Church Models: Part 2
This series of articles was originally posted sometime in 2001, so as you read, please keep in mind that it has been almost 5 years since I've written these articles and I am re-posting them with no changes, whatsoever, so you can get the complete experience of what I was going through in the moment.
Additionally, here's a quote I have from Wolfgang, the man himself, who found the page, read the articles and had this to say in an email he sent me;
"Hi Carlos, someone showed me your material on the web, good stuff! Sorry I couldn´t be there that evening when Ralph came in.
May the Lord translate all those dreams in you into something wild for God.
- Wolf
This is the second in a series I guess I'll call the "Church Structure Series." I've been praying through and taking a look at three different church models (based on my past experiences and the insights of those who have either helped to start or document these models). The week after I was able to sit down and talk with Wolfgang Simson about house churches, I was able to sit and talk with Ralph Neighbour, who is kinda' the cell church guru. He's written several books on it and has started a ministry, called Touch Ministries.
I came from a "church with cells" so I have been able to see the effectiveness and functionality of the cell, however, where most churches in America seem a bit unwilling to convert fully to house churches. By contrast, a great number more seem willing to consider and/or integrate the cell church structure in some way, shape or form into their present church structure.
The cell church functions in much the same way that the house church does, but the two models differ on two key points:
The cell church does not see itself as a separate entity, but rather a part of a whole and, by design, is not meant to function without the rest of the church body.
The cells that make up a cell church are usually built from interests or like-minded people rather than by location or by subculture as a house church is.
Now, these are definitely not the only two differences, but they are the two that I wanted to take a look at.
The usage of cells to make up a church is good because that way the full responsibility of each cell does not rest solely upon its' cell pastor. Instead, there is accountability between cell pastors and the church pastor, which can guard against some cells going astray. It's bad because this can quickly become just another church structure in which people get shuffled into and lost in.
The use of "focus group" cells is a practical evangelism tool and can be very effective in both discipling and evangelism. I remember as a teenager the times my youth minister would simply hang out with me moreso than I remember any of his Bible Studies. I'm sure some of them were great and meticulously prepared, but more often than not, the times that stuck out in my mind were those when he simply shared life with me. This sharing of life (or different aspects of it) is what these "focus group cells" can become. And this type of relational evangelism or discipleship can oftentimes be much more effective than going through a workbook or study guide.
All in all, the cell church structure strikes me as being something worthy of further investigation and the model can definitely be put to good use, especially here in America.