Home-grown
churches
Why
some Christians never leave home to go to church
By
Craig Bird
"Let's
get together at My house this Sunday before the game."
- God
Remember
that billboard? Good advice. Bad directions. After all, who
knows where God's house is?
But
for most people, there was no need for directions. "God's
house" equates to a church, which usually means a building
with a steeple, parking lot, denominational identity, preacher
and order of service.
Not
for a growing segment of believers who "go" to church
by staying home. They shove the couch back, bring the kitchen
chairs into the den, and answer the doorbell. Or perhaps they
travel to a friend's house where the furniture has been similarly
rearranged so a small group of people can gather to worship.
Generally
known as house churches, they intentionally change the emphasis
-- and the grammar -- of church. These Christians don't go
to church, they do church as they go.
"Members
of the body of Christ do not go to a place to be the church,
but rather they are the church wherever they go,"explains
Bruce Wofford of Ontario, a former missionary who now is part
of the House Church Network.
House
churches go by other names as well -- simple church, discovery
group, believer's church, body life, open church, New Testament
church, home fellowships, organic Christianity, small groups.
But don't call them cell groups! That's a vestige of the much-despised
megachurch.
Slippery
subject
The
house-church movement is nothing new -- in fact the practice
is ancient -- but it has produced a flurry of activity in recent
years.
How
many people are involved in house churches? The answer is literally,
"God only knows." They prefer fellowship to filling
out forms. Inherently resistant to outside authority, house
churchers limit their size to maintain intimacy. They look upon
the traditional church with at least skepticism and often disgust.
But they hold a special disdain for the marketing strategies
of the church-growth movement.
"It
is impossible to (thoroughly) research house churches, not 'real'
ones anyway," advises Herb Drake of House Church Central.
"They tend to be, at least partially, underground. They
don't apply to the IRS for tax-exempt status. They don't advertise
in newspapers or send out mass mailings. They simply build relationships
with people and attract them to Christ."
Though
largely low-tech, house churches have discovered the Internet.
A Google search for "house church" returns more than
3 million hits. Those websites that include directories yield
addresses for approximately 2,000 house churches in the United
States. Overseas numbers are even more slippery -- but even
more impressive. An estimated 80 million Chinese Christians
are involved in house churches.
The
popularity of house churches, at least in the United States,
stems from their decentralized structure, the emphasis on in-depth
relationships, the priority of spiritual experience over rational
argument, and an appeal to "authentic first-century Christian
worship."
For
"post-congregationals," who for various reasons shun
traditional churches (FaithWorks, Sept.-Oct. 2002), house
churches are often a refreshing alternative.
"These
are, for the most part, people who want to strip faith down
to its bare minimum," Nancy Ammerman of Hartford Seminary,
one of America's leading sociologists of religion, told The
New York Times. "They don't want to have to support
a big building and staff and insurance policies and advertising
campaigns and fixing the roof, because all of that seems to
them to be extraneous to what they understand a life of faith
to be."
'Pure
chaos'
That
appeal certainly hooked college student Ruthy Lipka, but only
after first repelling her. "As a teenager I rebelled against
my Pentecostal-preacher's-daughter upbringing and became obsessed
with studying different doctrines and denominations," she
told FaithWorks. "I eventually decided the Presbyterians
had just the right doctrine so I had to go there. I loved sitting
in a pew. I loved singing hymns so that I could sound good.
I loved that big old organ up there. Life was pretty perfect
as far as churches were concerned."
Then
a college friend invited her to a Brandon, Fla., home fellowship.
"I wore a dress but everyone else was in everyday clothes,"
she recalled. "Some people actually wore -- dare I say
it? -- shorts! I didn't quite like that. ... People didn't ring
the doorbell. They just barged in. And they weren't quiet and
proper when they did. They didn't ask 'How do you do?' but called
out 'Praise the Lord!' …
"I
sat in a kitchen! Some people actually sat on the floor. ...
There was no preacher. That shocked me. One guy stood up after
some songs and I thought he was the preacher. Then someone else
stood up. Then someone else. Then a girl sang a song. Then some
older man read a [Scripture] passage that had ministered to
him that week. Then a little 9-year-old girl shared what she
had seen in devotions with her mom that week. It was pure chaos!
...
"Not
only was there no organ, but the one guy who had a guitar didn't
even play for most of the songs. And they didn't have it planned
either. They'd just finish a song and someone would shout out,
'Let's sing 'As the Deer.' And they'd all bust out singing as
if they'd practiced all morning."
That
initial encounter unsettled her. "This isn't church,"
she told friends later. "It was just a bunch of people
coming together and sharing the Lord." Almost four years
later, she concedes, "Little did I know then that this
is exactly what the church is. The church is not an organization.
It is an organism. It is a living, breathing woman, the Bride
of Christ. Christ is the absolute dead center of our meetings
-- not organ playing, not the preacher, not a sermon, not Sunday
school and not even any doctrine. We share how we saw Christ
during the week, each and every one of us."
House-church
DNA
Lipka's
description touches on the three primary threads of house-church
DNA -- limited size (typically no more than 20 people), non-professional
leadership, and no buildings.
House
churchers also proclaim a common commitment, at least among
the evangelicals who make up the overwhelming number of such
groups, to replicate the first-century model of "meeting
house to house."
Otherwise,
variety is the order of the day.
"We
are from almost every Christian background -- Catholic, Methodist,
Baptist, Pentecostal, Church of Christ -- [and] many others
have never been associated with any sect," writes Dan Beaty
in "The Church: Triumphant in Christ! "We agree on
very little doctrine. Some believe baptism is necessary for
salvation, some don't. Some believe smoking is okay, some don't.
Some believe that drinking alcohol is okay, some don't. None
believes that doing something that harms his neighbor is okay."
"For
many Christians, the house church is simply an extension of
the home-schooling principle," writes Mark Mattison of
Open House Church. "Their driving motivation is withdrawal
from the world. For others, the house church is a key to renewal
and mission in the existing church. For yet others, the house
church is part of apostolic tradition and should be considered
normative on that basis. And for yet others, it is merely a
rap session, an outlet to express frustration over the institutional
church. … That's part of the diverse house-church dynamic!"
Other
similarities and differences include:
--
The overwhelming majority of house-church members define themselves
as evangelical Christians. But a handful are accused of espousing
a New Age theology. Many more consider even Southern Baptists
to be rank liberals. Others teeter on the brink of cultism.
--
Most house churches declare unswerving commitment to a biblically
based theology. But interpretation can vary widely. For example,
some house churches require female members to remain silent,
while others argue that women are equal ministers. A few house
churches are steadfastly "King James only." One website
(www.balaams-ass.com) offers extensive materials for those who
wish to start house churches, but only those committed to the
KJV. "Our creed is the King James Bible with no outside
presuppositions tolerated. If you live in a non-English speaking
nation, and if you can prove your Bible is based 100 percent
on the Textus Receptus, we will work with that. Better yet,
learn English so you can study the KJV. :)"
--
Most house churches carefully distance themselves from traditional
congregations. But the degree of separation runs from those
who condemn traditional churches as pawns of Satan to those
who send their children on mission trips with church youth groups.
Some even remain involved in traditional churches while embracing
the house-church fellowship.
Angry
diatribes, personal attacks and even threats of lawsuits are
far too common in the house-church movement, where conviction
runs deep and pain from past church battles is chronic. Most
of the conflict centers on what critics say is the central failing
of house churches: Who gives leadership and enforces doctrinal
discipline? After fleeing the traditional church, with its propensity
toward spirit-killing authoritarianism, how do you avoid corrupting
freedom with heresy?
Means
or end?
Is
the house church an effective way to spread the gospel? Or is
the movement best seen as an end in itself?
Without
the need to train and pay professional clergy or build and maintain
buildings, house churches can free incredible financial resources
to do missions and take care of the needy, proponents say.
Seminary
professor Alan Karr is a convert to the house-church-as-outreach
viewpoint. While teaching a class on church planting, he discovered
among his students an overwhelming interest in house churches.
He took the hint.
"I've
been a pastor of traditional churches for more than 20 years,
but now I'm a pastor in my own home on Saturday nights,"
said Karr, who teaches at Golden Gate Baptist Theological Seminary.
Typically
30-to-35 people meet in Karr's living room. One member gives
free guitar lessons prior to the meeting. Baptisms may take
place in a backyard hot tub or a church borrowed for that purpose.
Already
the group has spawned one new house church and three others
will spin out soon. That pattern of growth could continue indefinitely,
says Karr, who also participates in more traditional church
plants.
"To
keep things simple we are going to organize and register as
a single church -- the Ethene Church Network -- but each house
group will function as totally independent. All cooperation
will be voluntary."
House-church
networks are particularly popular as a church-planting strategy
among Gen-X Christians. The groups in the network usually come
together to celebrate worship and fellowship once a week or
once a month.
Rick
Bennett, a Baptist church planter among 20-somethings in Boston,
uses a house-church strategy out of necessity. The cost of meeting
space in Boston is prohibitive, he says.
In
Austin, Texas, house churches have a British accent. Brits Tony
and Felicity Dale, both medical professionals, became involved
in house churches in a poor section of London three decades
ago. Now in Central Texas, they helped organize the Austin Fellowship
of Home Churches, which has 15 member groups after five years.
In 2001 they launched House2House magazine, which has
a circulation of 30,000.
A rabbit plague
House-church
purists, however, despise the church-planting movement -- along
with all other strategies that look like marketing of the church.
The house church is the end in itself, they say, not a means
to an end or a "starter church."
Still
there is an emerging trend that bases evangelism squarely on
the house-church concept.
The
Dawn International Network insists house churches are not only
the best way to spread Christianity but, practically speaking,
the only way. The umbrella organization's immodest goal is "to
have at lease one Christian congregation within walking distance
of every human on earth." Sniffs one house churcher, "They
are to church planting what the Willow Creek Association is
to seeker services."
Wolfgang
Simson, a German evangelical who is part of Dawn-Europe, makes
the case: "If you put two elephants in a room and two rabbits
in [another] room, in three years you will have three elephants
and 476 million rabbits. Wonderful things happen in elephant-type
churches. But with all of these elephant churches around, it's
time for a rabbit plague."
In
his popular book, Houses That Change the World, Simson
argues: "It is time to change the system. Luther did reform
the content of the gospel, but left the outer forms of church
remarkably untouched. The Free-Church freed the system from
the state, the Baptists then baptized it, the Quakers dry-cleaned
it, the Salvation Army put it into a uniform, the Pentecostals
anointed it and the Charismatics renewed it. But until today
nobody has really changed the superstructure. It is about time
to do just that. …
"The
church has to become small in order to grow big. The traditional
congregational church as we know it is, statistically speaking,
neither big nor beautiful, but rather a sad compromise -- an
overgrown house-church and an undergrown [worship] celebration,
often missing the dynamics of both."
Beyond fault-finding
Dan
Beaty of www.livingtruth.com is a little more charitable in
his assessment.
"Having
church in the home, of course, does not automatically fix everything
[that is wrong with the traditional church]. We [house churchers]
must maintain a healthy, affirming spirit towards all of God's
people and his work in other environments. …
"God
is at work in the institutional church. He is saving people,
teaching them, building up his body … all [in a] place we deem
to be a less than an ideal setting. Satan would love to keep
us home-church folk busy with fault finding. We will never run
out of problems to expose in the institutional church -- and
even in those who home church but not like us.
"Let
us be about our Father's business and leave his purpose for
others in the various churches and denominations up to him."
-
Craig Bird is a free-lance writer in San Antonio, Texas. (ccraigabird@cs.com)
Resources
Wolfgang
Simson, Houses That Change the World, OM Publishing,
1998
Stephen Atkerson, Editor, Toward a House Church Theology,
New Testament Restoration Foundation, 1996
Stanley Nelson, A Believer's Church Theology, House Church
Central, 1994
House2House magazine, www.house2house.tv
Dawn International Network, www.dawnministries.org
www.housechurch.org
www.housechurchcentral.com
www.livingtruth.com
www.balaams-ass.com
back
to top ^