The Growing House Church Movement
If you have any doubt as to what the future church will look like, check out this article from the Daily Herald. The future is now. It has been estimated that millions of Gen-Xers are leaving the traditional churches of their parents and settling into house churches. House churches differ from the cell groups (also known as home groups, life groups, small groups etc.) of the 70's and 80's. They are not subgroups of local churches, but churches in and of themselves. Their attendance is rarely over a dozen people, but they are intimately connected and highly relational.
The article makes an interesting observation. Take away the baby boomers from your typical traditional church, and what do you have left? Most of the children of the baby boomers have deserted the churches of their parents. If the present "contemporary" church doesn't do something soon, the next generation will develop a new church expression parallel to the traditional church and eventually replacing it. This is not new, as the boomers did the same thing. They pretty much abandoned the church of their parents and created the present expression of "traditional" church. Out went the organs, and liturgy and in came the drums, electric guitars and casual atmosphere.
Traditional churches that will survive this trend are creating healthy small groups for people to join. These churches, although few in numbers, are growing at a healthy clip. They have found a way to tap into the need of the next generation and are successfully bridging them in. Each generation must make a commitment to creating new wineskins for new wine. After you read the article, post your own observations and thoughts.
The article makes an interesting observation. Take away the baby boomers from your typical traditional church, and what do you have left? Most of the children of the baby boomers have deserted the churches of their parents. If the present "contemporary" church doesn't do something soon, the next generation will develop a new church expression parallel to the traditional church and eventually replacing it. This is not new, as the boomers did the same thing. They pretty much abandoned the church of their parents and created the present expression of "traditional" church. Out went the organs, and liturgy and in came the drums, electric guitars and casual atmosphere.
Traditional churches that will survive this trend are creating healthy small groups for people to join. These churches, although few in numbers, are growing at a healthy clip. They have found a way to tap into the need of the next generation and are successfully bridging them in. Each generation must make a commitment to creating new wineskins for new wine. After you read the article, post your own observations and thoughts.
10 Comments:
I think Bing Hunter (from article) brings up a good point about the casual "church" groups. Most often, they are not following the Biblical model that every local congregation should have. As I understand it, every local church should have:
A body of elders, whose job it is to:
- Pray
- Guide and protect the congregation
- Preach the gospel to the lost
- Teach and disciple the saved
A body of deacons, whose job it is to:
- Manage the congregation's resources
- Minister to the physical needs of the congregation's poor and suffering
- Take as many administrative responsibilities as possible off the hands of the elders
Scriptures:
- 1 Timothy 3
- Acts 6:1-6
I worry about the the future of any church who may not be following the Biblical model.
- Tracie McDaniel
By Anonymous, at 3:49 PM
Tracie has tremendous insight as to proper and biblical function of elders and deacons in the church.In order to avoid more splitting of the church into small house groups, where there is little or no supervision, the roles of elders and deacons must be properly administered.
EPT
By Anonymous, at 6:40 PM
TRACIE, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN HIDING?
GOD HAS BLESSED YOU WITH A WONDERFUL PERSPECTIVE ON INTERPRETATION OF HIS WRITTEN WORD.
I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU AND ERNIE
TOM KANE
By Anonymous, at 10:48 PM
A body of deacons, whose job it is to:
a. - Manage the congregation's resources
b. - Minister to the physical needs of the congregation's poor and suffering
c. - Take as many administrative responsibilities as possible off the hands of the elders
Correct on b. Incorrect on a and c. There is no biblical precedent for either.
By Anonymous, at 11:17 AM
Thanks anony #4, I thought I was the only one who believed that :)
By jawbone, at 9:48 AM
We don't see precedent in the bible for the specifics mentioned, but is it safe to say we see it in principle? Therefore, can church elders delegate any administrative responsibilities to deacons as they see fit.
td
By Anonymous, at 1:03 PM
Deacons should exhibit a desire and are called and appointed to serve. Therefore they should be allowed to serve wherever their gifting and desire fit. There is a diffence in delegating versus mandating. Elders should delegate as much ministry as possible to qualified individuals so as to allow themselves to concentrate on praying (the chief tool for discernment) and the Word (the guidelines for action on what has been discerned).
These delegated activities change and shift according to the gifting of individual deacons. Thus we have examples like Stephen who served tables and was a capable evangelist as well.
By jawbone, at 4:05 PM
What I meant by principle is the principle of being called to serve. I think were on the same page. We don't see a job description, per say, in the bible for a deacon. What we do see is a set of standards. Based on a person's calling, gifting, character, and desire to serve, deacons can be appointed to many different areas of responsibility and ministry in the church.
td
By Anonymous, at 6:03 PM
Getting back to "House Churches". Is there a way we could take a house church approach as a local church? Is that possible? Any ideas?
td
By Anonymous, at 6:21 PM
td: we're definitely on the same page when it comes to deacons qualifications and how they are privileged to serve.
As for "house churches' I'll give you a 50 cent answer but can elaborate off blog if you click on "view my complete profile" and then click email. It's a different email address that I use just for the blog.
My take on house churches? I struggle with the idea of groups getting together acting as a "church" without qualified leadership. I don't have any problems with small groups as supplemental to a local church's oversight through qualified elders and pastors. Often small groups convene around a particular shared interest and may not be broad enough to cover many of the facets of quality discipleship.
While I like small groups and believe we should move in facilitating them, house churches seem to have too many inherent dangers.
By jawbone, at 7:18 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home