As I look back on our experience of House church or as some are calling it now “
In all honesty I cannot see where we failed as far as the Principles of Leadership are concerned. As far as molding leadership in the local Church; fail we did! I do not mean that leadership is not taking place but that the leaders are always looking to “professionals” in ministry for help. Services are still being planned weekly, Bible studies for men, women and young people are being carried out on a regular basis. Ministry in the local community is taking place as well as in the adjoining town; there has even been some support of cross cultural missions. With all this we might be tempted to just say that it is a phase they are going through and they will mature in the future. We might be tempted to say that this is a cultural phenomenon in that this church is a church of professionals and they expect a “professional” to lead the church. I think that in all the push that someone in the House Church could be the Pastor I never instilled the idea that they might have to pray about God raising up a leader from some other quarter.
The apostle Paul seemed to plant new work by going to the local synagogue, getting thrown out and then go somewhere close by to start the work. He then left Elders in each of the works. The word Elders needs to be explored a little more thoroughly for our evaluation. Strong’s concordance explains it like this.
G4245 πρεσβύτερος presbuteros pres-boo'-ter-os
Comparative of πρέσβυς presbus (elderly); older; as noun, a senior; specifically an Israelite Sanhedrist (also figuratively, member of the celestial council) or Christian “presbyter”: - elder (-est), old.
Of the 64 references translated Elder or Elders in the English New Testament; discounting the 32 times that it denotes a leader of the Jewish faith, and the 12 times in John’s Revelation where it is dealing with the 24 elders, we are left with 20 references that deal exclusively with the New Testament Church. As we can see the above reference to the word in Strong’s Concordance indicates older, senior, elder or old (I'm getting there!). What are we to make this key leadership reference? It also seems that Paul after having started work and maintaining a personal presence and or a trusted missionary leader at some later time appointed Elders in the churches. The question then must be asked, how long does it take to make an Elder? I am sure we all agree that this is a relative progression.
The Apostle Paul evidently spent 3 years in the school of discipleship before returning to evangelize and plant churches. Can we truly expect to leave firm leaders in newly formed churches that have been in existence for a few weeks or months? I am not saying that it could not happen, as we have stated earlier that the process is relative for every new believer. My question is should we take the best case scenario and make it the norm or model for planting churches? It seems to me that when we do this we leave in our wake frustrated Christian leaders, guilt ridden missionaries and local churches doomed to fail.
In the past we have seen a parade of Church Planters expounding their methods, writing their books and then urging all missionaries everywhere to “adopt” their model. We as missionaries are always asking to see the Latin American model of CPM. I know that it sounds simplistic but we have the model before us in the New Testament. The problem is that this model is not flashy nor does it have a flashy acronym. The principal flaw occurs when we get away from the Biblical model and use other models that do not adapt well if at all. Time does not permit to list all the models that have assaulted us over the last 20+ years. I guess under the Leadership question we must determine to take the time necessary to train and disciple new Christians to become leaders in the local Church.
The other point is can we expect the new churches to prosper without God called Elders/Pastors? Many people point to Models where the churches are multiplying very rapidly without such leadership as proof that it can be done. Only history will be able to evaluate the truth of what is taking place. Do I sound cynical? I can truthfully say that it is not cynicism but a true desire to see New Testament Churches started and become multiplying in nature. I guess one thing I do react against is the syllogism of church planting that says a+b=c. Some people would place Church Planting in the same type of equation without regard to other factors.
Charles Finney made similar claims about revival. He stated that revival was no more a miracle than a crop of wheat! By doing certain things he could guarantee revival would come. The problem with this thinking is that we assume that revival or in our case a CPM is something that is in our hands. It is pure ignorance of God’s word and work to suppose we are the determining factor in Church Planting, evangelism or even discipleship of new believers. Finney’s legacy in spite of all his impressive numbers was one of shallow believers, worldly Churches and many unregenerate Church members.
Can we so easily discount scriptural models that call for Elders or Pastors as the human agents in the plan of God for Church starting and growth? Looking back to the house church experience this is the major failure. Some would argue that the fact that the church is not constantly multiplying as the major failure. I personally feel that the leadership issue is the failure that I must assume. The house church is ripe for doctrinal error without a God called shepherd. Please do not interpret anything I have said as advocating a “professional clergy” or even paid leadership. One of the most effective pastors I know without a doubt, is an engineer that works full time in a chemical plant. He has started a thriving cell church and receives no pay from the church at this time.
In part three we will talk about the role of doctrine in Church Planting.
Grace,
