BirkeyBlog

Continuing in Chapter 3 of Pagan Christianity?, writers Viola and Barna next tackle how the changes in early church buildings affected worship. Because Emperor Constantine was the #1 “lay person” in the church, a simple style worship service would simply not do. To honor him, much of the pomp and ritual of the imperial Roman court was integrated into Christian worship.

These pagan cultural imports included:

• Lights and aromatic spices carried before important people in public
• Candles and incense burning
• The clergy dressing in special garments
• Gestures of respect toward the clergy
• Beginning a service with a processional and music accompaniment
• Choirs and instruments to make the processional more dramatic, professional and ceremonial

The outcome of these and more cultural imports was a “loss of intimacy and open participation. The professional clergy performed the acts of worship while the laity looked on as spectators.”

A Catholic scholar is quoted as writing that “even the ceremonies involved in the ancient worship of the emperor as a deity found [its] way into the church’s worship, only in their secularized form.”

4th century Christians came to view Constantine’s rise as an act of God, and divine provision for their rescue. He even instituted the “tax-exempt” status idea for these churches. This is in contract to 1st century Christians who were taught to avoid pagan culture and its futility, and to be living counter-cultural examples through their new life and community found in Christ.

To see Christians slowly blinded and overcome by the world system is a sad story. Buildings made with hands become holy shrines. Pagan ceremonies and objects become “holy” traditions of the church. They even began to attribute all of these things to principles and ideas found in the Old Testament. “Dignified and sacramental ritual had entered the church services by way of the mysteries [the pagan cults]. and was justified, like so many other things, by reference to the Old Testament.”

But this idea is self-defeating. We know from the New Testament that on the cross Jesus Christ destroyed the old wine skins [forms and structures] of sacred priests, sacred buildings, sacred rituals and objects. He replaced it all with the new wine skins of a nonhierarchical, nonritualistic, nonliturgical organism called the ecclesia.

REFLECTION

I do not personally come from a high-church tradition with lots of liturgy and ceremony. I can appreciate some of the beauty and wonder of these forms of worship, but it really doesn’t help me connect with God. Even within the Protestant traditions that I am more familiar with, I am growing tired and weary of some of the outcomes we see outlined in this book.

How many “churches” have spent years of time, and millions of dollars on their buildings? Buildings require upkeep, maintenance, expansion, heating and cooling, parking and all the rest. They can become a huge weight around the neck of a local congregation. How many have floundered and failed because of a building? How many other needy people were not ministered to because a “church” was focused and sidetracked on their building?

Buildings tend to become a huge distraction to people being a church, and doing the work of ministry and service that it is supposed to be about. Instead of investing in people, the community and outreach, we spend most of our time and money on the physical needs of the building and the programs in it.

Given this background and cultural conditioning, when it comes to worship, we feel we need sound systems, comfortable seatings, projection systems, technology, nice decorating, stained glass, beautiful objects, and all the rest… or “we can’t have a good worship experience.”

I don’t see any of this in the New Testament descriptions of the church. I see simplicity, mobility, agility, and more of a “freedom from,” rather than a “bondage to.” Perhaps the early believers we so thrilled with their new freedom in Christ that the old patterns, forms and structures didn’t have much appeal. Why have a building when you can worship from house to house and enjoy fellowship out in the neighborhoods, courtyards and places where the people are?

I think the 21st century world and culture is moving back toward these early NT church patterns. We have experienced spiritual life with the weight of programs, budgets, staffing, annual reports, fund raising, boards, buildings and committees, and found it wanting. We are yearning for a simpler and more basic spiritual experience with fewer encumbrances. We would rather invest a greater part of our time, money and talents in people, relationships, discipleship, ministry, service and outreach.

Does the community I live in need something like this? Do I need this? I think so. How do I make it happen? What are the steps? Where do I go from here? That is the question and the process of discovery I find myself in.

Exploring the First Church Buildings

In the book Pagan Christianity?, authors Frank Viola and George Barna continue Chapter 2 by exploring the evidence we have about the first “church buildings,” a trend started by the “Christian” Emperor, Constantine in the 3rd Century AD.

We have already learned why early church buildings were considered “sacred” places. This lead to the idea that congregants had to be purified in order to enter. This necessitated the design and construction of fountains and courtyards to pass through before entering. Early church buildings were huge and modeled on the Roman “basilica” - the common Roman government buildings, the design of which was borrowed from Greek pagan temples.

Basilica design included:

• Windows positioned to allow the sun to shine on the speaker who was addressing the audience - enhancing the sun worship idea - a practice that Constantine never stopped after becoming a “Christian.”
• An elevated platform where the “clergy” ministered, much like the Roman magistrate. Rails were added to further separate the “clergy” from the rest of the congregation.
• A center table or chest on the platform called the altar, considered the “most holy place” which usually contained bones of martyrs, or held the “holy” Eucharist. The Eucharist was served only by “holy men” - the “clergy.”
• A “Bishop’s chair” or “Throne” was positioned in front of the altar, and was called the “cathedra.” The term ex cathedra means “from the throne.” This concept came from the seat of the judge in the Roman basilica. The sermon was preached from the throne. Power and authority rested in the chair, which was covered by a white linen cloth. Later, this was moved to the “pulpit,” a raised platform where the “clergy” delivered the sermon.
• Surrounding the cathedra were rows of other - most often smaller - chairs, reserved for the elders.

The paternal hierarchical message embedded in this visual architectural layout and design were unmistakable.

This leads me to consider our typical modern day church building layouts. We also tend to have a stage or platform that separates the “leaders” from the “congregation.” Many churches still have a special chair on that platform for the “senior pastor.” Many “churches” have other smaller chairs next to it for other leaders, be they pastors or elders, deacons or worship leaders.

Even though the original pagan influence is quite clear, there are many today who would still argue that these “traditions” of the modern institutional church ought not to be questioned, changed or tampered with because they are “sacred.”

As a missionary friend recently pointed out to me in a personal conversation - the physical layout, decorations, architecture, design, lighting, etc. of a worship space - all contribute to a subconscious message and expectation as to what a worshiper will experience in that place. We are sending messages, good or bad, positive or negative, about ourselves, our view of God, about the purpose of worship, the source of truth, and all the rest, by these choices we make.

At the dawn of the 21st century, what are those messages we want to send?

• That worship is a spectator sport?
• That in worship there are some people who lead and some that follow?
• That we can “watch” worship take place?
• That there is one special person with the authority to speak the words of God?
• That God is separate and “up front” by the more holy places in the room?
• That there are special people who can only handle the holy items?
• That truth comes only from the one special person on the stage, in the chair or behind the pulpit?

What does all this really communicate about our God and our view of him - especially to those who do not yet know Him, and are unfamiliar with our customs and traditions? How many people have entered our special worship places, and received these unbiblical, negative messages, because they did not understand our culture and language? I wonder.

I believe that this kind of unthinking, blind acceptance of “the ways things are,” is unhealthy and damaging to the growth and relevancy of the ecclesia in the 21st century. I don’t see how we will reach our culture with the Gospel while thinking and acting like this.

Constantine-Father of the Church Building

Viola and Barna now enter into the incredible story of Constantine, the founder of the concept of church as a building. In AD 324, Constantine became emperor of the Roman Empire. Constantine’s thinking was dominated by superstition and pagan magic. He never abandoned sun worship, even after his “conversion” to Christianity. He made “Sun-day” a legal holiday to honor the god Mithras, the Sun God. To his death he retained the title Pontifex Maximus: chief of the pagan priests. Shortly after he became Emperor, he began ordering the construction of church buildings.

All the historical evidence points to Constantine as an egomaniac. A few examples include that he continued the practice of honoring the dead and increased the idea of sacred objects an places. After his death he was declared “divine.” He surrounded his own grave site with monuments to the 12 Apostles, making himself the 13th and chief Apostle.

After his wife’s trip to Jerusalem in AD 327, he started erecting the first church buildings throughout the Roman Empire. He named the “churches” after saints-following the pagan custom of naming temples for the gods. He built them often over the graves of dead saints, assuming additional “powers” to be ascribed to that location. In total he built 9 church buildings in Jerusalem, Bethlehem and Constantinople.

So I conclude that today when we say, “I’m going to church,” we do so thanks in large part to Constantine, one of the most pagan “Christians” in history. We are also in fact not referencing any concept, idea or words in the New Testament.

I happen to like architecture and buildings. I have been an architectural illustrator in my past. I think it is great than man has been able to learn to design and build great buildings and structures and spaces - even to honor God. But, when we allow the culture and worldview around us to redefine and reshape the way we think and act about the New Testament “church,” our culture and what it is telling us must be questioned

The Apostle Paul said:“Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind.” I like how Eugene Petersen translated this verse: “Don’t become so well-adjusted to your culture that you fit into it without even thinking.”

I suggest that this is one huge area where we have allowed the world system to change us for the negative.

The Creation of Sacred Spaces and Objects

Authors Frank Viola and George Barna record that a shift occurred in the late second and third centuries when Christians began reverencing their dead. Christians began to meet in two places… their homes and the cemetery. They picked up the pagan practice of having meals to honor the dead. Their original intended purpose was to honor the memory of the martyrs.

It became their belief that to share a meal at the cemetery, honored their dead brothers and sisters. Since the bodies of the “holy” martyrs were there, the idea of it being a “holy space” also developed. They eventually copied the pagan practice and erected small monuments over these spaces.

In Rome, the Christians started decorating the catacombs (underground burial places) with Christian symbols. The authors point out an interesting fact that the cross as an artistic reference cannot be found prior to the time of Constantine. Thus art became associated with sacred spaces.

Around the second century Christians started venerating the bones of saints, regarding them as sacred and holy. This gave rise to relic collecting.

Later in the second century, we see how the Lord’s Supper was changed from a full meal shared among believers, to a stylized ceremony called Holy Communion. By the fourth century the bread and wine produced a sense of awe, dread and mystery. As a result, some eastern churches put a canopy over the altar table, and later rails to separate and reinforce the idea of it being holy, separate and only for the holy persons (clergy) to handle.

So now we see more clearly how Christians developed sacred spaces, places and objects, as well as the beginnings of a sacred priesthood. During all of this, they also began to assimilate the “magical mind-set” common in pagan thinking. All of this prepared the way for the man who would be almost single handedly responsible for changing the meaning of the word church.

From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals

As already stated in earlier posts, the early church believed that Jesus was the very presence of God and that the body of Christ (the church) constitutes his temple.

The authors of Pagan Christianity? point out that Jesus made some radical statements about the Temple in Jerusalem that angered the Jews of his day. One that angered them the most was the claim that if the temple was destroyed he would build a new one in three days! (John 2:19-21) Though he was referring to the architectural temple as an example, he was actually referring to the real temple - his body - which he did raise up as Himself on the third day (Ephesians 2:6).

The New Testament teaches that since Christ is risen, we Christians have become God’s temple through his “life giving spirit” (1 Cor. 15:45). Through his spirit, he takes up residence with his believers, making them his house or temple. This is why the NT never refers to the church as a building, but as a people.

With Jesus, we no longer need a specific or special place to worship God. We can worship Him in spirit and truth from anywhere.

“When Christianity was born, it was the only religion on the planet that had no sacred objects, no sacred persons, and no sacred spaces.” (James D. G. Dunn)

As another scholar has put it, “The Christianity that conquered the Roman Empire was essentially a home-centered movement.”

As some early church congregations grew they began to remodel their homes to accommodate more people. One example of this is the famous home of Dura-Europos (AD 232) in modern Syria, which is the earliest identifiable Christian meeting place. It was a private home remodeled by removing one interior wall (between 1 and 2 at right), so that it could hold about 70 people.

Examples like this cannot be called “church buildings” but rather homes modified to accommodate larger assemblies. They were never called temples, nor considered sacred spaces.

I became aware of this particular archeological evidence a number of years ago when my father, Del Birkey wrote a book called: The House Church: A Model for Renewing the Church in which this same point is made.

Because of this, on trips in Europe and a recent trip to Spain, I have been keenly aware of the vast changes that occurred in history from the beginning of the church (The Upper Room and the house churches of the New Testament) through history (the basilicas and cathedrals of Europe) on to today (the American church building and church architecture) as it relates to the idea of the church as a building.

The most fantastic example I have seen so far is the Familia Sagrada in Barcelona, Spain. It is truly amazing and incredible… yet sadly, it is not a church, even though millions believe this to be the case.

Even though many of these buildings erected for the purpose of church gatherings are indeed spectacular works of art and human engineering, and deserve our study and admiration, they sadly detract from the original and true meaning of “the church.”

Temples, Priests, and Sacrifices

Continuing in Chapter 2 of Pagan Christianity? authors Frank Viola and George Barna point out that the Old Testament Hebrews had a faith experience centered around the Temple, the priesthood and the sacrifice. But Jesus fulfilled all three of these by becoming the “Temple” made without hands, the final high priest who has made each believer a priest, and he became the final, perfect, sacrifice. He thus ended all three of these Old Testament practices.

The Greeks and Romans at the time of the early church also had temples, priests and sacrifices. The early church was the first non-temple religion ever to emerge. To the early believers, they themselves were the temple or house of God. Nowhere in the New Testament writings is the word church (ecclesia) used to refer to a building or a place. To “go to church” would have been a foreign thought to a first century believer.

We first see an example of the word ecclesia used to refer to a building in AD 190 by Clement of Alexandria. But even here it refers to a private home used for Christian meetings.

New Testament scholar Graydon F. Snyder writes:

“There is no literary evidence nor archeological 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. The first churches consistently met in homes. Until the year 300 we know of no buildings first built as churches.”

The early church also did not have a priestly tribe or caste. They understood that every believer was a priest unto God and encouraged each other to act and worship accordingly. They each brought sacrifices of praise, thanksgiving and their very selves in worship to God.

It was much later, when Roman Catholicism evolved in the 4th to 6th centuries, that a professional priesthood was started, they erected sacred buildings, and turned the Lord’s Supper into a mysterious sacrificial event. Later, the Protestants dropped the sacrificial use of the Lord’s Supper (as it should have), but it unfortunately retained the priestly caste and the sacred church building concepts to this day.

In my own mind, I find it incredible that many in the church today still hang onto the remnants of this kind of thinking. Our houses of worship are not any more holy than any other place, including our own homes, or public buildings, schools, bars, and the like. Holiness and sacredness have nothing to do with physical things or places. Separating the secular and sacred was a gnostic idea, a heresy that the early church constantly battled. Ascribing sacred or holy qualities to objects of any kind is idolatry.

I also find our modern ideas surrounding what we call pastors or elders hard to square with the New Testament. The idea of a hierarchy of leadership with a “senior” pastor, or “head” elder along with associate or junior pastors and leaders is not in the New Testament. Elders and pastors were regular church members who were gifted in leadership and other teaching and pastoring gifts. Since these gifts were given by the Holy Spirit, the individuals so gifted were acknowledged and expected to function using their gifts for the edification (building up) of the body. They had no concept of these words (pastor, elder, bishop) describing an organizational position or a separate category of holiness. Jesus Christ was considered the only “head” of the church.

In my opinion, our modern traditions and expectations about the “senior pastor” position are more similar the the Roman Catholic “priest” idea than to the New Testament concept and practice. Others have called this phenomenon the “pedestal complex” (Chuck Colson and others) and have written and spoken extensively about the inherent dangers. In the New Testament, all believers are saints, priests, and uniquely gifted by the Holy Spirit to function and serve in the body of Christ. No one is more important or necessary than another. All are equal in Christ… this is the message of the Gospel.

When we put pastors, elders or other church leaders in a special category, or up on a pedestal as it were - consciously or subconsciously - we are practicing another form of idolatry.

Finally, I am also pained by the somber, joyless and introspective manner in which we often focus on the Lord’s Supper. What happened to experiencing it as an actual meal (as the original was) and a body life celebration or a “love feast?” Why have we abandoned that tradition of the early church? When Paul wrote to the Corinthians about their excesses in it, he never suggested that they discontinue the love feast altogether!

I my mind’s eye I can imagine a group of believers gathered around a meal in a home, weaving together fellowship, prayer, song, thanksgiving, confession, and scripture reading, as they also share bread and wine to remember what Jesus Christ did on their behalf. I hear responses in laughter, quiet reflection or prayer as well as the whole range of human emotion and expression as they “do this in remembrance of me.”

I find myself longing for that experience.

Well, here we go. Chapter Two of Pagan Christianity? deals with the first specific example of a pagan practice adopted by the church. That being the idea that the church is a building or a place. The authors point out the love affair we tend to have with brick and mortar. When Christians begin to meet and form a new church, most of the time they think they must secure a building.

Furthermore, the idea is so ingrained we unconsciously equate the two ideas without thinking:

• “Wow! Look at that beautiful church we just passed!”
• “We have gone to church every Sunday for the last three years.”
• “Isn’t it great to be in the House of the Lord this morning?”
• “We must show reverence when we enter the sanctuary of the Lord.”

The authors make the statement that none of these type of statements or ideas have anything to do with New Testament Christianity.

I have to agree. The church is people.

I have a friend named Steve Tanner who has started reading “Pagan Christianity?” as well. Steve works for a non-profit Christian organization that equips and encourages those who are involved in Children’s ministry. He has posted about the book and “house churches” as it relates to children’s ministry online here: http://www.kidology.org/network/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5654&TPN=1

This satirical video makes light of the many negative and condemning reviews of the book “Pagan Christianity?” (authors: Frank Viola and George Barna, Publisher: Tyndale) by reactionary people who have not even taken the time to read it!

I think the sad part is that many of us in the evangelical world are perceived to be reactionaries - and justly so - for extreme examples like this. It really irritates me and gives us all a bad name.

Weep and Enjoy!

Frank and George open up this first official chapter of the book Pagan Christianity? with a story which reminds me of the way Patrick Lencioni writes his books. The fictional story style pulls you in and gives you a more or less “real life” scenario to relate to as the main idea is introduced. Their story is of a typical Christian family and how they bicker, fight and get on each others nerves as they get ready to “go to church.” Then, once at “the church” they put on a different persona as if nothing is wrong, and go through the motions of being a “perfect” family. The husband/father named Winchester, starts thinking about all this during the sermon and then wonders if the pastor ever has a morning like his. Pastor Farley passionately claims in his sermon that “their church does everything by the book!” Yet Winchester sits and wonders if the Bible ever mentioned that people should dress up for church. This train of thought just snowballs into many other questions like: Why do my kids hate Sunday School? Why do we go through the same predictable ritual every Sunday morning? Why do I wear this uncomfortable necktie every Sunday morning when all it does is cut off blood circulation?

Coming out of the story, the authors state that:

“As startling as it may sound, almost everything that is done in our contemporary churches has no basis in the Bible.” And that “precious little… maps to anything found in the first century church.”

Questions We Never Think To Ask

It was the Greek philosopher Socrates (470-399 BC) who invented the Socratic method also known as the dialectic. He believed that truth is found by dialoguing and relentlessly questioning a particular issue. It was his habit of doing this - especially of long held traditions - that eventually got him killed for “corrupting the youth” of Athens. He was not alone. Many others have given their lives for similar reasons including Isaiah, John the Baptist and Jesus. Many thousands more have been martyred over the centuries for asking hard questions in pursuit of truth.

Christians today are typically encouraged by our leaders to believe, think and behave in certain ways. We are encouraged to read our Bibles, but usually through a particular lens of tradition (Baptist, Reformed, charismatic, etc.). We are taught to never challenge those traditional teachings, or if we do, to run the risk of being labeled heretics, be shunned from leadership or membership, or be accused of fomenting disunity, and leading God’s people astray. (I Randy, have personally seen and experienced some of this over the years.)

However, at this point in the chapter, Viola and Barna issue an amazing statement to all those who feel their rebellious spirits (including mine) rising to the surface. “We do not stand with you. Our advice: Either leave your church quietly, refusing to cause division, or be at peace with it. There is a vast gulf between rebellion and taking a stand for what is true.”

Instead, the authors invite the reader to ask the tough questions about why we do the things we do, and to discover where those traditions came from. Most Christians that claim to know The Book, and order their lives by it, have have never really explored this topic, and are not conscious of the non-biblical roots of many things that are often passed off as “Christian.”

A Terrifying Invitation

So, Viola and Barna invite the reader to the “untrodden path.” The path of asking tough questions. They claim that as you read their book, you will be surprised at how little of our modern ideas and practices of doing church are actually from Jesus, the Apostles or the Scriptures. Most of it was lifted right out of pagan culture. We think of pagans today as those who practice no religion at all, but the early Christians understood them to be polytheists, who followed the gods of the Romans. It was this brand of paganism that dominated the world at the time of Christ and into the 4th century, during which many of its elements were absorbed by the church. Two other periods stand out as times of great influence on our current church practices: The Reformation, and the Revivalist era in the 18th and 19th centuries.

In this book, chapters 2 - 10 will each trace a currently and widely accepted church practice. Not only will each chapter reveal where the practice originated, but more importantly, how it hampers the healthy functioning of Christ’s body (the church) today.

“Warning: If you are unwilling to have your Christianity seriously examined, do not read beyond this page. Give this book to Goodwill immediately! Spare yourself the trouble of having your Christian life turned upside down.”

The authors rephrase this warning in a couple more ways. If you are in the institutional church, this book may lead to a crisis of conscience. If you tend to resonate with Christian experience outside the institutional church, you may be encouraged as you discover that history and Scripture may stand with you more than you knew.

PERSONAL REFLECTION

As you know by now, if you are reading this blog… I took the challenge and plunged ahead with the rest of the book. I would have to say that I am at heart more of a rebel, and tend toward a questioning and analytical mind. This is why I ended up outside the institutional church in a “house church” during the 1970’s and into the 80’s. This is where I first experienced and came to appreciate “body life,” “small groups” and “contemporary worship.” I have often reflected on the events that lead to this development in my life, and can see how God used it to draw me to Himself. Otherwise, I fear that I was headed toward a rejection of Christianity and the church due to some very negative experiences I had witnessed within it.

After marriage we ended up at a small urban church (without a building) for a number of years, and then we migrated back into the more institutional church as our kids got older. We have been fairly happy in it for over 10 years. However, in the last couple of years I have sensed a new restlessness and dissatisfaction with some of the negative sides of it. Change is so very hard, long and difficult. The typical hierarchies of leadership I have seen to be unhealthy and damaging to people. It is very difficult to foster a new vision for being the church in a community that needs the church to be all that God intended. I am worn out with all the programs and activities required for involvement.

And so, given these inner urgings, this book is tapping into my roots and the experiences I once had in a more organic and non-institutional church setting. It is igniting a hunger and a fire to regain what has been lost, and to reshape it within the urban culture I find myself in at the beginning of the 21st century.

It was Francis Schaeffer who said that,

“Each generation of the church in each setting has the responsibility of communicating the gospel in understandable terms, considering the language and thought-forms of that setting.”

I believe this why the book Pagan Christianity? is so important. It raises the foundational questions and issues that the church must face if it is to communicate the gospel in the language and thought forms of current post-modern and post-Christian America. All we need do is look at Europe, the birthplace of the Reformation, to see what will happen if we don’t.

Helping to lead “contemporary worship” in a 1973 house church