I’ve known Frank Viola, my friend and brother in Christ, for many years. Our close friendship has continued to grow in the love and depths of Jesus Christ as we work together. It is an understatement to say that Father blessed my life with Frank. It seems that the more I know Frank, the more I am focused upon Christ and His body. Father has used Frank to unveil the glorious riches and heavenly treasures of Christ in each person within His body. Christ in Frank remains to be a powerful example to me — a living expression of God’s love, kindness, mercy and endurance.

When Frank first spoke about Bethany years ago, my heart slowly melted within me as the Spirit revealed Christ’s treasures in that little village. I am thrilled that God’s Favorite Place On Earth is now unfolding the Lord’s presence in Bethany.

It is an astounding revelation that Bethany was the only place on the earth where the incarnate Jesus was welcome! He never spent a night in Jerusalem. He would always find His way to His friends in Bethany. The riches of the endless reality of our Father and His people can be gleaned from what transpired in that small village two miles away from Jerusalem.

In 2009, Frank Viola developed the beauties to be discovered from the Lord’s presence in Bethany in a 62-page booklet, Bethany: The Lord’s Desire for His Church. Later, Bethany became chapter nine of The Jesus Manifesto.

In God’s Favorite Place On Earth, what happened in Bethany is unveiled through the words of one who was there — Lazarus — and then Frank draws out the gems from the treasure chest of Christ.

This book will encourage and challenge you from many angles. It reveals the passion of Frank’s heart — to see contemporary Bethanies spring up all over the earth — fellowships where Jesus is fully welcome — settings where death and resurrection in Christ will be realities.

If you order this book between May 1 – 7 at this link God’s Favorite Place On Earth you will receive a number of free gifts, including one of my writings — “This Is My Beloved Son, Hear Him” (94 pages, 1997).

— Jon Zens, May 1,  2013

One of the most fundamental misunderstandings, in what calls itself church, is the notion that somebody in the church – usually the pastor – has to be “in charge.” Jesus taught just the opposite. He made it clear that He was in charge, and each person in His body on earth has a unique Spirit-driven contribution to make for the building up of the ekklesia.

Closely linked to the mistaken idea that there has to be one leader, where the buck stops, is the tradition that males are to have center stage in all areas of life. For Harry Bethel, life boils down to the title of his booklet: It’s A Man’s World: A Fresh Look at a Truth Obscured by the End-Time Apostasy (3^rd edition, 1996, 16 pages).

“Male Dominance”
Harry believes that a man is “to be the dominant figure in the family, in the work place, and in the church.” He is sure that any person who is honest with Scripture will arrive at this same conclusion. However, it would seem that Mr. Bethel is very selective in his use of Scripture, and that his dogmatic perspectives are, in fact, the exact opposite of Christ’s will.

Before the Fall
He points out that before Adam and Eve’s transgression “there was a proper and perfect relationship with man and his wife and his God and with all other creatures of the earth.” He admits that the situation before sin entered was God’s highest ideal. But, then, it must be asked – was the earth a “man’s world” before the fruit was eaten? The answer is a resounding “No.” Genesis 1-2 portrays Adam and Eve as partners and equals, not as a hierarchy of male over female. God spoke to “them,” not “him.” In fact, the very name “Adam” embraced both male and female – “He called them Adam” (Genesis 5:2).

Of course, all of this was a profound mystery concerning Christ and His ekklesia (Ephesians5:32).

Mr. Bethel’s contention that our planet has always been “a man’s world” by God’s design is manifestly incorrect from the outset.

Woman Created for Man?
Harry maintains that “the woman was created for the man and not the other way around.” “In fact,” he goes on to say, “she is not even the glory of God, but rather the glory of man (1 Cor. 11:7). It is the man who is the glory of God.” But he totally misses something vitally important in 1 Corinthians 11. Paul is headed toward a conclusion in his line of thought here, and it comes in verses 11-12 – “nevertheless, neither [is] wife without husband nor husband without wife in the Lord, for as the wife is from the husband, so also [is] the husband by the woman – but all things [are] of God.” Paul’s bottom-line “in the Lord” is a relationship of mutuality and interdependence, not female subordination.

“The Head of the Woman is Man – Not Christ”
Mr. Bethel makes the astounding claim that “Christ is not even the head of woman – man is! . . . And the head of the woman is the man [not Christ].” This illustrates how far he will stretch to make his unfounded conclusions. Ephesians 5:23 affirms that Christ is the Head of the ekklesia, which clearly indicates that He is Head over both the men and the women in His body.

Women Prophesying
Further, Mr. Bethel fails to point out the obvious fact that in this passage Paul has no issue with women praying and prophesying in the assembly. He uses 1 Cor. 14:34-35 to enforce the silence of the sisters, but never deals with the female functioning unfolded in 1 Cor. 11.

Philip’s Virgin Daughters Prophesied
Acts 21:9 mentions Philip’s four virgin daughters that prophesied. Harry replies by saying, “one thing is sure – they did not prophesy in the churches and be in the Lord’s will, because it was a commandment of the Lord that women were not to speak in the church (1 Cor. 14:34-37).”

However, it must be asked, then, where did these sisters prophesy? For several reasons “in the ekklesia” would be the correct answer. First, in 1 Corinthians 14 Paul makes it clear that prophecy is to be central in the gathering. There Paul speaks of the “whole church” (men and women) coming together to prophesy. Paul’s flow of thought from 1 Cor. 11 to 1 Cor. 14:33 clearly assumes the participation of both sexes.

The Day of Pentecost
Secondly, when Jesus came to the ekklesia on the Day of Pentecost, 120 men and women prophesied, and Peter announced, right off the bat, that this was a fulfillment of Joel’s prophecy that both sexes would prophesy by the Spirit. For some reason, Mr. Bethel never mentions Acts 2, and does not wrestle with the implications of the female functioning in Christ’s body found in that passage.

1 Corinthians 7:1-5
1 Cor. 7:1-5 is the only place in the New Testament where the concept of “authority” is linked to marriage. However, contrary to Mr. Bethel, it is not the authority of the husband over the wife that Paul mentions, but a mutual authority over each other’s body. Couples are not to physically separate unless there is “symphony,” or mutual consent. Read over this passage and see if it sounds like “a man’s world” to you.

How could 1 Cor. 7:1-5 be reconciled with Harry’s bold remark that “there is no higher human authority on this planet, according to God, than that of a husband and father of minor children.” The New Testament never attaches “authority” to a husband, and when this word is used in the setting of marriage, it is applied to both the wife and the husband – it is mutual, not one-way.

Only Male Deacons?
Mr. Bethel believes that only men can be deacons. He skips over the fact that sister Phoebe brought Paul’s letter to the Roman believers and she was “a deacon of the ekklesia of Cenchrea” (Romans 16:1-2).

Only Male Apostles?
“Why did Christ,” Harry asks, “when He chose the Twelve, choose men?” But, there is more to the story than that. Romans 16:7 mentions Andronicus and Junia, who were Paul’s relatives, had been jailed with him, and “were outstanding among the apostles.” So, in Romans 16 we discover a female deacon and a female apostle! Paul called several sisters “co-workers,” which is the same word used to describe his relationship with Timothy, Titus, Barnabas and Aquila.

What Do We Know About the Twelve?
Harry makes a big deal out of the fact that in the record of the apostles’ work and writings, “there is nowhere in the Scriptures even the mention of one of their wives’ names including that of Peter.” The truth is, however, that the New Testament reveals more about the service of women in the early church than it does about the work of most of the Twelve!

Divorce
On the topic of divorce Mr. Bethel asserts that “nowhere in the Old or the New Testament does God allow a woman to divorce her husband for any reason.” Indeed, in the covenant life of Israel there was no provision for a wife to divorce a husband. But Jesus made a radical statement in Mark 10:12 in which He envisioned a wife divorcing her husband — “And if a wife shall put away her husband . . .”? Jesus mentioned a scenario that before was not viewed as an option.

“Brothers”
Mr. Bethel finds great significance that in the letters to the churches, the “brothers” (Greek, adelphoi) are mentioned, but Paul “did not address the sisters,” and “had nothing to say to the sisters.”

When the King James Version says in Acts 17, “God commands all men to repent,” are only males being addressed? No, it is supposed that women are included in that statement. “Men” back then was a generic word, and encompassed both sexes. Likewise, “brothers” is not limited to males. As J. P. Louw and Eugene Nida point out, “adelphoi [brothers] can mean both ‘brothers and sisters’ . . . . The masculine form adelphos may include both men and women” (Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, Vol. 1, pp. 118, 125).

The Scales Are Tipped Toward the Men
In Harry’s world, women get the short end of the stick. If they divorce their husbands for any reason, they are guilty of “rebellion,” but “this being a God-ordained man’s world, Scripture nowhere prohibits a man whose wife divorces him from remarrying.” The way Mr. Bethel sees things, “there are many God-given prerogatives for husbands and fathers that women do not have, if for no other reason than God ordained it so. It’s a man’s world.”

The fact that God has used women does not impress Harry, for “God uses Satan.”

“Test the Spirits”
It’s A Man’s World is a glaring example of how people can use selected Scriptures to spin a devious, hurtful tale that demeans the body of Christ.

This booklet also emphasizes the important fact that we as God’s people, need to see the red flags that the Holy Spirit reveals when an author tells us that we are “apostate, in rebellion akin to witchcraft, and in cahoots with the devil” if we do not become comfortable citizens in the male dominated “man’s world” that he has created in his own mind. To put it simply, gender bias opposes God’s eternal purpose in Christ.

Mr. Bethel cloaks his prejudice by saying that he “without bias in this treatise want[s] to present the whole counsel of God regarding the truth that this is a God-ordained man’s world.” I have tried to show briefly, however, that his presentation has omitted significant chunks of New Testament material that would call his conclusions into question.

The Notion That “It’s A Man’s World” Is Widespread
Many who would sympathize with It’s A Man’s World’s perspective may not express their views as boldly and vividly as Mr. Bethel did. That does not mean, however, that such opinions are not to be found in many quarters. Usually, such views are stealthily hidden within well-mannered language.

Even the well-known John Piper has echoed the essential sentiments of It’s A man’s World, as when he suggested in 2012 that:

Deborah the prophetess under her palm tree judging Israel (painting by Charles Landelle, 1901)

God has given Christianity a masculine feel. And, being a God of love, he has done it for the maximum flourishing of men and women. He did not create women to languish, or be frustrated, or in any way to suffer, or fall short of full and lasting joy, in a masculine Christianity. She is a fellow heir of the grace of life (1 Peter 3:7). From which I infer that the fullest flourishing of women and men takes place in churches and families where Christianity has this God-ordained, masculine feel. (Address on J.C. Ryle)

It would seem that in his ideal world men would accomplish the bulk of what needs to be done (What’s the Difference?,  pp. 60-64).  What are women supposed to think when they read statements like, “it is simply impossible that, from time to time, a woman not be put in a position of influencing or guiding men . . . . To the degree that a woman’s influence over man is personal and directive, it will generally offend a man’s good, God-given sense of responsibility and leadership, and thus controvert God’s created order . . . . The closer they get to the personal side, the more inappropriate it becomes for women to exert directive influence” (What’s the Difference?, pp. 60,62)? 

“Women Must Be Silent”
For further exploration of Mr. Bethel’s use of two passages – 1 Cor. 14:34-35 and 1 Tim. 3:11-12 – to completely silence the sisters in church, I highly recommend Also, you may find some help in my What’s With Paul & Women? Unlocking the Cultural Background to 1 Timothy 2.   

– Jon Zens, March, 2013

YET

by Kat Huff

More often than not, I find myself reaching, searching the heights, and my thoughts appear to fumble upon my tiny words, such minuscule and inadequate words. Even so, these mere words somehow seem to be a bit further than the scope of my present apprehension, so it is a great understatement to say, that with assured confidence that this unfathomable indwelling Christ transcends all theories, from the known impossibilities to the limits of all possible imaginations.

The increasing and living testimony of Christ, in His blessed heavenlies, reveals the Glory of His Life, Himself through and in us. The combined sphere of our hearts nearly explode at the hint of the unsurpassed excellence of God’s immeasurable Love in the glory of His exceeding grace — Jesus the Christ. And it is God’s glorious face of Grace who wept with us, walked with us, ate with us, and became “like one of us.” Yet, He is The Beginning and The End in the same, one existing breath, occurring together at once. What is in the beginning is also in the End. And, what is in the End is also in the Beginning. In divine accordance with the existing pleasure of God in His Son, the ending and the beginning are one perfected whole, consummated in the totality of ultimate completion and the heavenly manifestation of Christ in the fullness of the glory of God. And yet, at this very moment, this incomprehensible Christ of Love’s glory and unconstrained ever-Life lives inside of us.

kathuff.com; harvestofpearls.com

DeVern Fromke

In a similar vein, Frank Viola recently pointed out to his blog-readers the Christ-exalting nature of DeVern Fromke’s writings. DeVern was a pioneer in unveiling God’s eternal purpose in Christ. I read Ultimate Intention around 1980, and it had a huge impact on my vision of Christ. You would do well to obtain anything written by this author!

Here are some prime excerpts from Ultimate Intention to whet your appetite.

It is imperative to recognize that the Father has purposed at least three things FOR HIS SON. Let us see the several phrases which, when pieced together, give us the full picture of this intention.

Paul speaks of “my knowledge in the mystery of Christ” (Eph. 3:4). What was that mystery? It was that the Son might have a corporate Body through which to express Himself. It is this mystery of Christ in you—the means by which God’s glory shall be manifest in every believer. (Col. 1:27).

Again, it is the Father’s intention that His Son shall be the Head of this Body, the altogether pre-eminent One who expresses not only Himself, but the fulness of the Godhead. Thus the Father and the Holy Spirit also are revealed and expressed throughout the whole universe by the lives of His many sons. (Col. 1:18).

Further, the Father has intended to make Him (the Son) to be the center and gathering point for all things in heaven and earth—”to sum up all things in Christ” (Eph. 1:10). All things were not only created “by Him,” but “FOR HIM” (Col. 1:16).

What a glorious unveiling—almost beyond our comprehension. To think that the Father hath purposed in Himself to make Christ the center of His working. The altogether lovely One, His Son, is to have the pre-eminence.

Jon Zens

I remember well in 1964 when Barry Goldwater was running against somebody. Scott Chesley and Anita Anderson (Howard) had come to my door in Canoga Park, California, and presented the “Romans Road” to me. That was the first time I’d really heard anything from the Bible, and I was 19 then.

After a week’s worth of meetings with Major Ed Bundy of the Church League of America, I ended up being increasingly involved in Faith Baptist Church, a fundamentalist Baptist church in Canoga Park, pastored by Roland Rasmussen.

Roland strongly affirmed from the pulpit that if Goldwater did not win, our country would go down the toilet. In light of his convictions, the church expended a lot of effort to warn the local public about how bad the Democratic agenda was. As the election neared, many people in this church, including myself, went door-to-door several nights a week passing out None Dare Call It Treason by John Stormer. I sent out packets of information to most of my relatives, underscoring to them in personal notes how important it was that LBJ not win.

Goldwater lost . . . . overwhelmingly.

Well, here we are 48 years later, and it’s the samo-samo. Maybe our country is closer to the toilet now than it was in 1964, but it’s still going. Doesn’t history show rather vividly that all nations end up in the commode?

The life of Christ is in us, and His kingdom cannot be shaken. Our liberty in Christ cannot be taken from us, even if we are in solitary confinement. I love what my good friend Don Atkin said recently:

Hello Don,

Do you have any sense of who will win the election? I’m sure you’ve been asked this already.

Dear __________,

I have no sense of who will win the election. I don’t believe that it matters. We have our marching orders. And there is truly only one nation under God, a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, A HOLY NATION, His own special people (1 Peter 2:9).

God will choose, knowing who would best serve His purpose to bring clearer definition to a new creation.

Love, Don

We must ever remember what Father’s purpose in His Son – “In the time of those kings, the God of heaven will set up a kingdom that will never be destroyed, nor will it be left to another people. It will crush all those kingdoms and bring them to an end, but it will itself endure forever. This is the meaning of the vision of the rock cut out of a mountain, but not by human hands—a rock that broke the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver and the gold to pieces” (Daniel 2:44-45).

Paul told us in Ephesians 1:22-23 that Father has subjected everything under Christ’s feet, and given Him as Head over all things with reference to the ekklesia, which is His body, the fullness of the One filling all in all. Christ is ruling and directing everything in heaven and earth with reference to and for the sake of His bride. The focus of His passion is not earthly Israel, not America or any other created entity – but the apple of His eye, the ekklesia who continues His life and ministry in this age.

– Jon Zens, November, 2012

I don’t know what reasons #1 and #2 are, but I know this one ranks way up there. As Frank Viola pointed out in Reimagining Church, there is one source that for sure impedes God’s purposes in Christ – human traditions. One tradition that has a stranglehold in most of what calls itself “church” is the notion that the buck stops with “the pastor.” This so-called “office” is, as was unfolded in chapter five of Pagan Christianity, the biggest “obstacle to every-member functioning.” As this all works out, then, the expression of Christ is supposed to come from one person’s input, and the Life of Christ residing in the rest of the body remains essentially dormant, with no outlet.

Now, most pastors would never put what follows in writing, but a Baptist pastor in Tyler, Texas, did. Here’s what appeared in a 1989 Sunday church bulletin:

HOW TO ADDRESS A PASTOR. It was the first class for Government at East Texas State University. I observed the instructor as he entered the room. He walked to the blackboard where he wrote his name. He turned to the class and said, “That is my name. You may call me Mister or Professor, but never call me by my first name.” I never did call him by his first name, though he was my junior.

The Pastor should not be called by his first name for the same reason. At times, first names can be fitting and appropriate, but not for your parents, nor for judges, not for law officers, nor for preachers. It is a matter of respect for the position and office. A pastor may be called Bishop, Elder, Pastor, or Brother. Ananias addressed Paul as “brother” in Acts 9:17. How very true the statement, “Familiarity breeds contempt.” Refraining from calling a Pastor by his first name does not mean he is more spiritual than his flock, but it does mean he holds the highest office in the church, namely that of God’s undershepherd, which demands respect as seen in Hebrews 13:24.

The Pastor should never be called by the title of “Reverend.” That is God’s name as recorded in Psalm 111:9, and it refers to God’s holiness. Pastors have no holiness except imputed holiness. (Dan W. Cozart, Grace Baptist Church bulletin, January 8, 1989)

This is the mostly unwritten way that pastors view themselves, and the people view their leaders. But in this sentiment, and the assumptions upon which it is based, we have set in front of our eyes clearly and unequivocally Reason #3 why Jesus Christ is silenced from expressing Himself through all of His body in most church buildings.

How can Jesus Christ flourish when everyone is on a first-name basis – except the preacher?

How can Jesus be pre-eminent when there is such a focus on one person’s highest position, title, and official authority? Titles bring division among the brothers and sisters by unduly elevating those who can’t be called by their first name.

How can fellowship in the Son be a reality in an atmosphere where one person must remain aloof from the others, lest familiarity breed contempt? The clergy-laity system insulates “the pastor” from the flock. He can’t really have close friends in the church. So he must go away to conferences for pastors/leaders to find camaraderie, and it may rarely be found even in those professional venues.

Where does the New Testament say that the pastor “holds the highest office in the church”? There are no “offices” in the ekklesia. Rather, everyone has “a manifestation of the Spirit” for the full edification and nourishment of the body. Paul clearly stated that “the body is not one part, but many.” But when someone occupies an alleged “highest office,” it paints a picture to watching eyes that the body is dependent on one part, not many. The fullness of Christ is in and through all the body parts together; one body part is merely one part, and nothing more.

The fragrance of Christ evaporates when more respect is demanded for titles and positions than for all the other body parts. In his church bulletin, the official leader stated, “The Pastor should never be called by the title of ‘Reverend.’ That is God’s name.” Yet, by his demand for respect from the rest of the body of Christ because of his high position, he is by his own admission demanding the very reverence which he affirms belongs to God alone.

Emphasis on leaders with titles creates a lifeless hierarchy, with people walking on eggshells, lest they breed contempt because of an inappropriate level of familiarity. Respect and honor are extremely important in the body of Christ, but not based on offices and titles, but on the aroma of Christ exuding through the lives of all the parts. In fact, Paul insists that honor should be bestowed especially on the weaker and seemingly less honorable persons in the body. Where do you see the reality of this being worked out? You can mark it down as a surety – wherever respect is demanded for the few in “office,” Christ’s life in relational community will not be present.

The fact that a traditional pastor felt compelled to express himself in such terms is proof in itself of how far we have drifted from the simplicity of Christ. We have created a religious monster where being “over” others is the name of the game. It’s not about gathering around the lovely person of Christ, but about religious leaders controlling “the flock.” It’s not about Christ guiding His sheep; it’s about those in the “highest office” having the final word. One evangelical denomination put out a position paper that underscored what a sin it is to question the pastor, and told its members to just leave quietly if they didn’t go along with the pastor’s vision/teaching. This is not Christ, but fleshly religion.

Traditional Christianity has said, “respect those in office who are over you, or else.” Jesus said, “not so among you, for you are all brothers and sisters.” The Lord God said out of the cloud, “This is my beloved Son, hear Him.” There is little evidence that we have listened.

Jon Zens, October, 2012

Along these lines, check out Jon’s previous blog, “The Body with One Part?”

[For an in-depth presentation that unravels the idea that The Pastor is “the highest office in the church,” check out Jon’s The Pastor Has No Clothes: Moving from Clergy-Centered Church to Christ-Centered Ekklesia]

FRAGILE

mark
i always assumed
you were strong
impregnable
thinking you stood like granite
in the swirling storms
then
you told me on the phone
In 1985
that you were crushed
doubting
hurting
dismayed
it took me a few days to really
believe that
you were
fragile too
but as time elapsed
i began to see
that
my wife
and daughters
and son are
fragile
like vases that can
slip off the shelf
and shatter
we’re all like
flowers
whose delicate petals
can be torn off
with autumn winds
we all need
care
when the winds of life come
we need our
petals supported by other
fragile flowers
especially the One who
had His petals
knocked off
for us

– jz march 1988

PAY UP — OR NO SACRAMENTS FOR YOU!

In August 2011 I did a blog on “When Are We Going to Wake Up to Reality? The Nightmare of the Pastoral Institution.” Welcome to Part Two!

First Baptist Church of Hammond, Indiana, had 15,000 people come to its weekend services, and claimed 40,000 members. This growth had come primarily as a result of the pastor’s leadership and charisma over the past eleven years. But just like that, the pastor is dismissed, and now the deacons are crawling into bed tonight with sweat rolling down their foreheads.The Chicago Tribune News.com

What happened in Hammond occurs every day in churches all across the States – pastors leave for all kinds of reasons. Whether a church has 100 members or 15,000 members, when it has no pastor the group goes into various levels of concern, even panic.

Why? Because church in North America is based on the premise that the health and progress of a local body is tied into the presence of one person – the pastor. Apparently 90% of Americans choose their church based on the pastor’s gifts. If this “office” is not occupied, huge concerns arise about how new people will be attracted, about how the faithful will remain and not leave, and about how plunging offerings can be avoided.

Keep your eye on First Baptist in Hammond. It is highly likely that as a result of waking up to find that the pastor is gone, attendance and offerings will plummet. The powers-that-be will have to find a comparable replacement in a hurry in order to avert a tail-spin into disaster. The folks in the pew just don’t feel comfortable without having a pastor. They can’t last for long without him. They will mumble, “This one didn’t work out. Find a new one – and quickly.” They can always find a pastor down the street, you know.

Can you see that there is something very wrong with a practice of church that revolves around one person’s presence and functioning? Paul said that the “body is not one part, but many.” The way church is usually done, Paul would have had to say, “the body hinges on one part, not many.”

Is it any wonder that the visible body of Christ is deathly ill? What if your physical body tried to carry out life with one or a few parts trying to do everything? You’d be in the ER in minutes, and pronounced dead not long after. Yet we have been attempting to do “church” since 300AD with single-gift dependence. When are we going to wake up and stop this spiritual insanity?

The Lord desires to express His life through each and every part, but most church structures put a dam in front of the Living Waters so that pastor-dependence is maintained.

The great tragedy is that many well-meaning people are trying to serve the Lord in a system that is counter to the Lord’s heart. This system of “Christianity” is the only option most folks know about.

Both “clergy” and “laity” have been shredded by this system into a million parts of hurt and ruin. For example, this letter from a pastor’s wife captures the heartache that the system can cause – a story that few ever hear about. http://www.searchingtogether.org/articles/Pastors_Wife_Letter_1989.pdf

I would like to suggest that the tragedy in Hammond, Indiana, will just continue to repeat itself over and over again if we do not jettison the one-pastor system. We need a revelation from above about how counter this system is to the centrality and glory of Christ in His Bride on earth. How could we ever expect Christ to be expressed through His people, when what we do as church places the onus of spiritual health on one person? As I observed in A Church Building Every ½ Mile: What Makes American Christianity Tick?

In the play Smoke on the Mountain the pastor of Mount Pleasant Baptist Church, Mervin Oglethorpe, announces at the start of the service, “I am the Preacher, Choir Director, Chairman of Finance, Director of Education, and Youth Director.”[5] Pastors are expected to fulfill a job description that is beyond demanding. To get their paycheck they must prepare sermons and lessons, fill the pulpit, teach Sunday School classes, counsel those with problems, do hospital visitation and pre-marital counseling, perform marriages, funerals and baptisms, bless civic events, raise money, manage staff and volunteers, resolve conflicts, be involved in evangelistic efforts, administer the Lord’s Supper, attend various church (and denominational) committee meetings and functions, perform administrative duties, and generally be on call 24/7. If church attendance declines,the pastor is blamed. If it increases, it is because of his vision and leadership. The buck stops with the pastor with a vengeance. 17th Century Puritan John Owen went so far as to affirm that, “. . . on this office [‘pastor’] and the discharge of it He has laid the whole weight of the order, rule, and edification of His church.”

If this is our functioning paradigm – and it is – no wonder the “Christianity” in front of us is a complete mess. Are we going to continue putting band-aids on an ulcerous sore, or be radical, and go to the root? A book that does go to the root is Frank Viola’s Reimagining Church. It unfolds a vision of ekklesia in which Jesus is exalted by His Life coming to expression in every part of the Bride. We are not stuck with the option in front of our eyes that calls itself church.

– Jon Zens, August, 2012

Suggested Reading: The Pastor Has No Clothes: Moving from Clergy-Centered Church to Christ-Centered Ekklesia, by JZ.