Share

A Review of Finding Organic Church, part three

Let's Discuss Apostles

A key idea in Finding Organic Church is that these apostles (that Viola says are essential to the proper functioning of organic church) must be trained by being part of an organic church for some time as non-leaders before they are sent out as leaders and apostles. 

Now, the basic idea of Christian workers being trained in the local church, without the burden of leadership, under the watchful eyes of wise leaders, is entirely solid—much more solid, biblically, than just sending young people to gain academic knowledge without experience, obedience, or spiritual guidance (aka, seminary).  It’s also true that people who grow up in the institutional church have “absorbed” the unspoken assumptions and liturgies of our “non-liturgical” denominations—and it takes time for them to unearth those assumptions so they can do something more organic. 

However, I have some observations about Viola’s system.  One, since true organic church absolutely needs apostolic guidance, according to Viola, to be healthy, then most organic churches are not healthy.  If organic churches aren't healthy, they're not sufficient to be training grounds for apostles (lest they spread dysfunction).   Thus, if most organic churches are not good training grounds for apostles, then there are not many well-trained apostles.  Without well-trained apostle, according to Viola, few new organic churches have a chance for apostolic help, and few have a chance for long-term success. 

That is, where will the workers come from to support all the organic churches Viola hopes will pop up as a result of this organic church movement?  Will they all come from his stable of vetted apostles?  Were all those workers trained up by spending non-leader time in healthy organic churches?  If so, were those healthy organic churches started and/or guided by true apostles?  And did their apostles get their start in organic churches? 

The issue is basically the same conundrum as the traditional one about authority.  Does authority come historically, though the laying on of hands?  Does it come democratically, through a congregational vote?  Does it come educationally, though superior knowledge and experience?  Does it come aptitudinally, through superior speaking or interpersonal skill?  Or does it come supernaturally, through an explicit call, confirmed by spiritual fruit before and after? 

Viola seems to imply that an original crop of apostles fought their way out of an institutional mindset (around the 60s, perhaps?) and gained the necessary experience to function as ex cathedra voices for the new crop of hapless and helpless organic churches.  But if God has raised up apostles outside "Viola-brand" organic church before, couldn't He still be doing the same?  That is, though the scriptures agree that a "novice" shouldn't be in leadership, I believe that restricting apostleship to "organically-certified" people is both impossible and possible source of spiritual inbreeding.

Paul's Apostleship Was By Revelation, Not Experience

Viola's dip into church history, by the way, to prove that all apostles served first as non-leaders in organic churches doesn’t fly—his evidence ranges from completely blind speculation (asserted as fact) to scriptural contradiction.  We can take Paul’s apostolic training as a case in point.  There's no evidence that Paul spent time listening and learning as a non-leader in a Viola-certified organic church.  Every time we see him in the Acts narrative, Paul is doing active ministry (and nothing is told us about his Tarsus years).  

Moreover, Paul's apostleship came in the form of a calling (both at salvation and at Antioch), a revelation of the gospel of Christ, and an empowering.  He was not “taught by Barnabas,” as Viola says, but received his apostolic training “by revelation” and carried it out “by the gift of the grace of God, given to me according to the working of His power" (Eph. 3). When Paul did go up to Jerusalem to check his apostleship by the word and practice of the original apostles, he says that Peter and co. "added nothing" to him (Gal. 2:6). 

Where Do Apostles Come From Nowadays?

So, in our time, where do apostles come from, and are they necessary for healthy churches?  The easy answer to the second question, from I Cor. 12, is that apostles are just as necessary for the perfect health of the church as all the other parts of the body. 

Where they come from is a harder question (see the conundrum above), but I believe that the fundamental qualification of an apostle isn’t age, experience, education, skills, or popularity, but a clear and confirmed call.  When Jesus appointed his first apostles, pretty much all they had was a call.  Paul’s call (by Jesus, too) was not because of experience or knowledge, but solely as a function of God’s will.  Timothy’s call as an apostle was helped by his “family Bible school” and his long-term apprenticeship to the apostle Paul, but its foundation (as Paul reminded him twice in the Timothy letters) was the calling of God as witnessed by Paul and the elders. 

So, while experience in organic church might be helpful, the main condition for an apostle is the calling of God and the willingness to listen to and learn from Him.  Called apostles grow in their gifting just like any other Christian in their gifting. 

That is, if Viola says that experience is the necessary condition for apostles, I would say, instead, that the supernatural call and gifting is the necessary condition.  Therefore, apostles can come from any church situation and any expression of the church—often, they are already there, but haven’t been given the opportunity to practice their gift. 

The benefit of Viola's mandate to limit organic church apostleship to long-term participants is that the continuity of the vision and practice is preserved by apostles who teach what they have seen and practiced.  Or, monkey will only do what monkey has seen.  

However, the problem with such a limitation is that “apostles” can teach what they’ve seen and practiced on a human level without any input or power from God, while truly called apostles might not just promulgate the organic status quo but might also challenge, improve, and change it.  

Do we desperately need apostles to help reinfuse the church with the glory of God?  Yes, but the apostles we need are ones who are primarily committed to Christ, the scriptures, and the voice of God--that is, we need apostles who are truly called.  Apostles who are primarily trained by their own experience in an organic church are too likely to direct churches horizontally, not vertically.  

A Review of Reimagining Church, part one