Frank Viola’s unfortunate assumptions regarding “postchurch” views
August 18, 2009 by churchless
Filed under Post-Congregational
Has anyone read Frank Viola’s broadbrush generalizations of the “postchurch” mindset? He claims that much of our doctrine is based on Matthew 18:20 passage (”where two or three are gathered together”). Then he says, “Because this is the primary passage the postchurch viewpoint is founded on, I’m of the opinion that the position cannot stand up against the light of the New Testament.” So what do you think?
I have been bothered about this ever since Frank wrote that post. (I read his blog regularly.) And I wondered what prompted it, since I had not seen the term even used before. Maybe I had missed it, but when I googled the term “postchurch” most of what I found was links to Frank’s blog entry or reactions to it. My wife and I joined the ranks of Wayne Jacobsen’s “free-range Christians” in January. I have not seen any sign of Wayne using the term, the friends we now gather with do not use the term although Frank might want to apply it to us–we are not nearly as formal as a house church. Last winter I would have liked to have found one of Frank’s “organic churches”but could not find any local activity. I feel like he’s looking for trouble where there doesn’t have to be any.
Phil, if you’re regularly meeting with a group of Christians at set times and places then you’re not one of the people Frank Viola is disagreeing with here.
Frank is responding to people like Spencer Burke and other postchurch advocates in a wing of the emerging church movement who feel that just occasionally and more or less getting together with a few friends at Starbucks and chatting is enough fellowship. Commitments to particular groups of Christians and regular meetings with them at set times and places seem oppressive to these Christians. Many of them are good Christians who are reacting to bad experiences in conventional churches. Frank encourages churches to do without recognized elders or orders of service and participation by all is encouraged, so they may be far less formal than you think.
Thank you for the additional information, Frank. In the article that prompted this thread, Frank Viola did not mention any names (maybe the Christianity Today readers are up on it, but others may not be) and I did not have a clue who he was talking about. I do not know him personally, but I have read a few of his articles and 3 of his books in the last 6 years, and I have read his blog since he began doing it, and commented a few times. I have read one or two articles from Burke; don’t really remember what he wrote about, but recall he struck me as a little flaky at that time. I have not paid as much attention to the modern Emergents in the last year or two as I used to, partly because the local ones in our city (I attended one of their churches for a couple of years) finally seemed to me to be more interested in finding a new shade of lipstick for the Churchianity pig than in real reformation. I tried to google the term, but in 10 pages all I found was Frank’s article, various references to it, the usual accidental similarities, and stuff about an early type of Norwegian church buildings! Couldn’t find who was starting the stuff that Frank was concerned about. If I (and others) have jumped to the wrong conclusion, maybe he should have been less vague.
As for my other comment, I admit I don’t know what goes on in anyone’s mind, other than what comes out in speech or writing. But having been in churches all my life until this year (59 years) one thing I’ve learned is that the most dangerous spot in any church building, as far as your own Christian walk is concerned, is the front platform. Over the years I have seen so many get caught by pride in their position, some of them close friends. Leadership is risky for the leader, in a lot of ways, which is why James wrote, “Brothers, let not many of you become teachers…” If Frank can continue to avoid the traps, that is good. If he does get caught once in a while, well, welcome to the human race. When the chips are down, we are all fallen beings, saved by grace, and none of us is infallible, not even me.
After posting the previous comment, further thinking brought to mind some events I lived through about 30 years ago. My wife and I were part of the “church renewal” movement of the 1960s and ’70s. (The “emerging church” of that day–there actually was a 1970 book by that title.) The church we were part of had a group of leaders, some supported and some “tentmaking”. But a time came when the two older men apparently became as “renewed” as they were willing to be, and before long strife broke out. The two drove one man from the leadership and the church, then another left before they could start in on him, and the church quit growing and began to shrink. The man who started criticizing everyone else was the last one left, but had to leave the city himself when the church could no longer pay his support.
I also remembered the Reformation: Luther, Melancthon, Bucer, Zwingli, Calvin and others broke from the Roman church, but could not agree among themselves and developed into 2 camps, the Lutherans and the Reformed. But as other groups arose like the Anabaptists who began to move farther away from the Roman church than the first round of reformers had, Luther, et al. reacted strongly against these newer groups. The Anabaptists and other new fringe groups soon found themselves persecuted not only by the Catholics, but by Lutherans and Reformed as well!
My concern is this: Frank Viola has become one of the established leaders of the house church movement. He’s been around for years and many have found his teaching and writing helpful. But it is dangerous for any of us to assume we’ve reached the final revelation of God’s idea of church. He may be in danger of having created a box for God and His Church that God may not want to stay in indefinitely. And it is God’s prerogative to give further revelations to others besides Frank, just as He may have taken Menno Simons farther than Luther was willing to go.
Phil, Frank Viola frequently ministers with people who don’t see eye-to-eye with him on everything. I’m a good friend who he frequently talks to about many topics and I’m an Episcopalian! So Frank is clearly as unsectarian and open minded as they come. But he does feel that the idea of doing away with regular meetings with a continuing fellowship of Christians in favor of spontaneous catch-as-catch-can is harmful. Of couse I agree, but then as an Episcopalian I’m more structure tolerant than house church folks (certainly more so than Frank).Perhaps you should in the future be more hesitant about attributing to a brother some sort of sectarian pride until you’ve learned a little more about him.
I am not sure it is of any value to use these labels to overlay followers of Jesus. If we include labels, there is no way to avoid creating an “us” and “them” conflict.
It seems ok to me for someone to prefer meeting in a regular group and another to meet in a random group. It even seems ok for someone to never meet in a group at all for a time. Paul apparently vanished for at least 10 years himself. Maybe that is how he heard so clearly from god directly.
I am no authority in your lives but picking out all the comments Paul makes about how churches should meet or what they should do when they gather is helpful if it is helpful.
What I know for sure about life and humans is that we nearly always isolate people with labels. That is what labels are for. That’s how we sort out cans of food or cereal and stuff. It doesn’t work with people very well though because so much about people is hidden.