| House Church Values Defined
House Church Values Defined by Eric Holter Our core value: God has manifested His glory to us through Christ. We supremely value, cherish, delight in and exult in the glory of God in the face of Christ (2 Cor 4:6). We stand in awe of the love of God and every way He manifests His perfections to us. All that we do, we do to the glory of God (I Cor. 10:31), for Christ’s love compels us (2 Cor. 5:14). We exult in the knowledge of God, the worship of God, and our utter dependence on God in prayer. Everything else that we value rests squarely on our supreme value for God Himself. Our secondary kingdom values: Note: This is not a statement of doctrine. Rather it is a statement and description of our secondary values. They are secondary because we value the church as a manifestation of God’s glory (Eph. 3:10). This does not mean we do not value doctrine, or that we do not have strong doctrinal beliefs and leanings. In fact, it is our doctrine that forms the basis of these values. However, this statement of values is not meant to be a comprehensive biblical defense of them. CHURCH PURPOSE:
Reproduction Jesus teaches in His parables in Matthew 13 that the kingdom of God is a growing, multiplying entity. We refer to this aspect of the kingdom as reproduction. Just as God told Adam and Eve to be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth (Gen. 1:22), we believe the church is to reproduce and fill the earth. Reproduction ought to characterize every aspect of our church’s life. Believers are to reproduce other believers (evangelism), leaders are to reproduce other leaders, ministers are to reproduce other ministers and ministries, and churches are to reproduce other churches. Reproduction has both an outward and an inward aspect. Outwardly we proclaim the gospel through preaching, evangelism, missions, and manifesting the love of Christ through works of mercy and service. Inwardly we reproduce the new life in Christ by living out the kingdom of God, building one another up, helping each other grow in holiness through knowledge of the truth, and by being transformed into the image of Christ. Outwardly - We think of the church more as a mobile fighting unit than as a training academy. The church is to focus on assaulting the kingdom of this world, not on fortifying the church’s defenses against the world. Jesus promised in Matthew 16:18 is that the gates of hell (its defensive walls against our onslaught) would not be able to withstand our attacks, not that we would withstand its attacks on us. Therefore we are to charge forward rather than hold our position. We emphasize the church’s calling to go to the people more than emphasizing the church’s calling people into itself. This does not exclude training, equipping, and instruction. It does require us to engage in these activities while “on the move.” Inwardly - The glory of God is manifested when our hearts are transformed into the image of Christ. The church is to rescue people form a broken world, setting them free by healing them through the wisdom and knowledge of Christ. While this activity is more individual, personal, and inwardly focused, it aligns perfectly with the outward task of the church, since those who are set free in Christ are freed to serve and engage in the battle between kingdoms (Gal. 5:13). Additionally, while transformation takes place deep in the heart of the individual, the means of transformation are intensely corporate. Flowing from the first command to Love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, and strength is the practical outworking of loving our neighbors as ourselves. This means of corporately working out our transformation includes conflict, bearing with each other, and helping each other “preserving the unity of the Spirit through in the bond of peace” (Eph. 4:3). (See the paper The importance of Church Membership for more detail on the need for commitment in church relationships in order for God’s to work out His transforming purposes in and through the body.) CHURCH ORGANIZATION:
In the New Testament we see that the identification and organization of any given church was limited to the city level. We see in Paul's salutations and references to churches in his epistles. He always refers to only one (singular) church in any given city. For example, he never says "the churches of Corinth," even though there were certainly multiple house churches within Corinth (1 Cor. 1:11, 16, 16:15, cf. Col. 4;15, Rom. 16:3-16). In fact, Paul never uses the plural form "churches" when referring to a city church that contained multiple "house churches." While Paul does refer to the house churches within a city as "churches (plural)," as a group they always make up one (singular) city church. In contrast whenever he refers to churches within a region he uses the plural form "churches." For example, the churches of Galatia (Gal. 1:2), the churches of Asia (I Cor. 16:1), or the churches of Macedonia (II Cor. 8:1). Therefore we see the outer extent of the organizational structure of any one church ending at the city level. Nevertheless, we can observe in scripture the existence of multiple house churches within a singular city church (Rom. 16:1,5; Col. 4:15). These house churches are also referred to as churches in their own right, though they exist within the context of a larger city church. Therefore in terms of governance and organization, the city church is extent of any specific local church, it can be made up of many smaller house churches that are in themselves churches, but not autonomous from the other house churches in their city (fellowship). Therefore we believe the limits to the organization of any one church is the city (or fellowship) and the house churches within the city, while properly referred to as churches in themselves, exist within the organization and under the leadership of the elder's of the greater city church. Another biblical observation of this organizational structure is Paul's calling of the elders (plural) of the church (singular) of Ephesus in Acts 20:17. Also he extolled Titus to appoint elders in every city of Crete in Titus 1:5. We see that the elders of a given city mutually oversee the church within that city (or fellowship). Each elder would likely have had specific oversight responsibility for the particular house church they attended. This organizational structure is necessary because the nature of an elder's responsibility to look out for the people requires that he know them personally. His specific responsibility to the believers at a house church level allows for personal oversight to occur. The elders within the city church maintain mutual responsibility for the greater citywide church. (See the section "Leadership" below for more detail on leadership structure). * In referring to the city church above we have parenthetically included the term "fellowship" as synonymous with a city church. The organization of church in the New Testament is clearly established at the city level. However we do not practice this in exactly the same way since the geographic extremity of any given locality in our society is much less clear than it was in the first century. Additionally, our ability to easily travel across much greater distances negates much of the clear grouping of communities that easily defined the extent of a church in the first century. Therefore we retain the organizational structure we see in scripture but we define what makes up a "city" through mutual covenant, based roughly along geographic lines, but not necessarily limited to specific city boundaries. We commonly refer to this "city church" as a "fellowship", in our case the East Providence Fellowship of House Churches (currently made up of three house churches, one in Pawtucket, one in East Providence and one on Aquidneck Island). CHURCH MEETINGS:
Biblical basis: We offer this brief biblical explanation with regard to our emphases on small groups, because this is one area that we differ from many other church organizational practices. NOTE: Please see our value statement on how we maintain passionate conviction without causing division - we love and appreciate our larger church sisters!). We read in I Corinthians that Paul had specific instructions, rules, requirements, and expectations for what would happen "when the church gathers together as the primary meeting of the church (I Cor. 11:18, 20, 33; I Cor. 14:23, 26)." These instructions point out that Paul's authority as an apostle gave him the right to direct the church through his inspired letters, but also through his example, practice and traditions. Paul praises the church for keeping the teachings and traditions and rebukes them in as much as they neglected them or cast them off. Among these traditions highlighted in 1 Corinthians are a focus on mutual edification through open participatory meetings (when the church comes together for its primary meeting - 1 Cor. 14:26), multiple speakers, and a focus on the Lord's Table. It seems to us that Paul's insistence on the church meetings being structured as open and participatory, that there ought to be an emphasis on the smaller house church meetings where such interaction is more readily encouraged and managed in an orderly way. Another clue to what we feel is Paul's expectation for primary church meeting to be small is seen in his rebuke to the Corinthian church for not waiting for everyone before beginning to partake of the Lord's Supper. It seems that one of the most important practices the church was to maintain was waiting for everyone before beginning supper. With this clue in mind, practicality would require that the primary church meeting to be small enough that the church can know when everyone has arrived. During larger church meetings, who would know if a few people were missing? Perhaps the strongest biblical values we embrace that call us to maintaining a primary focus on house church meeting are the many mandates for the church to obey the "one another" verses in the New Testament. These commands are extremely practical and personal and most effectively fulfilled through small "family sized" groups. A study of the New Testament "one anothers" shows how the church is to bear with each other, correct and rebuke each other, help each other, pray for each other, etc. The character of the New Testament "one anothers" is highly personal and relational (see "Church Membership below for a more examples of New Testament "one anothers"). Large group meetings, while having certain benefits small group meetings do not have, are much too anonymous for the extremely practical, relational, and personal mandates the New Testament "one anothers" command. Small groups can be much more effective at deepening and maintaining interpersonal relationships than large groups. Therefore we emphasize the smaller house church meetings as the primary Sunday morning meeting, and utilize other times and places for larger group, public teaching and preaching. While we maintain a primary emphasis on small group house church meetings, there are other citywide (fellowship wide) ministries that are more publicly oriented. For example, we see that the church of Ephesus (as a whole) had certain ministers and ministries operating across house church lines and God "gave [to the church] some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers" (Eph. 4:11 - see the section "Leadership" for more information on "Ephesians four ministers"). Paul reminded the Ephesian elders that he had for three years taught both publicly and from house to house. One of God's primary means of grace to us for strengthening and growing our faith is instruction in the Word (Rom. 10:17; Gal. 3:2). Therefore we need to preach the Word, and incline our ears to those gifted teachers and preachers of the Word. It was likely this kind of public teaching that Paul exhorts Timothy to continue until he returned (I Tim. 4:13). While all elders are to be able to teach (I Tim. 3:2) some are particularly called and gifted to devote themselves to teaching, and in some cases might be helped financially, so that they can focus on this important work (I Tim. 5:17). Such teaching is directed both publicly and from house to house (Acts 20:17; I Tim. 4:13). However, given the small group, open participatory nature of the primary Lord's Day meeting, this larger public context for teaching was likely done at other times. For example, the public teaching Paul did in Ephesus took place daily, not just on Sunday morning (Acts 19:9). The fact that certain kinds of teaching were to be done publicly probably implies that in such meetings there would regularly be both believers and unbelievers present. Public preaching was directed to believers for edification and to non-believers as a proclamation of the gospel. In contrast, however, it seems that the presence of non-believers during the primary Sunday meeting was not something that was necessarily expected. In Paul's discussion on the use of tongues and prophecy in the church in I Corinthians 14, he makes an argument about what would happen, if an unbeliever were to be present. The use of the conditional "if" shows that the presence of unbelievers (while not forbidden) was not necessarily expected in the primary meeting of the church. Instead, the primary meeting was intended for the believers to engage in mutual edification through the exercise of their spiritual gifts. More formal instruction and public preaching likely occurred in other contexts, like Paul's daily teaching in the school of Tyranus. So we view both aspects of church ministry as important: the primary small, intimate, personal meeting of the house church on Sunday mornings, and the larger, more organized, public teaching and preaching ministries of the city church through gifted teachers at other times. REMINDER: Our passionate convictions about house churches, and the biblical viewpoints we hold that define our values and vision for house churches do not keep us from deeply appreciating, benefiting from, learning from, and enjoying fellowship and partnership in the gospel with larger churches that do not share our exact views or values for emphasizing house churches!Additional rationale for house churches The values identified above come from our biblical viewpoints and convictions. While these certainly form the foundation and core for our structure there are a few pragmatic reasons why we are committed to house churches. Freeing of resources: Not having to support a building and maintaining a primary emphasis on bi-vocational elders and ministers the house church model is able to devote over 90% of its financial resources to missions and other ministries. Every member ministry: The house church model simply does not work if every member does not actively contribute to the ministry of the church. Lack of a "professional" or supported leadership/administration helps to engage each member to be actively involved in just about every aspect of the churches activity, meetings, and ministries. Leadership raised up from within: Because the primary leadership of the church is not supported financially, and typically not seminary trained, leaders are developed from within. This makes character and quality of work the basis for identifying leadership, rather than credentials and knowledge only. Support of missionaries to un-reached "closed" countries: House churches are particularly relevant models for missionaries who are called to the un-reached peoples of the world. Many of these countries are hostile to the gospel and any church planning activity would need to be grass roots and underground. It has been our pleasure and privilege to help train and support missionaries called to these people groups. While house churches may often be considered optional in our county, for these missionaries it is just about the only option. CHURCH ACTIVITIES:
The activities of the church are often referred to as services or ministries. We recognize that the act of "serving God" is of critical importance, and can be easily distorted in our hearts and minds. For God does not ultimately need us. He does not need us to accomplish his work, nor does he need us to make himself happy. He is gloriously and perfectly self-sufficient and not lacking anything he needs (Acts 17:25). Therefore, we are receivers of his mercy and grace even in our serving the Lord. Our acts of service are acts of worship and dependence on his glorious grace (Rom. 15:15-16; I Cor. 15:10; I Pet. 4:11). Since every act of service in the church is actually an act of dependence on God's grace, and to serve him in any other way would offend the grace our God, we actively pray corporately as is fitting for those dependent on his mercy, grace, and power in serving him. We are humbled and sobered in recognizing that God has called believers to be actively engaged in discipling one another. We view discipleship in a broad sense, as formal instruction and training, but more specifically as modeling a personal example of what it means to live as a Christian. Paul both lived as an example for others to follow, and encouraged others to be examples themselves (Phil. 3:17; I Thes. 1:7; I Tim. 4:12). Therefore the task of making disciples includes proclamation and instruction as well as personal modeling and coaching. Discipleship also includes discipline. Jesus commands in Matthew 18 that believers ought to be regularly and deeply involved in each other's lives, so that when we sin or are sinned against, we deal with it appropriately and thoroughly. This means that we follow his commands for contending with conflict, not avoiding or ignoring it. In doing so we avail ourselves of God's ordained means for growing in the love of God. We are so committed to maintaining God's order that we regularly obey Jesus' command to go to our brother when we are offended. We go in a spirit of forgiveness for the good of the other brother, and for reconciliation. When necessary we follow through with all three steps of church discipline, including the third step of expulsion when there is clear un-repented sin in the church. There is a proper context for discipleship: men train men (II Tim. 2:2), and women train women (Titus 2:3-4). We recognize distinct roles for men and women in the church. For example, we consider it inappropriate and unbiblical for men to directly train, instruct, or counsel women one-on-one. This makes wise, well-equipped women leaders crucial for the health and ministry of the body. Likewise men (not just the leaders) must look to other men for accountability, shepherding, and leadership. CHURCH MEMBERSHIP:
Some of the New Testament letters were written to the church at large (like I and II Peter), but most were written to specific churches in specific cities like Phillipi and Corinth. Many of the commands he gave these churches can only be obeyed in the context of a visible, specific expression of the local church. For example, when Paul wrote to the Corinthian church that they were wrong to begin the Lord's Supper before everyone arrived (I Cor. 11:21), the people had to know whom they were supposed to be waiting for. If they had to wait for the universal church to show up they would still be waiting, and very hungry. For the Corinthian church to obey Paul's command they had to know specifically whom they were waiting for. This command is for the universal church to apply, but only in the context of a specific visible local church. Another way we see the specific nature of New Testament commands is in how its commands are directed at "you" and "your." For example, in Eph. 4:1, "As a prisoner for the Lord then, I urge you to live a life worthy of the calling you have received." Because the English language does not distinguish between "you" singular and "you" plural, we can read these instructions as if they were directed to individual Christians. However, in most cases these occurrences are written to the plural "you." I Thessalonians 4:9-10 is more descriptive of how the Bibles speaks to "us" as a group much more than to "us" as individuals. "Now about brotherly love we do not need to write to you (plural), for you yourselves have been taught by God to love each other." We can grasp how broadly scripture speaks to churches rather than to individuals if we remember that when we read the word "you" it usually means "you all." When we see how much of scripture is written to churches we begin to realize that many of God's commands are impossible to fulfill outside of a local church. For example we are commanded to build one another up (Ephesians 4:29), encourage one another (Hebrews 3:13), serve one another (I Peter 4:10), pray for one another (Ephesians 6:18), exhort one another (Hebrews 10:24), teach one another (II Timothy 3:16), rebuke and correct one another (II Timothy 4:2), when necessary, discipline one another (Matthew 18:15-17), bear one another's burdens (Galatians 6:2), forgive one another (Colossians 3:13), do nothing that would cause a brother to stumble (Romans 14:13), maintain unity with one another (Ephesians 4:3), meet together regularly (Hebrews 10:25), and submit to each other (Eph. 5:21), especially our leaders (Hebrews 13:17). Another reason God designed the church to be specific and local is that God intends to do a sanctifying work in us, while doing his work through us. This inner work is called sanctification. One reality of sanctification is that it often hurts! Ps. 66:10-12 speaks of God's refining our hearts through trouble. Refining it the burning away of impurities. There is nothing comfortable in a refiner's fire. God is loving, kind, and gentle in his refining purposes, but sometimes our hearts require deep and painful measures in their purification. God uses all the tools at his disposal in this effort of refining our hearts. One of these tools is the church. God is glorified when we are sanctified. God often sanctifies us through our relationships in the local church. How many chapters and books in the New Testament are written to Christians in conflict? How many words focus on interpersonal conflict, fighting, and factions? Should we really expect our churches to be any different? Churches are inherently volatile. They are sometimes like a furnace where our dross is burned away. For God to achieve his refining purpose through the church, we have to stay in it. A refining fire will not remove the impurities from metal if it is removed from its heat! For God to do his refining work in us we must stay in relationship with one another, even when it's hard (especially when it's hard). This is why there are so many exhortations in the New Testament to bear with each other (Col. 3:13), forgive each other (Matt. 18:35; Lk. 17:3-4; Eph. 4:32), submit to each other (Eph. 5:21), remain humble (James 4:6), love each other (I Pet. 1:22), and to agree with each other (Phil. 4:2). If it were easy we wouldn't need to be reminded so many times to stay in relationship with each other. While church membership in the New Testament was certainly different than it is today, it did exist. The difference between then and now is that the membership of the Corinthian church, for example, was made up of every believer in the locality of Corinth. There was no variety of church denomination or location for them to choose from. If two believers in Corinth had a conflict, they simply did not have the option of choosing to attend different churches. Today churches are not necessarily defined by location. It is not uncommon to have two next-door neighbors be members of entirely different churches. Not only do we have many denominations in our region to choose from, we also have multiple churches within a single denomination to choose from. Our mobile society has also enabled us to choose from an even wider range of churches. We aren't even limited to choosing between denominations within our town or city; we can choose from churches from localities as far as we are willing to drive to attend. "Church membership" in New Testament times was a non-issue. You were a member of the church where you lived; it was not possible to live in one place but go to church somewhere else. In the New Testament it was unheard of for a believer to "switch churches." The only time this occurred was if a believer physically moved from one city to another. Once they arrived in their new city they would seek out the church in that city. There was no church shopping or visiting. They became members of the church of their new city. It even seems that when believers moved from one city to another, it was common for their previous church to send along a letter of commendation to the new body (II Cor. 3:1). Trust and commitment are essential in any intimate relationship. Marriage, for example, is the ultimate human relationship with the greatest degree of intimacy. Trust and commitment are critical for any marriage to succeed. This is why marriage is an exclusive covenant between one husband and one wife. The marriage covenant is protected by vows and by laws. We protect and fortify the marriage covenant because we know marriage is not easy. The deepest love in marriage is not experienced on the honeymoon. It comes after much work and effort, and after many years of marriage. The church is intended to be a place of intimacy and trust. This is why the Bible often uses terms related to families to describe it. Just as families stick together through thick and thin, so the church ought to hang together as well. Just as marriage and families are specifically identified units, so too the church needs to recognize it's family members. Only when we are committed to one another will God's purposes for refining and sanctification be accomplished in the church. Although it is much harder to maintain clear lines of church membership today, the need to identify the members of a church from non-members, or members of other churches, is still important if God's purposes for the church are to be fulfilled. There are various means for identifying the members of a church. We use the means of a church covenant to define the membership of our church. We use a covenant because it focuses us on the nature of the relationship we enter into, not primarily on the doctrines that we agree to. We specifically covenant at the house church level, and then the house church covenant acknowledges its relationship to the overall fellowship. Each believer signs the covenant of the house church to which they are becoming a member, thereby clearly defining the primary relationships that make up their church. For more information and a historical account of the use of covenants for defining church membership see paper "The Importance of Church Membership." LEADERSHIP:
How remarkable! God has chosen to entrust the governance of His precious, blood-bought church, to frail, limited, fallible, and weak men. No such leader should ever think he is adequate to such a task. Only by the enduring grace of God can any group of men shepherd the flock of God. Holy Spirit, you have appointed men to oversee your Church, God give us yourself so that we will be able to fulfill such a calling.An understanding of the preceding section on church organization is an important prerequisite for understanding this section on church leadership. We define the church ultimately at the 'fellowship' level, so while view each house church as a church in itself, it is clearly a part of the overall 'fellowship.' We establish the relationships of house churches to 'fellowship' through the mechanism of the church covenant (rather than purely based on geography as we see in the New Testament). The most significant implication of this structure is the relationship between leaders. The leadership of the church ('fellowship') is made up of a plurality of elders. These elders together oversee the 'fellowship' as a whole, as well as the specific house churches they attend. We maintain a plurality of elders recognizing that no one man has all the gifts, knowledge, or ability to lead the church on his own. Hierarchical leadership structures with one primary leader are based on the priesthood model of leadership. In contrast, the New Testament model for leadership is corporate in nature, requiring the unity of the Spirit among leaders. This unity of leaders is perhaps more important than the unity required in the church as a whole. Elders are normally to be bi-vocational, working to meet their needs by serving the Lord willingly, not eager for gain (Acts 20:34-35; I Pet. 5:2). Certain elders are also gifted as Ephesians four ministers (see below), such as those gifted as teachers. These might be called to devote themselves more fully to their ministry and might be helped financially to some degree (I Tim. 5:17). Elders are to keep watch over the flock and over each other. They are to shepherd the church as a whole (oversee, direct its affairs, set policy, protect, administrate, etc.) and be able to teach the Word (Acts 20:28). They are to govern and direct the affairs of the church (I Tim. 5:17). They are to guard the church from false teaching and false teachers. Elders and "Ephesians four" ministers We are currently in the process of defining, identifying, and implementing ministries held by those we have come to refer to as "Ephesians four" ministers. There is certainly a great deal of overlap between the role of elders and the Ephesians four ministers, therefore the following discussion may get cloudy. The basic premise to keep in mind is that while many elders are likely to also be Ephesians four ministers, not every Ephesians four minister will be an elder. What are Ephesians four ministers? Ephesians 4:11 lists certain people who are given as gifts to the church. These gifts include apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers (see The Five Fold Hand of God for details and further description of these ministries). It is important for the ongoing health of the body for each of these gifts to bear their influence throughout the entire church (fellowship). This is especially necessary as it is highly unlikely that any individual house church will have at least one of each of these gifted people as members of their specific house church. To reiterate, all of these gifted ministers are not, by virtue of their gift, elders of the church. All Ephesians four ministers operate among the house churches of a given fellowship at the direction of, and under the authority of, its elders. It is entirely possible, and likely, that many of the elders will also be gifted in one or more of these ministries. An elder/Ephesians four minister exercises his ministry under the authority of the entire body of elders. Distinctions between the ministry of elders and Ephesians four ministers The relationship between the general responsibilities of elders and the particular ministries of Ephesians four ministers can create confusion. Two of these overlapping responsibilities are shepherding (pastoral role) and teaching. Elders, by virtue of their calling, are responsible to shepherd the flock and to be able to teach (especially in defending the truth from error and guarding against wolves). There is overlap between the responsibility elders have to both care for the flock and instruct in the Word, and the role non-elders who are called and gifted as pastors and teachers have. There is definitely a tension here, but there are a few biblical clues that can help us to manage such tensions. Clearly all elders are to be able to teach (I Tim. 2:3). Yet I Tim. 5:17 calls attention to certain elders who work hard at teaching and preaching, so not all elders are necessarily gifted teachers. Additionally, there may be gifted teachers who are not appointed or called to be elders. In the same way elders are to shepherd the flock under their care. Yet there are some elders who are particularly gifted as pastors (shepherds) and perhaps some who are even weak in this area. Again, there will also be those who are gifted pastors (men and women) who are not elders. Dividing responsibilities Perhaps it would be helpful to emphasize the elders' role as overseers. As such, they clearly are responsible and accountable to make sure that the Ephesians four ministries are active in the church. For example, the elders must see to it that the flock is shepherded. This does not necessarily mean that every elder will be directly engaged in shepherding as a pastor. It is possible that some elders might not do any actual shepherding, but rather gifted Ephesians four pastors might shepherd at the direction of, and under the authority of the elders. If an elder is also a pastor they might regularly engage in pastoral care of members across house church lines. The same scenarios can be valid for the exercise of a teaching ministry as well. This distribution of gifts and mutual dependence on each other fits well with the overall New Testament illustrations of the church as a body. No one person has all the gifts. We need each other. God wants us to be dependent on each other, because He ultimately wants us to be dependent on Him. Even among elders there is a distribution of gifts. This emphasizes the need to maintain a plurality of elders. The elders then, need to serve as a body of elders, not in a way that each one is doing all the ministries for their particular house church. If an elder is held to such a standard, they will likely burn out because no one is gifted in all five areas. God designed our inadequacies to require just this sort of cooperation and interdependence. The elder trying to do it all might even hinder those non-elders whom God has gifted and called to be apostles, evangelists, prophets, pastors, and teachers from rising up to fulfill their calling and ministry in the church. Another distinction: those gifted, and those given as gifts In the past we have made it the primary responsibility of elders to "equip the saints" based on Ephesians 4:12. However, recognizing the distinctions between elders and Ephesians four ministers, we need to follow the path from verse eleven and see that it is actually the Ephesians four ministers who are required to equip the body for works of ministry. This raises a couple of points. First, there are those who are not just gifted in a particular area, but who are identified, appointed, and given to the church as gifts for that particular ministry. It is these identified ministers who have primary responsibility for identifying the gift in others, and equipping them in it. Of course, as previously discussed, there will be elders who are also recognized Ephesians four ministers, so in this sense an elder is responsible for equipping the flock. But elders, as such, are not required to reproduce ministries that they themselves are not gifted in. They are, however, responsible to see that such overall reproduction and equipping is taking place for the health and growth of the body. Deacons and deaconesses Elders are helped in their work by deacons and deaconesses, appointed and recognized for their consistent and faithful service and help. The elders should not take on the role God designed for deacons to fill. If elders are required to handle many logistical and administrative details, they will likely fail to fulfill their appointed role as overseers, leaders, examples, and protectors of the flock. Deacons (and deaconesses) are faithful helpers. In the same way that the primary ministry of elders is to the entire church (fellowship), the role of deacons will often be fellowship-wide as well. In the past we have primarily appointed various up and coming leaders to the position of "shepherding deacon." Sometimes these deacons would have been referred to as provisional elders - especially in a new house church where no other elder had been appointed. I would suggest that this emphasis might have propagated a misconception of the role of elders as well the role of deacons, thus keeping us from utilizing those faithful servants in ways that they would be most helpful. For example, if an elder has been viewed as the primary leader, ultimately responsible for all of the ministries, especially shepherding and teaching, then the shepherding deacon would come to be viewed in basically the same way. Such a view of the ministry of elders is overstated and can lead to burn out (as discussed above). How much more would a shepherding deacon tend to feel overwhelmed and ill equipped at taking on such a ministry! Perhaps this is why so few men among us have "aspired to the office of overseer" as is encouraged in I Tim. 3:1. Training and teaching (reproduction) of elders should always be going on in the church. The role for which an aspiring elder is being equipped should be focused specifically on what it means to be an elder, rather than trying to stamp out more men to perform a loosely and broadly defined set of leadership skills. A rising elder is not required to fulfill every area of ministry. Instead, the Ephesians four ministers should be identifying and reproducing ministries and gifts of others so gifted, elders and non-elders alike. The role of deacons and deaconesses should also be more tightly defined. Rather then seeing deacons as proto-elders, we might need to see them as having a supportive ministry to the elders at a fellowship wide level. Deacons should focus on helping the elders and serve the body administratively, logistically, and in other ways that will "keep the wheels greased." We have utilized such help and helpers in dealing with fellowship level finances. This kind of use of deacons should typify the way many fellowship wide ministries are done. For example, children's ministries and youth clubs could be organized at a fellowship level. Ministries of mercy and relief of the poor would likely be facilitated more effectively at a fellowship level. Organization of fellowship events, coordination of schedules, and cross-house church communication would all be better served by specific faithful helpers that God has called and appointed for this purpose. In our case we have given such tasks to the elders (who do a miserable job at it!) where such ministries are often simply left undone. Women leaders We hold to the biblical limitation of male elders (I Tim. 2:12; I Tim 3:2) but we recognize, encourage, and depend on women leaders (not elders) who shepherd, teach, and disciple the women of the church (Titus 2:3). Certainly there are women who are gifted and called as teachers. These are mentioned in Titus 2:3 "Older women likewise are to be reverent in their behavior, not malicious gossips nor enslaved to much wine, teaching what is good." The church needs gifted women pastors and teachers, because it is inappropriate, and ultimately impossible for a man to be an example for a woman or for a woman to be an example for a man. This is why men are called to teach and shepherd men, and women are called to teach and shepherd women. The church will be weak if men usurp the role of women in teaching women, not to mention to the plague of immorality that has destroyed many churches, which stems from men treading where they ought not to with regard to women's ministries. Recognition and appointment of elders We believe elders are to be raised up from within the church, not hired from outside. This is because elders are to be appointed primarily based on their character and their work in the Lord, not primarily by their knowledge and experience. The nature of a man's character is best discerned when they are be observed by many people, in many situations, and over time. There is no interview process that can truly evaluate and test a man's character. Therefore elders are to be trained and raised up from within the church, not hired from outside. Elders are to be recognized and appointed first by apostles (church planters/missionaries), and then after a church has been duly established, by other elders. The lists of qualifications for eldership were not given to churches but to church planters. I and II Timothy and Titus were written to church planters and gives them instructions in how to fulfill their job, one aspect of which was to appoint (not call for a vote) elders (Titus 1:5). It was the church planter's job to recognize and appoint elders; these qualifications were given to them to help them find the right men. They are not to be used as a checklist for a church in qualifying (or disqualifying) elders. Nevertheless, those put forward for eldership should have their calling confirmed by the body before being appointed. Elders are qualified by the quality of their lives (character) and their work in the Lord more than they are by their knowledge, although a certain level of experience and knowledge is to be expected (enough, for example, to defend the truth from error). SCRIPTURE:
With regard to the New Testament, we observe Paul's self-consciousness in being an author of scripture (I Thes. 2:13), and the apostle Peter placed Paul's writings in the same category as scripture (II Pet. 3:16). Therefore we view the entire Bible, both old and new testaments, as being fully inspired by God. We depend on God's Word and place our trust and confidence in it. God's Word is the ultimate and final authority for all that we believe about God and know about our savior Jesus Christ. There is no other authority, and no other writing that adds to, or overrules its authority. There is no human representative or office that controls the interpretation of scripture, rather scripture itself interprets scripture and the spiritual mind understands, appraises, values, submits to, and is governed by the Word of God alone (II Pet. 1:12-21, 3:1-2). We also view the scripture as being completely adequate for all knowledge, wisdom, and direction for us to fulfill God's will for our lives. The scripture alone is able to make the man and woman of God adequate and fully equipped for every good work (I Tim. 3:16-17). While we do not neglect other means of growing in knowledge and wisdom (the past writings of godly men and women, the scriptures applied and preached by teachers, etc.) the Word of God is our final and ultimate source for all that we need to know about God. There is a need for counseling in the church. Again we turn to the Word of God as the perfect source for our psychological healing and transformation. We recognize that there are those who are particularly gifted in applying the scripture in counseling situations, who might not be in each church. We do avail ourselves of outside people when they can be of help. However, the Word of God correctly used by mature, spiritual people is adequate to minister to all the needs in the church. Outside professional counseling is sought in special situations where specific knowledge, experience, or wisdom is lacking in a particular church, and where a professional counselor (believing in the Bible and using the Bible) can be of help. STEWARDSHIP/GIVING:
As a church we maintain a very small administrative budget. Less than 10% goes to administrative items such as refreshments at fellowship meetings, kids club curriculum and the like. We do not pay for staff and we do not maintain buildings, so just about all the rest of our budget is allocated to missions. The elders review the church budget annually. Any church member may solicit the elders regarding the support of a particular ministry, missionary, or other benevolence need. The elders review and discuss the budget in each house church before finalizing it for the year, and then report on the final budget during a meeting of the entire fellowship. Church members may request a copy of the budget at any time. We have organized our church budget at the fellowship level in order to protect the commitments we make to various missionaries. Because individual house churches grow, reproduce, and sometime go out of existence, we feel that long-term commitments to missionaries on the field ought to be made at the fellowship level since the fellowship is more stable than any specific house church. What principles can keep us passionate about our convictions, but humble in our relationships? There are some critical values we must have in any biblical convictions we hold, whether related to being house churches or other controversial subjects (such as election, women in leadership, homosexuality, etc.). Humility. When we hold a controversial view it needs to be accompanied by great humility. Humility however is not the opposite of confidence. II Cor. 3:4-6, and 10:12-18 show how confidence can run comfortably alongside humility. We can be bold in our convictions and confident of our views as long as we do not exert ourselves beyond the sphere wherein God has called us to serve. Paul deals differently with controversy when addressing churches that fell within his sphere (with gentleness mixed with great boldness - II Cor. 13:2), versus how he addresses controversy in those churches outside his sphere of influence (with greater restraint - Rom. 14). I believe we ought to lead with boldness, confidence, and vigor in the church God has called us to oversee, while maintaining attitudes of humility and being examples of humility toward other churches. Fighting the enemy, not our allies. So much material written about house churches seems to be criticism directed at non-house churches just as much as to help house churches. While in Atlanta, at a house church conference, much of the dialogue centered around converting traditional churches to house churches rather than on converting the unsaved to the kingdom of God. The structure of a church is ultimately just a wineskin. While I feel the form of the wineskin is important (otherwise we might spill out precious wine), it is not the substance itself. A perfect wineskin without wine in it is just as useless as a broken skin that cannot hold wine. Engaging in debate on subjects we hold strong convictions about can be perfectly healthy and useful; it can also be critical and destructive if we lose focus on the substance of what we are about. Being faithful to the revelation and insight God has given to us from his Word (regarding house church), and cherish the insights he gives to others (regarding other matters). It is possible that God has given us revelation into matters of church structure and organization that he hasn't given to others. If so, we should rejoice in it, but also be completely humble realizing that everything we have comes from God (I Cor. 4:7). If he graciously blesses us in one way, we can be certain that he blesses others by giving them insight into other matters. We need to be faithful to the insights God gives us, and value even more the insights he gives to others (Phil 2:3). Avoiding generalities and abstractions. Controversies can easily lead to contentions. One of the ways this can happen is when we allow ourselves to generalize and abstract issues rather than dealing with things we actually grasp. Psalm 131:1 says, "My heart is not proud, O Lord, my eyes are not haughty; I do not concern myself with great matters or things too wonderful for me." When we establish a view or perspective on a matter, we need to keep that insight focused on that matter, not generalize and apply it to other matters that we do not have insight into. For example, we might hold a view that leaders should be raised up from within and be self-supporting. We can make a strong biblical argument toward this view. While it may be true, if we generalize the principle too much or abstract it so it becomes a hard and fast rule, we could develop a distain toward paid pastors. We need to focus on, and practice that which we do understand, and not become critical of others who might see things differently (Phil 3:15-16). Seek peace and genuine love with brothers who might passionately disagree. While we might be passionate in our views, there will always be brothers who, just as passionately, disagree. Yes, we can "agree to disagree." But this "agreement" usually has an unspoken additional agreement, "… and go our separate ways." This is not the kind of agreement that maintains unity through the bond of peace (Eph. 4:2-3). When we disagree with a brother we should still be able to stay in close fellowship and intimate relationship. We should look for opportunities to express this, especially when there is disagreement.Back |