What’s in a name? House church

Very occasionally, I experience the almost surreal experience of being the person learning most from what I am teaching. The context in this particular instance: I was part of a team that was training people in a country hostile to the Gospel in how to identify the person of peace and start multiplying simple organic churches as a response to a major evangelistic meeting. Tens of thousands were giving their lives to the Lord at these times, and our training had two to three thousand attendees.

I found myself saying to these people, “It doesn’t matter how big the harvest is. God has already provided the buildings! He’s given us houses to meet in!”

Although here is the States we have plenty of buildings to meet in, a harvest of the size we all long for would swamp all our facilities. But God has provided the buildings here too. He’s provided our homes.

Photo Credit: Shapeshift (Creative Commons)

Of the three interchangeable words used to describe churches–house, simple and organic, for various reasons, house church is the one I like least. Here’s why. Firstly it implies that these groups only meet in houses whereas they can meet anywhere–restaurants, parking lots, college dorms–anywhere life happens. The second reason is that  for historical reasons, people associate the term “house church” with an insular,  inward looking group of people,, reacting against the establishment, and convinced that house church is the only Scriptural way to meet.

House church, however, is a Scriptural term used several times in the New Testament, for example, the church that meets in Aquila and Priscilla’s home  (Romans 16:4). Until Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire following the Edict of Milan in 313AD, the church, apart from a few short years right at the beginning of her existence, met in homes. Once Stephen’s martyrdom and the persecution of the church began, the only references which might be construed as having another venue are the Hall of Tyrannus in Ephesus where Paul held daily discussions (Acts 19:9), which he probably describes later when meeting with the Ephesian elders “I taught you publicly and from house to house” (Ephesians 20:20). Other than that, while Paul spoke often in synagogs or public places declaring the good news about Jesus, all references are to church meeting in homes.

The church began her journey meeting in homes. Could it be that she will end her journey the same way?

Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.

  • Steve Simms

    Homes are great, but like you said, wherever the Holy Spirit is allowed to personally direct His people without human agenda and control, there is His church, regardless of the building.  If we are not in direct touch with the Head (going through a human leader instead) the church becomes paralyzed — unable to respond to the Head’s commands.  Perhaps house, simple, organic church is the key to healing the churches paralysis:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aM9Z_e2wfIc

    • felicitydale

      Steve, we like to say that the key skill we need within simple/organic church is that of listening to Jesus and responding to what he says to us. If we could all do that, his whole body would come back to life.

  • http://www.facebook.com/marc.winter.524 Marc Winter

    Perhaps the word “church” needs to replaced to facilitate a broader understand of the ekklesia Jesus said He would build. Words, especially names, are important. Church with its corrupt history, as I see it, is an impediment to living by the truth.
    http://www.waschurchgodsidea.com

    • felicitydale

      I totally agree with you, Marc. In fact I already have plans to blog on that very soon.

  • Pingback: What’s in a name? Simple church | Simply Church: A House Church Perspective

  • Pingback: Simple Church? Organic Church? House Church? Missional Community? | The Assembling of the Church