Particulars
of Christianity:
312
The Church Ethic
Church Gatherings and Leadership
Introduction
& 3 Models of Church Gatherings and Leadership
Examining the Models
Examining the Models
Conclusions and Study Expectations
Examining Church Gatherings
in the Gospels
The First Supper, Jesus'
Specific Instructions, Conclusions
Survey of Post-Ascension
Church Gatherings
Apostolic and Eldership
Functions in Acts and the Epistles
1 Corinthians 1-10 &
Introduction to 1 Corinthians 11-14
1 Corinthians 11-13
1 Corinthians 14
1 Timothy 2:12, Conclusions
on Women in Church Gatherings
Conclusions: 1 Corinthians
14, Church Gatherings & Leadership
Introduction
to the Issues of Church Gatherings and Leadership
In
the Church Ethic section of our In-Depth bible studies, we
discuss many topics that are related to church life, church
leadership, and to some extent church gatherings themselves.
Collectively, those articles clarify and contrast New Testament
church practices with modern church practices.
In
them we learned that the early church met in their homes and
did not have church buildings or the rent, mortgage payments,
utility bills, and maintenance costs that go with them (see
our article entitled, “The Church and Going to Church.”) We
learned that early church meetings involved the ability for
questions to be asked during the teaching portions of the
gatherings (see “Reason and Learning through Questions.”)
We learned that in the early church, music did not dominate
worship as it does in our church services today (see “The
Importance of Music in Worship.”) We learned that scripturally
speaking there is no such thing as a specially “call” to be
“in the ministry” that is given by God to some believers (see
“Ministers, Pastors, and the Calling.”) We learned that in
the New Testament church communities pastors, elders, bishops,
and overseers were different terms used to describe the same
role. We learned that while apostles and evangelists were
often fully supported by church communities, local leaders
were not fully supported financially. Instead, we learned
that local elders could take a portion of a weekly distribution,
which was taken to support the needs of the whole community
(see “Financial Support for Ministers.”)
These
and other facts, gleaned from these in-depth biblical studies,
work together to help build a composite picture of New Testament
church life and practice. In this study we will take a more
focused look at the nature of the New Testament church meeting
and inherently linked issue of church leadership.
The
immediate motivation for this study comes from several books,
which have recently been written on the topic by other home
church advocates. At the time of the writing of this article,
we ourselves have been involved in a home church for more
than seven years. Upon reading the work of these authors we
decided that a more thorough scriptural analysis and presentation
would be helpful to address and correct the inaccurate models
put forward in these books. In particular, the books we are
referring to are Pagan Christianity, authored by Frank Viola
and George Barna and Reimagining Church also by Frank Viola. We will quote from
these two books throughout the course of our study as we investigate
the various models that are put forward for church gatherings
and leadership. Below is the bibliographic information for
both works. Each quote used in the study will include the
book name, chapter, and page number where the quote cited
can be found.
Pagan
Christianity?: Exploring the Roots of Our Church Practices. Copyright 2002, 2008 by Frank Viola and George Barna. All rights
reserved. First printing by Present Testimony
Ministry in 2002. Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.
Reimagining
Church, Published by David C. Cook, Colorado Springs,
CO. Copyright 2008. Published in association with the literary agency of Daniel Literary
Group, Nashville,
TN.
In
his books, we are informed that Viola’s background and work
in the home church movement spans over several decades and
includes both charismatic and non-charismatic experiences.
These two works (along with other books and writings which
are available online) attempt to provide insight into the
New Testament church gathering and to redirect the modern
church away from long standing false practices in this area.
Upfront
we want to be clear that we do not disagree with everything
that Viola (and Barna) put forward in their writings. For
instance, Pagan Christianity does a proficient job
of documenting the historical facts and origins of many modern
church deviations from New Testament practice. This work is
valuable for informing modern Christian men and women (who
are all-too-often highly unaware) of where we get our modern
church customs. The effectiveness of the work is found in
Viola’s (and Barna’s) quotations of Christian historians who
track the development and changes in church practice over
the course of church history. Before proceeding into our larger
New Testament study of church models, which will in part include
a critique of Viola’s model, we want to affirm our agreement
with several important historical facts that Viola establishes
in Pagan Christianity through his use of reputable
scholars and historians.
First,
we would like to draw our attention to the following quote
of the well-known Christian Historian, Philip Schaff, in which
Schaff unequivocally informs us that for centuries after Christ
the early church did not meet in buildings called “churches.”
That
the Christians in the apostolic age erected special houses
of worship is out of the question…As the Saviour of the
world was born in a stable, and ascended to heaven from a
mountain, so his apostles
and their successors down to the third century, preached
in the streets, the markets, on mountains, in ships, sepulchres,
eaves, and deserts, and in the homes of the their converts.
But how many thousands of costly churches and chapels have
since been built in all parts of the world to the honor of
the crucified Redeemer, who in the days of his humiliation
had no place of his own to rest his head! – Philip Schaff,
Nineteenth-Century American Church Historian and Theologian
quoted by Frank Viola, Pagan
Christianity, Chapter 2, The Church Building: Inheriting
the Edifice Complex, page 9
In
a related quote, Viola cites authors Robert and Julia Banks
and Frank Senn to verify similar historical facts. The early
church met in one another’s homes for over two centuries after
Christ.
Footnote
22: Robert and Julia Banks, The Church Comes Home (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1998), p.
49-50. The house at Dura-Europos was destroyed in AD 256.
According to Frank Senn, “Christians
of the first several centuries lacked the publicity of
the pagan cults. They had no shrines, temples, statues, or sacrifices. They staged no public festivals, dances, musical
performances, or pilgrimages. Their
central ritual involved a meal that had a domestic origin
and setting inherited from Judaism. Indeed, Christians
of the first three centuries usually met in private residences
that had been converted into suitable gathering spaces for
the Christian community…This indicates that the ritual
bareness of the early
Christian worship should not be taken as a sign of primitiveness,
but rather as a way of emphasizing the spiritual character
of Christian worship.” Christian Liturgy: Catholic and Evangelic (Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1997), 53. – quoted by Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 2, The Church Building: Inheriting the
Edifice Complex, page 14
Notice
from the quote above that these authors agree to several historical
truths we have posited elsewhere in our studies. First, for
the first three centuries of church history, Christians met
in homes and not in buildings called “churches.” Second, for
the first three centuries, Christians had no public festivals
(like Christmas). Third, the early Christians did not have
musical performances for the first several centuries AD. Fourth,
these authors note that the communal meal was “domestic” and
“inherited from Judaism.” (We will discuss this later in our
study.) And lastly, note that the quote above states that
it isn’t due to primitiveness that the early church had such
different practices than we do today, as if they lacked the
resources or the awareness to do them. Instead, the early
church had no church buildings, lacked musical performance,
celebrated no public festivals, and had a domestic communion
meal because they felt that doing so was contrary to the “spiritual
character” or nature of Christian worship as established by
the New Testament.
In
a third quote, Viola again offers Schaff’s assessment that
the early church met in their homes.
Footnote
48: A Historical Approach
to Evangelic Worship(New York: Abingdon Press, 1954),
103; Schaff, History
of the Christian Church, 3:542. Schaff’s opening words
are telling: “After Christianity was acknowledged by the state and empowered to hold
property it raised houses of worship in all parts of the Roman
Empire. There was probably more building of this
kind in the fourth century than there has been in any period,
excepting perhaps the nineteenth century in the United States.”
Norrington points out that as the bishops of the fourth and
fifth centuries grew in wealth, they
funneled it into elaborate church building programs (To Preach or Not, 29). Ferguson
writes, “Not until
the Constantinian age do we find specially constructed buildings,
at first simple halls and then the Constantinian basilicas.”
Before Constantine, all structures
used for church gatherings were “houses or commercial buildings
modified for church use” (Early
Christians Speak, 74). – quoted by Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 2, The Church Building: Inheriting the
Edifice Complex, page 18
To
his credit, these types of citations permeate portions of
Viola’s Pagan Christianity
and go a long way to establishing the little-known truths
of early church life and how they differ from much of modern
practice. From his knowledge of the subject Viola appropriately
draws the conclusion that the modern institutional-corporation
model of church life is not the New Testament model of church
life.
In
Pagan Christianity,
Viola provides a deserving critique of the financial drain
of church buildings versus meeting one another’s needs, the
isolation of modern Christians from real, shared community
living, and the unchallengeable, authoritarian concept of
having a single church pastor. He documents the error of the
modern church service in being structured to be prohibitive
of interaction during the teaching. He demonstrates the origin
of the modern motivational sermon from the pagan orators of
Roman and Greek society through the homiletics courses of
seminaries designed to train new pastors how to compose a
sermon. And he explains the inadequacy of reducing the full
New Testament communion meal to a small bite of bread (or
cracker) and a tiny swallow of wine (or juice). For these
efforts and conclusions, Viola deserves our commendation and
the gratitude of his readers. We would certainly recommend
that anyone unfamiliar with the historical facts cited above,
which birthed so many of our modern practices, read Pagan
Christianity or other books available on the subject.
Through
the research of authors in this field, we can be confident
that there is good reason to re-examine the New Testament
in search for understanding about how the early church met
together. But it is at this point that we part company with
Frank Viola. In response to the dilemma of deviant modern
practice, Viola offers his own model for church gatherings
and church leadership. His model is presented in his works.
While Pagan Christianity serves primarily to
chronicle the historical trends and origins of the modern
church, it also contains provisions from Viola for what he
believes to be the correct approach. Viola’s concept for church
gatherings and leadership, however, is more centrally focused
on in his more recent work Reimagining Church.
In this second work, Viola provides 306 pages espousing a
comprehensive look at the subject.
As
we proceed in this study it is important to define the various
models that may be available for church gatherings and leadership.
After identifying these models and distinguishing one from
another, we will proceed to some additional support that Frank
Viola makes for the model he puts forward in his books. This
will be followed by a discussion of the relevance, nature,
and use of the New Testament as an information source for
determining the manner of church gatherings and leadership.
We will then survey the New Testament in the context of a
historical narrative of the early church in order to determine
which model fits the biblical picture.
Three
Models of Church Gatherings and Leadership:
Introduction and the Pseudo-Traditional Model
There
are three basic models for conducting church service that
we will discuss in this study.
The
first model we will define is what we might term as the Pseudo-traditional
church model. We attach the prefix “pseudo” to this model
in order to be clear that by “traditional” we do not mean
to imply a model that has actually been handed down since
the very earliest church period. That might be the implication
if we simply used the term “traditional.” Since, however,
we are referring to the modern norm for church services, which
has only been in effect since about the fourth century AD,
we will add this prefix. The name Pseudo-traditional then
acknowledges that this model has a very long-standing acceptance
over the lengthy course of church history. While at the same
time, we are emphasizing that this longevity does not reach
all the way back to the New Testament period.
What
is the Pseudo-traditional model?
Most
of us know it very well. Whether Roman Catholic or some brand
of Protestant, all modern church services are very alike in
their key aspects. For one, most church services begin with
a segment of time for musical worship led by a music minister
or worship team and then proceed to an uninterruptable monologue
from the pastor called a sermon. The modern sermon itself
is a feature that we would seriously critique, due to its
lack of real and serious biblical instruction replaced instead
entirely by motivational speeches and formulas for successful
living in modern society. (Other common features of the modern
church service are noted by Frank Viola in his book Pagan Christianity.)
However,
the particular aspect of modern church meetings that we are
most interested in is the fact that when it comes to authority
the senior pastor is without peer in the congregation, operating
as the president or CEO of the church just as if it were a
corporation. More specifically, we are interested in how this
concept of church leadership, vested so extensively in the
senior pastor, organizes the church gathering around his uninterruptable
monologue and prevents interaction from the rest of the church
body.
Due
to the widespread familiarity of the Pseudo-traditional modern
model we will not spend much more time explaining it further.
We will only note how well the Pseudo-traditional model inherent
links our concept of church leadership and our format for
church services. Below are the defining characteristics of
the Pseudo-traditional model.
1.
The concept of church leadership is chiefly limited to a single
individual.
2.
The church gathering is formatted so that speaking and teaching
are exclusively reserved for the pastor while participation
by anyone else is entirely restricted.
We
will now move on to the model for church services and leadership
that Frank Viola offers in his work and has practiced in the
networks of house churches that he has established over the
many years of his ministry.
The
Viola Model of Church Gatherings and Leadership
In
many ways, the model presented by Frank Viola in his books
Pagan Christianity
and Reimagining Church are the complete opposite
of those exemplified by the Pseudo-traditional model. Viola
himself refers to the model he offers as “the organic church
model.” However, the term “organic” may validly be applied
to whichever model best follows the biblical mandates for
the gatherings of the body of Christ. In addition, the term
“organic” doesn’t immediately present a clear definition of
Viola’s approach. For these reasons, we will instead call
his model “the Viola model.”
The
quotes below substantiate the various defining aspects of
the model that Viola posits. We will be looking at quite a
few of them so that we can be clear and specific about the
features of Viola’s model, which he feels distinguish it from
other alternatives. We will begin with the following quote
in which Viola criticizes limiting leadership in church gatherings
to a single person and emphasizes the necessity of all persons
being able to speak and share.
Second,
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 of one member of the
body – the pastor. Where is the freedom for our Lord Jesus
to speak through His body at will? Where in the liturgy may God give a brother
or sister a word to share with the whole congregation?
The order of worship allows for no such thing. Jesus Christ has no
freedom to express Himself through His body at His discretion.
He too is rendered a passive spectator. 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 turns it
into one huge tongue (the pastor) and many little ears (the
congregation). This does violence to Paul’s vision of
the body of Christ, where every member functions in the church
meeting for the common good (see 1 Corinthians 12). – Frank
Viola, Pagan Christianity,
Chapter 3, The Order of Worship: Sunday Mornings Set in Concrete,
page 76
Viola
makes similar comments in a later chapter as well, once again
criticizing any model for church gatherings that reduces all
the members to mere listeners and “mute spectators.”
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. 186 It has rendered you a mute spectator
who is proficient at taking sermon notes and passing an offering
plate. – Frank Viola, Pagan
Christianity, Chapter 5, The Pastor: Obstacle to Every-Member
Functioning, pages 136-137
According
to Viola it is not correct to have our regular church services
be lead by only one or two individuals. (We stipulate regular
church services specifically in order to be fair to Viola
who does recognize other types of church services, which he
says are legitimately lead by a singular individual and where all do not participate
equally. We will examine his views on this further as we proceed.)
In the series of quotes that follow we will continue to see
Viola’s contrast of his own model where each and every member
participates to the “pastor-only” limited participation offered
by the Pseudo-traditional model.
But
there is something more. The contemporary pastorate rivals
the functioning headship of Christ in His Church. It illegitimately
holds the unique place of centrality 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 it. By his office, the pastor displaces
and supplants Christ’s headship by setting himself up as the
church’s human head. For this reason, nothing so hinders the
fulfillment of God’s eternal purpose as does the present-day
pastoral role. Why? Because that purpose is centered on making Christ’s
headship visibly manifested in the church through the free,
open, mutually participatory, every-member functioning of
the body. – Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 5, The Pastor:
Obstacle to Every-Member Functioning, page 137
Some
of the signs of a healthy
organic church are:…meetings
that express and reveal Jesus Christ and in which every member functions and shares - – Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 11, Reapproaching
the New Testament: The Bible Is Not A Jigsaw Puzzle, page
241
The
New Testament church had no fixed order of worship. The early Christians gathered in open-participatory
meetings where all believers shared their experience of Christ,
exercised their gifts, and sought to edify one another. No
one was a spectator. All
were given the privilege and the responsibility to participate.
The purpose of these church meetings was twofold. It was for
the mutual edification
of the body. It was also to make visible the Lord Jesus 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,
spontaneity, and joy. The meetings belonged to Jesus Christ
and to the church; they did not serve as a platform for any
particular ministry or gifted person. – Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 12, A Second
Glance at the Savior: Jesus, the Revolutionary, page 243
Taking
note that elders are the same thing in the New Testament (and
in Viola’s view) as bishops, overseers, and pastors/shepherds,
the following quotes demonstrate Viola’s resistance to the
idea of elders/pastors monopolizing participation at church
meetings and his insistence that the meeting not be dominated
by one or two persons leading or teaching.
Elders
and shepherds were ordinary Christians with certain gifts.
They were not special offices. And they did
not monopolize the ministry of the church meetings. They
were simply seasoned Christians who naturally cared for the
members of the church during times of crisis and provided
oversight for the whole assembly. – Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 12, A Second Glance At
the Savior: Jesus, the Revolutionary, page 248
In
this particular church, they were never called “elders.” And
in the church meetings, they were indistinguishable from the
other believers. Visitors could never tell who the elders
were. The reason? Because
the meetings of the church belonged to the whole church, never
to the elders. Everyone was free to share, minister,
and function on equal footing. – Frank Viola, Reimagining
Church,
Chapter 9, Reimagining Oversight, page 172
While
gifted elders had a
large share in teaching, they did so on the same footing as
all the other members. They didn’t monopolize the meetings
of the church. – Frank Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 9, Reimagining Oversight, page 170
It’s
quite clear, then. The
New Testament consistently rejects the notion of ecclesiastical
officers in the church. It also
greatly downplays the role of elders. – Frank Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 9, Reimagining Oversight, page 185
It
would serve us well to ask why the New Testament gives so
little airplay to elders. The oft-ignored reason may be
surprising to institutional ears: The bulk of responsibility for pastoral care,
teaching, and ministry in the ekklesia
rests squarely on the shoulders of all
the brothers and sisters. In fact, the richness of Paul’s
vision of the body of Christ stems from his continual emphasis
that every member is gifted, has ministry, and is responsible in the body
(Rom. 12:6; 1 Cor. 12:1ff.; Eph. 4:7; 1 Peter 4:10). As a
consequence, ministerial responsibility is never to be
closeted among a few. – Frank Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 9, Reimagining Oversight, page 185
With
dramatic clarity, all of these “one-another” exhortations
incarnate the fact that every
member of the church is to share the responsibility for pastoral
care. Leadership is a corporate affair, not a solo one. It
is to be shouldered by the entire body. Consequently,
the idea that elders
direct the affairs of the church, make decisions in all corporate
matters, handle all of its problems, and supply all of its teaching is alien to New Testament thinking. Such an
idea is pure fantasy and bereft of biblical support. –
Frank Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 9, Reimagining Oversight, page 187
In
the following quotes, Viola includes what he feels are deficiencies
of small group bible study formats despite their allowance
of greater interaction and dialogue than the typical Sunday
morning service.
All
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 where Jesus Christ is made
visible by the every-member functioning of His body. –
Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity,
Afterword, page 266
Note
that it takes time 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. – Frank Viola, Pagan
Christianity, Chapter 12, A Second Glance At
the Savior: Jesus, the Revolutionary, page 252
The
above quotes give us some additional insight into what Viola
envisions for regular church gatherings. Not only is Viola
against the Sunday morning format, which completely restricts
all participation from the congregation, but he is also ruling
out any format where leadership and participation is not equally
shared by all. Bible study formats where one, two, or three
persons lead the group are just as unacceptable to Viola as
services where one person gives an uninterruptable sermon.
In Viola’s model, there must be total equality of participation
by virtually all that are present. No members should speak
or be more dominant than any others. Consequently, home churches
where some lead and present teaching while others interrupt
throughout the study, ask questions, or make comments are
not what Viola has in mind.
One
key to understanding Viola’s model is what he means by “functioning”
and “sharing.” Some of the above quotes imply that in Viola’s
view the sharing and functioning, which is traditionally reserved
only for the pastor, is instead shared equally by all members
of the congregation. Below, Viola describes the model he envisions
and implements in the house churches that he interacts with.
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 expressed
in 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 prayers, the ministry, and the sharing.
The meeting is completely open for the Holy Spirit to
reveal Christ through each member as He sees fit, In the words
of 1 Corinthians 14:26, “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
features are virtually absent in the typical institutional
church service. – Frank Viola, Pagan
Christianity, Afterword, page 261
For
instance, I (Frank) recently attended a conference where a
contemporary church planter spent an entire weekend with a
network of house churches. Each day, the church planter submerged
the churches in a revelation of Jesus Christ. But he also
gave them very practical instruction on how to experience what he preached. 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 essential New Testament apostolic
ministry. – Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 4, The Sermon: Protestantism’s Most Sacred
Cow, page 99
Some
shared poems, others shared songs, others shared stories,
others shared from Scripture, others offered prayers.
– Frank Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 1, Reimagining the Church
Meeting, page 70
In
fact, one of the goals of New Testament-styled preaching and
teaching is to get
each of us to function (Ephesians 4:11-16). It
is to encourage us to open our mouths in the church meeting
(1 Corinthians 12-14). – Frank Viola, Pagan
Christianity, Chapter 4, The Sermon: Protestantism’s Most
Sacred Cow, page 97
The
church meeting was based upon the “round-table” principle.
That is, every member was encouraged to function and participate.
– Frank Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 2, Reimagining the Church
Meeting, pages 53
To
be sure, Viola certainly intends that all persons have an
equal part in speaking. However, we can see that by “every-member
functioning,” Viola does not simply mean that all members
take turns giving long-winded sermons. At Viola’s church meetings
there are songs. There are poems. There are skits. There are
short teachings. There are commentaries on passages read earlier
in the week. There are testimonies and stories about what
God has done in your life. Prayers are offered. But no member
teaches at length. There are no long teaching presentations
in Viola’s church gathering. While some planning may occur,
it is not necessary and the meetings do not follow a set order,
but rather are completely spontaneous. Each person takes a
turn leading and sharing for a few moments. No member takes
up a disproportionate amount of the meeting time than any
other member.
As
Viola explains, he believes that the New Testament calls for
just the type of meeting he has described for us above with
no one, two, or three people
dominating or directing the meeting.
Nowhere
in the New Testament do we find grounds for a church meeting
that is dominated or directed by a human being. – Frank
Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 2, Reimagining the Church
Meeting, pages 54
In
like manner, the New Testament letters show that the ministry
of God’s Word came from the entire church in their regular
gatherings. From Romans 12:6-8, 1 Corinthians 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). – Frank Viola, Pagan Christianity, Chapter 4, The Sermon:
Protestantism’s Most Sacred Cow, page 88
The
regular meetings of the church envisioned in Scripture allowed
for every member to participate in the building up of the body of Christ
(Eph. 4:16). There
was no “up-front” leadership. No one took center stage.
Unlike today’s practice, the teaching in the church meeting was not delivered
by the same person week after week. Instead, every member had the right, the privilege, and the responsibility to minister
in the gathering. Mutual encouragement was the hallmark of
this meeting. “Every one of you” was its outstanding characteristic.
– Frank Viola, Reimagining
Church,
Chapter 2, Reimagining the Church Meeting, page 52
Again,
“one-anothering” was the dominant ingredient of the early
church gathering. In such an open format, the early Christians
regularly composed their own songs and sang them in the meetings.
In like manner, each Christian who was given something to
say by the Holy Spirit had the liberty to supply it through
his or her unique gift. – Frank Viola, Reimagining Church,
Chapter 2, Reimagining the Church
Meeting, pages 52-53
From
all of these quotes we can get a pretty clear idea of Viola’s
model for church gatherings and leadership. Below we have
listed its chief characteristics.
1.
No one, two, or three people lead or teach at church meetings
or take up the majority of the speaking.
2.
Church meetings are not defined or dominated by leading and
teaching from elders/pastors/bishops/overseers.
3.
There are no long teaching components during a church gathering.
4.
Every member, whether man or woman, has the right and the
responsibility to share and speak at the church gathering
by singing a song, reading a poem, acting out a skit, giving
a short bible commentary on a passage they read that week,
saying some encouraging words, giving a testimony of something
good God has done, or praying.
Spiritual
Gifts and Church Gatherings
As
we sum up Viola’s model we should comment briefly on an additional
set of items that he lists as possible occurrences at their
church meetings. In the above quotes and elsewhere in his
books, Viola mentions the giving of revelations and prophecies.
He also mentions every person using their gifts for the benefit
of all as they are enabled by the Holy Spirit and he references
1 Corinthians 12-14 in support of his “every-member functioning”
model. However, Viola does not (in his books) provide evidence
for whether spiritual gifts, such as those mentioned in 1
Corinthians 12-14, are legitimately being distributed to the
church by the Holy Spirit today.
This
subject has some relevance to our study of church gatherings
for two reasons. First, if the Holy Spirit is not giving spiritual
gifts to the church today as He did in the early church period,
then passages in the New Testament which inform us about their
occurrence during church meetings are not relevant to our
meetings today. (We will return to this topic later as we
discuss the relevant New Testament passages.)
Second,
any model for church gatherings (such as Viola’s), which demands
replacing human leadership with the direction and involvement
of the Holy Spirit must first answer the question of whether
the Holy Spirit is providing that same kind of oversight in
the church today. Viola does not answer this crucial question
in his books. A discussion of that topic can be found on our
website in the In-Depth Studies section of our website under
the title “Charismatic Doctrines.” The conclusion of that
study is that the gifts are not being distributed by the Holy
Spirit in the modern church the way they were in the early
church. Without the legitimate leading of the Holy Spirit
(as exemplified through the distribution of true spiritual
gifts), Viola’s model, which claims to be Spirit-led rather
than human-led, will either be a model without any leadership
or one which, in reality, is as much based on human leadership
as any other model. The only difference is the number of humans
leading the meeting, many instead of just a few.
Having
defined the first two models of church gatherings and leadership,
the Pseudo-traditional model, and the Viola model, we will
now move on to the third model that we will discuss in our
study.
The
Elder-Leadership Model for Church Gatherings and Leadership
The
above two models for church gatherings and leadership are
at opposite ends of the spectrum from one another. One model,
which we have called the Pseudo-traditional model, restricts
the leading of church meetings to a single, authoritative
pastor/elder/overseer/bishop who
alone can teach and speak over the course of the meetings.
No one else can contribute, speak, ask a question, or share
in any other way during the service.
In
the second model, which we called the Viola model, leadership
and teaching by one, two, or three dominant persons is completely
prohibited. As such, pastors/elders/overseers/bishops do not
lead the meeting through teaching. There are no long teaching
segments at all. All members speak and contribute equally
over the course of the meeting through songs, poems, skits,
prayers, testimonies, encouraging words, short commentaries
or teachings.
A
third model is available, which we believe is the model actually
presented in the New Testament. The defining features of this
model will be compiled as we survey and study the New Testament.
However, at this point it is helpful to likewise provide a
definition of this third model to compare and contrast against
the other two alternatives. This third model we will call
the Elder-Leadership model.
In
the Elder-Leadership model each local church community is
lead by a group of elders/bishops/overseers/pastors. These
men coordinate and work in cooperation with one another as
a group and not in the singular manner of the Pseudo-traditional
pastor. Church meetings are conducted through the leadership
of the elders who dominate the meeting by teaching the Word.
However, participation and sharing are not exclusively limited
to the elders. Instead, the men present in the meetings are
able to interrupt at any point during the presentation of
teaching and ask a question or make a comment of their own.
It was also possible and allowable for other men, besides
the elders, to present scriptural insight to the church, provided
that the elders were present to supply supervision. (The question
of participation by women during church gatherings will be
addressed later in our study.)
In
this way the Elder-Leadership model falls between the two
extremes offered by the Pseudo-traditional model and the Viola
model. In it, dialogue is not prohibited. Instead it is encouraged.
However, emphasis is still placed on the priority of teaching
of the Word. This is done by those who have become capable
of doing so. This teaching of the elders dominates the church
gatherings, with one of its purposes being to develop other
men to share in this vital role.
To
sum up, the Elder-Leadership model has the following characteristics.
1.
A group of capable teachers dominates the church gathering
through the teaching of the Word. These men could correctly
be referred to biblically as elders, pastors, overseers, or
bishops. They share the leadership with one another rather
than having a single person over the entire church community.
One of their goals is to train up other men in the congregation
to join them in this important role.
2.
Speaking at the church gathering is not limited to the teaching
of the elder(s), instead the men (but not women) who are present
can interrupt with questions, comments, clarifications, or
even counterpoints. Dialogue is permitted and encouraged as
useful.