Book review: Pagan Christianity

Post by **_Paidion** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 12:48 pm

Thank you so much, Danny. I was going to write a few words in response to Matt, but you said it all and more.

I have seen body ministry in operation, and have heard people "sing in the spirit" off key and with no timing. Yet, when God inspired it, it was glorious!

Post by **_mattrose** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 1:59 pm

Thanks for the dialogue

As I said, I liked the chapter and agreed with the dangers of the contemporary worship 'scene'

Perhaps, though, you both misunderstood (or I miscommunicated) my statements. I wasn't implying that only 'good' singers are gifted or even that only 'good' singers should sing. I think you might be under the impression that I said this b/c of this statement by Danny:

The lesson I learned is that it's not about how gifted we are. It's about our heart towards God.

This seems to me a fairly odd statement. It seems you are talking about physical gifts and not spiritual gifts. Spiritual gifts are, of course, from the Holy Spirit. We don't have to pick (as I'm sure you would agree) between a good singer and a singer with a good heart. We have many examples of both! I agree that the latter is more important than the former.

Danny also said...

The other problem is, who determines who is "gifted" enough to stand before the congregation and lead worship? Oftentimes (in fact, in my experience I'd say usually), such decisions are based more on taste than discernment (and sometimes on politics).

Again, I agree this can become a problem. But the way to fix it is more discernment and less personal preference. Viola throws the baby out with the bathwater far too often in the book. His goal is, of course, to make sure we get rid of the bathwater, but he sometimes seems oblivious to the idea that the baby can be saved in an organized church. I assume this mistake, on his part, is b/c he's got a personal opinion to defend.

The other problem I have with your premise is that it seems to negate the idea of the Holy Spirit leading a meeting. I've played with some well-known and amazingly talented worship leaders, but the most intense worship times I've had were in a small gathering where there was no designated worship leader

How, I ask, does having Holy Spirit filled worship leaders using Holy Spirit empowered gifts negate the idea of the Holy Spirit leading a meeting?

Once again, you are buying, completely, Viola's underlying assertion that organization is un-spiritual. You may have the same personal preference as Viola (And that may be why your most intense worship times were in an un-organized setting. Some people prefer more structure. I don't think Viola is really solving the problem of 'preference-based' worship. He's just moving it to the house-church.

One of the interesting aspects of an egalitarian worship community is that if something seems "off", it can be brought up and discussed by the entire group. There are some popular worship songs which I have trouble with theologically. If I was part of a house-church where that song kept being sung, I could lovingly bring it up for discussion and see what consensus we might reach. On the other hand, if a worship leader up on stage at an IC keeps singing a song that I believe is theologically questionable or downright heretical, my only recourse is to try to get word to the worship leader (via email or maybe catching them in the hallway) or complain to the Senior Pastor.

So in a house church, if there is a problem, you can discuss it with other believers and address it? But in an institutional church, if there is a problem, you have to discuss it with other believers to address it? There need be no difference! Are you trying to tell me that if a member of our church had an issue with the content of a song selected by a worship leader, he couldn't discuss the matter with other believers in the church and/or discuss it with the worship leader? Viola is painting a VERY cynical view of churches. While the cynicism is sometimes well-founded, it's over-arching nature is the main critique I have of this book (a book which, as I said, I am enjoying).

Also, in an organic church, the group as a whole could put together their own songbook or hymnal. This process could lead to some great theological discussions!

Haha, why couldn't this happen in an institutional church?! In fact, just last week we were discussing having just such a time of writing and sharing in the near future!

It is, of course, possible that Viola comes from a very different church background than I do. That may be why he is so offended by the institutional church whereas I am not. Perhaps I should share was 'singing' is like at our church.

~ Many different people are involved in the worship teams. We actually have 'teams' of teams. Various people get to help lead on various weeks.
~ Anyone is allowed to volunteer to do some type of special music
~ When the normal worship leader is away, another member leads. This man doesn't have a 'great' voice. He's physically handicapped and so plays the guitar somewhat slowly. Yet he has a great heart for worship. I truly enjoy when he leads.
~ Sometimes we sing for 20 minutes and sometimes for more. The Holy Spirit is allowed to lead.
~ We routinely have nights where people can request or lead any song they want to sing.
~ We have a monthly coffeehouse where anyone can get up and sing
~ Etc.

I suppose I am simply of the opinion that Viola is quite a bit heavy-handed in regards to institutional churches. I am sure he's had some very bad experiences. I'm sure many do. I agree that there are dangers. There always are.

Post by **_Rick_C** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 3:46 pm

I just started going to a new Bible study last week in someone's home. I mentioned I play guitar and am invited to play it tonite, and will. I've played guitar at various kinds of meetings in homes, prayer meetings, bonfires, picnics, and impromptu get-togethers. I'm always sensitive to what the Spirit seems to be doing and follow His lead, including when to stop playing. I've seen the same thing happen with Spirit-led "worship team leaders" in churches with up to 1300 present.

As far as musical instruments go, we don't have any reason to doubt the early Christians (in N.T. times) used them. Actually, I downloaded some early hymns not long ago which were dated from the 2nd and 3rd century. They had musical notation and lyrics and some musicologists have played and recorded them on the original instruments (such as the kitharo, a stringed instrument). I also loaded a first century hymn to Apollo and plan to learn it on guitar and put biblical lyrics to it! (Btw, the Christian and non-Christian tunes sounded essentially the same back then).

This may not be addressed in the book, but one fairly recent development in evangelical churches is the "applauding after songs." We had "special singing" in the church I grew up in, where certain people would arrange in advance of the service to sing. But also, anyone was invited to sing after that. One brother couldn't carry a tune in a bucket and the piano player would eventually give up trying to find out what key he was in. We heard him anyway...it blessed his heart so amen for him! (though it was really hard to listen to him, and well, was very funny for we kids!)....

I don't like applauding after songs as I'm used to people praising God then. But I don't think this "entertainment aspect" will go away any time soon...so I'm trying to get used to it. (Mom says they do it in the church I grew up in now also. "They just clap. You never hear anyone say, 'Oh thank the Lord!' or 'God bless you for that song, sister'," she reported). Thanks.

Post by **_Homer** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 3:51 pm

Interesting discussion. If you guys keep it up I'll not need to buy the book! 8)

I'm curious - what is an "organic church"? Chemical free? I guess where we attend is qualified as organic; haven't heard of any drugged folks thereabouts though perhaps someone may have been thrown off their horse and drugged around the pasture.

I take it from the discussion that prepared sermons are not highly regarded, just not led by the Spirit, I guess. Now you are discussing music. If sermons written ahead of time are not the best, why wouldn't the same principle apply to songs? Just make them up as you go. That should be interesting; never know 'till you try it!

Post by **_Rae** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:07 pm

It's not that a prepared teaching is not highly regarded (his whole book is a prepared teaching!) What is not highly regarded is the meeting's focus being almost completely centered around the "prepared teaching" and "prepared songs." I think that is moreso where he is coming from.

----

I would like to ask him what he thinks about the fellowships that are starting to have weekly "homechurch" type meetings with 7-15 families, and then everyone comes together on Sunday mornings to sing together, listen to teaching together, and provide a place for others who might not feel comfortable visiting a home to check things out. Does he still believe this is not a good setup?

My personal preference would be to have the homegroups weekly and then to meet corporately every other week or every three weeks (to keep everyone's focus on the weekly meeting primarily).

Post by **_Paidion** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:47 pm

Rae wrote:I would like to ask him what he thinks about the fellowships that are starting to have weekly "homechurch" type meetings with 7-15 families, and then everyone comes together on Sunday mornings to sing together, listen to teaching together, and provide a place for others who might not feel comfortable visiting a home to check things out. Does he still believe this is not a good setup?

Actually a similar question was asked of him, and he quotes it in the book on page 266, and then answers it:

While you fault traditional churches for making members passive spectators, I not only attend Sunday morning servce, but I belong to a church small group that sounds a lot like the organic church experience. We worship, study God's Word together, and turn to one another for support when we face challenges and crises. In my view, I have the best of both worlds.

Viola's Answer:

"If you feel 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 it or facilitates it.

"I (Frank) have been in countless small group meetings of this nature across denominational lines. Never did I see a meeting that was completely under the headship of Jesus Christ in which all members came to the meeting to share their Lord with sisters and brothers freely and without human control or interference.

"All the gatherings operated more like a Bible Study or traditional prayer meeting than a free-flowing, open-participatory gathering that is envisioned in the New Testament where Jesus Christ is made visible by the every-member functioning of His body.

"I have met with some of the founders of the small group movement in the institutional 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 meeings that have no leader but Jesus Christ.

"All 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 shows another path."

Post by **_Rae** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 8:52 pm

Thanks! I haven't made it there yet!

So I guess he wouldn't be ok with someone "facilitating" instead of "leading."

But, if you have a group of people who are not used to this "organic" style of church meetings, wouldn't you need a "facilitator" to help to draw their thoughts out and to "shepherd" them into this? How do you get people from point A to point..... Q without having someone leading/facilitating?

Post by **_Paidion** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:09 pm

Unfortunately, it seems hard to get them from A to B even with someone faciliatating. I recall one time at a Baptist church I used to attend, that the minister, who understood body ministry, really tried to lead the people into it. However, not one person tried it. I really think no one had any idea what he was talking about. I, myself did, from past experience, but I felt socially awkward in being the lone ranger who tried it in that setting.

I think Frank Viola would say something similar to the following: either have find an organic church and experience it for yourself in order to understand how it functions, and know how to participate, or else have your small group instructed in the practice (not "method") by someone who has experienced it and participated in it. However, this instruction would need to be accompanied by two or three persons accompanying the "instructor" and practising it together with him so that your small group could observe body ministry in operation and participate themselves.

Post by **_featheredprop** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:53 pm

Okay .... I'm really feeling confused right now.

After reading the chapter, and reading Matt's summary, I found that I pretty much agreed with Matt's take on it.

Then Danny posted; and I agreed with him.

Then Matt responded; and I agreed with him.

Now I don't know what to think ...

The thought occurred to me that I might be so used to worship as being a certain way that I can't see beyond the scope of my own experience.

I think that Danny, Paidion, Rae & some others here, have experienced worship in what some might call "unconventional" settings. I envy their experience, for mine is not so broad. Perhaps my limited exposure constricts my ability to imagine life beyond my little world; and therefore, constricts my ability to grasp what Viola is trying to say - but I don't know.

The only thing that I know right now is tonight I went to my sister's church for a Saturday night "contemporary service," and wound up feeling disconnected from most of what went on.

So ... I just don't know ...

peace,

dane

Post by **_mattrose** » Sat Apr 05, 2008 10:55 pm

featheredprop wrote:Okay .... I'm really feeling confused right now.

After reading the chapter, and reading Matt's summary, I found that I pretty much agreed with Matt's take on it.

Then Danny posted; and I agreed with him.

Then Matt responded; and I agreed with him.

Now I don't know what to think ...

Haha, actually, I get the same feeling when I read over this thread! I think it's because I'm not really disagreeing with anyone. I think we're in 90% agreement with each other. I just feel that Viola is overstating his case (as most authors do).