[this post originally appeared at Fuller Seminary’s The Burner Blog]

It’s interesting to listen to what people mean when they talk about community.  A while back I had conversations with three different church members in one week about their community needs, and was struck by how different the need was for each person. One expressed the need to have one or two intimate friends with whom they can share their deepest heart, a second said she has great friends in the church but feels alone on Sundays because those few friends are the only people she knows, and a third said what he really needs is more social interaction – the kind of friends you call to go out with on a weekend. These are three very different needs, yet all three get lumped into the need for community. And most of us are pretty certain that the need we have is the same need others have as well – that if I fix what is needed for me that “real” community will be achieved for everyone else too.

One of the first counsels on the spiritual life that St. Francis de Sales gives is to seek out a guide.  “If you would really tread the paths of the devout life, seek out some holy man [or woman] to guide and conduct you.  This is the precept of precepts . . .”  Each of us needs a person (or people) in our lives who can serve as a spiritual friend, spiritual director, mentor, or pastor.  Someone who walks with Jesus, has wisdom, and can help us recognize the movements of God in our lives. 

The keys to utilizing such people in our lives as God provides them are (1) commitment to let this person speak into our lives over time, and (2) transparency.  “Deal with him in all sincerity and faithfulness, and with open heart; manifesting alike your good and your evil, without pretense or dissimulation.”

Great article on smaller churches posted at Out of Ur this week.  Author Brandon J. O’Brien cites pollster John Zogby as pointing to the trend among younger people to smaller churches, and gives some great cautions as well.  I see this trend too.  If the younger generation chooses religion at all, they tend to place a very high value on knowing and being known by those in their community, and there is a real appeal to being part of a body where you can know just about everyone.

Reason number three why we planted a more typical church rather than a house church: I feel called to pastor full time, and subsequently, to earn what living I can as a full time pastor.

I often tell church-planters-to-be that one has to factor this into their sense of call.  Do you feel called to be a house church planter?  Excellent, but realize that part of your planning has to be figuring out how you will support your family, because you will most likely need another job to pay the bills.  For many this is fine.  They see being bivocational as an important part of their calling and even an advantage in doing ministry, and many of these have jobs with the kind of flexibility that enables them to connect with people during the course of a work day.  Others already have jobs in ministry, are coming from a parachurch background and already have a solid support base to draw on, and a few of the most successful house church guys make their living as they travel as speakers or training others for ministry.  For others, the paycheck factor alone can be a deal breaker and send them back in the direction of typical church ministry.

I like to read old dead guys.  Especially on the topic of the spiritual life, there is a richness in learning from those who learned to follow Jesus in different times and places than our own.  Currently I am reading a bit of St. Francis de Sales in my daily devotions, and there are some real riches there in meditations and in simple instructions in the spiritual disciplines.  Thought of the day:

Our devotional practices differ according to our station and season in life.  We are all called to different vocations, and we should not expect that each vocation will require or result in the same kind of spiritual practice.  “A different exercise of devotion is required of each – the noble, the artisan, the servant, the prince, the maiden, and the wife; and furthermore such practice must be modified according to the strength, the calling and the duties of each individual.”

Big thanks to blogger Tim Hoiland for taking time to review Embodying Our Faith!  Thanks Tim for your kind words, and I pray God uses the book in some small way to further his work in and through you.  Lord bless you as you serve him -

Number two in our reasons for not going in a strictly organic direction was sustainability.  Organic churches typically (though not always) have a shorter life-span than more typical churches.  Those inside the movement could comment from experience on the reasons for this, but my observation is that being smaller makes it more difficult to continue long term in the face of ordinary issues like attrition, people moving away, changes in life circumstances that limit a leader’s time to lead, etc.

I once brought this up with the leader of an influential network of house churches, and he said he was not at all troubled by the relatively short life-spans of their churches.  They essentially self-start, self-end, and spring up elsewhere as needed, he told me.  The kingdom work continues, it’s just not tied to a particular geographical location or certain key leaders. 

Granted, there is a certain quality to that fluid, mobile church scenario that I can appreciate, and I have great respect for those who go the house church route.  But on the other hand, I can’t help feel there is value in having the sustained, visible presence of a church in a community over the course of decades.  There is a kind of influence, credibility, and impact that only comes over time, and it is difficult to achieve this longevity in a house church scenario.