The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

Shmuel is the name of the boy in the striped pajamas. He is an eight year old Jewish boy in a Nazi concentration camp. Bruno, the eight-year old son of the camp commandant meets Shmuel across the electric barbed wire fence. The film, based upon the book by John Boyne, uses this powerful story to explore issues of innocence, friendship, good, evil and what it means to be human.

As Catherine Barsotti and Robert Johnston say in their helpful book, Finding God in the Movies: 33 Films of Reel Faith,“ Successful movies do not merely transplant us somewhere new; they inspire us to become one with one of the characters.” And this film certainly does that. We look at the Holocaust through the eyes of an 8-year-old whose country and family would have him believe that the Jews were enemies and were getting what they deserved. But Bruno’s childlike identification with Shmuel tells him otherwise. — Breakpoint.org

This is a very powerful, emotionally gripping story with implications for our current culture and world situation. I encourage any adult who reads this blog post to go see the film, or read the book (it is not for children!)… then sit down over coffee with some friends and have an open discussion about it. There is a discussion guide available below to help.

Watch the movie trailer (above)

Book: Boy In the Striped Pajamas (Movie Tie-in Edition)

Discussion Guide: The Boy in the Striped Pajamas

May we never forget.

Chapter 2: From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals

From House Churches to Holy Cathedrals

Dura Europos House Church Renovation Floor PlanAs 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.

The Familia Sagrada in Barcelona, SpainBecause 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.”

Chapter 2: Temples, Priests, and Sacrifices

The Pedestal ComplexTemples, 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.

The Calf Path – A metaphor for the church?

I am quoting from Pagan Christianity? – “In this book, we sometimes refer to “the crooked path” that led the institutional church to its current form. This poem, written more than a century ago, served as the inspiration for that metaphor.”

Sam Walter FossThe Calf Path
A poem by Sam Walter Foss

One day through the primeval wood
A calf walked home as good calves should;
But made a trail all bent askew,
A crooked trail as all calves do.

Since then three hundred years have fled,
And I infer the calf is dead.
But still he left behind his trail,
And thereby hangs my moral tale.

The trail was taken up next day
By a lone dog that passed that way;
And then a wise bell–wether sheep
Pursued the trail o’er vale and steep,
And drew the flock behind him, too,
As good bell–wethers always do.
And from that day, o’er hill and glade,
Through those old woods a path was made.

And many men wound in and out,
And dodged and turned and bent about,
And uttered words of righteous wrath
Because ’twas such a crooked path;
But still they followed – do not laugh -
The first migrations of that calf,
And though this winding wood-way stalked
Because he wobbled when he walked.

This forest path became a lane
That bent and turned and turned again;
This crooked lane became a road,
Where many a poor horse with his load
Toiled on beneath the burning sun,
And thus a century and a half
They trod the footsteps of that calf.

The years passed on in swiftness fleet,
The road became a village street;
And this, before men were aware,
A city’s crowded thoroughfare.
And soon the central street was this
Of a renowned metropolis;
And men two centuries and a half
Trod in the footsteps of that calf.

Each day a hundred thousand rout
Followed this zigzag calf about
And o’er his crooked journey went
The traffic of a continent.
A hundred thousand men were led
By one calf near three centuries dead.
They followed still his crooked way.
And lost one hundred years a day,
For thus such reverence is lent
To well-established precedent.

A moral lesson this might teach
Were I ordained and called to preach;
For men are prone to go it blind
Along the calf-paths of the mind,

And work away from sun to sun
To do what other men have done.
They follow in the beaten track,
And out and in, and forth and back,

And still their devious course pursue,
To keep the path that others do.
They keep the path a sacred groove,
Along which all their lives they move;
But how the wise old wood-gods laugh,
Who saw the first primeval calf.
Ah, many things this tale might teach —
But I am not ordained to preach.

PERSONAL REFLECTIONS

I would have to say that when I read this poem for the first time, it slowly dawned on me how the metaphor fit the institutional church. I believe it is the job of each generation of the church to ask the question whether or not we are creating “idols” of our own personal or cultural preferences. When I was young, the evangelical church had a hard time with accepting guitars and other non-traditional instruments to be used in church worship. They also had a hard time accepting long hair styles, and other outward cultural expressions of the times.

Today, we have gotten past a lot of that, but we don’t seem to apply the same “enlightenment” to the very foundations of our evangelical practices. Why do we not ask the question as to why there is no mention of a “senior pastor” in the Bible? Why is there no mention of “the pulpit” in the New Testament writings? Did the early church have small groups, Sunday school or adult bible fellowships? How about a youth group? If so, where? If not, why not? There are hundreds of these kinds of questions that come to my mind as I read this poem.

Which is a great segue into the title of the next chapter: Have We Really Been Doing it By The Book?