Home

How did the early church teach their children? Did it involve Sunday school, children's church, or nurseries?

At a Virginia house church conference, before a panel discussion was about to begin, I whispered to a friend that I bet the first question was going to be: “How do we handle the children?” Sure enough, it was. This, in my opinion, is the number one question asked by those contemplating the house church. It is a tremendous stumbling block, but it shouldn’t be. This chapter will examine three things: first, the differing philosophies or mind sets that the institutional and house church have toward children and the church; second, practical issues that arise; and third, the advantage to children of the church in the home.

Our fascination with celebrities often becomes personality cult.  One of the things which I simply do not understand about  American politics is the messianic fervor which seems to flow through the presidential process.  Can one person really solve the problems of a nation?  That leadership cult also flows through the church.  So much teaching on leadership seems to have as its goal the creation of dependency!  We have our own versions of the celebrity, personality, leadership cults!

In John 16:7,  Jesus is telling the disciples that  "It is to your advantage that I go away".  After three years with Jesus, after all the miracles and after all the dreams of the Kingdom it comes to this?  How could it possibly be better without Jesus?  How could it possibly be better without the moment by moment flesh and blood presence of Jesus?

Dear Nicolay,

Greetings, dear brother!  I hope your family is well.  Greet your wife, Anna, and children for me.

Nicolay, I should probably define what I mean by “a church planting movement”.

Neil Cole who was with us in Kiev in November of 2006 describes a church planting movement as follows:

“A rapid and multiplying increase of indigenous churches planting churches…”

The process of thinking about, practicing, re-thinking, re-imagining, and re-experimenting is exactly where the church needs to be today as it struggles to shed some irrelevant outer garments and seeks to uncover the shape it is morphing into.

I have seen the benefits of moving away from more traditional structures and into church forms that are simpler:

* Small, so that community and family can be experienced
* Participatory, so that every person’s gift is valued and developed
* Non-positional in leadership status, so that submission is mutual and leadership is situational and gift-based
* Non-programmatic, so that mission, discipleship, and leadership training is relationally-oriented
* Simple, so that it supports a 24/7, Jesus-following way of life

Dear Rich [1],

As I look at our churches, it does seem that we have become very complex and that you from America have helped us get this way.

There was a time when all that we had was the Bible and prayer.  Those were difficult days for us.  I remember the early 1990’s when ordinary men and women did very extraordinary things.  There was such a spontaneity to our evangelism and starting of new churches – even though many church leaders feared division in the church.  Even small groups threatened many church leaders.

As I began to think about leadership for simple, organic churches, one major thought came to my mind.  Jesus was a cross-cultural revolutionary who came and turned the world upside down.  One only has to read the Sermon on the Mount to understand that following Christ makes no worldly sense – to be poor in spirit, to rejoice when persecuted, and to mourn are all counter-cultural ways of life and thinking.  And, this Jesus is our best example for leadership.  I have always been amazed that during discussions on leadership people so often revert to examples from the Old Testament and examples from successful organizational leadership rather than simply focusing on what Jesus said and did.  Is not Jesus our greatest and best example?  And, His example is that He had no political or organizational power, no wealth, no school, no position, nor any possessions.  He had no authority except that authority which was derived from His relationships.

Hello Friends

We keep having this conversation about the several responsibilities that one must accept if any church is to work. Folks join up with a simple community and then discover that the freedom brings responsibility!  It would seem as though some actually prefer freedom from responsibility to the responsibilities of freedom!  Sitting in the stands watching the game carries no inherent risk but actually playing the game carries the risk of failure as one of the prices of the possibility of victory.

The church is the extension of the “missio Dei.”  As Jesus was God in flesh, the church is to be the presence of Christ Jesus on earth.  The mission of Jesus is now the mission of the Church.   Peter Wagner points out that, “The mission of the church is so to incarnate itself in the world that the gospel of Christ is effectively communicated by word and deed…”¹

For years, I’ve tried to put my finger on it—the reasons why I left the professional pastorate. And you know, more than anything, I think it’s this: I lost my first love.

The reality is that much of what we call ministry today is really administration. It’s about adding things—programs and strategies and rules. In my 22 years as a pastor, I often administered more than I ministered, if that makes sense. I’ve come to see that I was an add-minister more than a minister.

For years, I’ve tried to put my finger on it—the reasons why I left the professional pastorate. And you know, more than anything, I think it’s this: I lost my first love.

The reality is that much of what we call ministry today is really administration. It’s about adding things—programs and strategies and rules. In my 22 years as a pastor, I often administered more than I ministered, if that makes sense. I’ve come to see that I was an add-minister more than a minister.