Church buildings

[morbo3000]

I believe each case is unique. A large church with a huge building may be exactly what God has in mind in one situation. While a small parish, or house church or network of house churches is right in another.

In the 80's I was part of a church that really had no choice about size. They were growing faster than their building(s) could contain. They started out in a community rec center in Kirkland, WA. Then as more and more people came, they started buying the houses in the surrounding neighborhood to use as offices, and sunday school classrooms. The parking lot was never paved. When it rained, and it did often, being in the Pacific Northwest, it was a muddy soupy mess. Eventually, the county kicked them out. They put such a strain on the roads that their location and building couldn't contain them anymore. When they began the process of building, their plan was very sparing. Nothing was fancy about the facility. Nothing ornate. Ultimately, however, the new building put a drag on the evangelism. That sense of urgency that comes from a revival, busting at the seams, slowed down in the comfort of a new facility. And the cost of the mortgage put a huge drain on ministry. I know the pastor. It burned him out. And others with him. And they were planting churches in the neighborhoods as fast as they could too. And training leaders. But the rate of growth was more than they could keep up with. I know this was a similar problem with Chuck Smith's church and others from that era

When I was church planting, one of the worst moves I made was to buy (attempt to) a building. Though I made so many mistakes doing that it's hard to measure one over the other.

The church we are members of has a building plan for the future. We use ours to death. We have multiple pastors/elders. None of them are living anything close to extravagant. By contrast, a pastor in our comparably sized church in town has a house and car that puts him well in the upper middle class. We won't build until there is consistent giving to support it. And consistent ministry to warrant it. We aren't interested in a building for building's sake. We want to make a building a warehouse of ministry activity.

[Singalphile]

As some of you seem to do, I try to say "church building" or "church service" rather than just "church" (as in "I went to church." or "There's the church.") in normal conversation. If nothing else, it's just a little reminder (perhaps) that a/the church is made up of people. Of course, if you use really unusual language, then I think people will think you're in a cult.

Checked "church" in some online dictionaries, and "a building for Christian/religious worship" is always the first definition.

[Paidion]

As I see it, if a local assembly truly represents the Assembly of Christ, then it has a body ministry. If the assembly becomes too large, then there is no opportunity for some persons to minister as they are led by the Spirit. When an assembly gets too large for body ministry, then it should divide so that body ministry is possible.

There may be occasions when several of these assemblies get together in a large hall for special meetings with special speakers, or just to communicate with each other and confirm their unity in Christ.

[morbo3000]

As I see it, if a local assembly truly represents the Assembly of Christ, then it has a body ministry. If the assembly becomes too large, then there is no opportunity for some persons to minister as they are led by the Spirit. When an assembly gets too large for body ministry, then it should divide so that body ministry is possible.

There may be occasions when several of these assemblies get together in a large hall for special meetings with special speakers, or just to communicate with each other and confirm their unity in Christ.

There has to be leaders. I would say it is the essential role for body life. Without elders, pastors, prophets, teachers, evangelists, churches can't function. And leadership is a skill as well as a gift. One that is best taught or mentored. If an assembly does not reproduce leaders at the rate they are growing, they will just reproduce dysfunction.

[TheEditor]

There has to be leaders. I would say it is the essential role for body life. Without elders, pastors, prophets, teachers, evangelists, churches can't function. And leadership is a skill as well as a gift. One that is best taught or mentored. If an assembly does not reproduce leaders at the rate they are growing, they will just reproduce dysfunction.

Not in the Western mindset of these words. We have a "dysfunctional" view of these roles and "church" already. You can create a machine that churns out "leaders" (the Catholics have been doing that nicely for 1700+ years), but that isn't "church". If you can't reproduce in a family setting what happens at a big Hall, then it's already down the wrong path in my opinion.

My cousin drew a cartoon once of a fellow sitting by the side of the road whittling or some such thing. A guy in a suit comes up to him and says "That looks like an interesting little human endeavor. Care to institutionalize it?" That's about the size of church these days.

Regards, Brenden.

[Paidion]

There has to be leaders. I would say it is the essential role for body life. Without elders, pastors, prophets, teachers, evangelists, churches can't function. And leadership is a skill as well as a gift. One that is best taught or mentored. If an assembly does not reproduce leaders at the rate they are growing, they will just reproduce dysfunction.

Morbo, I wasn't arguing against assemblies having leaders. The original apostles appointed overseers and deacons in all the assemblies. But there was also body ministry in these assemblies.

How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for edification.

How many in today's so-called "churches" give room of each person to minister in this fashion? How many people who attend, are free to give a teaching or share a revelation, etc.? If body ministry WERE practised, assemblies would have to be small enough to make it possible.

[mattrose]

Again, I wouldn't argue that Sunday morning in America is a good representation of the church.

I only aim to say that Sunday morning in America need not be viewed completely negative (giving a false sense of security to people). It also does some good things (connecting genuine seekers to genuine disciples). And, in some cases, it is indeed a good representation of 'church'. The intense negativity toward the 'institution of sunday morning' is more the result of cultural anti-institutionalism (And bad past experience) than biblical passion, at least in many cases. The institution is extra-biblical, not anti-biblical.

[dizerner]

[user account removed]

[morbo3000]

By "dysfunctional" I meant the small churches that hurt people because mini cabals of a few or more families are stifling any freedom in Christ and expression of gifts. It's happened to me twice as a pastor, and another 2 in churches I was a member.And I know through relationships with others that it is common. It happens regardless of polity or church size. There is not strong enough leadership, pastor/elders to confront these people, and as a result, they dictate the culture of the church.This was addressed in a previous thread about dealing with conflict in the church. In order for churches to multiply after a certain size, the church would first need to be one where a biblical understanding of the church has been established, And pastors/elders/prophets/evangelists/teachers mentored so that when the church multiplies it has a chance of being healthy itself.

I'd be interested in hear what others think would be good skills and character five-fold leaders should be mentored into.