It seems these days, in one way or another, many Christ-followers are making an honest effort to return to the roots of their faith. They are seeing the inconsistencies, shallowness, and even corruption that seems to have infected modern-day versions of Christianity. This prompts some to walk away from their faith completely; but for many others, they believe there is something real and authentic to this journey underneath this veneer, and that if they can dig beneath that, they will rediscover a vibrant faith, and reconnect with the faithful and true God they still know exists.
It’s interesting to me, though, how the same basic quest to return to our roots takes people in such different directions. I don’t necessarily see this as a bad thing–just interesting. The church’s history is rich and diverse in expression, and I think God uses those things we connect with in order to meet us where we are. Where perhaps it can get a little off-center for us is when we decide that our journey is THE journey–that we’re the ones who have found it, and others need to catch up. That attitude is ultimately no different than what we’re trying to leave behind, and leads to the same religious pride that clouds our vision.
That said…the roots of our faith may run deep and wide, but ultimately end up at one Source. So why is it that a search for the roots leads us in so many different directions? I’ve been thinking this over, and I think that possibly the answer lies in how far along the root structure we go, and how far along the timeline.
Lemme ‘splain. 🙂 And lemme do it by identifying three general groups. (By the way, these are just fun names I came up with for them…)
GROUP ONE: Returning Prodigals
There are a large number of what we’ll call “recovering evangelicals” who have come to the realization that while good things have come from the evangelical and Pentecostal movements of the past century or two…ultimately these have detached from the previous 1800 years of our history, and tend to keep their own counsel. Theological issues and recent slick marketing stuff have disillusioned them. For many of these, they look back on the timeline and find a rich history that was going on before the church looked like this, and in connecting with it, they feel more a part of the eternal church, rather than the modern version. So their journey leads them out of evangelical forms into more liturgical, “high church” forms like the Roman Catholic church or the Greek Orthodox church.
I’m not knocking this, but I question: are these really our roots? The historical significance of high church doesn’t change the reality that said history is as “colorful” at times as evangelicalism, if not more so. (The Crusades and the Inquisition come to mind.) Also, it doesn’t change the fact that the church in general has since the first century adopted many things from pagan Greco-Roman traditions that aren’t even found in the Bible. So while there may be redemptive things to be found here…in my view, while it’s certainly part of our root structure, it isn’t the end of the journey. I don’t think this goes back far enough in the timeline.
GROUP TWO–Adopted Jews
There is a huge and still-growing trend today for believers to return to the Jewish Roots (or Hebraic Roots) of the Christian faith. This group of people rightly recognizes that what we know as Christianity was born out of Judaism–that the very first believers were practicing Jews, and that Jesus Himself was a Jew, and functioned as a Jewish rabbi. They see the disconnect that has happened when the church become mostly Gentiles, and how much meaning is recovered when we place the Scriptures back into the context in which they were written. This trend has also affected the wider church (consider how many churches now hold Passover seders).
I don’t knock this, either; in fact, I have gained a great deal of insight by what I’ve learned about Hebraic Roots. But I also think some folks take it much further than it should probably go, because they start acting more like Jews, talking in Hebrew, insisting that the church meet on Saturdays and observe Passover, basically getting all religious about it. I think Acts 16 and the book of Galatians make it quite clear that non-Jews who embrace Jesus do not need to become Jews. So while there is something important to discover here, IMHO, I think this can go too far back in the timeline, beyond the actual roots of our faith.
GROUP THREE: The First-Centurians
Then there are those who look back at the Book of Acts and the epistles, recounting the earliest days of the church and how things were. They correctly see that the modern church looks little or nothing like that group of folks who “turned the world upside down.” They see the church meeting in homes, not in church buildings; they see the sense of fellowship and community they had; they see the open participation of believers rather than a program of events from a stage or pulpit. They see that the first-century church was an organism, and they seek to return to this organic way of being church. The trend toward house churches is largely fueled by this.
I’m obviously not knocking this one; I’ve had a house church meeting in my home for nearly 10 years. And yet…taken too far, people start acting like house church is a mandate of Scripture. I’ve never been part of the “house church movement” for this very reason; house church for us was always something that worked, not something that was mandated. Plus…it should be obvious that we’re no longer living in the first century; so why should we want to be first-century Christians? Certainly there’s great value in recovering the heart of the early church; but again I must ask: is this really the root of our faith? Is this as far back on the timeline as we can go?
So…which of these groups has tapped into the roots of our faith? I’d say all of them, and none of them. All of these expressions have recovered something valuable from the past–part of our root structure–but there’s something much simpler, I think, about the actual root, the place where the church was conceived.
Wanna know where I think the root is?
I think the root of our faith is thirteen guys walking the countryside.
Before the Day of Pentecost, before the five-fold ministry, before any of that existed–even before the death and resurrection had taken place–Jesus spent several years traveling around in a mobile community with twelve other men that He was discipling. They lived together, laughed together, ate together, and walked together…and Jesus taught them as they went. The whole group gathered under a simple, two-word call: FOLLOW ME.
In my search for the roots of my faith…this is where my own journey has taken me. To thirteen guys walking the countryside. This primitive sense of community, this basic sense of following Jesus. And I’m interpreting all other aspects of my faith from this place.
Yes, yes, for anyone who wants to get theological with me about it…I know it wasn’t just the thirteen guys. And I know there were women in the caravan–women of substance, mind you, who cared for Jesus’ needs. And don’t get gender-conscious and sexist about this, either; it would have been inappropriate for Jesus, a single man and a Jew, to live in this kind of intimacy with the opposite sex, and that’s why I believe the Twelve were all male. It isn’t about whether the Twelve were men or women; what matters is that they were following Him.
And when you think about it, it also doesn’t matter so much (at least in theory) how the church ends up being shaped from season to season, or whether they observe the Passover, or whether they do a liturgy. The root of our faith is so simple that it can be expressed in a multitude of ways, depending on culture and circumstance; and I think that may be why the search for our roots can take so many directions. At the same time…I think the unnecessary things we have tacked on to the faith over the centuries happened when we stopped following Him and started building our own thing. And sometimes, those things actually started out as legitimate expressions…but Jesus moved on while we stayed behind and built a tabernacle. These are the things that need to be deconstructed, and that’s why I think a return to the root is so important. It helps us gain perspective on what is necessary, and what is not. It helps us prioritize, to sort things out.
To get back to the heart of why we were drawn to Jesus in the first place.
And not just for our own sakes…but also for a generation of people who have been turned off by all the extra stuff that’s been tacked onto the church. Returning to this root helps us live our faith authentically, in a way that others who watch us can take more seriously, because it’s real, and it’s simple. Real simple. 🙂
So if you ask me what the root of the Christian faith is…it’s following Jesus. The whole thing starts by being a disciple.
Wayward Son
Musician. Composer. Recovering perfectionist. Minister-in-transition. Lover of puns. Hijacker of rock song references. Questioner of the status quo.
I'm not really a rebel. Just a sincere Christ-follower with a thirst for significance that gets me into trouble. My quest has taken me over the fence of institutional Christianity. Here are some of my random thoughts along the way. Read along, join in the conversation. Just be nice.
View all posts by Wayward Son →
Jeff,
One of the things that trips me up when I think about this is the lack of a cultural reference. Let me explain. In first century Judaism, the notion of the notion of Rabbi and disciples was well known; there was a cultural reference for what Jesus was doing. Now, I think he put his own spin on it (though I've not studied this, so I may be leaping a bit), but it had a reference point.
As I look around in my culture, there is no reference point, no activity that tells me what sorts of things teachers and disciples do together. I know in my head that it's intentional, ordinary life, but it's tough getting that out into the air.
This is such an important issue–it's something I'm dealing with up close and personal. I find myself longing for a model and the culture gap from here to the gospels sometimes seems too far too reach.
Not sure where I'm going with this. Sometimes seminary training seems so woefully inadequate.
I understand Laura's point. What does dicipleship look like in this culture, and how do you protect it from being of the culture and not of Christ?
I know that our jobs can be worship, but sometimes I feel guilty that I should be paying more attention to God than work…but we are supposed to work. And we are supposed to enjoy the good gifts…
I think the home church may be the closest to the idea…I like the grandeur of liturgy sometimes, but I would want a steady diet. I go to a fairly traditional Baptist church, because, quite frankly I like the idea that it is there without me. If I go it is there, if I don't go, it doesn't really affect anyone. I don't have any responsibility for the the success of the church. A home church would be so much more "heavy" and dependent on me.
as i read i thought of the post-modern attraction and desire for the ancient. i know i see that trend in myself and i see it in church behaviour too. i think that's the direction you're going here and it's why so many are looking for something else; be it a high church, a house church or i suppose no church. i don't see the return to Judaism that you seem to be seeing.
my own community was born out of a house church and has remained unaffiliated for its 27 year life. i guess you could say that we're trying to work on our own attachment to the ancient. we don't use the word "emergent" as a general rule but we do use words like "community" a lot.
this was an interesting read anyway. thanks.
Laura,
I can understand what you mean about a reference point. This teacher/disciple relationship thing is not very visible in our culture. The closest thing I see is mentorship, and when the church has tried to rekindle it in recent times (think shepherding movement) it proved disastrous. I think the void of this kind of example has probably come from the deterioration of community in general. As people, we've become more and more isolated from our neighbors, and less and less accountable.
I'm far from having the answers here. All I do know is that even though our safest reference point might be two thousand years distant, this is still Jesus' church, and we are still His sheep. I believe if we can focus first and foremost on being HIS, and following Him as best we can…He will show us what this ought to look like for us.
Kari,
First, without suggesting human authority isn't important…I think our discipleship is firstly about following Christ. Any human mentors we have come from Him; and my experience has been that those mentors are the ones who are actually quietly feeding us, not the ones who simply *say* they are our authority and demand our allegiance. Humans can aid our discipleship (and should), but ultimately we must daily choose to submit to Christ and watch for Him to teach us.
As for it being "of the culture and not of Christ"…I am not sure you can separate them. We are products of our culture, and discipleship has to be formed according to how we are conditioned to respond. That does not mean it is not of Christ also. Jesus doesn't embrace the sinfulness in our cultures, but I believe He engages culture b/c it's a normal part of humanity. Jesus Himself was immersed in the Jewish culture He grew up in. So I don't worry too much about Christ versus culture–only Christ versus sinfulness.
You said, "sometimes I feel guilty that I should be paying more attention to God than work…" I want to submit to you that this feeling, which is common among believers today, is actually part of the dualistic mindset we've adopted that isn't really Biblical–meaning the separation of natural and spiritual. God flows in both realms, and they intermingle. God isn't just Lord of our spirituality or our thoughts, and He doesn't go away while we are working. When you consider that all your life is lived unto God (not just the times you're specifically thinking about Him), your work becomes a natural part of that worship, and you can rest in knowing that He is pleased with you.
Sorry for rambling, your thoughts here just got me thinking. Thank you very much for sharing here.
Jeff,
I've been pondering these issues the past couple of days and arrived at a couple of models related to mentorship: apprenticeship and internship.
I continue to ponder–part of which will include a much closer and more intentional look at how Jesus trained his disciples.
Jeff,
I'm with you. I definitely believe that following Jesus is the root of our faith. He wants to take us where we've never been before. And as a result, it's where the Church has never been before.
He wants to take us out of meaningless tradition and help us get closer to Himself. It's only then that the Church will begin to see it higher purpose and that it will lose it's worldliness and become a bride without spot, blemish, or wrinkle.
I could go on with this for a while. But I'll stop for now.
Blessings,
Gary