OUR WORST HOUSEGATHERING IS OUR BEST HOUSEGATHERING: Tales from the Missional Front
Saturday, July 14, 2007
This morning Matt, one of the pastors at our gathering, and I met to discuss what's happening in our body, plans for the fall, and basically how things are going. A phrase Matt said stuck out from the conversation that was worth remembering:
Our worst housegathering is our best housegathering.Matt described how some house gatherings really struggle. We gather in homes as missional orders in the geographical neighborhoods. Part of the missional order is to be with people that we don't choose to be with but rather are with in geographical proximity. Part of the missional journey then is learning how to talk share, support, pray for and edify people that are different than you. Sometimes, especially at the beginning, it is not a feel good time, a comfortable time or even an enjoyable experience. And so, as we were talking between us, we thought of times, when someone had to be challenged more than once to stick with a housegathering. Often people are challenged to rethink the instinct to leave something 'which just isn't clicking.' Many times we pastors might be thinking "this house gathering is our most dysfunctional gathering," Age group differences, lack of affinity between people, even theological differences make a missional house gathering a struggle in our suburban culture where people are so accustomed to choosing their friends. We'd find ourselves saying this is our worst housegathering. But then a major breakthrough, some trust, and the true story of someone would come out in said housegathering and incredible learning, healing and a heart for mission would burst forth. The maintaining of the difference in the composition of the house gathering was the very thing that made it a place for learning how to love. Something unimaginable, something profoundly deep, life expanding and mission inspiring would take place. IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS THE HOUSEGATHERING STRUGGLING THE MOST WITH DIFFERENCE, our worst housegathering that would become our best housegathering. And it was the preserving of difference that made way for such a missional order of community where a.) people can learn to love the other and b.) become places of hospitality, ministry and service for Christ's mission.
Charles Taylor, the brilliant philosopher of language, epistemology, and history of modernity offers the following description of pseudo community in modernity.
The primacy of self-fulfillment, particularly in its therapeutic variants, generates the notion that the only associations one can identify with are those formed voluntarily and which foster "self-fulfillment, such as the "life-style enclaves" in which people of similar interests or situations cluster - e.g. the retirement suburbs of the South, or revocable romantic relationships. Beyond these associations lies the domain of strategic relations, where instrumental considerations are paramount. The therapeutic outlook seems to conceive community on the model of associations like Parents without Partners, a body which is highly useful for its members while they are in a given predicament, but to which there is no call to feel any allegiance once one is no longer in need. (Sources of the Self p. 508).I worry that so much of what evangelicals call community is built on affinity, self-fulfillment and common interest. And when people change, or needs change, we up and leave the community we have chosen to participate in. The group is easily discarded for some other community that best fits my needs and lifestyle. Missional orders are of a different ilk. They are built on difference and the common commitment to mission. And because of this, amazing growth and supernatural engagements with God working in us and thru us in the neighborhood are possible. The housegatherings we might think the most dysfunctional are the best housegatherings.
What has been your experience of difference in your house gathering?
Posted by David Fitch | 5:02 PM
COMMENTS:
While not a house church, as a YWAM community we all live together in the same house. We are somewhat drawn together by common things (more general vocation than specific affinity), but are all very different.
As you say, the differences are the most difficult and valuable aspect of our community. It is something similar to marriage- that which makes marriage the most difficult, engaged and processed properly, results in a deeper, truer relationship.
I have done a great deal of unofficial "consulting" with YWAM in Canada, as well as teaching on our DTS level on this topic. I have observed some interesting stories unfold. The more I watch it, the more I believe you are right.
I will say that, while I affirm the geographic emphasis of the missional order as you describe it, I believe the same depth (and the necessary chaos) can be achieved in groups drawn by affinity, though it takes a lot more work. The geographic value forces the issue where others would need to be more intentional.
Great thought!
Peace,
Jamie
8:07 AM
wow...this is probably one the best pts i have seen written about why sticking with hard relationships is so beneficial.
it is so contrary to our natural human desire to go the easy path. i think petrarch's story about his ascent to a mountain peak is along the same lines:
he was taking a walk up to the peak. he wasnt really paying attention and found himself going on the easier ground that wasnt so steep. but he found that the further he went, the longer he journeyed out of the way. and as he ascended the harder, steeper slopes, he much more quickly pressed on toward the peak.
sometimes, we need to go up that steep slope.
peter
1:11 PM
HI David
I think this is a huge challenge because even subtly we 'exclude' those who are different.
To move beyond 'me and my friends' is always a challenge, but I actually believe its essential otherwise we are just another club
7:56 PM
These are great thoughts - and I agree with them on paper. But in practice, bad small groups/house gatherings/cell groups can be an excruciating and silly experience. Foolish conversation ("What do you think this bible passage says?" "I dunno. What do you think it says?"), surface conversation that never gets past the surface, and the general feeling that someone in authority grouped these people together and said, "Now play nicely together and be friends". I agree that perhaps this is the goal - to practice hospitality and fellowship with people I'd never get to hang out with in daily life - but the reality is that most of the time these groups don't become what they're intended to be: community of any kind. Or anything besides an exercise in trying to be good team players at a church.
(Don't forget - your church has a disproportionate amount of extremely well-educated, well-read people, which would seem to solve the silly conversation issue at least in your congregation's small groups.) I've been in enough bad small groups over the years to respectfully question whether a bad small group is a victory against rampant suburban isolation and individualism, especially if the bad group experience has the longitudinal effect of reinforcing the idea that small groups are a silly waste of time.
There are some of us who seem to connect with others better when we're working together on something besides simply gathering weekly or monthly with a bunch of other people in order to attain a spiritual/social goal. Give us a project to work on together (church service planning, creating art or theater, rehabbing a house) and community often develops naturally.
7:13 AM
Thanks to jamie, peter and upstream .. good thoughts y'all... Michelle ... just a quick response ...I agree with you about coming together around a project ... indeed in the last two years our house gatherings have been moving more towards being missional orders ... coming together to support one another and participate in mission in the surrounding neighborhoods... I mentioned this in the post but perhaps did not highlight it enough. I think this counteracts the tendency to navel gaze etc. that occurs in affinity groups. I disagree with you on the "highly educated" comment. Indeed our congregation has a disproportionate number of well educated folk (the NW suburbs is a highly educated place), especially as we have grown in the last two years. Nonetheless, I have found that highly educated professionals tend to be more self centered and closed off from community than less educated. More driven by personal interest. More difficult to get into community. Granted, the large number of Trinity Co/Sem students that come to "the Vine" are mission oriented, still .. since we have gotten larger, the Trinity contingent is a lesser percentage of our church. Just a thought ...
Peace
9:28 AM
Hey David,
I am on the beginning edge of moving from the Michigan City Indiana, about 45 minutes from Chicago, to Portland Oregan around the 1st of the year to help plant a Church. I am going to be heading up our Micro-Church, Home Church environment, and some other related tasks.
I have always done "small groups" in the traditional sense (affinity, age-based, etc...) and want to move more towards doing groups as you described that are based in Neighborhoods and are geographically based. But this is something that is out of my comfort zone and I was wondering if I might talk to you and/or your other pastor partners about how you guys are doing that. I need a brain to pick...
email me at transformission@hotmail.com
2:24 PM
David,
Loved this post--I would say what you are talking about--whether it is a housegathering or just one-on-one, is the fine art and practice of Christian friendship, same gender, or cross-gender--that is completely unlike secular (or pop evangelical) versions of friendships where one has to "click," or one has to be "attracted" to the other, initially.
4:16 PM
For a community to be "Christ-centered," there actually has to be a need for Jesus in people's relationships with one another. He actually has to matter, and really has to do his saving and reconciling work in relationships for him to be "the center."
Though this seems obvious, few of our community initiatives in the church recognize this base reality, let alone build their programs on it. Instead, it seems like we do as much as we can to "lighten Jesus' load" and "set Him up for success" if you will--by working as hard as we can to put people together that will "get along."
I think the above paragraphs might hold the record for "phrases in quotation."
Anyways, I lived in a community for three years in Denver--called the Downing House--and I wholeheartedly agree that Matt & David have a valid premise and argument here. The result of living and working together with a group of people that you just plain don't naturally get along with is this: God gets the glory for what he's doing with and through the community, because each individual knows that without the real presence and influence of His Spirit, it'd be a meaningless disaster. (It's still usually a disaster, even with His Spirit... but it's anything but meaningless!)
Thanks for the post.
1:48 PM
Some of us need to practice getting along where the circumstances are highly in favor of the chances that we will get along before we jump into more complicated ones. Some of us have a hard enough time getting along with friends, especially in close quarters, extended lengths of time, or stressful situations, without the added difficulty of trying to relate to those who are very different. I suppose it takes some discernment to determine how much of a maturity step we are asking people to take. I suppose it also depends on how much encouragement/ support a person gets to make such a maturity step.
Peace
7:29 PM
Dave, your post and all the comments here are quite challenging.
I claim no supreme wisdom on this subject just years of attempting to connect with people. I don't know if I'll be able to articulate this accurately, but it seems to me that the idea of a common interest or affinity need not, ipso facto, be self-serving. It can, indeed, be a selfless instrument for achieving some level of comfort for those we are attempting to bring into a group, even conferring a social edge to people who may not otherwise be socially confident or versatile.
I participate in a library discussion group which requires me to read titles I may not otherwise choose to read. It's an especial sacrifice for me when I have such limited time to read and a long list of books which I would desperately prefer to read. (Perhaps the Lord will not count it against my life span?)
But this investment gives me a connection point to strangers, and that connection point offers the promise of further connections and deeper discussions. It's my way to "hang out" with strangers and see what God wants to do with me.
Perhaps this would not surprise anyone who has studied group dynamics, but it surprised me. The discussion group that began last fall included a very odd assortment of geographically, professionally, economically, culturally, educationally, maritally diverse folk whose differences were further exaggerated by diametrically opposite personalities. I really didn't hold out much hope for this one, but I plugged along. To further my hopelessness, the group leader was neither a strong personality nor a facilitator. (Let's hope she's not reading this blog!)
What made this motley crew eventually "click" was not gifted leadership nor even primarily the literature we were discussing. I believe that the real cohesion for us was our mutual investment in hours of reading for the others (many reading more than the required 2 books prior to each meeting). This honoring of the group covenant made us respect and appreciate each other and eventually open other areas of our lives to one another.
Perhaps the group that starts up this fall will develop along entirely differently lines and force me to very different conclusions. Howe'er that may be, I plan (deo volente) to be there, to do my "missional" reading and see what God wants to do with me!
10:34 PM
That's Deo volente!
7:01 AM
Sheila ... i think I agree with your sense of collaboration and what can happen mkissionally out of that. I think I suggest that mission can be that focus upon which a disparate group can become unified and empowered by God's Spirit and become a community. Likewise. I see mission as joining in many times with an affinity like you described at the library. And yet this comunity for a different telos...?..
anyways ... that was a much needed defining of some subtleties for this conversation. Thanks !
8:57 PM
I like this post, of course. Its not an EASY message, but its true, I think.
And yet I am still struggling with it. Besides my own self centeredness to deal with...not in terms of the question of a house church...but in terms of my actual house...my roommate is a young professionaly commercial real estate agent...who isn't "missional minded." We don't exactly have much in common. Problem is, what we don't have in common is that we aren't missional minded...and his selfhodd and life is an investment in all that I...uummm...loathe. And that wouldn't even be a problem...TO ME...if he seemed OPEN to something ELSE.
For example...I used to live with an engineer. Being an architect...he and I are also very different...in some of the same ways as he and my current roommate. But over time we both grew and came together, and we both made concessions, and I would hear him make comments in which I would realize that he was mentally QUESTIONING his own materialism. So that made it comfortable enough...over a long period of time...that we can talk about the important issues. And now we are VERY VERY good friends. And yet we still avoid conversations about capitalism and consumerism.
But with my current roommate...I see no such openness or questioning...and I don't really know how to approach that. Its kind of confusing to me. It confronts me with my own version of selfishness; and yet at the same time it makes me wonder if I need to be more assertive.
Again, none of that applies to the house CHURCH, but instead to the HOUSE. But I would think that the questions would be valuable.
Blessings,
Jason
11:11 AM
Oh, I should mention/explain...
My current roommate and I are considering not being roommates anymore. Not because we hate each other or anything, but more just because we are so different and "incompatible" (and because my roommate is moving in a different direction, if you will...he wants to buy a house). Which obviously relates to this post. I think the whole point of this post is to let the Holy fire of God forge a unity in Him rather than in our own self-interests/"compatabilities."
Interestngly...I hadn't considered moving out until last night's conversation. But when I consider it, though, I relish the thought of getting away from the big screen HD TV with "on demand" cable (which regularly features UFC bouts and reruns of The Fast and the Furious and such things), the computer, all the extra space (which he thinks of as cramped). All these things he takes for granted as being good, and can't really image why anyone would not like them in some way. That's what I meant above by being "confronted with my own version of selfishness."
To me such differences are even still "compatable"...if he were "missional minded." How do you forge a unity through differences with folks who don't really think of it like that (even when they are Christian)?
I am not asking for advice (unless anyone feels so moved). I just see a relation between my situation and this post and comment conversation.
12:11 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home