Welcome, Guest: Register On Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 3,140,468 members, 7,770,153 topics. Date: Tuesday, 19 March 2024 at 06:04 AM

'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover - Religion - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover (1622 Views)

Christianity; The Religion Not Founded By Jesus / Christianity; The Reason For Science / Are Roman Catholicism And Christianity The Same Thing? (2) (3) (4)

(1) (Reply) (Go Down)

'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by pilgrim1(f): 3:53pm On Jun 13, 2009
Hallo,

As some of you might've guessed, this thread stems from another one; but rather than a repetition, I thought it might be helpful to actually discuss this idea of the 'institutionalized church' or 'insititutionalized Christianity'. What really are the concerns Christians bear about these issues that seem to make many swing to the opposite end of the pendulum?

The topic of the thread is (rather unfortunately) named 'Institutionalized Christianity - The Viola Hangover', not for any particularly distasteful reasons against Frank Viola; but as a point of reference for many people who can identify easily in what has become a reaction against large church settings. This reactive movement against large churches is commonly associated with "House Church Movement" (HCM), House Fellowships (HF), or House Churches (HC). There are various expressions to this movement; and it's not my intention to talk down on any group. Rather, I'm seeking to make this a lively discussion, free from group-condemnation(s), and focused on the main issues instead of on persons.

While there are some good points that the HCM might display, I am not particular sure that many within the movement have a healthy modus operandi. Yes, I've read some of Frank Viola's books and concerns extensively, and I'm sure that some may be familiar with one such: Pagan Christianity. Basically, the gist is that the many large Churches with any form of leadership structure (especially pastors) is 'pagan' and quite contradictory to Biblical Christianity. He identifies a number of such issues and believes that they are all contrary to what Biblical Christianity is about.

However, when one tries to read Frank Viola with discernment, it is striking that he essentially dismisses certain issues in large churches while at the same time making the same 'mistakes' in his recommendations for small-group churches (his own flavour). I wonder how many people have actually read Viola's book about this, or listened to one of his 'messages' - perhaps such people would agree or disagree (we're all welcome to our opinions). But what is so fascinating about the HCM to warrant this attitude of interpretating large churches as "institutionalized"? What essentially is 'super' about the HCM that make other non-HCM fit the epitaph of "unbiblical" and a "departure"?

Those are the issues we shall be identifying and discussing, in the hope that we can all benefit and have a good understanding of what the Church is all about.

Cheers.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by pilgrim1(f): 4:21pm On Jun 13, 2009
So, let's see a few things about the HCM/HC/HFs -

The origins of the so-called house church movement are varied. In North America and the UK particularly, it is often viewed as a development and logical extension of the 'Brethren' or Plymouth Brethren movement both in doctrine and practice where many individuals and assemblies have adopted new approaches to worship and governance, while others recognise a relationship to the Anabaptists, Quakers, Amish, Hutterites, Mennonites, Moravians, Methodists, and the much earlier Waldenses and Priscillianists. Another perspective sees the house church movement as a re-emergence of the move of the Holy Spirit during the Jesus Movement of the 1970s in the USA or the worldwide Charismatic Renewal of the late 1960s and 1970s. Others see it as a return to a New Testament church Restorationism paradigm and a restoration of God's eternal purpose and the natural expression of Christ on the earth, urging Christians to return from hierarchy and rank to practices described and encouraged in Scripture.

The house church movement has been more recently encouraged by the church planting and publishing initiative of writers like Robert Fitts, Frank Viola, Tony & Felicity Dale, Wolfgang Simson,Wayne Jacobsen,Gene Edwards, Keith Smith, and Steve Atkerson. The Internet itself has contributed to the phenomenon's exponential growth in the past decade, networking many previously unconnected individuals.
source:Wikipedia

Incidentally, I'm quite familiar with the Brethren and Plymouth Brethren groups, and a few others which are not named above. Yes, many of these groups have sound teaching in many aspects or subjects, and some of their publications have been of tremendous blessing to many Christians around the world.

One of the emphasis (it seemed to me at the time) was the aversion for any structure. Simply put - a clergy-laity structure is unwelcome to many of these groups, so that any concept of 'pastor' is rejected in their groups.

Another emphasis is the idea of 'non-denominationalism' - all others are denominations but not their own. This is why you may not find them identified by any denomination names, and in many instance you would find Christians among them say they're 'brethren' or 'Christians' or 'saints', etc.

There are other issues which they find disturbing in larger churches. Apart from the size and the buildings where those other churches meet/gather for worship, the HCM favours home meetings and small groups which operate independent of one another.

In my experience, when someone begins to compare the HCM and what obtains in other churches, I cannot but come to the conclusions that there's nothing significantly or essentially different about the HCM. Whether we believe it or not, the HCM has its own 'forms', meets in a building, are as denominational as other groups, and involve the same things that they complain against other denominations. These 'complaints' are woven in smooth language that has become all too characteristic of the HCM, such as "an organic body" or clichés like that.

I may be wrong; but what essentially are the differences between the churches of the HCM and the denominations that they stand opposed to?
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by Image123(m): 2:09pm On Jun 14, 2009
Seriously, seriously, I think the only difference between the two is that one makes more money than the other. lol. They both have real believers, unbelievers, 'good' preachers and all that.
It's a misunderstanding really. The large churches are usually also divided into HCMs and zones. The way to the Father still remains Jesus, irrespective of where one worships, small church or large church.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by pilgrim1(f): 4:45pm On Jun 14, 2009
Oga mi, happy greetings today to you. cheesy How far?

Image123:

Seriously, seriously, I think the only difference between the two is that one makes more money than the other. lol. They both have real believers, unbelievers, 'good' preachers and all that.
It's a misunderstanding really. The large churches are usually also divided into HCMs and zones. The way to the Father still remains Jesus, irrespective of where one worships, small church or large church.

Well, that's another perspective that is appreciated. Me sef, while I experience the HCM as a "movement", no be everthing I understand among them.

However, the HCM is a distinct movement on its own. . something akin to a denomination different from other denominations. Let me draw from one of numerous HCM-type of statements of belief:

The house church movement is an attempt to get away from the institutional church, seeking instead to return to the small gatherings of peoples that constituted all of the churches of the New Testament era
Why the House Church?
Historical. The house church is the biblical church. All of the churches in the New Testament era were small assemblies that met in homes. While setting up institutional forms of "church" may or may not provide a way to honor God, the movement toward the institution and the human authority that tends to accompany hierarchical institutional structure are not theologically neutral.
Authority:
House church advocates reject any human authority other than the very real and present rule of Christ, who was inaugurated the king of his church at the first Pentecost (Acts 2). The house church assembles to know the will of its king through the Holy Spirit and to be obedient to that will. Many in the professional clergy, however, understand their role as a "priestly" one in which they are to be intermediaries between the Lord and His flock, being thus trusted through the ordination process with a certain degree of authority. While they seek the benefits of the vibrant Christianity that manifests itself in small groups, and work hard to make small groups a part of the ministry of their churches, many harbor a concern that the groups might become a threat to their own relevance and livelihood.
source: http://www.hccentral.com/

It seems all nice and cute. However, in reality, the HCM as a distinct movement rejects many things that characterize the principles of NT church fellowship. It is not only leadership, authority and ordination that is their wahala, but they often are averse to any gathering or church fellowship that is larger than 20 to 40 people. It all seems that a deliberate dogma is made out of these issues, and there are often more than enough excuses for their position. . . all in the name of contra-'institutionalized'.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by Image123(m): 12:53am On Jun 15, 2009
I'm doing fine, my sister.
I meant to say that most of the large churches are 'divided' into smaller units which they call house fellowships or cells. This small units also hold their meetings in some house. Some have their priest/pastor as a member of the cell, led by another person.
Like I said, I believe it is misunderstanding. There's no need for the large church to condemn the small church, or for the small church to feel holier than the large church. We are members of the same body if we believe.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by nwakaibe(m): 8:25am On Jun 15, 2009
I did a quick run thru the Acts of Apostles to cross check how the early church conducted its activities. Basically, the church went from staying in the upper room to sending missionaries. As the church continued to grow, certain offices like pastor, teacher, evangelist etc became needed to build up the body of Christ. A quick check thru the Pauline epistles would prove this. The early church never remained in the upper room. It moved out. At times, the early Christians met at the sea shore or beach to pray and at another time Paul hired a hall to hold meetings.Acts 19;8. The basic doctrines/teachings/message of Christianity remains unchanged thru the ages but the mode of meetings, means etc continued to be improved in line with changes in the society.
For example, there was no internet in the early church days but we are using it today to have fellowship and build each other up. There is a lot of difference in the Church at the early days and the Church in today's advanced age. Christians should walk with discernment and stop majoring on minors.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by pilgrim1(f): 9:08am On Jun 15, 2009
I'm enjoying your inputs - well done @Image123 and nwakaibe. smiley
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by KunleOshob(m): 1:52pm On Jun 15, 2009
@Pigrim.1
As you stated that you are starting this thread as a fallout of a thread i earlier statrted and seeing the line of your discourse here let be correct a notion that i might have earlier put across wrongly. Whilst i am not against large churches per se, it is how they achieve this large ness that sometimes bothers me. Though i would not like to derail this thread by stating obvious examples, in the bid to "grow" the church all sorts of false and twisted doctrines are introduced to the gatherings to encourage, stimulate, co-erce, black mail or intimidate christians to give more. They claim they are building a house for God[which actually sounds ridiculous]. Churches go into competition with each other and the focus is eventaully lost. While Jesus was on this planet he had large gatherings which he preached to. [remember sermon on the mount] but he never turned it into a money generation issue whilst claiming he wants to use it to spread the gospel. On the contrary he fed them all when they were hungry[free of charge]. So the focus should not be whether the church is large or not but rather that the church does not succumb to wordly desires whilst claiming that they are trying to serve God.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by pilgrim1(f): 2:23pm On Jun 15, 2009
@KunleOshob,

Thank you for your entrée. smiley

KunleOshob:

@Pigrim.1
As you stated that you are starting this thread as a fallout of a thread i earlier statrted and seeing the line of your discourse here let be correct a notion that i might have earlier put across wrongly.

We all make mistakes, so no worries.

KunleOshob:

Whilst i am not against large churches per se, it is how they achieve this large ness that sometimes bothers me. Though i would not like to derail this thread by stating obvious examples, in the bid to "grow" the church all sorts of false and twisted doctrines are introduced to the gatherings to encourage, stimulate, co-erce, black mail or intimidate christians to give more.

That is where you're getting it all wrong. First, the very huge mistake that adherents of the HCMs make is to start out being accusative. That is a very wrong approach to issues like this.

Second, I don't know any true church that does not participate in 'giving' in one form or another. This thread is not about what people do for "christians to give more"; and if any Christian feels that he/she does not want to give, let them keep their worries to themselves - such complaints are inconsequential with respect to the very core of our being Christians.

Third, HCM adherents happen to find themselves in the very same things that they often accuse other large churches of. False doctrines, twisted scriptures, denials of basic NT teachings, and even far more serious issues pervade the HCMs - not because pilgrim.1 says so; but more because you will find that this very reason is why many Christians have come to the conclusion that HCMs are hypocritical, and deceptively so. This concern saddens me, and was one of the reasons I thought it would help for us to discuss this subject in an amicable manner. You see, when believers in the HCMs start out accusing other people, they unwittingly expose themselves to far more grave consequences than they might imagine - and after many years, the results are in.

KunleOshob:

They claim they are building a house for God[which actually sounds ridiculous]. Churches go into competition with each other and the focus is eventaully lost. While Jesus was on this planet he had large gatherings which he preached to. [remember sermon on the mount] but he never turned it into a money generation issue whilst claiming he wants to use it to spread the gospel. On the contrary he fed them all when they were hungry[free of charge].

I know that many HCMs compete in an insidious manner with one another - I have had firsthand experience in many HCMs. You may not know, and may dismiss it out-of-hand. However, through the development of many HCMs, you might wonder why they make a big issue out of "autonomous assemblies". Second, I also know firsthand that many of the leaders involved in the HCMs have also been affected by financial scandals. I refrain from giving specific examples, because this thread is more about understanding issues rather than finger pointing. I don't think it is to your spiritual health to see others the way you do - more often than not, it's only a matter of time before you begin to see more serious issues crop up in your own small group.

KunleOshob:

So the focus should not be whether the church is large or not but rather that the church does not succumb to wordly desires whilst claiming that they are trying to serve God.

But I wonder! You often have pegged your complaint against others on the very same issue of how "large" a church is! besides, how could you be so sure that your own favoured group is "trying to serve God" and others are not?!? How could you be so sure that your favoured group is not succumbing to worldly desires while that is a charge well suited to the groups you disfavour? Haba.

There's nothing special about your own HCM that some of us don't already know. But as we progress this discussion and identify the issues of our worries, you might come to see that your concerns are surprisingly stretched out of proportion. Trust me. wink
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by nwakaibe(m): 2:28pm On Jun 15, 2009
KunleOshob:

@Pigrim.1
As you stated that you are starting this thread as a fallout of a thread i earlier started and seeing the line of your discourse here let be correct a notion that i might have earlier put across wrongly. Whilst i am not against large churches per se, it is how they achieve this large ness that sometimes bothers me. Though i would not like to derail this thread by stating obvious examples, in the bid to "grow" the church all sorts of false and twisted doctrines are introduced to the gatherings to encourage, stimulate, co-erce, black mail or intimidate christians to give more. They claim they are building a house for God[which actually sounds ridiculous]. Churches go into competition with each other and the focus is eventaully lost. While Jesus was on this planet he had large gatherings which he preached to. [remember sermon on the mount] but he never turned it into a money generation issue whilst claiming he wants to use it to spread the gospel. On the contrary he fed them all when they were hungry[free of charge]. So the focus should not be whether the church is large or not but rather that the church does not succumb to wordly desires whilst claiming that they are trying to serve God.

Uncle Kunle, I am yet to see a perfect church community and in the event you see one, you will be denied membership because no one is perfect yet. The church is for building up xtians. This forum serves as a church in a way. I have learnt a from other xtians and having fellowship with them daily refreshes my soul. Though I am not in agreement with what some of them are saying, I am happy that we are discussing Christ, his church and Heaven kiss kiss kiss. we are not discussing the latest nightclubs, hiphop artists or other worldly topics.

I got saved and started out in a small village fellowship. The beauty there is that all the members know each other. It was a close knit community. Ditto in the campus. I worship with a congregation of about 600 and it is problematic knowing one third of them. Most of the young sisters greet me when we pass on the road or anywhere but always get embarrassed cos I cant recognise them.
So both the big and small churches have their roles in the kingdom
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by KunleOshob(m): 2:48pm On Jun 15, 2009
pilgrim.1:



That is where you're getting it all wrong. First, the very huge mistake that adherents of the HCMs make is to start out being accusative. That is a very wrong approach to issues like this.

For the record, i am not an HCM adherent. I am only instrested in whatever movement would promote the undiluted gospel and pracitcalize it.

pilgrim.1:

Second, I don't know any true church that does not participate in 'giving' in one form or another. This thread is not about what people do for "christians to give more"; and if any Christian feels that he/she does not want to give, let them keep their worries to themselves - such complaints are inconsequential with respect to the very core of our being Christians.


pilgrim.1:

As i have always pointed oout to you christian giving in the bible was always about giving to meet the needs of believers and less priviledge and not to "run" churches as is done this days. Whilst i am not saying it is wrong to give to run churches i believe the focus of chritian giving as been completely lost by the church




pilgrim.1:

There's nothing special about your own HCM that some of us don't already know. But as we progress this discussion and identify the issues of our worries, you might come to see that your concerns are surprisingly stretched out of proportion. Trust me. wink

As i said earlier i am not an HCM adherent neither do i belong to one
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by pilgrim1(f): 2:51pm On Jun 15, 2009
KunleOshob:

For the record, i am not an HCM adherent. I am only instrested in whatever movement would promote the undiluted gospel and pracitcalize it.

As i said earlier i am not an HCM adherent neither do i belong to one

That is what HCMs say - and I wasn't expecting anything new. 'HCM' is a common term that describes believers who use 'institutionalised' to complain accusingly against other Christians; it does not mean I'm using it to label you in person.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by Nobody: 3:17pm On Jun 15, 2009
sigh . . . another us vs them argument. I thought this was going to be a bible-based discussion, its turned into another parade of human philosophy, criticism, mis-representation and blaming.

What are "HCM adherents"? This is my first time of hearing such a thing.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by Nobody: 3:27pm On Jun 15, 2009
I was thinking last night . . . the early apostles didnt have the facilities available to us today - no radio, satellite TV, no private jets, publishing houses, giant buildings . . . YET the message of the gospel of Christ took the world by storm. We have more giant temples today with record attendances every sunday YET all we have is a lukewarm church and an increasingly cynical public. We cant find miracles anymore, sinners are now welcome in our front row seats, gays can go to church and not feel an ounce of conviction . . .

Welcome to the church in babylon. Its all ok, we can just blame HCM adherents.

The problem isnt the "size" of the church, its in what is preached there.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by pilgrim1(f): 4:30pm On Jun 15, 2009
Hi davidylan,

davidylan:

sigh . . . another us vs them argument. I thought this was going to be a bible-based discussion, its turned into another parade of human philosophy, criticism, mis-representation and blaming.

Thanks again for your perspective. Indeed, the thread seeks an understanding of issues and is meant to be a Bible-based discussion. I wonder, like you, why it seems it was almost going down the road of "human philosophy, criticism, mis-representation and blaming" - why do people often have to be so focused on accusing others with "all sorts of false and twisted doctrines"?!? >Sigh< This tendency is what I'm seeking to discourage.

davidylan:

What are "HCM adherents"? This is my first time of hearing such a thing.

I suppose I left enough pointers to show what was meant by that - it would be helpful if you tried to check them up. We've heard a lot about "institutionalized Christianity" and "institutionalized"-this-and-that, and it's rather strange that such terms are particularly well-known in HCM circles.

davidylan:

I was thinking last night . . . the early apostles didnt have the facilities available to us today - no radio, satellite TV, no private jets, publishing houses, giant buildings . . . YET the message of the gospel of Christ took the world by storm. We have more giant temples today with record attendances every sunday YET all we have is a lukewarm church and an increasingly cynical public. We cant find miracles anymore, sinners are now welcome in our front row seats, gays can go to church and not feel an ounce of conviction . . .

I believe you're not alone in having that concern. However, the approach we hold in dealing with these problems matter a lot to those who are outside the Church as well. If we begin by accusing our brethren, how does that help us effectively reach the cynical public?

davidylan:

Welcome to the church in babylon. Its all ok, we can just blame HCM adherents.

No, this discussion is NOT about "blaiming" the HCM or any other group for that matter - but about discussing issues pertinent to our collective identity as Christians. The outcry against "Institutionalized"-this-and-that is coming particularly from the HCM movement - they sponsored it and have sought to promote their movement on that same ideology. This is why this thread is a platform to identify issues for what they are and get them right, rather than seeking to lay "blame" at others or like victims when such misconceptions are corrected.

davidylan:

The problem isnt the "size" of the church, its in what is preached there.

We know - that's what we would like to find out about the "institutionalized Church" that is often complained against and what those who make such complaints are teaching in their own groups.
Re: 'Institutionalized' Christianity - The Viola Hangover by nwakaibe(m): 11:50am On Jun 16, 2009
davidylan:

I was thinking last night . . . the early apostles didn't have the facilities available to us today - no radio, satellite TV, no private jets, publishing houses, giant buildings . . . YET the message of the gospel of Christ took the world by storm. We have more giant temples today with record attendances every sunday YET all we have is a lukewarm church and an increasingly cynical public. We cant find miracles anymore, sinners are now welcome in our front row seats, gays can go to church and not feel an ounce of conviction . . .

Welcome to the church in Babylon. Its all OK, we can just blame HCM adherents.

The problem isnt the "size" of the church, its in what is preached there.

Hi Davi,Some of these problems being associated with today's churches started when the early apostles were still alive. Remember; the Greek Jews complained about their widows been discriminated against in the distribution of alms. Acts 6;1-2. So sectarianism is not a new thing. The apostles worked on this issue by appointing the seven deacons. A time came when some of the early xtians were declaring their loyalty to either Paul or Apollos. In several of his letters, Paul had to confront and point out the errors been taught by some xtians at the time.
Going thru first and second Corinthians will throw more light on this. see 2 Corinth 3;1-3There may be mighty miracles in a church yet it is still a baby church.
The Church is shaking the world and will continue to do so until the Lord comes. Despite the imperfections, we are reaching more people than ever before thru radio,TV,internet,travels etc. For many years while in my tiny village, I was being blessed by reading booklets from The Radio Bible Class. These were the first set set of Xtian literature that entered my hands. I was really blessed and learnt a lot from such material, likewise are many people being blessed. Now, billions of people are sharing the glorious gospel via the internet. Now I am at work,and is taking some minutes off to interact with online body of believers. we are having more effects than the early xtians cos of improved means of communications and the kingdom of darkness is not folding its hands. Satan is unleashing all his full arsenal against the xtians. No wonder homosexuals are occupying prominent position in some churches. The bible specified that such things are coming so I am not surprised. The bible talks of reprobates etc.
As for miracles, I started witnessing miracles as a young secondary school boy. Real miracles abound today both in Nigeria and other places. The fact that the fake exists signifies that there is an original version.
Christian should learn how to walk in love, forgive those who offend, be strict and firm on sin. We are not yet there. We are still hindered by flesh and blood. So let these thoughts sober us.

(1) (Reply)

Nigerian Gay Church Resume Operations In Lagos / The Problem - What Is Wrong With The Islamic World? / Why Should The World End?

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 108
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.