Maning

1967.

of Arnerican Euangelicalism. Carlisle, PA:

Banner of Ti-uth Tiust, 1994. Murray, Stuaft.BeyondTithing. Carlisle, UK: Paternoster Press, 2000. Narranore, Matthew. Tithing: Low-Realm, Obsoleteand Defimct. Graham, NC: Tekoa Publishing, 2004. Nee, Watchnan. The Nonnal Christian Life. Carol Stream, IL: Tlardale House Publishers, 1977. Nevin, l. W. The Anxious Bench. Chambersburg, PA: German Reformed Church, 1843 .

Nichols, tanes

Hastings. Corporate Worship in the Refomted Ti'adition. Philadelphia: Westminster

Press,1968. Nicoll, W. Robeftson, ed, Tbe F,xpositor'sBible.New York: Armstrong, 1903. Niebuhr, H. Richard, and Daniel D. Williams.The Minitry

in Historical Perspectiues.San Francisco,

Harper & Row Publishers, 1956. Nornan, Edward.The Hottse of God: Church Architecture, Style, and Historl. London: Thames and Hudson, 1990. Norrington, David C. Tb Preach or Not to Preacb? The Church,s IJrgent euestion. Carlisle, UK: paternoster Press,1996. Oates, wayne. Protestant Pastoral counseling. Philadelphia: \Azestminster press, 1962. Old, Hughes 0liphant. The Patristic Rootsof Reforuted Worsbip. Zurich: Theologischer Veriag, 1970. 0man, charles. English church Plate 597-183. London: oxford universiry press, 1957. 0sborne, Kenan B. Priesthood:A History of tbe Ordained Ministry in the Rontan Catholic Church.New York: Paulist Press,1988. 0wen, lohn. Hebrews.Edited by Alister McGrath and J. I. Packer. Wheaton, IL: Crosswav Books. 1998. True Nann'e of a Gospelchurch and hs Gouerument.London: James clarke, 1947. Park, Ken' The World Alm.anacand Book of Facts 2003. Mahwah, I$: World Almanac Boola, 200i . Parke, H. W, Tbe Oraclesof Apollo in Asia Minor. London: Croom Helm, 1985. Pearse, Meic, and Chris Matthews. We Must Stop Meeting Like This. E. Sussex, UK: Kingsway Publications, 1999. Power, Edward l. A Legary of Leaming: A History of Wutem Education. Nbany: State Universiry of New York Press,1991. Pttrves, George I "The Influence of Paganism on Post-Apostolic Christianiqt."

Tbe Presbyterian

Reuiew.No.36 (October 1888). Quasten, lohannes. Music atzd Worship in Pagan and Christian Antiqaity. Washington DC: Nationai Association of Pastoral Musicians, 1983. Reid, Clyde H. The Enpty futlpit.New York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1967. Reid, Daniel 0. et al., ConciseDictionary of Cbristianity in America. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press,1995. Dictionary of Christianity in Am.erica. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1990. Richardson,A. Madeley. Church Muic.Lond,on: Longmans, Green, & Co., 1910. Robertson, A. T.A Grammar of the Greek New Testamentin the Light of Historical Research.Nashrille: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1914. Robertson,D. W.Abel.ardand Heloise.New York: The Dial Press, 1972. Robinson, lohn A. T. The I'lew Refotm.ation.Philadelphia: westminster press, 1965. Rogers, Elizabeth. Music thrwtgb the Ages. New York: G. P. putnam's Sons, 1967. Rowdon, Harold H. "Theological Education in Historical Perspective." In VoxEaangelica:Biblical and other Essaysfrom London Bible college. vol. 7. carlisle, uK; Paternoster press, 197 I .

Sanford, Elias Benjanin, ed. A ConciseCyclopediaof Religious Knou'ledge. New York: Charles L. Webster & Company, 1890. Saucy, Robert L. Tbe Church in God'sProgram. Chicago; Moody Publishers, 1972. Schaff, Philip, History of the Cbristian Church. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994. Schlect, Christopher. Critique of Modem YouthMinisny. Moscovr', ID: Canon Press, 1995. Schweizer, Eduard. The Church As the Body of Christ. Richmond, VA: John Knox Press, 1964. Cbttrch Order in the l,lrw Tbstament.Chatham, UK: W. & J. Mackay, 1961 . Sendrey, Alfred. Mwic in the Socialand Religiow Life of Antiquity. Rutherford, N[: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, I 974. Senn, Frank C. Christian Liturg:

Catbolic and Euangelical. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1997.

Cbristian Worship and lts Cuhural Setting. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983. Senter, Mark H. lll, The Coming Reuolution in Youth Ministry. Chicago: Mctor Books,1992. The Yoatb for Christ Mouement As an Educational Agenry and bs Impact npln Prltestant Cburches:1931-1979. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan, 1990. Shaulk, Carl. Key Wordsin Church Mwic. St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1978. Shelley, Bruce. Church History in Plain Langrage. Waco, TX: Word Books, 1982. Short, ErnestH. HistorT of ReligioasArchitecnre. London: Philip Nlan & Co., 1916. Sizer, Sandra. GospelHymns and SocialReligion.Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1978. Snith, Christian. Going to the Root.Scottdale, PA: Herald Press, 1992. in tbe l4/ildemess,September/October 1987. "Our Dressed lJp Selves." Voices Snith, M. A. From Christ to Constantine.Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1973. Snyder, Qraydnn F.Ante Pacem:ArchaeologicalEuidencefor Church Life beforeConstantine.Macon, GA: Mercer Universiry Press, 1985. First Corinthians: A Faith Com.munity Cornmentary. Macon, GA: Mercer Universiry Press, 1991. Snyder, Howard. Radical Renewal: Tbe Problem of Wineskins Tbday. Houston: Touch Publications, t996. Soccio, Douglas. Archetypesof Wisdom:An Introduction n Philosopby.Belmont, CA: Wadsworth ITP Publishing Company, 1998. Somner, Robert."Sociofugal Space."AmericanJou.malof Sociolog72,no.6, 1967. Steyens,R. Paul.The Abolition of the Lai4'. Carlisle, UK: Paternoster Press, 1999. Liberating the Laity. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, I 985. The Other Six Days: Vocation, Work, antl Minisny

in Biblical Perspectiae.Grand Rapids:

Eerdmans, 1999. Streeter,B. H.The Primitiue Churcb. New York: The Macmilian Company, 1929. Streett, R. AIan, The EffectiueInaitation. Old Thppan, NJ: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1984. Stumpf, Sanuel Enoch. Soeratesto Sanre. New York: Mc(lraw-Hill,

1993.

Swank, George W. Dialogical Style in Preacbing.Yalley F-orge, PA:Judson Press, 1981.

,r,

Swank, l. Grant. "Preventing Clergy Burnout." Minisny (l.trovember 1998). Sweet, Leonard. "Church Architecture for the 2lst Cennrry." Yoar Church (March/April

1999).

Sykes, llornan. Old Priest and New Presbytet'.London: Cambridge Universiry Press, 1956. Tan, Kin. Lost Heritage: The Heroic StorT of Radical Christianiry. Godalming, UK: Highland Books, 1996. Taylor, loan E. Cbistians and the Holy Places:The Mytb ofJewish-Christian Origins. Oxford: Clarendon Press,1993. Terry, lohn Mark. Eztangelism:A ConciseHixory. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers. I994. Thiessen,Henry C. Lectttresin SystematicTbeolog. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1979. Thonpson, Bard. Liturgies of the Westem Church. Cleveland: A{eridian Books, 1961. Thonpson, C. L. Times of Refreshing, Being a History of American Reaiaals with Their Philosophy and )Ietbods. Rockford: Golden Censer Co. Publishers, 1878. Thonson, leremy. Preaching As Dialogte: Is the Sermon a Sacred Cow? Canbridge:

Grove Books,

t996. Tidball, 0. l. Dictionary of Paul and His Letters. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsiry Press, 1993. Truenan, D. C. The Pageant of the Past: The Origins of Ciailization Toronto: Ryerson, I 965. Turner, Harold llll. From Timple to Meeting House: The Phenomenolog,andTheolog of Placu of Worship. The Hague: Mouton Publishers, 1979. Ulan, Adam B. Stalin: Tbe Man and His Era. New York Mking Press, 1973. Uprichard, R. E. H. "The Eldership in Martin Bucer andJohn Calvin." Irish Biblical StudiesJoumal fiune 18, 1996). Uschan, Michael V. The 1940\: Cuhural History of the US through the Decades.San Diego: Lucent Books, 1999. Van Biena, David. "'lhe End: How It Got That Way." Time (July 1, 2002). Verduin, Leonard.The Reforwers andTheir Stepchildren.Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964. Verkuyl, Aerrit. Berkeley Wrsion of tbe Neu Testamenr.Grand Rapids: Zondewan, 1969. Viola, Frank, God\ Ubimate Passion.Gainesville, FL: Present Testimony Ministry

2006.

Reimagining Churcb. Colorado Springs: David C. Cook. 2008 The lJntold Story of the New TbstamentChurch: An Extraordinary Guide to (Jnderstandingthe Nna Testamenr.Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image, 2004. Campenhausen, Hans. Ti'adition and Life in the Churcb. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1968. ';l'

von Harnack, Adotf. The Mission and Lrpansion of Chrisitianity in the First Three Centuries.New York:

;"1 lj

Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988.

;: ,):til

von Simson, ?tto. The Gothic Cathedral: Origins of GothicArchitectwz and the Medieual Conceptof Order.

von Soden, H. Die Schrirten desl,lewen Tbstamentes.Gottingen, Germany: Vandenhoeck , lgl2. Walker, A. S. M. The Chttrchmanship of St. Cyprian. London: Lutterworth

Press, 1968.

*.i;

Wallis, Arthur. The Rndicat Cbristian. Columbia, MO: Ciryhill Publishing, 1987.

li"

Warkentin, Marjorie. Ordination: A Biblical-Historical Wew. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982.

Warns, t. Baptivn: Its Histrnl and SigntJicance. Exeter, UK: Paternoster Press, 1958. Watson, Philip. iieoplatonism and Christianity: 928 Ordinntl Gencral lleeting of tbe Victorin Institute. S u r r e l ' ,U K : T h e \ i c t o r i : r l n s t i r u t e ,l ( ) i 5 . Welch, Bobby H. Euangelism through the Sunday School:A Journey of Faith . Nashville: Lifew.ay Press, 1997. Wesley,tohn. Sennonsott Selernl Occasiotts. London: Epworth Press, 1956. White, lanes E Protestant Worsbip:Traditions itt Ti'ansition. Louisville: Westminster{ohn

Knox Press,

19 8 9 . The Worldlinessof Worship.New YorL: Oxford University Press, 1967. White, L. Michael. Building God\ Llousein the Rornan World.Ba1trnlore: Johns Hopkins Universiry Press,1990. White, lohn F. Protestunt Worship and Church Architecttu'e. Nev. York: Oxford University

Press,

196+. Whithan, larry. "Flocks in Neecl of Shepherds." WnshingronTitnes,July 2,2001. 'l'ba,ers Wickes, Charles. Illustratiotts of Spiresand of the tladiet,al Churches o.fEnglond. Neu. York: Hessling & Spiehneyer, 1900. Wieruszowski, Helen. The Xledieaal Uniuersity. Princeton: \'an Nostrand , 1966. Wilken, Robeft. The Christiansat tbe RlTnansSa*- Them. Nerv Haven, CT: Uni..ersity Press, 1984. Willians, George.The RadicalReJonnation.Philadelphia: \A/estminsrerPress, 1962. Williams, Peter. HottsesoJ'God.Chicago: University of Illinois Press, 1997. Wilson-Dickson, Andrew. The Stotl of Christian lIusic. Oxford: Lion Publications, 1992. Wright, David F.The Lion Handbookof the Historl of Christianity. Oxford: Lion Publications, 1990. Wuest, Kenneth S. The l,Jeu Testament:An Expanded Transhttion.Grand Rapids: Eerdnans, 196i. Youngblood,Ronald. "'lhe Process:How \4re Got Our Bible." Christirnity Today(Februarv 5, 1988), 23-38. Zens, lon. The Pastor.St. Croix Fails, \\'I: Searching

-lbgether,

1981.

FRANKVIOLAis an influential voice in the contemporary house church movement. For the last twenfy years,he has been gathering with organic house churchesin the United States.Frank haswritten eight revolutionary books on radical church restoration, including God's Llltimate Pnssion and The Untold Stor"yof the l{ew Tbstament Church. He is a nationally recognized expert on new trends for the church, holds conferences on the deeper Christian life, and is actively engaged in planting New Testament-styled churches. His Web site, www.frankviola.com, contains many free resources designedto enrich the spiritual lives of God's people. Frank and his family live in Gainesville, Florida.

GEORGE BARNAis the chairmanof Good News Holdings, a multimedia firm in Los Angeles that producesmovies, television programming, and other media content. He is alsothe founder and Directing Leader of The Barna Group, a researchand resourcefirm in Venrura, California, whose clients have ranged from ministries such as the Billv Graham Evangelistic Association and Focus on the Family to corporations such as Ford and Walt Disney, as well as the U.S. Nar.y and U.S. Army. To date, Barna has written thirty-nine books, including best sellers such as Reaolution,ReaolutionaryParenting, Tian.forrning Cbildreninto Spiritual Champions,TheFrog in the Kettle, andThe Power of Vision.He hasbeen hailed as "the most quoted person in the Christian church today" and is counted among its most influential leaders. Barna lives with his wife, Nancy, and their three daughters(Samantha, Corban, and Christine) in Southern California.

Y trt ct S) F

-

+ -t r.F *

m F F th

*{ rF rrL

(e fr v,