Do House Churches Have to Be Affiliated with a Denomination or Similar Institution?

When considering the topic of house churches, a common question people ask is about an external institutional affiliation, such as a denomination or similar organization, network, or umbrella/covering body.

The short answer is no. A house church does not need to be officially affiliated with a denomination or similar body. Of course, it could, but it doesn't have to. And there is a better, more biblical way to offer leadership, accountability, and structure than the institutional affiliations most of us are familiar with.

In this post, we will cover the following topics:

• Some house churches are associated with denominations and other similar groups

• Our concerns with these status quo associations

• A better way: autonomous citywide networks

• Living the city-church model

Some House Churches Are Associated with Denominations and Other Similar Groups

We want to start by acknowledging that, of course, some house churches are affiliated with denominations and similar organizations, such as a mother church, perhaps a mega church with house churches under it, and the like. And we want to acknowledge that quite often born-again, spirit-filled, Bible-believing, God-fearing brothers and sisters are part of many of these churches. Furthermore, we acknowledge that many denominations have historically had positive origins, providing doctrinal accountability, resource sharing, and mutual support during times of persecution.

To be clear, a house church could have such a denominational affiliation. We've seen this with denominations, church-planting organizations, mission agencies, and singular congregations. These house churches sometimes have different shapes and sizes. Some can be more like a traditional church, but in a home or other informal setting. Others are small groups that go by the name of house church or home church. And others are much more autonomous, even with this sort of denominational affiliation.

All of this said, we will address our concerns with this particular setup and offer alternatives for the remainder of this post.

Our Concerns with These Status Quo Associations

The problem is that when house churches and networks of house churches have associations like this, there are often unnecessary shortcomings that hold them back:

• They are typically not fully autonomous: To call a particular group a church means they should have the authority to do things such as celebrate the Lord's Supper, perform baptisms, and even start new house churches. However, when many groups that go by the name "house church" but are affiliated with a denomination or similar body, they may not be able to perform all of these functions on their own without permission or the need for a pastor, bishop, or elder to step in. There are exceptions to this observation, but there is often an imposed element at some point that limits the group's autonomy as a church.

• Their institutional affiliation can hold them back from reaching their neighbors: When a church foregrounds its identity as part of a particular denomination or similar institution, this identity often limits its ability to reach some people. This is because many people are interested in learning to follow Jesus with others, but some of them are not interested in religious affiliations. They might like the idea of a house church, but they are not sure that they want to be part of a particular denomination.

• Such affiliations are an extrabiblical tradition that can breed legalism: Our main concern, however, is less practical and more biblical. We would argue that the idea of denominations in general runs counter to Jesus' desire for his church to be united (John 17) and to Paul's criticism of divisions in 1 Corinthians 1-3. Denominationalism looks a lot like the very thing Paul told the Corinthians not to do. Therefore, to insist that Christians and churches need to belong to an institution like a denomination is an extrabiblical imposition that breeds legalism (a man-made rule or expectation that is not in the Bible).

Again, we want to be clear, although we have our concerns about denominationalism, we seek genuine unity with our brothers and sisters who find themselves in a denominational expression of the church. That said, we want to now offer a faithful alternative.

A Better Way: Autonomous Citywide Networks

Although we do not advocate for institutional affiliations for house churches, we do promote structure. And typically, the question about denominational or institutional affiliation concerns structure, accountability, and leadership. The good news is that we can have oversight without denominations and remain faithful to what we see in the Bible.

Even though they are autonomous, individual house churches should not exist in isolation forever. A singular house church might be the beginning of a local work, but the people in that church should be making disciples and, eventually, see more of their neighbors gathering in a similar way. As this sort of movement grows at the local level, it can form a city church—a decentralized network of house church gatherings.

It is at this city level that we should expect to see elders and deacons emerge and be appointed, offering more formalized leadership and oversight. Such elders then become responsible for facilitating doctrinal disputes and confronting heterodox teaching.

This is the ecclesiological structure that we see in the New Testament, especially in Acts, some of the epistles, and the beginning of Revelation (namely, chapters 2–3). In these books, we typically see the church in any given area named for the city that it is in (Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, etc.). And when elders are mentioned in the New Testament, they are typically associated with cities like Jerusalem or Ephesus, and not particular house church gatherings.

We hold the city expression of church loosely in our day. It might not neatly fit within particular municipal boundaries as much as it does a metropolitan area or a region where people live close enough to one another that they can easily share life and serve one another, often today within relatively close driving or other commuting distance.

This city-level church is the highest level of structural autonomy and authority that we see in the New Testament. In other words, the church in Antioch did not own the churches in Iconium and Lystra, even though there was a relational connection, chiefly through Paul's missionary activity. These churches were related and networked to one another, yet autonomous in their oversight.

Living the City-Church Model

This city-church expression is the kind of structure we are trying to live out today. We have seen such networks emerge in various states, including Michigan, Georgia, Florida, Massachusetts, and elsewhere. The church in one city may have helped the church in another region get started through discipleship relationships, but it does not own the work there. Of course, there is accountability and even leadership through discipling relationships that persist over the long haul, but one fully autonomous church network is multiplying another, and so on.

Often, such a work starts with one individual or family who is hungering for something more like what they are reading in the Bible. They start gathering others and making disciples, and over time, more gatherings emerge locally. These individual house churches begin to form a relational network and identity of their own. Over time, leaders, including elders, deacons, and people with gifts, emerge. There is no real need for an institutional affiliation. They don't even need to incorporate as a nonprofit organization. They operate more like an extended spiritual family than a business.

As a matter of fact, we believe this is what we see when we read the New Testament as we watch the early church grow. There was no need for denominational affiliation then. We'd even say that something like denomination was criticized. Therefore, we seek to fulfill the desire and need for leadership, accountability, and structure by following the model expressed in Acts, the epistles, and Revelation.

If you appreciate this post, we encourage you to share it with someone else who might benefit from it. You can also read similar posts on similar topics here and here. And we encourage you to join one of our upcoming coaching cohorts to learn more about how you can start gathering with others in simple ways.