We know that the early church was an unleashed, Spirit-led movement that was eventually tamed and organized into the type of institution that we see today. I find that many people really begin to “get it” when they see the following timeline of when the different parts of the institution were added:
• special class of clergy separate from laity, 2nd century
• special clothing for clergy, 3rd century
• one-bishop-rule, which we know today as “the pastor”, 3rd century
• the sermon as the centerpiece of worship, 4th century
• special buildings for worship, 4th century
• choirs, 4th century
• the pulpit as a raised place to speak from, 5th century
• the basic order of worship as we know it today, 5th century
• pews, 13th century
• congregational song leader, 14th century
• dressing up for church, 18th century
• youth pastors, 20th century
• worship team, 20th century
“Wait a minute! You mean there was not always a worship team with guitars, bass, and drums?”
Actually, it is quite challenging for most of us to really envision the church as Jesus defined it: followers, living radically for Him, gathering simply for prayer, worship, and mutual encouragement, going wherever the Spirit sent them to reach and minister to others. None of the extras that we associate with church (buildings, pews, preachers, worship leaders) were needed. Just people, lit up with the fire of God in their hearts, caring for and supporting each other (simply like families), living into a broken world with God’s light.
Comments
10 responses to “From Movement to Institution… and Back”
You know, I once brought up the fact that dressing up for church didn’t come about until the 18th century when I was on staff at a church a few years ago. Interestingly enough, this was one of the main reasons that I was asked to resign.
I find it interesting that we have created such traditions and in the course of even a few hundred (or less) years made them sacred. It really doesn’t make much sense, does it?
Josh Boldman
http://www.joshboldman.com
Do you have footnotes for your timeline?
thanks a ton. Very good.
steve
Roger,
It seems as if you are attacking the major evangelical church. Not that this is a negative to see the differences within the church, but are you saying that a church setup as a business, with 501(c)3 exemption, with a building, budget, and pastoral staff is not what Jesus intended?
It seems that the church leaders created positions such as elders or pastors to be devoted to prayer and the teaching of word. They didn’t have outside jobs, or so it leads us to believe.
I am in full support of self examination of the body as long as we show humility and respect to those who are in this life the same reasons.
God has created diversity within humanity and I am grateful for that, because a lot of people will not connect with myself as a leader and they should have other connection points to meet Jesus.
I appreciate your opinion and thinking and I look forward to hearing more from you!
Joey
Hey Joey,
Glad to have your thoughts and involvement here. I hope this is a forum where we can learn from one another.
It is never my intention to “attack” any part of the body of Christ. “Challenge”, yes. “Attack”, no.
As humans, we will always function with forms and structures. None of these things are intrinsically “bad.” To some extent, they are absolutely necessary. If we meet in a house for two times in a row, we are creating a form. The third time we meet, one could even say that we are moving down the road toward institutionalizing something. This, in and of itself, is not a bad thing.
The problem is when the form replaces the substance and the life. Forms and structures are meant to support the life and movement of God, by His Spirit, through His people. I am certain that this was Jesus’ intention.
Unfortunately, it is our human nature to become enamored with our forms and structures. We build “bigger and better” forms and then our life in and with God becomes defined by those forms and structures. Supporting the forms and structures will eventually take precedence over living the Spirit-directed life UNLESS those structures remain fluid. This does not mean the structures are “bad.” It simply means that the more institutionalized and business-like they become, the greater is the tendency for the body of Christ to become passive participants in an external “church-life” rather than active catalysts in the “God-life.”
This tendency, just mentioned, IS the problem.
Some people, within our present-day, institutional churches are able to find and express their own God-given destiny. That is wonderful! But, there are many, many people who need to step out of the traditional church forms, along with the hierarchical leadership, in order to break out of their passivity and find the freedom to fully express their own destiny and life in God.
Jesus’ focus was on a way of life, not a form of churchy living. Eventually, I believe we will find that it is the most fluid forms of church life that will best support the release of God’s people through whom God will fill the earth with His glory.
This time line is great and needs to be expanded upon. The trouble is most Christian’s are so ignorant of Church history they don’t even know this.
Thanks for posting this. It can encourage the church within walls and those that meet in homes.
This post reminds me a bit of a temple vs. tabernacle analogy that Darrell Guder uses in “Be My Witnesses” which I just read and posted on today.
Hi,
I appreciate your timeline, and also am thinking along the lines of Joey re: the tone of your article.
With the presidential election coming up, one of the things I am not looking forward to is all the commercials supposedly “for” one candidate which are really nothing more than mudslinging at other candidates. Instead of “Vote for Smith because Smith promises to…” it is always “Don’t vote for Jones because Jones is a bad person, as evidenced by…(and then the voiceover says ‘paid for by the elect Smith campaign’)”
I appreciate your desire to challenge without attacking, and I really appreciate your historical perspective and research. Along these lines, I’d find it helpful and instructive to read a post here listing some things about the institutional church which are positive and which a simple church could learn from and emulate.
Or maybe along with the posts you have re: “simple church is good because of A, B, or C” or “institutional church is flawed because of D, E, or F” — how about an article listing common pitfalls of simple church, and also listing some strengths of the institutonal church that edify the body and advance the gospel?
~ Keith
And to think one cannot be saved if one doesn’t go to church. How 3rd century of them!
Teaching ? I am told that god never changes… here is one of gods laws
When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she will not be freed at the end of six years as the men are. If she does not please the man who bought her, he may allow her to be bought back again. But he is not allowed to sell her to foreigners, since he is the one who broke the contract with her. And if the slave girl’s owner arranges for her to marry his son, he may no longer treat her as a slave girl, but he must treat her as his daughter. If he himself marries her and then takes another wife, he may not reduce her food or clothing or fail to sleep with her as his wife. If he fails in any of these three ways, she may leave as a free woman without making any payment. (Exodus 21:7-11 NLT)
Question ? God apparently had no problem selling your daughters as slaves, seemingly sex slaves at that. Why doesnt this sort of thing not stand out as problematic ?
Or do you all agree that selling your daughters as sex slaves is fine as long as god say so ?
Here is another one;
Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city. (Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)
WOMAN RAVISHED ? doesnt that mean RAPE ? Of course it does,a and here we have god saying it is OK to rape woman…even in modern war we know that is wrong.
Do you all every actaully read the bible?
I’m not sure where you got the time line from but you might like a new book that’s just come out called “Pagan Christianity” by Frank Viola and George Barna. The premise of the book is that a lot of our church traditions have pagan roots and were not as God intended his church to be. It’s definitely a pro-simple church book.