Quote:
Originally Posted by Amanah
So, I'm finished with Chapter 2 which can be summarized fairly well by the following quote from page 42:
"We have become victims of our past. We have been fathered by Constantine who gave us the prestigious status of owning a building. We have been blinded by the Romans and Greeks who forced upon us their hierarchically structured basilicas. We have been taken by the Goths who imposed upon us their Platonic architecture. We have been hijacked by the Egyptians and Babylonians who gave us our sacred steeples. . . The building is an architectural denial of the priesthood of all believers."
On Page 30 thru 46 Viola continues his critique with Protestant churches. He thinks that we have taken the Pagan Catholic model and changed a few things like replacing the altar table with the pulpit. We have kept the steeple, which he equates to the obelisks of Eqypt. The Pulpit and preaching is central in our contemporary churches, and he sees this as a problem because he feels that the platform, pulpit and choir server the purpose of educating, entertaining, reaching lost souls, ect, But he sees the people in the pews as non participants.
I'm having problems with the book at this point for a few reasons. Jesus came to seek and save that which was lost. If we are having revival in church, the Word is being preached, and souls are being saved, that can't be all bad right? The point of going to church is not to be non-participatory, but to bring people to church with you so they can hear the gospel and be saved.
I'm also thinking about the books that I have read about Azusa street now and wondering about the services described in those books. I've read that people met to pray and God took over the services. That people took turns bringing the message as God led them. There were testimonies, preaching, gifts in operation as the Spirit led.
Of course the central message of this book is that the early church first met in homes and that people were able to participate as God led them. And according to Viola, this is impossible due to the structure of our pagan buildings.
|
What you are describing sounds like something I read 30 or so years ago in a book called
Mystery Babylon, written by a man by the name of Ralph Woodrow. His views (at the time) seemed nearly revolutionary.
He recent publications reflect some softening of his views.
If Viola is right then the entire protestant church must de-construct it's form, liturgy, methodology, tradition, venues and so on; only then will we become liberated from christian paganism, that is, if it is indeed pagan christianity.
But what of the good components of the way "church" is
presently done? There must be some linkage of old w/the new in order to derive that which is good from it. By that I mean, if our christianity needs to dramatically change, it will not happen overnight. Any transition is hard, especially when organizational/denominational power structures and paradigms interfere. Transition is hard, and it will take patience for positive changes to occur.
Church leadership just doesn't happen like a poof of angel dust. It is intentional. So then, what mechanisms are in place for the 5 fold ministry to flourish in the type of environment Viola suggests? I can see where many more cults will develop without good leadership. Is the American church spiritual enough to rise above it?
What say you, Amanah?