« Amelie | Hobart Emerging Church »

Boxable Church

27 April, 2003 10:54 PM

Over at Stinky Convoluted Past Steve posts this

" i love the scientific mind. "is it a house church?" ask those who are aware that i am experimenting again. "well, i guess so, we meet in our homes occassionally and have dinner, conversations and pray together, but we also meet in the local pub too". "oh, so you're a pub church then?" again, curiosity. "well, as you have already pointed out we meet in our homes as well, but in addition to our houses and some local pubs, a few of us meet in a couple of cafe's around the area too.' "so you're a cafe church then?" "well, like i already said, you could say that but we meet in a variety of places".

here's my confusion, why when a church meets in a purpose built building it is simply referred to as a church, yet when we meet anywhere else, it is referred to as a "place of meeting" church? i might start asking traditional church goers, "so are you guys a church building church?"

I think I've had virtually the same conversation as Steve at least 30-40 times in the past couple of months....glad I'm not alone.



One word: it's got to do with labelling.

It's also got to do with mindsets. The traditional mindset is that a church meets in a church building, or at least a building you've designated for such meetings. Not just simply anywhere at anytime.

In addition, the lack of organisational structure/watchdog-cum-authority body can be a problem to some. I attend an "independent" church (no denominational affiliation) that's currently meeting in our pastor's apartment. A parent of one of our younger members found out that we don't meet in a church church and freaked out. She's afraid her son's gonna get swallowed up by some cult. Apparently she was so "seriously disturbed", the son told us that he probably will stop joining us for the time being. Interestingly, my dad also said something like, "Leaders who don't have to answer
to anyone can develop a messianic complex. Look at David Koresh."

There you have it.

irene » 28 April, 2003 1:08 AM

Churches may be for the worship of God but they are built and operated by humans with the usual human failings. Like all organisations as they age the mainstream church has been populated at the upper levels by people how have the motivation to put the intellectual and actual time into the task. The motivation I am talking about here is "power" and before anyone screams in righteous indignation just remember that you don't need to be high up in the church to be devout.

That being said one role of an organisation, religous or otherwise, is to ensure it's own survival. These new methods of worship are inherently threatening to the established church and as such will continue to be subject to attack by those currently holding the power.

They can, of course, not be a threat without growing to a size that requires the establishing of an infrastructure that will eventually be populated by the devout who also have a need for power. And so it goes. The cycle repeats. It is part of the frailty of human nature.

chris » 28 April, 2003 10:22 AM

Why in the world would your church meet in a pub or hotel? Isn't that just condoning drinking!? Why would you want to worship God in a place where so much evil is done!? You people really confuse me - are you Christians?

Greg » 28 April, 2003 3:28 PM

Greg, a few websites that you might find some spiritual encouragement from:





When you're done, you might want to read the gospels, you know, where Jesus was accused of being a wine bibber because he hung out with all those yucky sinful people? Remember them? The ones God loves? Guess not. You probably spend all your time with good, (self) righteous Christian people who are too good for sinners.

Get over yourself...

Mugshot » 28 April, 2003 3:52 PM

Mugshot - kiss my leperous butt!

I'm sure Jesus would have!

Greg » 28 April, 2003 3:56 PM

That's right Greg. Miss the point. There's a good narrow minded, dogmatic, legalistic boy.

Mugshot » 28 April, 2003 4:39 PM


Newflash: The WHOLE WORLD is full of evil. There's evil in your office - do you still go to work? What about all your non-Christian colleagues - do you avoid sitting next to them, do you stop talking to them? Are all of them teetotallers, or would you rather not know?

Are you sure your company doesn't have any unethical business practices whatsoever? If they do, why are you still working there - aren't you condoning evil?

Lastly, if we don't mix with sinners, how on earth are we going to bring the gospel to them?

irene » 28 April, 2003 8:10 PM

I condone drinking. It's a fairly pleasant passtime actually and fare more pleasant when indulged in in a convivial setting with other sinners. I am pleased you never sin Greg. It must be sooooo satisfying being that much better than the rest of us.

chris » 29 April, 2003 11:52 AM

at least I can acknowledge when I'm sinning and don't delude myself that I'm not when I am!

Greg » 30 April, 2003 3:39 PM

What sin are you referring to here Greg?

Rachel C » 30 April, 2003 9:19 PM

I believe the drinking is a sin because it makes you loose control. How many verses warn against drunkeness in the bible!!! Obviously its something that removes people from Gods presence. And when we do it in a hotel then we are not only sinning in a personal sense, but also condoning the sin of others. Are we not to be an example? To live lives of purity and holiness?

Greg » 1 May, 2003 9:17 AM


Go somewhere else please! Seriously! Either that or grow a brain and read the bible for yourself in that order. By your standards, Paul is a sinner and so is Timothy for encouraging young Timothy to have wine with his dinner. Use your freaking brain or just quit this site.

BTW - I noticed you didn't respond to the first encouragement to read the Gospels, when Jesus was being accused of being a drunkard. Answer me this or just get thee hence...

Mugshot » 1 May, 2003 4:05 PM

Email this entry to a friend:

Friend's email:

Your email:

Message (optional):