Debate: Is endorsement incompatible with simple church

[Nik P.]

I am wondering if there is an organic process, expressing authentic Christian community that can replace the bureaucratic hoop-jumping for participants of house chuches who work in para-church organizations requiring "ecclesial endorsement." Right now, para-church workers either keep a denominational affiliation on the side or get endorsements on-line with an application and annual renewal fees.

I'm thinking of Frank Viola's Pagan Christianity bonus chapter, and see this as a question of commissioning. The others are communion, corporate display and community life.

In the institutional church, "ecclesial endorsement" is a top-down certification that you are fit to serve as salt and light in the world. I think SC should have a counter-cultural process, providing shared discernment, accountability and growth in a communion of peers. Commission should come from the community, in communion with Christ, in a shared process.

I picture this much like the Society of Friends. (Quakers) They have never had separate clergy. So, when someone feels called to serve those outside, they just take turns in a meeting and share until a consensus is reached regarding that person's qualities to do as called.

I started this debate on House2House, so some posts are cut and pasted from there.

[Nik P.]

Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 11:43 pm on House2House

I am calling for folks to help discern how to meet the needs of professional chaplains who belong to house or simple churches.
-In order to receive training from an approved Assoc. for Clinical Pastoral Education site, an intern usually needs higher education in religion and an endorsement from their denomination.
-In order to continue to higher levels of CPE, a resident or supervisor-in-training needs ordination and ongoing credentials to affirm they are fit for chaplaincy.
-To apply for Board certification as a profesional chaplain with the Assoc. of Prof. Chaplains, the professional chaplain will also need both ordination and credentials.
-In order to work as a staff chaplain at most hospitals, board certification is required. The requirements are not as strict for hospice, nursing homes . . . and I am not certain about military.

The FAQ page here addresses ordination, which can be obtained through certain on-line bodies. Some states will also accept a certificate that your house church prints up on your computer and signs, stating that they as a church body, have ordained you for ministry.

However, there are no existing bodies who have been accredited by ACPE to grant credentials to house or simple church members. Currently, we have to go back to the denominational structure and show ourselves enough that they grant us credentials to continue working. I think we can find an expression of house / simple church that meets the requirements without creating an institution or elite, ordained body.

I am also asking this question on simplechurch.com and I spend more time on that forum. This discussion is under the "practice" section. I look forward to all discernment! My question is: are there enough people in house / simple churches who are engaged in para-church ministries that require 'credentials' that we can create an on-line community of support, discernment, formation and recognition of ministry gifts? If so, I am willing to jump the hoops to have a house / simple church accrediting body certified by ACPE.

[Editor]

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 7:54 am on House2House

I understand your preference not to be tied to a denomination--I have no brief for the things myself. But there are some denominations that are open to house churches. The General Baptists (I think it was them) have a few house churches in Cincinnati, Ohio; and there is a small HC network in Oxford, Ohio that is affiliated with the Southern Baptist Convention. The SBC took a hard look a few years ago at what it cost them to plant new churches in the traditional pattern, and decided house churches made financial sense. I have no idea what your background is, but these groups may be more open to helping you than others who haven't caught on to HC yet or are outright opposed to it. It would be best for the long term to develop such a thing within the HC movement, but it will take a lot of time and effort to start, and may take years to get it recognized all over the country. After all, the local hospitals etc. won't have to ask "Who is the SBC?" If you don't have too much doctrinal disagreements with them, it may be worth checking into.

Phil Hawkins

[Nik P.]

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 9:20 am on House2House
Thank you so much Phil for this information. I think it is worth looking into, and may be helpful for some. I know the SBC won't work for me because I am an ordained woman. I don't know the regulations of the General Baptists. I come from northern American Baptist (USA, inc.) and they WOULD credential me if I attend any church within the denomination. So, I would either have to align the whole house church with the denom, or find an alternate route of credentialing for myself alone.
Thank you for the foresight, seeing how this might be developed in the long term. I appreciate your support.
you've given me much to chew on.

Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2008 10:38 pm on House2House
Phil and others,

Here's my first attempt: http://simplecreds.ning.com/

Let me know what you think. Thanks!

[Editor]

Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:10 am on House2House
It may be a start. But a website is one thing, acceptance by local bureaucrats who run hospitals, etc. may be another.

And even the SBC may not be as solidly "out" for you as you think. I'm not a Baptist of any stripe, but I do follow the evangelical world fairly closely. As I understand it, their objection is to women pastoring local congregations--not a blanket refusal to allow women in any type of ministry. There may be local variations on this according to who you talk to, but you'll find that in any group.

You had mentioned military chaplaincy in your original post. That is a whole different ball game, because the Defense Dept. has its own rules--and military chaplains actually are officers of the services. The group I grew up in (Christian Church/Church of Christ) was having problems getting chaplains approved back in the 1960s. And from what I have seen over the years, the military even today tends to end up heavily weighted towards the historic "mainline" Protestant denominations, (plus Catholics and rabbis, of course) and allows less representation from smaller/later groups (there are actually more Assemblies of God members in the US than Episcopalians, but guess who has more military chaplains?) Part of it boils down to government bureaucrats are always going to be more comfortable with the more bureaucratic denominations.

Phil Hawkins

[Nik P.]

Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:05 pm on House2House
Phil- (and lurkers)

Thank you for your concern about the difficulty of convincing local hospitals, but I was actually thinking ABOVE the hospital's head. Hospitals don't care if your faith group endorses you or not. Hospitals just care if you have been recognized by one of the national organizations for chaplaincy.

I'm shooting for the national organization which trains chaplains (ACPE.) I have the forms, and it is not too hard to document how your faith group is endorsing chaplains. In conjunction we would need recognition from APC (assoc for prof chaplains,) one of the certifying agencies for chaplains. The recognition to be a certified ACPE supervisor or APC board certified chaplain come through these two national bodies. They are the ones that care if your faith group endorses you.

I was at a Texas chaplain conference the past few days and met two chaplains who are endorsed by the American Baptist Church in Austin as "associate members" even though they live 2+ hrs away and rarely attend. So, I have the possibility of ditching my house church periodically and driving up to Austin to show my face and fill out an annual form. It meets the requirements, but it is simply jumping hoops.

I didn't explain my reluctance at switching Baptist "flavors" well enough. Because some of the views are different (like women in ministry) I would be required to take polity classes and "convert" to the new denomination to come under them. Even more hoops! I became a simple churcher because I don't believe in hoops, I believe in the community that follows Jesus together.

The speaker at the conference was the head of certification of the General Baptist Conference of Texas. Nice guy. Again, an option of switching, but it looks like all the options could take me just as long as exploring a way to make this work for other house / simple churchers too.

Glad you mentioned military. I don't really know the process for military chaplaincy. Do you know where I can get more information about the requirements? I think you are right about who they favor as chaplains, but I also know that Wiccans have been getting a foothold into military chaplaincy, and local covens work very much like house churches. Whatever they are doing should work for Christians who house church.

Looking forward to whatever y'all come up with! Nik

[Editor]

Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 9:19 pm on House2House
This discussion has bothered me all along in several ways. I have been following the house church/simple church movement for some years now, and I have yet to hear of anyone else concerned about this issue. Going back over your posts, it appears to me that you hold a salaried position on a hospital staff, rather than a church staff, but to keep it and/or to advance in your profession you have to maintain some kind of certification to satisfy your professional association, which is accustomed to accepting credentials from denominational authorities.

The trouble is, in the house church/simple church movement, there ain't no such animal. One reason the term "movement" applies is that there is so much variety among house churches, in so many ways. Five years ago I read an article by Frank Viola in which he identified a dozen "streams" of house church--based on the backgrounds people came from, who they tended to follow as mentors, directions they tended to go, and other factors. And there is nobody who can speak in any authoritative way for all house church people, in a sense of binding everyone by what they say. This H2H website is one of the better ones, but it certainly is not the only HC website, and I know it is definitely not the oldest. There are people on other sites who were meeting in house churches when the Dales were still in London--maybe even still in school.

Another thing that strikes me as a major incongruity in this: you seem to have a clergy-type position in a secular organization (I presume if your hospital had a denominational affiliation it would hire from its own denomination). But one of the most nearly universal characteristics of the house church movement is the tendency to reduce or minimize, and in some of the more extreme groups, totally eliminate, professional clergy.

So where does this leave you? I can see a possibility that the website you have started may work. I don't know how many people have responded to it so far; I have no idea how many chaplains are in your professional association, much less how many are or will be interested in house church/simple church. But since there is no authority structure to approve your effort from the house church movement, if the management of the association choose to question it, it may not work at all. If that happens, you personally may have to choose between your profession and your house church. I hope it doesn't come to that for you; but if it does, this is my advice: gather your church, surrender your own desires, and pray that the Lord will reveal what He wants you to do. He may open a way to remain in your job; He may lead you into something else you had not foreseen or even thought of. His way works out better than anything we can do ourselves.

One separate comment on military chaplaincy: The armed services make their chaplains officers, not enlisted men; this parallels the distinction between clergy and laity found in most traditional denominations. It also maintains a barrier between the chaplain and the enlisted men that parallels the clergy-laity barrier. I am myself well past the age of military service, so this is sort of an academic question for me. But from what I have seen of the ideas and attitudes prevalent in the house/simple church movement, I think it more likely that if an individual were to sense a call from God to minister to our military personnel, then that person would enlist, go through basic training, and serve his hitch or his career ministering to those around him as opportunity arises, but doing it as one of them, not as an officer/clergyman. I don't know if this has happened already, or how likely it is--there are HC groups that are pacifists-- but I suspect it fits better with the nature of the movement.

I don't know if any of this helps you at all; I hope I haven't offended you by being frank, and I did not mean to be disrespectful in any way. I know that members of the clergy who become interested in house/simple church do face a hard choice, because their livelihood is impacted when they become involved. And each has to work out with God what He wants them to do.

Phil Hawkins

[Nik P.]

Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:31 pm on House2House
Phil,
I am grateful for your prolonged interest and questioning. That is exactly what I was looking for, a "task force" to take a look at the compatibility between who we are, expressing Christ organically, and the possibility of expanding our missionary opportunities in areas that are tied up with bureaucracy. So, your directness is appreciated for what it is and no offense is taken because I am also being up front.


Phil Hawkins wrote:
and I have yet to hear of anyone else concerned about this issue. . .have to maintain some kind of certification to satisfy your professional association, which is accustomed to accepting credentials from denominational authorities. . . The trouble is, in the house church/simple church movement, there ain't no such animal.


I've actually talked to a number of people who worship in house churches and also work in para-church ministries, such as retreat centers, evangelism or chaplaincy. What people have been doing is basically "buying" on-line credentials or participating the minimum at a congregation in order to get their endorsement. Yes, I believe that I may be the first to say, "Hey, let's talk about this," because I do not feel genuine doing the hoop jumping.


Phil Hawkins wrote:
And there is nobody who can speak in any authoritative way for all house church people, in a sense of binding everyone by what they say.


If I'm hearing you right, that there is no set 'doctrine' then I absolutely agree with you. I am talking about the quality of relationships and character; that is what makes a person pastoral, not theology. I am talking about people being able to interact with each other in an on-line community and to be able to endorse each other's giftedness.

I'm sorry, but your presumption was mistaken, I currently work in a Baptist hospital and was in a Catholic one last year. In reality, most hospital chaplian departments are made of a mix of faiths. Therefore, the denomination of the hospital has nothing to do with the certifying of its chaplains.


Phil Hawkins wrote:
But one of the most nearly universal characteristics of the house church movement is the tendency to reduce or minimize, and in some of the more extreme groups, totally eliminate, professional clergy . . . But since there is no authority structure to approve your effort from the house church movement, if the management of the association choose to question it, it may not work at all.


The Society of Friends (Quakers) have never had professional clergy though they do have professional chaplains. Those who are working in that capacity are simply recognized at a meeting of their peers, to be solid people who go out with peer support to do the work that they do. This is accepted by the professional organizations. I think there could be a simple church equivalent.

Thank you for explaining the rank differences with military chaplains. That, I did not know.


Phil Hawkins wrote:
I know that members of the clergy who become interested in house/simple church do face a hard choice, because their livelihood is impacted when they become involved.


Funny, I've never been "clergy" who left an institutional church. I was a house churcher who felt called to minister to the sick and had the chance to study at seminary on scholarship. So, that would make me a simple-churcher who became a member of the chaplaincy whose congregation is now impacted by my livelihood.

[Nik P.]

Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 10:49 am on House2House

Phil,

May I cut and paste your input over to the discussion on www.simplecreds.ning.com? I think it is valuable and deserves careful consideration.

Thanks-
Nik

[Editor]

Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 4:14 pm on House2House
I don't know what H2H's policies may be on it--you might PM Paul or Lori and make sure they're okay with it--but I have no problem. If anything I said seems helpful could lead to further thinking, feel free to use it.

Phil Hawkins

[Keith]

Hi Nik,
I guess Phil has the same thoughts that I have. I like you do know of some folk who keep a denominational affiliation just to keep their jobs. But this causes problems to me because I feel it lacks integrity somewhat. I know they simply see it as hoop jumping, but I'm not sure how I feel about it.
Also Phip is right, the vast majority of HC's have no time at all for the idea of professional clergy. I find your position of being "ordained" by your HC inconsistent with scripture, where apostolic leaders recognize or appoint elders and deacons. As I've said in other places the 5 fold ministries are "ordained" by God, and man has no input at all. Except to stand on the sidelines and say "Wow brother/sister XXX who serves us so well, is a real gift from God", That is real recognition. But I like Phil acknowledge that that doesn't jump and hoops for the world. Now I realize that others within the movement may disagree with me over this, but as in all things I would direct both you and them back to the Bible. We are a Spirit and Word movement, Not a Pragmatic, I think movement.
Blessings
Keith

[Nik P.]

Keith said:

As I've said in other places the 5 fold ministries are "ordained" by God, and man has no input at all. Except to stand on the sidelines and say "Wow brother/sister XXX who serves us so well, is a real gift from God", That is real recognition. But I, like Phil, acknowledge that that doesn't jump and hoops for the world. Keith

Actually, I think that WOULD do it for the world, and that is what I am pushing for. I think that is the model exhibited by the Society of Friends (Quakers): how they simply recognize, within their meeting, who displays the gift of visiting the sick. Now, ordination is another matter altogether, and we should probably talk about that on another thread. But then again, my Quaker teacher had a full position based on the weight of her community's agreement that they see God's work through her . . .

Seriously, this could be a real revolution of changing the rules. . . for those in the simple church anyway, to match our beliefs, and not the other way around.

[Carolyn Spence]

I have a question... do you ever sleep?

Have you ever read the book "Adventures in God"? Its the story of John Lake. Have you read about the story of Smith Wigglesworth? Maria Woodworth Etter:? William and Catherine Booth? These are not contemporaries, and are from a time when denominations were fewer, but were tightly controlled. However, these people impacted the faith and our world more than anyone in recent times.

They were Holy Ghost people... Smith never joined a church, was never endorsed by any group, but went to every church and attended every conference he could when it was available to do so. He turned the nations of England and Europe upside down so much that some attempted to forbid him to heal by laying on hands. In that city, he told the people in the crowd on the city square to put their own hands on themselves while he prayed, and they were healed in droves.

Once, in a Quaker meeting, when nothing was happening, he stood - went to the front - opened his Bible and preached a most powerful message, and many were healed in that meeting. They were impressed, but they were not the ones to credential him. The Holy Ghost did so by following up his words with signs following.

John Lake sold his million dollar insurance business, his property, gave the money away and took his 10 kids to South Africa on a ship. When they arrived, a man in line was impressed by God to give them money ... it was the amount needed for customs, and a woman showed up at the dock looking for a family of 12 as she had a house for them. God had his endorsements ready. But, once the miracles happening in meetings were reported, they were supported by many mainline churches in the US later on.

Maria Woodworth Etter began by speaking at home meetings... they were not trying to organize as "house churches". Her meetings were characterized by the presence of the Holy Spirit and by the level of holiness among attendees. She could pray so that not only her meetings, but people living around the area of them would be impacted by the presence and the work of God (healing, repentance from sin, etc.). She resisted preaching because she was a woman, but God held her accountable for what he had given her. She was rejected officially and completely by the city of San Franciso and left the town shaking the dust from her feet on April 15th, 1906. There may have been an endorsement of a differemt kind here because the town was destroyed three days later.

Catherine and William Booth founded the Salvation Army. They did not do so from the covering or endorsement by any church. Their impact was far more reaching. Their methods more effective than any denominational group. That group is not the same today... when it finally received endorsements, it seemed to lose its power.

Today there is a move of God that is raising up fathers. The gatherings will be in line with those who are going to gather us together under the love and care of fathers -male and female. The associations will not be so much doctrinally aligned, because focus on doctrine separates. That is what is called in scripture a heretic - one who divides. But, fathers can gather together those who are different in doctrine under the context of family. Just as one's children should be allowed to be different, and have different thoughts and ways, so this family gathers in the love of their heavenly father who was the first champion of real diversity ... look at the flowers.

Our Father does not want us all to be alike. The only authentic church is the family. That is where God started, and that is how he sees us. We need to do everything and be everywhere... taking his name and his power to the ends of the earth so that they know him and glorify him - or have a chance to see the real Father in action and still reject him. We need to focus more on being genuine, in love with Jesus, full of the Holy Ghost, walking in kingdom authority, and demonstrating the reality of God in the earth.

Now, don't anyone get offended. You are all precious in God's sight, and precious to me. Our standard needs to be raised much higher, and our focus on heaven. There is so much work to be done... or rather so much work of the devil to be undone. We should associate with whomever to get the job done... and get what ever credentials we need to gain entrance to all places. I am not sure any hospice will endorse one who ruins their business... but go anyway... For me, the problem is that I am afraid to go alone. I want the comfort of the agreement of others, and I probably am rejecting the direction of the Lord when I don't go. He is so amazing to love us still... Carolyn