There might be a third option: That God will still use some of our “cathedrals” to change lives and reach lost people. If that ever ceases, hopefully those of us who are still part of those cathedrals will catch another wave.

Steve, I’m glad God is using you and a whole bunch of other folks like you to build this new wave. Some of us may be late in catching it. We’re going to both ride out the one we’re on as long as it has life (but hopefully not past that point) while cheering you on.

Thanks, Mike.

Lynn Trigg

Recently I was asked to address the topic of how to create meaningful relationships in our large church. I was tempted to say, “It isn’t possible. This isn’t what church was ever supposed to be.”

I didn’t say that. And I know that some people in our church have been able to create real community within the larger framework. But it’s sad to hear people talk about how very difficult it is simply to make a friend and really get to know them, and how stuck the leaders feel in trying to address these needs. And how infrequently the idea of Christocentric relationship is brought up in these conversations.

I teach in my church, but the truth is that most of my real fellowship and most of my own sharing of the hope within me, happens in places and relationships that have little or nothing to do with the place and the people I see on Sunday mornings.

May God give wisdom and insight. We need it.

Here’s what I know: Early believers viewed their faith as a lifestyle, and connected at various points with brothers and sisters in Christ nearly every day. They probably were celebrating the Lord’s Supper at most meals together. They were also still in the world, meeting in the Temple, and “had the favor of all men.” Wow. (do Christians have the favor of all men today?) In short, their emphasis was on “being the church”, not “going to church.” Sure, it was a semi-oppressive culture toward Christians (though accounts of the persecution has often been over-exaggerated), but I think they chose to meet in homes because that was the most natural, relational “wineskin” available for the early Christians to live out their faith. “Attendance” wouldn’t have been in their vocab, I don’t think. Really, “church” as we’ve defined it wouldn’t have been in their language — they were followers of “the Way.” Keep in mind that “God was adding to their numbers daily.”

It remained that way until the early 300s when Emperor Constantine passed some political legislation legalizing Christianity and even punishing those who did not join “the Way.” He built large cathedrals. Many who did not really know what they were doing joined up. Church became an “attendance thing,” and thus began the era of Christendom. For better or worse, church (in the West) for the last seven centuries has seen only a handful of really exciting “multiplication movements” of God, and I believe that is because many were focused more on architecture than Jesus.

But I (and others) think the big boat of Christendom is creaking to a stop. Some are calling it the “Second Reformation,” when the workings of the church is being taken out of the hands of “trained clergy” and put back into the hands of everyday Christians, who look to Christ as the head of the church. Some are calling it a Revolution. Whatever you call it, more and more Christians (and lots of not-yet-Christians) are finding the deepest forms of spiritual growth and fellowship outside of the local church. House churches are just one wineskin through which this is happening — home-schooling communities, “cyberchurches,” family churches, large worship gatherings, and worldview discussion groups are just a few of the many “mini-movements” that God is using to prepare his bride for Christ. (if you want order a $3 CD of George Barna reading portions of his book Revolution, which describes in detail his findings on these mini-movements, click here.)

Like Mike said, the local church is still working alongside God in announcing his kingdom, and has for 700 years. But the local church (and its members) need to know that a tidal wave of God’s spirit is coming to North America (as it has to most of the world already — just research church growth stats from recent years in Africa, India, Indonesia, or China), and it will be difficult to quantify this movement using our traditional “church growth” methods. The local church needs to realize that God’s Spirit cannot be bridled. It will move to and fro, convicting hearts in our cities, and will not be contained by the boundaries of the church walls. We can either join the Spirit in the harvest field, or we can hunker down even more in our cathedrals.

I know this mini-book I’ve written sounds very critical of the local church. The truth is, I’m a member in a local church. So are my parents. I love the local church. But I see God moving in powerful ways outside the local church, and I want to join Him there. I also believe that this movement outside the local church is one of the only ways that disciples can be equipped and released quick enough to keep up with the growing U.S. population and declining Christian population. US Christianity goes in the hole 6 million people every year, and our churches need to be multiplying more like rabbits than elephants to keep up with this. But the great thing is, God is going to do all this — we just need to be aware of His workings and be obedient. We don’t need to “try hard” to plant a certain number of churches or make a quota of baptisms — we just need to plant seeds of faith in people we know every day.

God will give the increase.

Which brings me to your topic for the day. I went and read your links and they were good. But I think we DO need to have both a larger body to meet with, along with the smaller groups and “house churches” if we want to call them that.

Don’t you think, Mike, that having both is exactly how the early church(es) operated beginning in Jerusalem? They sometimes came together in one large group, while the rest of the time met in smaller groups daily from house to house.

We don’t really know where all they met around whatever towns and cities they were all in or how often what size groups got together. Some accounts are of very large masses of Christians meeting together with the apostles and leaders at least some of the time and it was all considered “the church,” right?

I’m definitely with you that it is not an either/or situation, but BOTH. There is a time and place for both and on a full time, regular basis.

As far as spending money on facilities - I’d be the first to cut big bills and cut out a bunch of excessive, extravagent “things.” But to condemn big churches and big church buildings across the board isn’t right, either, I don’t think. If they are functional and utilitarian and being used seven days and nights a week for the community for meetings, gatherings, Bible studies, AA meetings, whatever, then they are well serving their purpose.

It’s just like with everything else we’ve been given in this life by God, especially here in America. We need to wisely spend and wisely use all we’ve been given both on a personal level and church level. That includes our time and our relationships with other Christians, with our neighbors, all around town in EVERY neighborhood, in EVERY church group ALL the time.

Does any of this make sense? It seems pretty straightforward and easy to understand to me if you study the New Testament at all.

Leave 2000 member Highland, come to pacific northwest and start a small missional church. I will stop by and see how it’s going.

I won’t leave East County Church to attend cause that’s shopping around. But I’ll visit once and a while.

Enough of our people have gone to Abilene. It only seems fair.

I have a great respect for a head minister of a large church who can mention other church models (house church, organic, etc) in a positive way, like you did in response to Tim.

Glad to know you and others don’t feel threatened by them.

Excellent point. It’s so hard not to think that YES, WE HAVE NOW FOUND THE RIGHT MODEL AND ALL OTHERS ARE WRONG. I’m thrilled with the number of young ministry students thinking about “simple church,” “organic church,” “house churches,” etc. They are needed by the thousands. But that does not mean that larger churches are invalid. But what has tended to happen is that these larger churches have become supermarts, offering the best of religious services.

Years ago it was a mark of great “success” to build a church up to a thousand. It the future, it may look more like a Korean or African model of church: where the mark of faithfulness isn’t the size of one church but the expansion of house churches and the infiltration of a lost community, living and preaching the reign of God.

So what happens if the seats at Highland are all empty next Sunday?

Seems like the author is close to limiting real Christians to only one context.

Detox church article was outstanding! Thanks for sharing it.

Brian