The process of thinking about, practicing, re-thinking, re-imagining, and re-experimenting is exactly where the church needs to be today as it struggles to shed some irrelevant outer garments and seeks to uncover the shape it is morphing into.
I have seen the benefits of moving away from more traditional structures and into church forms that are simpler:
- Small, so that community and family can be experienced
- Participatory, so that every person’s gift is valued and developed
- Non-positional in leadership status, so that submission is mutual and leadership is situational and gift-based
- Non-programmatic, so that mission, discipleship, and leadership training is relationally-oriented
- Simple, so that it supports a 24/7, Jesus-following way of life
Yet, I have also noted the many downsides of working with simple/house churches:
- Community/family life in small groups is challenging.
- Despite good intentions, the consumer attitude of “what’s in it for me” can still be the prevailing attitude.
- We can talk a lot about a 24/7, Jesus-following lifestyle, but the reality is often that the only real change is that we gather in a small, participatory gathering rather than a large, stage-oriented one.
- Participatory gatherings, that seek to have the Holy Spirit lead, often fall short of such an ideal.
- Simple/house churches can become a place for Christians who are done with traditional church, for whatever reason, but who are not really ready to move forward into something truly, substantively different in terms of lifestyle.
Does this mean that I am ready to abandon simple/house churches? Not at all.
But re-think? Always. I believe that God is on the move at this time like no other season I have been through in a long time, and the challenge is to keep moving with Him.
“Your old road is
Rapidly agin'.
Please get out of the new one
If you can't lend your hand
For the times they are a-changin'.”
(Bob Dylan—whew… where did he come from?)
Keeping First Things First: How Hard It Is
I have spoken and written about the following statement over and over in many different ways:
“Simple church is not about ‘doing church differently,’ rather it’s about a way of life, the Jesus way of life, and supporting that way of life through simple, organic gatherings.”
In other words, the “way of life” really is the primary focus while the structure, format, or type of gathering is completely secondary. Our communities/gatherings must consist of people who are living or learning to live dynamic, purposeful, intimate, prophetic, missional Christian lifestyles rather than just being house-sized containers for passive Christians to gather in.
Tom Sine, in The New Conspirators, comments: “We are concerned that fewer than 10 percent of the believers we work with in North America have any time outside of home and church to work in ministry with others.”
I am concerned that meeting simply and in houses has not actually changed this. We are spending less time in church meetings and programs, but has this really translated into more ministry outside the walls? Has our way of life changed?
I am concerned that we fall into the “downsides of working with simple/house churches” (mentioned above) precisely because we sink into the habit, once again, of just “doing church” rather than living out the type of ministry and lifestyle that Jesus modeled.
My confession is that I fall into this far more often than I choose to admit. My intentions for living as a radical, whole-life disciple dissipate into a few weekly Christian activities. I begin just “doing church.” I begin to look at my Christian friends and the church communities I gather with as though they are the problem when, in fact…
- I am the one who is no longer purposefully engaging with God in His intentions to bring His Kingdom to earth all around me and through me.
- I am the one who is trying to replace a lifestyle of listening and following Jesus’ voice and footsteps with a pre-formatted, Christian routine and a simple/small gathering.
- I am the one who is hesitant to fully explore with God what it means to lay down my life in order to allow His compassionate, missional heart to beat in me and change the way I live.
Re-Imagining Church With a Whole-Life, Missional Ethos
So, I am once again seeking to re-imagine what “church” can be. Or rather, what it means to be the church in a way that actually reflects who Jesus is. It is certainly about pursuing a constant intimacy with Jesus developed through practices, both personal and corporate, which nurture and develop that relationship with Him. It is certainly about doing life with others in community which, for me, means small, participatory, shared-life communities.
However, I also see the need for a clear missional ethos that actually challenges my comfortable, North American lifestyle and propels me more often into the world of people’s hurt, pain, need, and lost-ness that Jesus engaged daily.
The Praxis Church offers the following as a partial definition of their church family: “As a Missional Church we value the time you spend in the world and so instead of filling your life with a variety of church events we would rather send you into the culture equipped with the Gospel.”
This type of statement is a good start. However, I also sense the need to bring this type of ethos into the discipleship process so that I am being discipled into a radical, missional, Jesus-following life and discipling others in the same vein. I believe a healthy, fathering/mentoring discipleship chain is essential to Christians living full-of-life, dynamic, intentional, intimate, purposeful, kingdom lives that propel us out of our cultural sloth.
I am re-imagining simple church that places a whole-life, missional, counter-cultural, Jesus-following ethos at the very center of its gathering and intentional discipleship processes.
There is, obviously, much more to explore together so consider this an invitation to think, re-think, and re-imagine with me.
Comments
12 responses to “Re-Thinking House Church”
You are exactly right about what is missing in some of the “missional” ideas floating around today. Engaging culture within a community is great, but if we want to be missional like Jesus, we need to not just engage culture, but engage those in culture who are hurt, alone, abused, abandoned. Thanks for the reminder.
Thanks for writing this Roger.
I am glad u brought out the downpoints about doing housechurch. Having been a part of a housechurch, I can concur that was exactly what I also saw happening amongst us too.
People (myself) often like the idea of housechurch initially it seems, but unfortunately, we all still have a very strong and familiar mindset, one that is long-since programmed and brought with us all into the house church environment (what’s in it for me and what do i need to do to make this happen).
Either participation is self-centred as in trying to ‘be’ a “leader”, or ‘forceful’ in a different sense, as in trying to force an avenue to be heard through and have needs met.
Of course there are others who often would rather just sit there quietly and just let others participate. But then again, listening is so important as a way of conveying Christ’s love and compassion.And it is a very important part of knowing how to pray and help others. Listening as in trying to really get a sense of, first of all, should we respond, if that is a yes, then how do we respond ? The main purpose is to share life and to offer life to each other, how we do that and how we work that out, all I can say is that basically as we keep looking to the Father and the Son, and see the relationship that they had and that we are invited into and partake of , our hope is that we would become a better reflection of them more and more.
Thanks for this post.
I’m interested in simple/house church. As a lifelong attendee of the “institutional” church and realizing that it doesn’t seem to be working, I’m intrigued by the movement that tries to get back to Jesus, discipleship, Acts 2, etc.
So, I’m a little discouraged hearing that this movement is not working for you. Why isn’t it working? Is it, at least, better than regular church? Will anything ever work? Is anything working anywhere?
I wish the institutional church were more open to this discussion. It seems like too many peoples’ jobs are at stake to discuss these ideas!!! What to do!?
Hi Jesse…
So sorry if I came across that the house church movement is not working for me. That was not at all what I was trying to communicate. In fact, it’s working for me very, very well precisely because it is a fluid approach to church life. By that I mean that it can easily adjust, as needed, to new understandings of how God is working and leading and it can easily develop new structures that support those new directions. If I were to re-think institutional life, it would mean tearing down structures and then trying to re-build. House/simple church, on the other hand, provides a place for growing, changing, learning, failing, renewing in an environment that is easily adaptable. Thus, my excitement about simple/house church is that it provides a framework for church life that allows for the constant re-thinking and growth that makes church the kind of dynamic experience it is meant to be. It may not be for the timid of heart, but it’s the only framework that, for me, has the ability to support a dynamic, growing, Jesus-following lifestyle.
I am very confused about the answer you gave Jesse and what you said in your post.
About re imagining:
If I was to re imagine….
1- the meeting would take an immediate trip to the back of the bus. The business of making disciples around our values would be ushered to the front.
2- I would no longer talk about house church (or the meeting) but the reality of making disciples
3- Leadership would no longer cater to “meeting only” house churches
4- Conferences would revolve around equipping us to being disciples
5- I would try to find a source of real connection (besides conferences) between disciple making people.
6- I would put out an immediate call to gather disciple making people. (not in California, Texas or Florida but in central North America. In a medium sized city)
7- Then at some point we could begin meeting again.
A QUOTE
Let’s face a harsh reality. When all the latest books on house church (or simple church, or organic church, or campus church, etc.) have been read & digested, and all the latest house church conferences have been attended, at the end of it all there remains one brutal truth. If the house church movement does not become an outreach-oriented movement that actively, prayerfully and creatively seeks the transformation of neighbourhoods, then we will perish as a movement . . . and rightfully so. We cannot and will not survive as a “Honey, I shrunk the Church” movement (I stole that from John White in Denver!) that simply reproduces what we have traditionally known as “church” on a smaller scale behind the four walls of a house. There is much talk today about 24/7 houses of prayer and how they compare to the early Moravians. There is a lesson here for the house church movement. Like the early Moravians our house churches need to become centers of prayer and fasting where we spend time praying, fasting, seeking and listening to God. But the Moravians then sent out an impressive number of missionaries/evangelists, people like Peter Bohler who befriended John Wesley and became instrumental in his eventual conversion. To me this speaks of concerted prayer COMBINED with intentional outreach. If we as a house church movement do not become outreach oriented we will die. Simple as that. (Maurice Smith: A people and a river… July 5, 2006 Newsletter)
I have been the leader of a house church movement for over 6 years and have discovered similar things to what you have mentioned in this article. House church, I believe, is a step in the right direction towards authentic Christianity and Christian community. It has provided a ligitimate alternative for people to the institutional church, and for those searching for something more, house church has become a beacon of hope. However, experience and time has shown that it hasn’t always turned out to be the “answer” some people were looking for. A new structure or form of church can become a simple redressing of the same old attitudes and culture. Itis not so much the form that needs to change as the mindsets of people. The form will not necessarily do that.
As well as leading a house church movement I am also a pastor of an ‘institutional’ church. Originally my desire was to change the institutional church to a house church movement, believing that was the answer to people’s search for something more and authentic. However I am now focusing my energy and attention to changing mindsets. Changing from church centered Christianity to personal responsibility, from the secular/sacred divide to 24/7 all of life worship. We do not have week day activities to make room for people to build relationships with each other and people in the community, and more. It will take time, but basically I am focusing on the life rather than the form, and letting the form be shaped by the life.
There is much more to say, but I love this debate. Also I appreciate the honesty to say that there can be problems with house church too. For all that house church is still a great form, away from all the trappings of institutional church to explore authentic, true discipleship and Christian living.
For me my goal wasn’t to start a house church, it was to get the church activated in the neighborhood I lived in. House gatherings became a part of a greater whole and they are neighborhood based so when they don’t meet people continue to interact on a regular basis. It is not the “house meetings” we base our success, but the spiritual footprint that has been created because we chose to stay in the neighborhood and bring the church there. Our neighborhood is becoming transformed because of it and disciples are being developed. There are still many challenges and old habits die hard, but with partnerships and common sense we are making a difference.
After 35 years going to church meetings and serving the local church, stepping out and making my neighborhood the primary place where I would love Jesus and love people, I have never been more alive and aware of God’s presence than at any other time in my life.
Thanks for this post. I think it is extremely healthy to take a look at what we are doing, in the process of pulling things apart, we highlight the areas that need to be watched and the parts that need to be nurtured.
I have been involved in church all my life and have spent the last 4 years planting one with my wife. We have now closed this down and are sitting back with a lot of questions.
I am tired of structured church and I am interested in more fluid ways of gathering as a group of followers of Jesus.
I have read Neil Cole’s book around Organic Church and liked a lot of what I read. But as you highlight in this post it is far to easy for people to bring expectations and experiences with them into a house church and endeavor to bring the bad habits with them. Does the focus of a gathering have to have Jesus mission at the top of the agenda?
As a pastor I became sick of the consumer attitude that people brought with them to our church. But as I have worked through this I wonder whether we get what the model of western structured church produces. We provide a menu of services (products), youth programs, kids church, mid week gatherings, worship services, mens groups etc. Then we expect to see people invest in the church financially so we can keep providing these services. Then people expect to see these services available and new ones added.
The fluid nature of organic connection/ simple church with its less products and services, has to offer a disconnection from the consumer culture that we so easily fall into.
So I am looking forward to the next chapter of my journey discovering what a more fluid approach to gathering as followers of Jesus looks like. Thanks again.
Thanks for this post on re-thinking house church. A member of my church printed me a copy and I am so grateful for the articulation of what I have been trying to sort through. I am a church planter that started in our house but we are now meeting in a church building on Saturday nights. We are stuggling to change mindsets towards living a 24/7 lifestyle rather than just assuming the shape of the institutional church in a new location. We are having some success using extremely small groups. In an attempt to create an iron sharpening iron environment groups are no larger than 4 people so that lives and experiences can be shared deeply. The accountability has been remarkable. Now the question is how do we provide something larger that provides a greater level of support and teaching so that extremely small discipleship is not just the blind leading the blind. So far, a lot of health has come from this process but I see that there are potential pitfalls and I’m looking for insight from others who are thinking about how the process of building disciples works. If we are trying to resist falling into old institutional patterns then we must ask questions based from a position of what is working and also what are the possible pitfalls if we do not intentionally manage something once we have launched it. Something that just continues to run in the same way with out managaement is called a program, and that is what I want to avoid.
I am a pastor of a none denominational church in Brazil. We got some things really working well and I wish I could find somoene in the United States to share with. I know one might say “what good thing could come out of Brazil”… and I would have to agree with the question. However, this new church model that was born in Brazil 40 years ago is very alined with the simple church muviment but it actually works because several of its deails have been revealled to us by the Holy Spirit and is not a result of our own understanding.
1. We have small churches and home churches
2. We have serviece every day
3. We do not emphasize man…Christ alone.
4. Our pastors don’t get paid.
5. We do not solicit money.
6. We are led by the Holy Spirit.
7. We utilize the gifts of the Holy Spirit.
8. We have never suffered a split
9. We are one Mind and One Spirit.
10 We grow by 500+ chuches every year.
11.We provide personal assistance to the unsaved.
If anyone has a question on how we deal with any topic of a smaal church or home church please feel free to ask… we have leaned a lot in this past 40 years.
The Peace of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Pr. Taylor Vieira
Roger. I have the same issues. I have been trying to re-imagine whole-life/mission/church for quite a while. I have a rough pdf with some ideas & would like your thoughts on it, if you’re still exploring these tensions. Let me know.
Roger,
I share your concerns about our house churches. I suspect that our tendancy to “join” a particular house church is part of the problem. I believe that God desires us woven into a continuous fabric, each one responsivly gathering with many gatherings, not once a week with the same group. I don’t think God wants formulas, just responsive obedience.
I think this explains the problems wth our traditional churches:
http://thebigpicmin.wordpress.com/2009/03/11/pastoral-virus/
I think this explains the one of the main problems with the our House Church gatherings
http://thebigpicmin.wordpress.com/2009/07/01/whats-really-going-on-with-these-pew-sitter-pastors/
God Bless
Glenn