“Church” as we know it in the West (a building with pastors and a sermon, etc.) is not the best missional tool.
For some reason, we keep coming back to the conclusion that many people like Jesus, but not the church. The “church” to people on the outside is political, hypocritical and full of hate. And I completely agree with them. I do not hate the church, but I really dislike it. If this is how Christians are portrayed in the world then missions will be met with hard hearts.
This leads me to the radical conclusion that "church" as an institution should be abandoned. Why do we have it? Why is it necessary? We need fellowship, to DISCIPLE each other. In many institutional churches this does not happen. The pastor speaks on Sunday and by Monday I have forgotten what was said. I gain no community, no knowledge, and no tools to help me love the hurting and the broken.
I think Christianity needs to head back to its roots. We need to abandon our church buildings and move to our homes. We need house churches. I believe that once we step away from institutionalization then Christianity becomes 1) more approachable and 2) more authentic. House churches provide a setting for people to be become DISCIPLED, which I think is the most important thing, not only for missional work, but also for one’s Christian faith in general. House churches are interactive. They are challenging. They are conversation. They are spiritual growth.
My Young Life Team Leader always tells us in leader meetings “iron sharpens iron”. I believe this biblical statement wholeheartedly (Proverbs 27:17). If we as a church body are continually sharpening the way we act in accordance to our faith, then we could be a movement that people would want to be a part of. It’s no longer attractive, because of gimmicks and events, but it is attractive, because it is authentic love, hope, dedication and peace, that people in our generation long for. This is what we can learn from each other in house churches.
Emily M.
I understand what you are saying and agree to some extant with it. I agree that the church as an institution here in the west does not exemplify the way Christ interacted with people.
I think I hear what you are getting at…If I do, you are not saying that we should abandon the church, but some or all of institutional trappings that have been distractions. Perhaps. The problem is, the “house/simple/liquid” model has it’s issues as well. This requires us to be quite discerning. I think the model may not be the issue – the context and the trajectory of where are are going as a people probably creates a larger wake.
We do not throw out the education system because some do not earn a degree or some fail.
We do not abandon the institution of marriage because many marriage fail.
We do not choose celibacy because sex can be a destructive experience in some contexts.
Even the garden of Eden had it’s snake.
Reflecting on my own personal experience, by building a community within the churches that I attend has made everything so much more meaningful. I do believe that discipleship needs to more of the main focus within any church, but to completely throw out the large church community and to break off into house churches doesn’t seem like the answer. There needs to be a place were different groups can co-mingle and learn from each others experiences. I feel like the church body as it is now is a perfect place for this to happen. Small groups and what not are perfect examples of that, but I don’t think that enough churches do this so that everyone can have the opportunity to build their own sub-community within the larger community found in the church and that is where I see the problem.
Hi Emily,
I resonate with a lot of what you are saying, but I think that there can be a third way between contemporary church structures, which tend to be passive oriented and a purely house church orientation.
Part of this is due to a misconception on house churches during the New Testament period. Many of the houses that people used to gather would be the houses of wealthy families. These were less like what we’d think of as houses today, and more like mansions (a full entourage of servants, etc) and so tended to be larger than what we think of as house churches. And beyond that, there was much of the early church shaped by synagogues, as well as Christians that met in catacombs, etc. Having a place of gathering or being part of a larger group need not short circuit us from being active communities that are discipled by each other.
That aside, I do agree with you that we need more focus on how to do church in a way that takes discipleship much more seriously, and that’s a challenge that we need to deal with as we pursue mission in our churches(of whatever type)!