| CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE: Reproductive Cycle #1: Forming a Fellowship Overseer Board
CHAPTER TWENTY-THREE: REPRODUCTIVE CYCLE #1:Forming a Fellowship Overseer Board
Leaders of nearby house churches must network together for strength and stability. We do this by forming a Fellowship Overseer Board. This is set up for as soon as a house church reproduces. Any church planters working in the fellowship start by serving with the FOB but should not take any formal position on the board (e.g. Moderator, clerk, etc.). Their goal is to exit as soon as possible, so their role is to make sure the group of leaders learns to function as a team. Each leader in the house church is expected to be working to reproduce himself (new leaders) for new churches which will be formed. He does this by continually mentoring at least one potential leader in his house church (See chapters 15-17). These new leaders join the Fellowship Overseer Board as new churches come into existence. As a result, each new member of the board will have been personally mentored by another FOB member. The goal is to assure quality leadership through mentoring relationships with more mature leaders. This chapter outlines how one of our Fellowship Overseer Boards functions. INTERACTION AMONG LEADERS IN A FELLOWSHIP: East Providence Fellowship Of House Churches I. Introduction A fellowship of house churches is a network of from 2 to 6 house churches which see and embrace the need to be in fellowship with one another. They express that desire formally, normally through their individual church covenant. Churches outside the fellowship can join the East Providence Fellowship of House Churches by making the request to the Fellowship Overseer Board. After consulting with each of the churches in the Fellowship, the outside church may be accepted into the East Providence Fellowship of House Churches. The leaders of each house church meet together at least monthly on a board known as the Fellowship Overseers Board. What should be the interaction of leaders in the house church fellowship? There are two extremes of leader interaction, both of which we reject: A. The leaders are seen as leading each particular house church and have no accountability to each other. Any interaction would then be voluntary. The FOB could meet for prayer, mutual encouragement, counsel, etc. But there would be no binding decisions or accountability among them. They would be solely responsible for the house church of which they are the leaders. In this scenario the house church is seen as completely independent. It needs no help in accomplishing the task God has given to it and has all the resources necessary. We believe that this is not a healthy or Biblical definition of the church. Such "lone" house churches seldom survive over a long period of time, and we have never seen one reproduce. We rather see the individual house church as vibrant and versatile, yet also quite vulnerable and volatile. Networking can bring strength and stability to the individual house churches in the fellowship and to their leaders. B. The other extreme of leadership interaction is that the Fellowship Overseers as a group are the leaders of the churches. All decisions for the house churches would have to be made by the FOB. In this scenario, the house church is not a real church in itself. It is simply a part of the church, another "small group", and is becomes dependant on the Fellowship Overseers to discern what God's will for them. We believe this loss of autonomy eliminates the tremendous flexibility we have found in the house church model. It sets up a bureaucracy which quenches the free movement of the Spirit. It also leads to greater centralization over time. Further, the FOB becomes a committee where no one ones the decisions. So initiative is not only quenched in the churches but also in the leadership. Conclusion The model we have found to be more beneficial looks something like a cross section of the above two extremes. We believe that the house church is a true church, and as such has autonomy and responsibility to discern God's call upon them as a community of Christ. We must note however, that although the house church has its own particular calling as a church as its primary focus, it also cooperates in love with other churches in its area as well as in other parts of the world. House churches in the Bible were interested in one another, cooperated by sharing resources and personnel with one another, and were ready to help when there were needs, even at great sacrifice (2 Corinthians 8:1-5). Therefore, although the house church is a church, it also normally exists in a community of churches with a healthy interdependence. This is true of all churches, of course, not just house churches or those in our immediate fellowship. As such, we help other churches as well as house church fellowships in any way possible. We will endeavor to model this healthy, mutual interdependence in the East Providence Fellowship of House Churches. II. Leadership in The Church With this mutual interdependence in mind, let us review the leadership structure of the house churches. Then we will attempt to find a working structure for the Fellowship Overseer Board which will serve as a balance between the above two extremes. We begin with the commitment to have at least two men responsible for guiding each house church. A. The ideal situation (though often impractical) is to have at least two elders responsible for the oversight of a house church. Elders are men who have been trained by other leaders and confirmed by the congregation in which they serve. The two (or more) together form the leadership team of the individual house church. Although they may not be equal in ability or experience, they function as a team and therefore must seek corporate unity among themselves when guiding the assembly. These elders must keep seeking men to be trained for leadership for future expansion. Sometimes God blesses an assembly with more than two elders. In this case it is likely that God has a special plan for this assembly, to establish new congregations, help other congregations that are short of leadership, or commission some of these elders for itinerant church planting. B. In some cases there may be only one elder in a house church. This elder should be training a deacon for help in shepherding and guiding the flock (see Shepherding Deacon: Appendix 14). In the unlikely case that there is an elder and no shepherding deacon available, the elder should seek the counsel of other elders or church planters as he guides the house church, in order to maintain team leadership and avoid an independent (and often destructive) spirit. If this danger exists, or if the situation persists, the church should place itself directly under the authority of another house church or members of a church planting team. C. On occasion there may be a house church with no elders. In this case the leaders of that particular house church will be shepherding deacons, accountable to an elder of another house church or a church planter. Upon completion of training, their mentor(s) will recommend one or more of the shepherding deacons in the congregation for ordination to eldership. If there are not at least two men available and willing to serve as shepherding deacons, the church should consider disbanding or placing itself directly under the authority of another assembly. Interaction Among Leaders of the House Churches III. INTERACTION AMONG LEADERS OF THE HOUSE CHURCHES The leaders of each house church and the church planters working with that fellowship serve on the fellowship overseers board. Several questions occur as the fellowship expands through the establishment of new house churches: How does this board expand? What is it's function? What are it's limits? A. How does the board expand? 1. The Fellowship Overseers Board should start with at least two male CP's working in the fellowship. As they train men for leadership they would recommend to the board that these men be included on the board. The Fellowship Overseers Board would accept their confirmation through prayer and by asking questions clarifying the readiness of each individual to be included on the board. 2. When an elder is appointed to leadership, he then mentors new men, and sponsors these new leaders for service on the board when they are proven. The new men will be received upon confirmation by the Fellowship Overseers Board. 3. As new house churches are established through the activities of the existing house churches, the leaders will likely be either church planters, elders or shepherding deacons who have been trained in the above fashion. Thus they will either already be on the board or as explained above. 4. When a new fellowship is formed, the Fellowship Overseers Board should be established immediately, consisting of some of those who have already served on the FOB of the previous fellowship. Thus all Fellowship Overseers are brought on to the board by personal mentoring and personal recommendation of an already existing leader. This guards the quality of leadership in the house churches and the FOB. B. The Overseers depend on one another for several things: 1. Personal Accountability. A covenant between the overseers helps define accountability. A model covenant appears at the end of this paper based on the covenant between church planters on the team. 2. Corporate Accountability. We understand that God primarily directs His church through the congregation. However, an individual house church does not exist in a vacuum, but rather in an extended network with other assemblies. Therefore each house church realizes that some of its decisions may directly affect other assemblies. When facing a decision which might affect other house churches in the fellowship, the leaders should seek the counsel of the FOB. In some cases the decision may have to be held in abeyance until the FOB can pray and seek God's face for the fellowship of churches. 3. A house church may request the board or its representatives to help in an internal house church matter which it cannot handle. This is likely if the problem involves the leaders of a house church. In this case the representative(s) of the FOB help sort out the facts and responsibilities so that the house church can see clearly what to do, thus protecting its autonomy. A good example of this is found in I Corinthians 5. In some cases specific recommendations may be made by the representatives such as: removing a leader, bringing the congregation under the auspices of another assembly for a time, dissolving the house church, etc. If the congregation is unwilling to comply, the representatives bring the recommendations back to the board for advice, counsel, or action. 4. Such a decision by the board might cause a house church to leave the fellowship. The church should be cautioned to proceed with great care (see Appendix 12 "Reasons for Breaking the Church Covenant" for help on this). Such a congregation should immediately seek fellowship with other assemblies for protection and strength. If the church is unresponsive it may be asked to leave the fellowship under discipline. C. Board Decision Making: The board meets monthly for the purpose of prayer, encouragement, giving and receiving updates and counsel, and making decisions. It may meet more often as the need arises. FOB decisions are required in the following cases: 1. To appoint board officers such as moderator, financial secretary, and clerk. These appointments will be reviewed annually. 2. To receive new board members. 3. To dismiss board members for disciplinary reasons (and notify and warn the affected congregation). 4. To authorize fellowship expenditures. This in the case where there is a common purse. This is not always the case in our fellowships. 5. To determine if an overseer should be financially supported and set the support levels. 6. To define new policies or policy changes which will affect other house churches (e.g. mode of baptism). 7. To coordinate fellowship-wide activities such as fellowship seminars, courses, evangelistic events, etc. Sample Covenant of the Fellowship Overseers The purpose of the Fellowship Overseers Board is to aid and strengthen existing house churches in the (Specify Network). The FOB exists to foster accountability, shepherding, and interaction of the leaders of the (Specify Network of Fellowship). We, as leaders of specific house churches, realize that we need to be accountable to each other since we are not infallible or invulnerable to the devil's schemes. With this in mind we covenant to be on guard for each other in brotherly love. SPECIFICALLY WE COVENANT: To shepherd one another by being on the alert for any sin or activity of the flesh by which the Adversary could influence the working of our churches. In the event of any such activity, we will approach the brother int he spirit of Matthew 18. Recognizing that leaders may often sincerely and sharply disagree, we covenant to strive to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. WE COVENANT: To strive to understand one another, seeking to accept differing views, to be slow to take offense, but always ready to forgive, securing reconciliation without delay when offenses and misunderstandings occur among us. WE ALSO COVENANT: To maintain the Christian disciplines of prayer, scripture reading, public assembly and fellowship. To encourage the same on the part of the other overseers and our families. WE FURTHER COVENANT: To actively and diligently encourage our congregation to grow in its relationship to the other churches in the network. To diligently pray for the effective ministry of the (Specify Network or Fellowship), for our particular house church, and for the establishment of new local churches. In the event that we believe the Holy Spirit is directing us to change our calling (e.g. move geographically, stepping down from eldership) we will discuss this with our immediate leadership team as well as with the FOB. In the event we do leave we will endeavor to place ourselves under the protection of another church as soon as possible. Key Principles 1. There should be plural leadership in churches. 2. Leaders need to keep watch over each other since they are not infallible. 3. House churches should not be independent, but networked and interdependent. Questions for further thought 1. Why is it important to have networking for leaders? What would be some of the consequences of having no interaction? 2. What are the advantages of the structure presented here? What are the weaknesses? 3. How good a team player are you? How will this affect the leadership structure you set up? 4. How can team leadership positively affect the congregation? Can you see any negatives? Back |