So many of us in the West are in love with our church edifices. I'm not, and never will be. Oh, I'm not opposed to "Church houses". I tithe willingly, and when a church I attended needs money for the building I give it. I just toured the new building at my Father-in-Law's church in Charlottetown. Beautiful, I am very happy for them. It's worth every penny for their needs.
However, the truth is that most western churches are ministering while living on the very edge of their financial ability. And it's largely due to the cost of their edifices.
I like what I have been hearing out of the Global Missions Movement about House Churches the last 10 years.
Often people tort to me that our mega church growth principles came from the mission field. If they did, the world missions movement abandoned them long before I became involved in missions; Lew Cass made me read the previous ten years worth of EMQ (Evangelical Missions Quarterly - from 1985-1995) and it's was not a topic of discussion in any missions Journals since 1985.
Our western model of raising large amounts of money, buying expensive land, and build a building, does not multiply churches very fast. Certainly not fast enough to reach the millions in 3rd world mega cities. (3rd world has been changed to 2/3rds world as they are 2/3rds of the world) Most people in the world are poor; Did you know that? It is very expensive for us to buy land in cities, let alone the poor.
The Global missions movement seems to be united in thinking that House Churches are probably the only way to reach the majority of the world who live in 3rd world cities filled with the poor. 80% of the worlds people live in Asia, and 50% of them live on $2 a day or less. We live in the upper 5% of income in the world.
Some believe that in a few more decades 80% of the worlds population will live in fewer than 300 mega cities in the world. Guess where we are failing in the Great commission most? Yep, Our greatest failure in missions all over the world is in Cities. The single greatest concentrator and container of people in the world.
It seems that the larger a city becomes, the less influence Christianity has. We can't seem to get out of of the Western model of church planting. We say we need a building here to be respected, accepted, visible. Are we even achieving that with the edifice?
However, the 2/3rds world people can't afford this model on a 2$ a day family income. (That's almost half the people on this planet folks - that's how rich we are)
"House churches" are no different than a body of believers that meet in a "Church House." They are to set up the same leadership, practice the same ordinances. They are under the authority of God's word and Godly Leadership. They organized into a fellowship of interconnected beleivers form other home groups. For all intense purposes- all house church means is the house is the church building. That is it!
The goal of the House Church model in Missions jargon is this - to have house churches spread all over a city in every apartment building, every city block. Here are a few advantages;
1) More Money For Actual "Ministry" Our single largest consumption of God's money is edifices. We think we need them, say we do. Billions and billions of dollars of God's money is tied up in maintaining buildings and structures all over the world. We have the money to totally saturate every unreached people in the world with hundreds of thousands of mission workers. However the funds are all tied up in maintaining edifices, so is not available for ministry. This is not the case in house churches. With no church building overhead, a much higher percentage of offerings is invested in actual ministry, so they multiply faster.
2) More Intimate Fellowship. House churches generally foster deeper and real fellowship because homes are more relaxed, and the group is smaller.
3) Easily repeated by the ordinary every day folk, verses needing Church planting experts.
4) Provide greater and more intimate accountability.
5) House churches are the ONLY option for Christians living in persecuted countries.
It's interesting that everything we lament about in larger churches and church planting in the west are answered by the very principle of a house church. We try to emulate what house churches have naturally in our "Small Groups ministry".
Anyway, the house church movement is alive, well accepted, and well respected in Global Missions. But we are (myself anyway) not getting the information out. We seem to think this is going to be the answer, but I find little promotion or missions literature around the strategy. The How to? The results. I suppose it's hard to gather date on a mission house church movement?
I wish I could remember which African Theologian I heard say this. But he gave this prediction.
"Just as the church began in homes the first 300 years, so it will be back to meeting in homes when Jesus comes again." Interesting!
I planted churches that met under mango trees in Africa, as their homes are not big enough to hold a house church :-) However, I am 100% in favor of house churches. I do not think we can advance at any significant rate in the urban centers of the world without house churches.
I would love to discuss more about House Churches. I don't get overly excited talking about Church Houses but house churches I would love to hear more about. We need both kinds of churches, but it would be good to hear more on this subject.
No comments:
Post a Comment