Monday, December 05, 2005

Guest Book Review: Revolution by Barna

December 5, 2005, from David Smith, chair of IWU's Religion division, cowritten by Keith Drury and Chris Bounds.

Students and friends,

Often in our classrooms we recommend book-lists which will enable you to grow on your own, apart from us as professors. This time we would like to take a moment and recommend a “NOT-list.” The first book we will bring to you is the newly released, Revolution, by the skilled-pollster (and amateur theologian) George Barna. Overall, this book is a critique (make that a full-body slam) of the church’s inability to impact the American culture in a positive (i.e., redemptive) manner. Thus, in this book he notes that due to the church’s lack of being an impact player, God must be calling His people outside of the church to utilize their gifts and serve the Lord. Barna now calls these Christians who no longer center their lives around Church “Revolutionaries” and believes they (his count of 20 million of them and growing) are the real future of the manifested body of Christ on earth. Barna also joyously admits that he is now one of them as well.

First, from a biblical standpoint, this text would fail any and all of our exegesis classes. He claims to have studied the scriptures on the subject but there is a glaring lack of any serious reference to what the biblical pattern for the church really involves. It is a wholly invalid process to critique what the church is NOT until he establishes a biblical baseline for what the church IS! This effort, to be of value, must begin with a clear and precise ecclesiology; stating what the Church is, not what Mr. Barna wants it to accomplish.

His practice is to silence the opinions of others with out-of-context proof-texts. Barna (mis)uses God’s Words to Peter, “Do not call something unclean if God has made it clean.” This reference specifically calls Peter to welcome Gentiles into the Church. In no way does it justify one to jettison the church in a wholesale manner or even to re-invent “Church” according to a new paradigm.

Moreover, Barna simplifies (trivializes?) the church to be a series of quotes from the Book of Acts. Interestingly, Barna describes his understanding of the church from passages in Acts 2, 4, and 5. But it is worth noting that at that point the Gospel has not even been proclaimed to the Samaritans, God-fearers, or the gentiles. The true nature of servant-hood, forgiveness, and grace has yet to be encountered. Further, loosely based upon these scriptures, Barna describes the attributes he finds in the early church (what he calls “seven core passions”, pp. 22-25). These are so resoundingly modern in their orientation that they would be unrecognizable to the apostles.

Finally, Barna writes, “This mission demands single-minded commitment and a disregard for the criticisms of those who lack the same dedication to the cause of Christ. [Can you hear the spiritual arrogance?] You answer to only one Commander-in-Chief, and only you will give an explanation for your choices.” (p. 27).

Friends, there is no place in scripture which permits a Christian to function as a lone-ranger apart from the Body. We are called into fellowship not out of it. As I see it, Revolution is essentially autobiographical, not biblical. Barna’s approach is purely phenomenological; the fact that something is happening becomes its own validation. My suggestion to Mr. Barna; this book should have been co-written with a team of scholars who would join together with to utilize Barna’s sociological strength of reporting trends of culture and opinions of society; not interpreting scriptures and evaluating the church’s ability to meet his self-selected criterion for success. But that is the nature of what Barna is calling the future church to look like, not a unified Body but individuals working disconnected from one another and from the “head.”

Second, from a theological perspective, the ecclesiology espoused by Barna is plagued with problems. While Barna declares himself a “revolutionary,” espousing an innovative way of discipleship beyond the local church, he deludes himself. His ecclesiology, with a myopic preoccupation upon individual discipleship and a personal relationship with Christ, simply follows to its logical conclusion a shallow Americanized model of the Church, dominant in contemporary evangelicalism. Ironically, Barna’s stated doctrine of the Church is a product of the evangelical churches he critiques, both of which misunderstand the fundamental nature of the Church, distort the doctrine of grace and the means of grace, and ultimately succumb to Pelegian pragmaticism. As such, his book not only exposes his own inadequate ecclesiology, but highlights the deficiencies of many contemporary evangelical models of the Church.

Fundamentally, Barna sees the Church, the Body of Christ, exclusively as a mystical, spiritual community of “revolutionaries” without any direct relationship to the local church. The Church is a community that Christians spiritually join when they decide to follow Jesus, rather than one into which they are incorporated concretely through baptism and local church discipline.

However, membership in the Church, the Body of Christ, is problematic without relationship to the local church. Why? Because as the Reformed, Lutheran, and Wesleyan forms of Protestantism have consistently recognized, along with the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox traditions, the Church is the primary means of God’s saving grace and the Church is expressed concretely in local churches. Local churches are the means by which God’s saving grace in Christ Jesus given to the Church is made available to humanity. Through the preaching of the Word, the due administration of the sacraments, and the community rightly ordered (the marks of the Church), saving, confirming and sanctifying grace is communicated to people.

For people to isolate themselves from hearing the scriptures read and the Word of God proclaimed in community, from participation in the sacraments of the Church, and from submitting themselves to the discipline, order and life of the local church is to cut themselves off from the primary means of God’s grace. As such, while a generation of “revolutionaries” may be able to sustain themselves for a period of time, grace capable of sustaining and nourishing Barna’s “revolutionaries” for the long haul, much less succeeding generations, will prove difficult, if not impossible.

In the end, Barna surrenders the biblically and theologically prudent understanding of the Church for an expedient model that ultimately cannot birth, nourish and sustain believers. Dangerously, Barna’s ecclesiology has more in common with the Donatist movement in the third century and Pelegianism in the fifth century than it does in orthodox Christian theology. While these movements flourished in the moment, having great spiritual zeal and fervor, they could not be sustained, and their followers in subsequent generations were left without access to the means of God’s saving and sustaining grace found in the Church.

Finally, from a practical effect (especially among younger people) is to encourage them to drop out of church attendance and practice a do-it-yourself religion. Among ministerial students it encourages them to seek other more exciting venues for their ministry instead of the old fashioned local church. To the laity it legitimizes dropping out of church and going golfing—just so long as they go on a mission’s trip with a Para church organization occasionally and have a neighbor Bible study with a few friends on Tuesday evenings so they can skip church and go golfing on Sunday mornings. The practical effect of the book is to elevate lone ranger religion to which the local church (and obviously districts and denominations) are totally irrelevant.

In pondering this book, it seems to only have come from the pen (laptop?) of a frustrated “boomer.” Moreover, his focus is so modern, western, and individualistic in orientation that it has lost all connections with the biblical times or text. Moreover, it is not global in focus, making it an American Christianity issue, not Kingdom. This is a call to selfish, self-centered Christians who want what they want, want it now, and are not willing to submit to one another. It’s a call to men (predominantly, Eldredge “Wild at Heart” types) who need adventure and an instant-spiritual-gratification spirituality. Faith, forgiveness, perseverance, and body-submission are no where to be seen. Life is measured by pure performance rather than biblical faithfulness.

This is a dangerous book scripturally, theologically and practically—which is why it may be a popular book. Encouraging our people to buy it would be like promoting a book that celebrated pre-marital sex and extra-marital affairs as the wave of the future. People do not need encouragement toward such behaviors. What this book promotes if far more serious than pre-marital or extra-marital sex: it is a dangerous book.

Jointly composed and sincerely Church-men,
Chris Bounds
Keith Drury
David Smith

12 comments:

Anonymous said...

I stopped reading Barna a long
time ago. His books always gave
me headaches.

Kevin Wright said...

Bravo. Outstanding. Wonderful job. You should submit this letter to Wesleyan HQ and have them send it out to the entire church. I agree with your consensus. Barna's work envisions a Christian who is not submissive to any type of authority other than personal conviction. What a great review. And on a related note, shame on Wesleyan HQ for spending money on having the George Barna simulcast. If that is the type of people we are inviting to inform our denominational ethos, then we are no better.

Anonymous said...

Kudos! Thanks for the heads up on this book. I agree with Kevin, this review should be read by all Wesleyan's. The last thing we need to do is encourage people to leave the church.

nathan richardson said...

interesting... the other day my pastor was sent this to him by the e&cg dept of the wesleyan church.

. said...

Concerns me that a "name" like Barna can use his platform for this kind of agenda.

Do I see a tie-in with the news I read today? Several mega-churches (including Willow Creek) are cancelling ALL Christmas Day worship services because it is a "family day!"

Kevin Wright said...

I think the review nailed it when it suggested that Barna makes the mistake of attempting to define the church by its mission rather than its nature. Perhaps a discussion of what the nature of the church is, is in order. I would contend that most believer interpret the church's identity according to the actions they see it conduct, and not its ontological self.

Mike Cline said...

"I remember Keith telling “Gen Xers” if you don’t like the way boomers do church go start your own."

I already posted something in response to this on Drury's site. Why is it that myself, a "Gen-Xer" reads that and thinks it is the farthest thing from what we should actually do? Do we need more churches, or just better ones? Our turn will come. We can work within the churches that already exist, we just have to be patient. Church planting is going crazy (not to mention any particulars, but in the CMA especially), and I see a major flaw in this thinking. I just think I am wierd or something...here I am a Gen-Xer...and I think we should stop trying to be so agressive in church planting and "revolution" as Barna and Petticrew alude to. What is wrong with me? Am I just a wierd Gen-Xer or does Barna and the other boomers have my generation all wrong?

Mike Cline said...

James,

I stand corrected. I did not mean to lump you in with Barna's idea of not attending church at all. That was my not my goal. My goal was to let some people know that not all Gen Xers really want to go start new churches. The model of revolutionaries within the local body is something that I am very passionate about and think a lot of people my age are catching on to. I did not mean to lump you in with Barna or infer that you think we should abandon churches. I apologize if my words came off that way. I just hate all the Gen X generalizations that I don't seem to fit.

David Drury said...

This is a very important letter from you professors. I believe it should be re-worded a bit at the beginning and sent to several e-zines among the emergent church like next-wave.org, theooze.com and ginkworld.net.

I think they would all receive this as a "review" of the book and a wider audience would see "behind the curtain" on Barna's book...

I just wrote a sentance trashing the book but after I read it I deleted it. Too harsh. Your piece stands on it's own without my additional rant.

More must read this.

-Drutastic

Anonymous said...

i agree with Jonathan. My wife and I have been committed members of the same local church for nearly 30 years. But Barna's book describes a significant number of our close friends. They are good people who follow Jesus and do not want to be lone rangers. But existing church expressions arent cutting it for them. seems to me Barna is letting us all know what is going on. Theres nothing to be gained by ignoring the book or just slammin it. He may come across as arrogant but it would be foolish to match his arrogance by not acknowledging the valid issues that have created the group of people he describes. God does sometimes speak thro bad exegesis!

Justin Gentry said...

I was urged to get this book at a pastors retreat @ headquarters. I then visited IWU and a prof told me it was garbage so I read it myself and I definatly disagree with Barna's solution to the problem. The pickup-your-toys-and-play-elsewhere mentality never really works. However you have to admit that there is a problem. I look around my church and I see nobody between 20 and 35. Either they all read Barna's book and their soul's are lost forever or we need to do some serious thinking. Just a thought

Justin Gentry

Aaron said...

Jonathon said
"I went to a church where the demographics was composed of pretty much 75-80% 20-somethings and very few olders"

"It all depends on whether you want to keep tradition in the church or not"

I say
This doesn't make me any happier than an old church.

We don't have a choice, Tradition defines everything we do, from the books in our bible to the sacrements.

Theox said
Theres nothing to be gained by ignoring the book or just slammin it. He may come across as arrogant but it would be foolish to match his arrogance by not acknowledging the valid issues that have created the group of people he describes.

I say
There is a difference between ackowledging trends (as he does in his other books) and saying a trend is the answer (as he does in this book) These proffesors are not ignoring it, or just slamming it, they read it, and are now addressing it.