Book Review of Houses that Changed the World
In Houses that Change the World, Wolfgang Simson lays out his argument for a third religious reformation - a reformation of the structure of the Christian church. Simson argues that the current church structure is not true to the New Testament model of worship and fellowship:
The Bible absolutely does not teach us to say that a holy crowd gathering on a holy day at a holy hour in a holy sanctuary to participate in a holy ritual performed by a holy man on holy clothes for a holy fee is a New Testament church (36).
The new, yet age-old church structure that Simson proposes to replace the prevailing one is the house church.
THE NEED FOR HOUSE CHURCHES
The irony that today's "Christendom" has tolerated for too long is the enormous gap between God and church. While the majority of so called "unbelievers" in the world believe in God, very few are interested in or attracted to the church as it exists in its traditional structure. This structure is organizational, consisting of a group of usually 20 - 200 attendees, a formal leadership hierarchy, specific programs, set agendas, and a designated building. Simson argues that within such churches, a "fellowship without fellowship" usually emerges. The size and structure of the congregation rarely allows the members to engage in deep community of the kind described in John 13:34-35. Additionally, this structure tends to under-use the spiritual and natural gifts of the people of God. Rather than growing stronger in the faith, the majority of attenders rely solely on the specialized leadership to do the work of the ministry.
Simson argues that it is this particular form of church, not Christ or the Body of Christ, that many pre-Christians are rejecting. While he does not expect or suggest the banishment of existing church structures, he argues that house churches are a vital key to discipling entire nations. Mike Steele, Director of the North American division of Discipling a Whole Nation (DAWN), is very involved in the current house church movement in America. He believes that house churches need not compete with existing congregational church structures, but should rather complement them in the effort to reach the entire population with the Gospel. "[House churches are] there to complete the expression of the body of Christ, not to take over something or compete with something," said Steele. "We think this [structure] can help reach some people who heretofore have not darkened the door of a church."
THE ORIGIN OF HOUSE CHURCHES
Simson distinguishes the congregation, as defined above, from the cell and the celebration models of worship. The cell, or house church model (not to be equated exactly with the cell-church movement) typically occurs in a home, with 3-20 members who gather for intentional relationship and community. This informal setting and the natural relationships that form there make the structure organic rather than organizational. The third model is a large celebratory gathering of more than 200 Christians from a large region who wish to worship together in an expression of unity and hope in Christ. Ideally, the celebration model draws together all the Christians from a particular area.
The cell and the celebration are the two models described in the New Testament. Believers met regularly in small groups in homes, and on a more infrequent basis in the open air or in the Jerusalem temple. When persecution began, the public celebrations abated, but the house churches continued to meet. The original house church "movement" was derailed by the slow slide of the followers of the Way into moralism, religion, the veneration of saints, and the separation of clergy and laity. The apparent death of the house church came in AD 312 with Constantine's conversion and the subsequent professionalization of the church. Constantine married the cell and the celebration models to form the congregational model that has reigned until this very day. In the merging process, the strengths of both models were lost:
The cell provided family dynamics, a private and stable home and organic place of belonging and accountability to Christians. The celebrations were places charged with a somewhat grandiose, truly public atmosphere, where the small house churches reconnected with the big picture and with each other, heard apostolic teaching and encountered prophetic vision. The congregational-type church with its semi-private atmosphere, its limited fellowship possibilities and its professional clergy was a political solution which suited the state and conveniently fitted into the religious patterns of the world at the same time (25-6).
When the church moved from being a persecuted minority to a state religion, many Christians relaxed their formerly rigorous life and witness and conformed to the prevailing structural shift. In the process, they lost much of their credibility and prophetic power to transform the pagan society around them.
Many reformers throughout church history have advocated a return to the house church structure. Luther proposed a "third order of service" that would meet in a private home for the purpose of prayer, fellowship, study, teaching, and service. Schwenkfeld, Labadie, Spener, the Anabaptists, and the Huguenots followed him with similar concepts. But the most successful house church type movement emerged in the form of John Wesley's classes. The early Methodist movement saw most of its conversions occur in these intimate small group meetings, which were essentially house churches. While none of these particular movements replaced the congregational structure, house churches have existed since the beginning. Simson argues that they have actually sustained the Body through some of its hardest times, including the Dark Ages and the more recent reign of communism in Russia and China. House churches may not be the current norm, but neither are they a flash in the pan.
HOUSE CHURCHES TODAY
Simson describes four general elements that are common to almost all house church meetings. The first is "meating." The group meets to eat. "The question of who you eat with is central to each person's social identity"
(82). In most cultures, people eat with family. Thus, eating with other members of the body of Christ on a regular basis is an important expression of the spiritual family relationships that we enjoy. Eating also fulfills a sacramental function in many house churches. The meal becomes the Lord's supper - that is, a "substantial meal with a symbolic meaning,"(82) as it was for Jesus and his disciples. Steele described an instance when his house church gathered around a breakfast of pancakes (the body) and orange juice (the blood). Rather than being tied to traditional symbolism, they have allowed the sacrament to become incarnate in the culture of today.
The second element of house church meetings is teaching each other how to obey. This teaching generally uses a more kinetic eastern teaching-style. It may include a short talk, but more often consists of stories, discussions, and interactive dialogues. When people participate in the learning process, it is simply more effective because it is "more humane; it is part of real life, not in an artificial environment; it is driven by real people with real and existential questions, not according to some theoretical textbook and an agenda printed far away" (85).
Thirdly, house churches share material and spiritual blessings. The sharing of material blessings is clearly demonstrated both in the church described in Acts (2:44-5, 4:32-5), and in Jesus' direction to the rich young ruler.
Sharing spiritual blessings is important as well: "When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation" (1 Cor. 14:26). The Christians in the Acts church realized that they belonged to Christ, and every blessing that they enjoyed came from him. Thus, their impulse was not to hoard, but to share those blessings freely for the purpose of building up the body. Some house churches have certainly taken this sharing to its logical end, communal living. But this is not the case with all house churches, nor even the majority.
Finally, house churches pray together. This includes talking to God and listening to Him. Many branches of the church have squelched God's voice by ignoring the spiritual gifts that he often uses to speak to us. House churches recognize the five-fold spiritual gifts imparted by Christ (pastor, teacher, apostle, prophet and evangelist) in a healthy balance. Traditional church structures have usually exalted the pastor, teacher, and evangelist as the most important ministers, ignoring apostles and prophets out of misunderstanding or fear. The house church movement restores these vocations, thus allowing God's people to hear his voice again through these sanctified channels.
Particular house church meetings may look very different. "We think house church can express itself in multiple flavors," Steele said. He described one model that his own house church uses. The BELL model includes the following four elements: Blessing, Eating, Listening, and Learning. He pointed out that this is not a formal model, or even one that they always use in their particular church. He emphasized that a house church must be "incarnated" into the particular culture of its members. Some house churches are more charismatic, some incorporate traditional liturgy. House churches that consist of a lot of non-Christian seekers may gather for something as simple as a football game, and after having enjoyed that time of fellowship together, have a time of discussion about God and their lives. "The whole goal," Steel said, "is to give pre-Christians a place to belong, a place of safety, a place where they are welcome, so that the understanding of Christ can be imparted to them and they can receive it in that safe place."
LEADERSHIP
House churches are generally autonomous in the sense that individual groups are not bound by the authority of a top-down leadership structure. Simson does, however, propose a loose system of networking or leadership. This takes place on three levels. Within each house church there are one or more leaders, often called elders. Regionally and nationally, five-fold ministers network with different house churches in order to share information, provide training for individuals within house churches, and maintain connections in the body through relationship and prayer. Steele describes the function of such a minister (who he terms a 'network leader') in the following way: "A person who is not bringing them [the house churches] together organizationally, but rather relating to them as friends and as family, so their hearts are being joined together in purpose, not in organization - but in an organic relationship that causes them to be able to share information or to be able to join together for worship or whatever the circumstance requires."
Simson also proposes that an Apostolic Father ought to function as the visionary leader for all the Christians in all the house churches in a given city or region. This person would be one with an apostolic gift, and a corresponding burden to see the Gospel saturate that area. (Think Sam
Shoemaker.) The Apostolic Father would also be responsible for calling together all the house churches in his region for periodic times of corporate celebration.
ADVANTAGES OF THE HOUSE CHURCH
Simson provides an extensive list of advantages inherent to the house church structure. The most obvious is the depth of community bred in such groups, and the facility with which they can reach people's real needs with the Gospel. I believe this structure can be especially successful with young people, who have such a deep need to belong and to be known in an authentic way. There is no room in house churches for the distance and fakeness that is often felt by young people (particularly, but not exclusively
pre-Christians) when they enter a congregational church structure. The informal house church stands in contrast to the more formal congregational service which, in many cases, takes on the exalted ritual form of a wedding.
This removes church - and also faith - from the realm of real life:
If we allow church to take on only 'celebration structures,' we will start celebrating 'a wedding a week,' and our behavior will soon be far removed from real life and cease to make sense to ordinary people. It will become an artificial, weekly performance (19).
Home life is anything but artificial. It is the realm where your words are put to the test by your actions, where hypocrisy is easily and quickly detected, and where faith must be holistic if it is to be faith at all.
The house church, according to Simson, will also eliminate the need for formal evangelistic programs, because evangelism is built into the DNA of its structure. The foundation of the house church is the extended family, in both the natural and the physical sense. Steele describes evangelism as spiritual parenting, emphasizing the importance of deep, intentional relationship to the growth process. As Steele imparts all that God has given and taught him into his spiritual sons and daughters, and they go and do likewise, the church is grown in a consistent and sustainable way. "The family unit becomes the missional purpose," Steele said, "or the evangelistic program of the church." Considering the importance of relationship for today's youth, Steele's point is a good one.
The house church also contains a missionary purpose in its very structure.
As the group grows, it will eventually reach the 20-limit, and a new house church will spin off under the leadership of one of the members who has been prepared by the regional five-fold ministry training. Thus, rather then sending out a lone ranger missionary to evangelize a people group at home or abroad, the church sends out itself - a new baby church - to reach pre-Christians. This concept struck a chord with me as I considered the challenge of modeling Jesus' new command in a missionary setting. The new command cannot be modeled by a lone ranger; it can be modeled by a group of two or more Christians seeking to follow Jesus and love one another as He has loved them - a house church. The house church is also a more friendly structure for family-oriented cultures, as it does not extract new believers out of their 'natural habitat,' but incarnates Jesus Christ in the place where they already are. Owing to its small size and inconspicuous setting, the house church is also a more "persecution-proof" structure. This makes it an excellent option for reaching pre-Christians in anti-Christian societies, like those in the most unevangelized region on earth. House churches may very well be the key for unlocking the 10-40 window.
Finally, the multiplication principle of house church growth means that over time, these structures will simply reach more people faster than existing structures. Simson has done the math, and discovered that even allowing for a slow start-up period and a 25% rate of attrition every five years, one house church of 12 people could multiply to 165,888 house churches of roughly 2 million people in just 20 years! And this is more than theory - it has happened historically, and in recent times in other parts of the world.
Steele cited exciting growth already occurring in the US, where the movement is only about nine months old. In a few regions, networks of 12 house churches have jumped to 80 in just a year. While growth in the US is currently functioning more on principles of addition rather than multiplication, Steele believes growth will take off in the near future. "We are on the precipice now of seeing a real growth over the next two to three years where multiplication becomes the norm," he said.
HURDLES TO THE MOVEMENT
The idea of house churches threatens many of our established Christian institutions. A world where house churches are the only expression of the Body of Christ might consist of fewer professional clergy, because the laity would be empowered in the ministry and released from spiritual unemployment.
Seminary might be less important to spiritual development as the people of God learned to rely less on knowledge and more on hearing God himself.
Denominations and church structures and even para-church organizations and missionary agencies might become totally irrelevant. This prospect may lead many currently in the professional ministry to dismiss house churches as the latest fad. But neither Simson nor Steele advocate the total destruction of existing ministry structures. Steele sees house churches as "a move of the Holy Spirit that is not aberrant and not in any way looking to compete with the existing church, but rather in a complementary fashion, come along side of it to gather in more of the harvest that currently hasn't been gathered into the church." Still, the implicit threat of house churches will undoubtedly be a huge hurdle to its acceptance by many in the Christian community.
Some may criticize the lack of accountability in the movement's loose leadership structure. Steele responds that he trusts the Holy Spirit and the Word of God to function as the system of checks and balances for the Body of Christ. While traditional structures place someone at the top to guard against heresy down below, a house church network of leaders exists to spur one another on to good works. "When we come together in connection and relationship, that connection brings correction," said Steele. "We choose to make ourselves accountable to each other. And because of the rich walk with Christ that each one of us has enjoyed.we know that there is security in entrusting ourselves to each other - not for the purpose of condemnation or for judgment, but rather for healing and security and health." When someone falls, the network rallies around him or her, ushering him towards healing.
The focus is on support and growth, not surveillance, correction, and elimination.
But perhaps the biggest hurdle to the house church movement is its perceived newness. Many have the feeling that church must be formal in its structure - otherwise, its just not real church. The house church structure re-frames our perception of church in radical ways. "We have normally seen church as time and place and event," Steele responds. "But when we begin to see the church as going, as reaching out, as being a witness out in the community, the extension of the Kingdom is seen in the reflection of our lives touching other lives by the grace of God. It's not formal church, but it is an expression of the church! We want to allow God to do church in every environment, and as we do that we begin to see that church is a 24-7 event, not a two hour event on a Sunday morning. So it's perpetual, its life-giving, its organic, it constantly flows. Every time two or more are going out in His name, church is going out."
Meredith J Borel
REMIX Kingdom Outbreak Conference Coordinator Rock the World YouthMission Alliance www.rocktheworld.org borel@rocktheworld.org
910-494-1901
The Bible absolutely does not teach us to say that a holy crowd gathering on a holy day at a holy hour in a holy sanctuary to participate in a holy ritual performed by a holy man on holy clothes for a holy fee is a New Testament church (36).
The new, yet age-old church structure that Simson proposes to replace the prevailing one is the house church.
THE NEED FOR HOUSE CHURCHES
The irony that today's "Christendom" has tolerated for too long is the enormous gap between God and church. While the majority of so called "unbelievers" in the world believe in God, very few are interested in or attracted to the church as it exists in its traditional structure. This structure is organizational, consisting of a group of usually 20 - 200 attendees, a formal leadership hierarchy, specific programs, set agendas, and a designated building. Simson argues that within such churches, a "fellowship without fellowship" usually emerges. The size and structure of the congregation rarely allows the members to engage in deep community of the kind described in John 13:34-35. Additionally, this structure tends to under-use the spiritual and natural gifts of the people of God. Rather than growing stronger in the faith, the majority of attenders rely solely on the specialized leadership to do the work of the ministry.
Simson argues that it is this particular form of church, not Christ or the Body of Christ, that many pre-Christians are rejecting. While he does not expect or suggest the banishment of existing church structures, he argues that house churches are a vital key to discipling entire nations. Mike Steele, Director of the North American division of Discipling a Whole Nation (DAWN), is very involved in the current house church movement in America. He believes that house churches need not compete with existing congregational church structures, but should rather complement them in the effort to reach the entire population with the Gospel. "[House churches are] there to complete the expression of the body of Christ, not to take over something or compete with something," said Steele. "We think this [structure] can help reach some people who heretofore have not darkened the door of a church."
THE ORIGIN OF HOUSE CHURCHES
Simson distinguishes the congregation, as defined above, from the cell and the celebration models of worship. The cell, or house church model (not to be equated exactly with the cell-church movement) typically occurs in a home, with 3-20 members who gather for intentional relationship and community. This informal setting and the natural relationships that form there make the structure organic rather than organizational. The third model is a large celebratory gathering of more than 200 Christians from a large region who wish to worship together in an expression of unity and hope in Christ. Ideally, the celebration model draws together all the Christians from a particular area.
The cell and the celebration are the two models described in the New Testament. Believers met regularly in small groups in homes, and on a more infrequent basis in the open air or in the Jerusalem temple. When persecution began, the public celebrations abated, but the house churches continued to meet. The original house church "movement" was derailed by the slow slide of the followers of the Way into moralism, religion, the veneration of saints, and the separation of clergy and laity. The apparent death of the house church came in AD 312 with Constantine's conversion and the subsequent professionalization of the church. Constantine married the cell and the celebration models to form the congregational model that has reigned until this very day. In the merging process, the strengths of both models were lost:
The cell provided family dynamics, a private and stable home and organic place of belonging and accountability to Christians. The celebrations were places charged with a somewhat grandiose, truly public atmosphere, where the small house churches reconnected with the big picture and with each other, heard apostolic teaching and encountered prophetic vision. The congregational-type church with its semi-private atmosphere, its limited fellowship possibilities and its professional clergy was a political solution which suited the state and conveniently fitted into the religious patterns of the world at the same time (25-6).
When the church moved from being a persecuted minority to a state religion, many Christians relaxed their formerly rigorous life and witness and conformed to the prevailing structural shift. In the process, they lost much of their credibility and prophetic power to transform the pagan society around them.
Many reformers throughout church history have advocated a return to the house church structure. Luther proposed a "third order of service" that would meet in a private home for the purpose of prayer, fellowship, study, teaching, and service. Schwenkfeld, Labadie, Spener, the Anabaptists, and the Huguenots followed him with similar concepts. But the most successful house church type movement emerged in the form of John Wesley's classes. The early Methodist movement saw most of its conversions occur in these intimate small group meetings, which were essentially house churches. While none of these particular movements replaced the congregational structure, house churches have existed since the beginning. Simson argues that they have actually sustained the Body through some of its hardest times, including the Dark Ages and the more recent reign of communism in Russia and China. House churches may not be the current norm, but neither are they a flash in the pan.
HOUSE CHURCHES TODAY
Simson describes four general elements that are common to almost all house church meetings. The first is "meating." The group meets to eat. "The question of who you eat with is central to each person's social identity"
(82). In most cultures, people eat with family. Thus, eating with other members of the body of Christ on a regular basis is an important expression of the spiritual family relationships that we enjoy. Eating also fulfills a sacramental function in many house churches. The meal becomes the Lord's supper - that is, a "substantial meal with a symbolic meaning,"(82) as it was for Jesus and his disciples. Steele described an instance when his house church gathered around a breakfast of pancakes (the body) and orange juice (the blood). Rather than being tied to traditional symbolism, they have allowed the sacrament to become incarnate in the culture of today.
The second element of house church meetings is teaching each other how to obey. This teaching generally uses a more kinetic eastern teaching-style. It may include a short talk, but more often consists of stories, discussions, and interactive dialogues. When people participate in the learning process, it is simply more effective because it is "more humane; it is part of real life, not in an artificial environment; it is driven by real people with real and existential questions, not according to some theoretical textbook and an agenda printed far away" (85).
Thirdly, house churches share material and spiritual blessings. The sharing of material blessings is clearly demonstrated both in the church described in Acts (2:44-5, 4:32-5), and in Jesus' direction to the rich young ruler.
Sharing spiritual blessings is important as well: "When you come together, everyone has a hymn, or a word of instruction, a revelation, a tongue, or an interpretation" (1 Cor. 14:26). The Christians in the Acts church realized that they belonged to Christ, and every blessing that they enjoyed came from him. Thus, their impulse was not to hoard, but to share those blessings freely for the purpose of building up the body. Some house churches have certainly taken this sharing to its logical end, communal living. But this is not the case with all house churches, nor even the majority.
Finally, house churches pray together. This includes talking to God and listening to Him. Many branches of the church have squelched God's voice by ignoring the spiritual gifts that he often uses to speak to us. House churches recognize the five-fold spiritual gifts imparted by Christ (pastor, teacher, apostle, prophet and evangelist) in a healthy balance. Traditional church structures have usually exalted the pastor, teacher, and evangelist as the most important ministers, ignoring apostles and prophets out of misunderstanding or fear. The house church movement restores these vocations, thus allowing God's people to hear his voice again through these sanctified channels.
Particular house church meetings may look very different. "We think house church can express itself in multiple flavors," Steele said. He described one model that his own house church uses. The BELL model includes the following four elements: Blessing, Eating, Listening, and Learning. He pointed out that this is not a formal model, or even one that they always use in their particular church. He emphasized that a house church must be "incarnated" into the particular culture of its members. Some house churches are more charismatic, some incorporate traditional liturgy. House churches that consist of a lot of non-Christian seekers may gather for something as simple as a football game, and after having enjoyed that time of fellowship together, have a time of discussion about God and their lives. "The whole goal," Steel said, "is to give pre-Christians a place to belong, a place of safety, a place where they are welcome, so that the understanding of Christ can be imparted to them and they can receive it in that safe place."
LEADERSHIP
House churches are generally autonomous in the sense that individual groups are not bound by the authority of a top-down leadership structure. Simson does, however, propose a loose system of networking or leadership. This takes place on three levels. Within each house church there are one or more leaders, often called elders. Regionally and nationally, five-fold ministers network with different house churches in order to share information, provide training for individuals within house churches, and maintain connections in the body through relationship and prayer. Steele describes the function of such a minister (who he terms a 'network leader') in the following way: "A person who is not bringing them [the house churches] together organizationally, but rather relating to them as friends and as family, so their hearts are being joined together in purpose, not in organization - but in an organic relationship that causes them to be able to share information or to be able to join together for worship or whatever the circumstance requires."
Simson also proposes that an Apostolic Father ought to function as the visionary leader for all the Christians in all the house churches in a given city or region. This person would be one with an apostolic gift, and a corresponding burden to see the Gospel saturate that area. (Think Sam
Shoemaker.) The Apostolic Father would also be responsible for calling together all the house churches in his region for periodic times of corporate celebration.
ADVANTAGES OF THE HOUSE CHURCH
Simson provides an extensive list of advantages inherent to the house church structure. The most obvious is the depth of community bred in such groups, and the facility with which they can reach people's real needs with the Gospel. I believe this structure can be especially successful with young people, who have such a deep need to belong and to be known in an authentic way. There is no room in house churches for the distance and fakeness that is often felt by young people (particularly, but not exclusively
pre-Christians) when they enter a congregational church structure. The informal house church stands in contrast to the more formal congregational service which, in many cases, takes on the exalted ritual form of a wedding.
This removes church - and also faith - from the realm of real life:
If we allow church to take on only 'celebration structures,' we will start celebrating 'a wedding a week,' and our behavior will soon be far removed from real life and cease to make sense to ordinary people. It will become an artificial, weekly performance (19).
Home life is anything but artificial. It is the realm where your words are put to the test by your actions, where hypocrisy is easily and quickly detected, and where faith must be holistic if it is to be faith at all.
The house church, according to Simson, will also eliminate the need for formal evangelistic programs, because evangelism is built into the DNA of its structure. The foundation of the house church is the extended family, in both the natural and the physical sense. Steele describes evangelism as spiritual parenting, emphasizing the importance of deep, intentional relationship to the growth process. As Steele imparts all that God has given and taught him into his spiritual sons and daughters, and they go and do likewise, the church is grown in a consistent and sustainable way. "The family unit becomes the missional purpose," Steele said, "or the evangelistic program of the church." Considering the importance of relationship for today's youth, Steele's point is a good one.
The house church also contains a missionary purpose in its very structure.
As the group grows, it will eventually reach the 20-limit, and a new house church will spin off under the leadership of one of the members who has been prepared by the regional five-fold ministry training. Thus, rather then sending out a lone ranger missionary to evangelize a people group at home or abroad, the church sends out itself - a new baby church - to reach pre-Christians. This concept struck a chord with me as I considered the challenge of modeling Jesus' new command in a missionary setting. The new command cannot be modeled by a lone ranger; it can be modeled by a group of two or more Christians seeking to follow Jesus and love one another as He has loved them - a house church. The house church is also a more friendly structure for family-oriented cultures, as it does not extract new believers out of their 'natural habitat,' but incarnates Jesus Christ in the place where they already are. Owing to its small size and inconspicuous setting, the house church is also a more "persecution-proof" structure. This makes it an excellent option for reaching pre-Christians in anti-Christian societies, like those in the most unevangelized region on earth. House churches may very well be the key for unlocking the 10-40 window.
Finally, the multiplication principle of house church growth means that over time, these structures will simply reach more people faster than existing structures. Simson has done the math, and discovered that even allowing for a slow start-up period and a 25% rate of attrition every five years, one house church of 12 people could multiply to 165,888 house churches of roughly 2 million people in just 20 years! And this is more than theory - it has happened historically, and in recent times in other parts of the world.
Steele cited exciting growth already occurring in the US, where the movement is only about nine months old. In a few regions, networks of 12 house churches have jumped to 80 in just a year. While growth in the US is currently functioning more on principles of addition rather than multiplication, Steele believes growth will take off in the near future. "We are on the precipice now of seeing a real growth over the next two to three years where multiplication becomes the norm," he said.
HURDLES TO THE MOVEMENT
The idea of house churches threatens many of our established Christian institutions. A world where house churches are the only expression of the Body of Christ might consist of fewer professional clergy, because the laity would be empowered in the ministry and released from spiritual unemployment.
Seminary might be less important to spiritual development as the people of God learned to rely less on knowledge and more on hearing God himself.
Denominations and church structures and even para-church organizations and missionary agencies might become totally irrelevant. This prospect may lead many currently in the professional ministry to dismiss house churches as the latest fad. But neither Simson nor Steele advocate the total destruction of existing ministry structures. Steele sees house churches as "a move of the Holy Spirit that is not aberrant and not in any way looking to compete with the existing church, but rather in a complementary fashion, come along side of it to gather in more of the harvest that currently hasn't been gathered into the church." Still, the implicit threat of house churches will undoubtedly be a huge hurdle to its acceptance by many in the Christian community.
Some may criticize the lack of accountability in the movement's loose leadership structure. Steele responds that he trusts the Holy Spirit and the Word of God to function as the system of checks and balances for the Body of Christ. While traditional structures place someone at the top to guard against heresy down below, a house church network of leaders exists to spur one another on to good works. "When we come together in connection and relationship, that connection brings correction," said Steele. "We choose to make ourselves accountable to each other. And because of the rich walk with Christ that each one of us has enjoyed.we know that there is security in entrusting ourselves to each other - not for the purpose of condemnation or for judgment, but rather for healing and security and health." When someone falls, the network rallies around him or her, ushering him towards healing.
The focus is on support and growth, not surveillance, correction, and elimination.
But perhaps the biggest hurdle to the house church movement is its perceived newness. Many have the feeling that church must be formal in its structure - otherwise, its just not real church. The house church structure re-frames our perception of church in radical ways. "We have normally seen church as time and place and event," Steele responds. "But when we begin to see the church as going, as reaching out, as being a witness out in the community, the extension of the Kingdom is seen in the reflection of our lives touching other lives by the grace of God. It's not formal church, but it is an expression of the church! We want to allow God to do church in every environment, and as we do that we begin to see that church is a 24-7 event, not a two hour event on a Sunday morning. So it's perpetual, its life-giving, its organic, it constantly flows. Every time two or more are going out in His name, church is going out."
Meredith J Borel
REMIX Kingdom Outbreak Conference Coordinator Rock the World YouthMission Alliance www.rocktheworld.org borel@rocktheworld.org
910-494-1901
Post new comment