(Excerpt from, Building Blocks of the Church: Re-examining the Basics)
"The house church idea is not a new one. It finds its roots in an overemphasis of the fact that the New Testament churches frequently met in homes. In some parts of the world, such as China, it is a spontaneous God-ordained movement. In most Western countries however, these "churches" are generally populated and promoted by discontents and reactionaries who had been either hurt or disillusioned by the excesses and failures of the Charismatic revival.
At the outset, however, it must be said that the New Testament did meet in homes, but not exclusively so.
The first problem with this line of (house church) thinking is that it is strongly and negatively influenced by the bad experiences and frustrations in established churches. This is experiential theology in reverse and it works as follows: 'Because authority is abused in some churches, we will have no authority in ours. Because there is an over-emphasis on money in some, we will not participate in any form of giving. Because theological training has opened the door for some ungifted men to enter the ministry, we will not have anything to do with anyone who has a (theological) academic background. Because some full time ministers are lazy and abuse their privilege, 'we shoot paid preachers.' Because some sermons are boring, we reject all forms of formal preaching and teaching.'"
I think the excpert is over-generalizing, and putting too much of a negative spin on House Churches.
ReplyDeleteHe is making a blanket statement that is invalid. He can say some House churches but to discount all house churches is wrong.
I firmly believe that the west is getting to a point where there is a small minority of Churches acutally worth attending.
And this is the driving force behind House Churches. A program was on WFCJ the other day and it said that the largest growth in churches in America today is house churches, the estimate was that there were over 4 million people in America attending House Churches.
Now I dont think all of those people can be classified how the author of this extract protrays them.
The fault for this growth lies at the feet of the leadership of Chuches who are throwing off any semblence of accountability to their congregations. Very few churches now have boards of Elders.
A story was just ran yesterday of a young pastor who wanted to turn a church in to a Purpose driven, Emergent style church and was being obstructed by a long term elder member. The pastor actually called the police to have the person forcibly removed from the Church.
The way the church is going in America today. I will stand with the reactionaries.
God Bless.
that man...
ReplyDeletei'd have to agree with eric here.
while many who have been attracted to the "house church movement" desire to life up Christ, i would challenge some of their process...
to be a "reactionary" suggests that the person forms what they are based on what they do not want to be, rather than focussing one what they want to be. this has been my common experience with nearly every house church advocate i have found. when i ask, "why?" their answer is typically telling me all the things they do not want to become.
they will cite acts 2 for validation, yet completely ignore that the church was meeting daily in the temple as well.
barna and company can refer to the "house movement" or any other methodology as the next great reformation, but they seem to miss a product in the process.
luther, zwingli, calvin or even alexander mack did "react" to what they were seeing around them...but not in a way was driven by where they had come from.
luther's objective was never to become "anything but a catholic church."
mack did not seek to form a new fellowship as much as he was desiring to see the biblical style of church reproduced.
these men were not driven by their discontent with current circumstances or past afflictions. these men were driven by the Word of God and wanting to live it.
even if these "house church advocates" may have started as a reaction, hopefully their time in the Word will help them see areas of overreaction.
and certainly we (in traditional churches) can use this opportunity to re-evaluate what we do in light of Scripture.
Well keep in mind that an excerpt is exactly that. He (Bosch) makes several excellent points about what is found in some house churches - not all - but many. This is but one piece of one point (purposely provacative obviously).
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with you that a small minority of churches are worth attending (that oddly goes with the small number of rapture ready saints in those churches) I think the greater point Bosch makes is the problem of experiential theology, which I think is an excellent point. If we are going to stand against such theology 'coming' then we need to stand against it 'going'. Many of these house church folks are the 'offended' crowd who have a problem with authority - not all mind you, but many - and many of the ones I've known as well. If they can prove they've followed the Matthew 18 principle (I'd be struck dumb if even 5% have) then maybe I'd listen to what they're doing. In my opinion they lose any moral high ground they may have had because of this. Furthermore, that's why I would not stand with any reactionaries until I know they aren't reacting unbiblically to an offense.
Dont Get me wrong in what I said.
ReplyDeleteI didnt say I would stand with "reactionaries under all circumstances"
I would stand with some in the current climate of "official" Church deterioration.
You make reference to the "Church" that met in the temple, this was not ongoing, and was actually a small minority of the majority church which did meet in houses. And the true church was eventually forced "undergound"
Pastors of Churches need to be very careful not to write off House churches. And they need to search themselves to ensure that they too are not being reactionary against them, because they are a pastor of a "taditional" church.
Whether we all choose to accept it or not, the unofficial house church is the future for the true church. What now seems like reactionaries and malcontents will become the New Acts church. You will always have as you do now false house churches. But I firmly believe you will see unofficial House Churches that will work together will have recognized leaders who travel to other house churches to provide guidance and oversight for those house churches. But the diference from the Official Church is that leaders in these churches and goups will be the real thing. As leaders will have to be truly led of the Spirit. As this will be the only thing that will make them a leader and keep them a leader. They will be known and trusted by the word of others. They will stand and fall by their own testimony, no more will leaders be able to hold onto their positions propped by Legal designations.
But should we work in the meantime to fix the "official" and recognized churches, yes we should but I firmly believe that the medicine they need they will not take as it will be too harsh for their spiritually withered bodies.
They for the most part have become too attached to the privileges they receive being a recognized part of society. And they are not about to give that up.
The best thing any pastor could do for his church is get rid of their 5013c tax exempt status or desolve the church and create a new Church without 5013c status, And teach his congregation to live by faith alone, this is where the power of the Holy Spirit is.
The Holy Spirit can only be present where there is truth and complete reliance upon God, when we step away from Truth or begin to allow ourselves to rely on man made institutions or man made ideas, we gradually lose the guidance and th epower of the Holy Spirit in our lives and in our churches.
Why is the Holy Spirit not active in power in the official Churches today? Because they are not fully reliant upon God for their daily existence and sustenance.
So there is nothing wrong with being a reactionary against that. There is nothing wrong in being reactionary if the reaction is against apostasy but isntead having a desire to walk closer to God, when the Official Church does not want to walk closer but desires and works to walk further and further away from God.
God Bless