Pagan Christianity - Chapter 8

TITHING AND CLERGY SALARIES: SORE SPOTS ON THE WALLET

Whenever anyone asked me about "tithing" (back in the "pastor/layperson" days), a demeanor of guilt was most often the prompting force. My answer was consistently that it was never commanded in the bible, but used as a minimal portion by example. I would inform them that the only standard for giving in scripture was out of cheerfulness and not out of compulsion.

There were also times when I wondered about why I was compensated for exercising a gift. There might not be a direct correlation, but I couldn't help fend off the thought of Simon the sorcerer in Acts 8. You know the dude that offered money so he could receive a gift given by God's Spirit? And Peter blasts him with: "May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord. Perhaps he will forgive you for having such a thought in your heart."

Viola and Barnes make interesting and very challenging observations about tithing and pastoral salaried in this chapter.

First tithing. There is obviously an overuse (perhaps abuse) of one particular passage (Malachi 3:8-10) when the institutional church approaches the "need" for all participants to fork over 1/10 of their income. There also seems to be a classical and unbiblical superstition promoted as well.

This passage seems to be many Christian leaders' favorite Bible text, especially when giving is at a low tide. If you have spent any time in the contemporary church, you have heard this passage read from the pulpit on numerous occasions.

...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 happy. And they can expect Him to bless them financially. When they fail, they feel they are being disobedient, and they worry that a financial curse looms over them.

PC points out that the context of the Malachi passage was provision taken for the sake of those who were in need (widow, fatherless, stranger) and that they were the rightful recipients. This point segues into the unbiblical practice of paid clergy. Ownership of property appears to be the historical culprit.

Charting the history of Christian tithing is a fascinating exercise. Tithing spread from the state to the church. Here's the story. In the seventh and eighth centuries, leasing land was a familiar characteristic of the European economy. The use of the tithe, or the tenth, was commonly used to calculate payments to landlords. As the church increased in ownership of land across Europe, the 10 percent rent-charge shifted from the secular landlords to the church. Ecclesiastical leaders became the landlords. And the tithe became the ecclesiastical tax.

...As far as clergy salaries go, 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 the funds and municipal and imperial treasuries. Thus was born the clergy salary, a harmful practice that has no root in the New Testament.

...Giving a salary to pastors elevates them above the rest of God's people. It creates a clerical caste that turns the living body of Christ into a business. Since the pastor and his staff are compensated for ministry, they are the paid professionals. The rest of the church lapses into a state of passive dependence.

...No wonder it takes a person of tremendous courage and faith to step out of the pastorate.

Pagan Christianity - Chapter 7

MINISTERS OF MUSIC: CLERGY SET TO MUSIC

A good friend of mine responded to one of the chapter posts (I believe it was chapter 4) saying: "Criticizing a church's worship service is on a par with telling a mother she has an ugly baby."

This chapter covers an area of responsibility that has proven to be quite a volatile issue - namely the music part of worship. It's either too loud, not loud enough; too old, too new and unfamiliar; too slow, too fast; too much of it, not enough of it.... Therein lies the ancient problem. Music possesses a huge consumerist factor.

Leading up to the sermon, those who "lead worship" select the songs that 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 else who is often part of the clerical staff - or who has a similar stature.

This is in stark contrast to the first-century way. 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 affair, not a professional event lead by specialists.

...Much like oratory (professional speaking), the Greek culture was built around an audience-performer dynamic. Tragically, this trait was carried over from the temples of Diana and the Greek dramas straight into the Christian church. The congregation of God's people became spectators not only in spoken ministry, but in singing as well. Regrettably, the spirit of Greek spectatorship still lives in the contemporary church.

...At the front of the stage is a simple podium, some plants, amplifiers, speakers and lots of wires. In such churches, worship means following the band's prescribed songs. The praise and worship time typically lasts from twenty to forty minutes. The first songs are usually upbeat praise choruses. The worship team will then lead a lively hand-clapping, body-swaying, hand-raising, (sometimes dancing) congregation into a potpourri of individualistic, gentle, worshipful singing. (Typically, the focus of the songs is on individual spiritual experience.) First person singular pronouns - I, me, my - dominate a good number of the songs... ...a reform, but not a revolution.

I have discovered the last statement to be true - but only recently. The shifting of my own mind-set is fairly fresh. When "Purpose-Driven Church" by Rick Warren came out in 1995, I read it and read it, then read it again. It was refreshing for RW to lead the way (along with Bill Hybels) in transforming the methods used for music and message. Little did I realize that it is still music and message "driven" by the cultural malady of the audience/performer dynamic.

So now I understand and use the term "caught up" because I was and still am in some ways - as many, many are. As much as I challenged those while being in that context, it was like herding cats. Those in leadership were very dependent on the performer aspect and those who attended were likewise dependent on the audience aspect. All the while, very little was and is accomplished on a daily basis in putting the principles and teachings of scripture to practice.

Pagan Christianity - Chapter 6

SUNDAY MORNING COSTUMES: COVERING UP THE PROBLEM

At the beginning of the twentieth century, many clergymen wore white collars with a tie. In fact, it was considered highly improper for a clergyman to appear without a tie.

Don't I know that? How vividly I recall the day in the early 1990s when I decided to take a huge risk and not wear a tie one Sunday. I made sure that I wore the best pair of slacks I had, a shiny pair of shoes, a powder blue expensive Polo shirt and a wool tweed jacket.

Monday morning (my "day off") I received a call from the "Church Chairman." He wanted to take me out for lunch to "touch base."

The primary issue of our conversation was the missing piece of about 16" of pressed cloth hanging from the middle of my neck to just below the navel. My effort to reason with him by reviewing God's choosing of David through Samuel at Jesse's house (you know "God doesn't look on the outside...") was futile.

So I apologized and assured him it would not happen again. Oh, He did buy me lunch.

Being the rebel I am, the following Sunday, I put on a pair of worn khakis, my casual shoes, a yellow button-down shirt and one of those 1990s "relaxed" knit ties and no jacket. To my astonishment there was no call on Monday or (NC lingo) "nary" a word said about my wardrobe. Amazing what the presence/absence of 16" of pressed fabric could do about 15 years ago!

But things have changed, haven't they??? This brief chapter details how "dressing up for church" evolved. But read it carefully. It's not just about clothes.

The proliferation of the textile industry in the 19th century made "fine clothes" affordable and available to common people. Before that time only the rich could dawn exquisite apparel for social events.

In 1843 a Congregational minister named Horace Bushnel 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. Thus was born the idea of dressing up for church.

So what's wrong with it? What's the big deal about "dressing up" for church? It is hardly a burning issue. However, it is what dressing up for church represents that is the burning issue.

First, it reflects the false division between the secular and the sacred. To think the God cares one whit if you wear dressy threads on Sunday to "meet Him" is a violation of the New Covenant...

...Second, wearing attractive, flashy clothes on Sunday morning screams out an embarrassing message: that church is a place where Christians hide their real selves and "dress them up" to look nice and pretty...is little more than image management... Dressing up for church violates the reality that the church is made up of real people with messy problems... It is a study in pretense that is dehumanizing and constitutes a false witness to the world.

...Third, dressing up for the church smacks against the primitive simplicity that was the sustaining hallmark of the early church... the early Christians made concrete efforts to show their absolute disdain for social class distinction.

It is tempting to raise an argument that the "seeker-sensitive" influence of the last 10-15 years has allowed congregants to dress down. That may be true but the nature of the institutional pretense still exists inside the walls of the distinguishable edifice. I have observed first-hand how the "sophistication and refinement" have been transferred from attire to aesthetics and production.

The premises of the building and the "Worships service" are now "dressed to kill." The new garb is parking lot attendants, banners, color, lights, aroma, nursery pagers, sound, musicians (who have survived a rigorous process akin to American Idol) - all for the purpose of giving the presentation an "excellence" and "quality" so the audience will not be "distracted."

I personally started becoming lost in aggravation with this when I had flesh-colored ear set microphones fastened with surgical tape to my neck and face and people in the production booth waving me to get back in the field of the stage lights when I spoke.

"This can't be what Jesus intended!" I thought more than once.

Pagan Christianity - Chapter 5

THE PASTOR: OBSTACLE TO EVERY-MEMBER FUNCTIONING

I was recently let go from a temporary job I had putting together a very impressive robotic conveyor system at a new Target Distribution Center in the area. Since it was temporary - I was thrown in with all kinds of men who needed work and income to sustain their lives/families.

As I got to know them through the work involved (heavy pieces of equipment that needed cautious handling as they were assembled), I was able to learn about their place and journey in life.

Len (not his real name) was probably a few years older than me (pushing 60?), but he looked to be in his 70s. He had this prospector look - short, protruding jaw, which was enhanced by his rapid gum-chewing habit, and wiry. He was well-seasoned in the area of general labor and I found him to be a major resource in helping me learn the techniques of going about the duty given us.

One morning (each day started at 6 am and ended at 4:30 pm) as we were working, I made a passing comment about the irony of my extensive education landing me in a $9 per hour situation. "8 years of school for this..." He replied: "Well, I went to 9." Naively, I asked, "You have a graduate degree?" "No - I only got through 9th grade."

At the time I smugly thought - "He doesn't know who I am and what I am and where I've been...BLAH BLAH BLAH!"

As the job continued over the weeks, I looked to him as a major leader - a shepherd. Others facetiously called him "boss-man" because of his expertise. I learned to have a deep Godly love for him and learned that he was a Follower. We had some great conversations about our mutual walks in obedience to Christ. I met others as well who loved God - two of them ex-convicts and one a recovering alcoholic. My spiritual growth jettisoned through this community. I would have never sought this out by structural design.The giftedness of others was functioning on a daily basis - almost like the early church.

Curious!

The word is used in the plural. It is 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 poimen. 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.

...With the Fall came in 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 special caste of 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 since Adam's blunder. And this person is always marked by special training, special garb, a special vocabulary, and a special way of life...

...Up until the second century, the church had no official leadership. That it had leaders is without dispute. But leadership was unofficial in the sense that there were no religious "offices" or sociological slots to fill.

Is there a possible correlation in the history of God's people between what happened when Israel requested a king and the second century of the church? It seems that both were under the direct headship of God/Christ functioning by humble obedience with humble leaders until form was lofted above function.

Human hierarchy and "official" ministry institutionalized the church of Jesus Christ. By the fourth century, these elements hardened the arteries of the once living, breathing ekklasia of God - within which ministry was functional, Spirit-led, organic, and shared by all believers.

This is an appropriate nutshell statement to end the excerpt. I could easily copy more, but that would deprive you of doing what I think you should do in purchasing and reading yourself.

Interview with Barna and Viola

Got an hour to "kill" ? Dare you to go to this website and click on the link to the left "New Interview with George and Frank." Listen and see if you're not provoked in SOME way.

This will serve as a nice interlude between reviewed chapters.

Jeff

http://tinyurl.com/cmc5no

Pagan Christianity - Chapter 4

THE SERMON: PROTESTANTISM'S MOST SACRED COW

A cold splash of reality hit me late one Sunday morning about 12 years ago as I stood at the back doors of the sanctuary performing my obligatory pastoral handshake/hug. The dependant - er uh rather "parishioners" were leaving the premises to go out into the world and put principles into practice. One of the faithful (an elderly man in his mid-70's) shook my hand, looked me in the face and said: "Nice sermon pastor." Normally I would be flattered and humbly tip my head with a gentle "Thank you." But I couldn't do that. Why? Because that was the week I forwent my habitual duty (week after week after week after week....) of pontificating the week-long research accomplished in the confinement of my "study" well away from the rigor of a broken world - you know - the place where Jesus was on a daily basis when he "made his dwelling among us?" We had a guest speaker that morning and he was in the restroom at the time when the affirmation of what I didn't do was rendered.

At the time, I thought that this was a careless gaffe on the part of the man who merely uttered a convenient platitude. But in retrospect it serves as an emblematic indicator to me that there is something wrong in how the church operates in form.

The insight provided in this chapter is of the nature that helps me realize that I am not insane in pondering and asking the questions I do - and arriving at the conclusions I have observed.

The sermon is the bedrock of the Protestant liturgy. For five hundred years, it has functioned like clock-work. 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 sermon 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 Sunday and you will most likely get a description of the message.

Every week since 1985 (or every Memorial Day weekend, Labor Day weekend, Sunday after Easter, or Sunday after Christmas in my last context), I would wake up Sunday morning with this ball and chain fettered around my ankle. Its presence was brought on by the pressure to bring 20-35 minutes of exegetic excellence and homiletic brilliance to those who were willing to sacrifice a morsel of their weekend. So it better be good. I would often ask my wife afterward (since she was horrible liar), "How was the message?" More than once, her answer would be "Okay, I guess. My mind was wandering." So why did I sit in the confines of about 120 square feet all week leafing through published works and parsing Hebrew and Greek so that she could tell me that it was "OK?"

Chapter 4 provides the historic backdrop.

...The stunning reality is that today's sermon 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.

...there is a world of difference between the Spirit-inspired preaching and teaching described in the Bible and the contemporary sermon. This difference is virtually always overlooked because we have been unwittingly conditioned to read our modern day practices back into the Scripture.

...Yet for the last five centuries, most Christians have never questioned its origin or its effectiveness. 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 at worst. The sermon turns the church into a preaching station. The congregation degenerates into a group of muted spectators who watch a performance. There is no room for interrupting or questioning the preached 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.

Second, the sermon often stalemates spiritual growth. Because it is a one-way affair, it encourages passivity.

Third, the sermon preserves the unbiblical clergy mentality. It creates as excessive and pathological dependence on the clergy.

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 ministry," the truth is that the contemporary sermon preached every week has little power to equip God's people for spiritual service and functioning.

Thus the typical sermon is a swimming lesson on dry land!

The authors don't condemn the need for spiritual leadership within a community of Followers, but rather chastise the dependence on one person (or a few people) to shepherd and teach. This robs the body of its full capability to function by every member exercising the gift(s) which they have been given by the Spirit.

Therefore, the church needs few purpiteers and more spiritual facilitators...the Christian family needs a restoration of the first-century practice of mutual exhortation and mutual ministry.

Pagan Christianity - Chapter 3

THE ORDER OF WORSHIP: SUNDAY MORNINGS SET IN CONCRETE

Hitchhiking on chapter 3 - it's apparent that the form of the building has indeed influenced the function within over the last several centuries. Structure gives birth to structure. There are those who strongly believe that the antithesis to structure is chaos and disorder. I've met them - they proffer their conviction with vigor. The reading of this chapter made me realize how much that notion is based on a mind-set from a very long history of cultural influence with fear and the obsession to control. There is a governing template by which to operate and you dare not mess with it. It can be and has been reformed (Luther, Zwingli, Calvin, Hobbs, Finney), but never revolutionized or better stated revitalized.

You can scour your Bible from beginning to end, and you will never find
anything that remotely resembles our order of worship. This is because the 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. 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, nor a static ritual. And it was often unpredictable, unlike the
contemporary church service.

Contemporary Christianity still reflects this ideology. Pragmatism is unspiritual, not just because it encourages ethical considerations to be secondary, but because it depends on techniques rather than on God to produce the desired effects...
...Unfortunately, pragmatism ('if it works let's do it"), not biblicism or spirituality,
governs the activities of many present-day churches. (Many "seeker sensitive"
churches have excelled at following in Finney's footsteps.) Pragmatism is harmful because it teaches "the end justifies the 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 oneself rather than upon God. Note that there is a
monumental difference between well-motivated humans working for God in their own strength, wisdom, and power versus God working through humans.

...the Protestant order of worship strangles the headship of Jesus Christ.
The entire service is directed by one person. You are limited to the knowledge,
gifting, and experience 0f one member of the body - the pastor. Where is the
freedom for our Lord Jesus to speak through His body at will?

Granted, Christ may be able to express Himself through one or two 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 makes me sad and somewhat frustrated to know that many will read these words (either here or by obtaining the whole book) and will hardly be moved to take any risks to allow the Church (ekklasia) to function as God really intended. As I have witnessed, many will consider the challenges and attempt to adapt a vague principle or two that will slighty tweak what they have done, are doing and will do - - until they drop. It is appropriate to quote the final words of this chapter.

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."