Alan Adams - Return to Simple Church

WHAT ABOUT CHURCH 3.0?

What follows is part of the Introduction to Neil Cole’s fantastic book CHURCH 3.0 –

There have been two major upgrades in church formation,
since Acts, that have changed the entire system. The fi rst occurred
dramatically during the rule of the Emperor Constantine. The
church shifted from an underground, grassroots, organic movement
to a more institutionalized organization. I believe the second
is occurring now.

church 1.0

The fi rst-century church was Church 1.0, with its minor differences.
The Jerusalem church would have been the original
Church 1.0. Antioch would be Church 1.1. The Galatian
churches, started in the fi rst journey of Paul and Barnabas, wouldrepresent Church 1.2. Corinth would represent a change to 1.3,
as Paul added some patches to how he approached church. The
Ephesian church would be Church 1.4. And so the changes
went on, through two centuries of church life, kept simple and
organic by oppression and persecution from ten Roman emperors.
Heresies emerged and were purged. There was the establishment
of regional bishops and institutionalization of some of the
forms of Christianity during this period, but overall the church
remained a grassroots, marginalized movement under the heat
of intense persecution.

All that changed in 313 a.d., when Constantine declared that
the empire would not only tolerate Christianity but restore to the
church all lost property. He was the fi rst “ Christian ” emperor;
Christianity went instantly from the margins to the mainstream,
and everything changed. Christianity became the state
religion, and the church did not change much from that point
on. This was the shift to Church 2.0 and all its eventual variants.

church 2.0

Over the centuries, after Constantine, the Western church
evolved in many ways, but none has been a signifi cant systemic
change. There was establishment of both the Roman Catholic
Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church, and for hundreds
of years there were very few changes. The Reformation split
the Western church into the Roman Church and the volatile
Protestant church, or Church 2.1. In spite of the differences,
the institutional system remained mostly unchanged.

The Reformation set loose (and persecuted) the Anabaptists,
but this was just a change from Church 2.1 to 2.2. Whether
the church adapts to reach coal miners in eighteenth – century
England or postmodern pilgrims in the twenty – fi rst century, most
of the changes have been patches and plug – ins to the Church
2.0 system. Whether you are talking about high church or low,
Pentecostal or Reformed, the church has remained in the 2.0
range of upgrades. From Baptist to Brethren, from Mennonite
to Methodist, the changes in the system are relatively untouched
over the centuries. Music or no music? Pipe organ or electric guitar?
Whether seeing tall ceilings with stained – glass windows, or
meeting in a box building without windows, the actual system of
church has gone relatively unchanged.

You have the priests or pastors, the Sunday service with singing
and a sermon, the weekly offering, the pulpit with pews, and
the church building. These have been constants since the fourth
century. Even if you move the whole show into a house instead
of a church building, if the system hasn ’ t changed you have only
shrunk the church, not transformed it. Changing the style of
music does not upgrade the system. Turning down the lights and
turning up the volume is a simple patch to the same old system.
Choirs and hymns or praise bands and fog machines, kneeling,
or standing are miniscule changes to the system. Sermonizing
with topical messages or expositional ones is not changing the
system; it ’ s making minor adjustments. Sunday schools or small
groups as secondary learning environments are not a systemic
change at all, just a variation on the same old operational system.

Although most of the advances to Church 2.0 over the centuries
have been plug – ins and patches to the same old system, there
have been anomalies along the way. Usually, these anomalies
are the result of rampant persecution driving the church back to the
old default system. One could say that these are examples of
going back to the Church 1.0 system, because their 2.0 system
crashed in the face of extreme heat. The radical Anabaptist
churches are an example. The Chinese house church phenomenon
is also a departure from the expression of the Church 2.0
system. These experiments are really not the norm and have not,
to date, infl uenced the church as a whole in any permanent fashion,
except perhaps to say that they are part of the learning that
has led to this new operating system — Church 3.0.

church 3.0

I believe that the second major shift is occurring now, in our lifetime.
Many people want to go back to the beginning again. As
much as I am enamored of what I learned about the church of
the fi rst century, we simply cannot go back; we can only go forward.

Granted, if we went back it would be a vast improvement
on where we have been more recently. I have to ask, though:
Could we do even better than Church 1.0? Some may find evensuch a question as this heretical. It is only a question, but it bears
consideration.

Could we actually improve on the fi rst – century church? A
careful study of Acts reveals that even in the fi rst decades of the
church there was profound improvement as people learned from
experience. Why not seek more improvements today, building on
the foundation of two thousand years of mistakes? I believe it is
possible. I think we can see the awesome impact and rapid spread
that the fi rst century saw, but we also can benefi t from two thousand
years of learning and use today ’ s technological advances.
Imagine if the apostle Paul could buy an airline ticket and be
across the world in twelve hours instead of twelve years. Imagine
what he would do with the Internet and the ability to see events
unfold globally and instantaneously. Our ability to understand
culture and translate languages today is built on two thousand
years of mistakes along with the successes they produced. Perhaps
more than any other benefi t we have is looking in hindsight
at how easily institutionalization took over the church. It was no
longer people in relationship to one another, but an organized
system. Armed with that knowledge, we can now move forward.
The early church fl ew blindly into a trap of a religious hier archical
system that kept her in the dark ages for hundreds of years.

History can train us for the future, if we listen to it. No, Church 3.0
is not a shift downward in church life or quality. It is an upgrade
in every sense of the word, perhaps even rising above the early
church. Why would we suspect that God is content with our going
backwards? Why wouldn ’ t He want us to grow and develop in
better ways?

The best upgrades do a few things. First they allow greater
power in what you want to accomplish, and Church 3.0 is a huge
boost in raw spiritual power. Every part of the body of Christ can
function at a much higher level. A second thing you may look
for in an upgrade is to move to a simpler and more intuitive
way of using the system. This upgrade to Church 3.0 is certainly
that, in many ways. It is built on simplicity and potency bound
together to increase speed and power in the infl uence that the
church can and should have. Third, upgrades take advantage of
the latest discoveries in technology and help you interact better
with all the other electronics you may use. Church 3.0 is far and
away better at being fl uid, mixing with multiple expressions of
church structure, and overcoming the world ’ s obstacles. Fourth,
an upgrade should have greater capacity to accommodate much
more information, functionality, and storage. Finally, some cool
new features in an upgrade should signifi cantly improve the system
’ s performance and make it much more fun to use. Church
3.0 is so enjoyable that it is quite common for those who have
made the switch to comment that they could never go back to
the old system.

Do not be deceived into thinking that this is just another
patch to the same old system; it is a radical change from the core
of the church. Church 3.0 has rebuilt the function of the church
in every sense, from the smallest to the largest capacity.

---