Reimagining Church.

Book Review.

Viola, Frank. Reimagining Church. Pursuing the dream of organic Christianity. Pub. David C. Cook. 2008.

F.V.- an influential voice in the contemporary house church movement for the past twenty years, an expert on emerging trends of the church.

Comment. Henry.
All that I know about the house church movement has been learned from written material. I am not aware of such a church in our community and I have not visited a house church. That is not to say such churches do not exist here.
Frank’s book has left me with more questions than answers on the subject. I now have new terms to deal with their own special definitions, i.e. ‘organic’ and ‘institutional’ as they apply to churches. Organic is the term that characterizes the N.T. church(es) and is therefore the biblical blueprint for church. Anything different is some kind of counterfeit if not a heresy and should be viewed as such. Since my whole life has been lived in what would qualify as an institutional church it hard for me to maintain an ‘open mind’ about Frank’s “reimagining”.

An organic church will be “organic in its construction; relational in its functioning; scriptural in its form; Christ-centered in its operation; Trinitarian in its shape; communitarian in its lifestyle; nonelitist in its attitude; and nonsectarian in its expression”. (26)

An organic church has a DNA. A basic aspect of that DNA is reflected in the characteristics of the Trinity. The ‘church meeting’ of the early church is contrasted with a typical ‘church meeting’ of today. There is actually no comparison. “The Reformation recovered the truth of the priesthood of the believers. But it failed to restore the organic practices that embody this teaching.” (58)
The celebration of the Lord’s Supper is explained as it happens in the house church environment. The home not an edifice is the correct ‘meeting place’. The family metaphor is appropriate to describe the church. Sectarianism, denominations, and other such group labeling are seen as evidence of lack of unity. It is in organic churches that we see legitimate unity. There has been a disproportionate emphasis in teaching (preaching) on God meeting man’s needs and not enough emphasis on the eternal purpose of God.

There are serious shortcomings in the clergy-laity form of leadership. “The mere presence of clergy has the deadening effect of conditioning the congregation to be passive and perpetually dependent.” (162) The single pastor leadership of a church is not a biblical concept. Oversight (which is not synonymous with contemporary leadership) was shared and it was indigenous. “It’s the believing community that is called to carry out pastoral functions.” (186) “The N.T. pattern for decision-making in the early church was by consensus.” (193) The proper exercise of gifts by its members is a huge asset in arriving at a unified consensus. When it comes to accountability (also called covering) it must be to the Lord not to ‘those in authority’. Subjection vs obedience and official authority vs organic authority are important related concepts regarding accountability. “Mutual subjection creates a culture that appreciates spiritual leadership without absolutizing it.” (227)

“Denominational covering” (229) is portrayed as being quite unbiblical, in fact it is a “heresy”. (235) The concept and teaching of “apostolic tradition” (241) is revisited. An interesting chart is presented “comparing the institutional paradigm with the organic paradigm”. (274, 275)