The Meeting Places

Another thing which is considered of vital importance to the existence of a church is a church building. The thought of a church is so frequently associated with a church building, that the building itself is often referred to as "the church." But in God’s Word it is the living believers who are called "the church," not the bricks and mortar (see Acts 5.11; Matt. 18.17). According to Scripture it is not even necessary for a church to have a place definitely set apart for fellowship. The Jews always had their special meeting-places, and wherever they went they made a point of building a synagogue in which to worship God. The first apostles were Jews, and the Jewish tendency to build special places of worship was natural to them. Had Christianity required that places be set apart for the specific purpose of worshipping the Lord, the early apostles, with their Jewish background and natural tendencies, would have been ready enough to build them. The amazing thing is that, not only did they not put up special buildings, but they seem to have ignored the whole subject intentionally. It is Judaism, not Christianity, which teaches that there must be sanctified places for Divine worship. The temple of the New Testament is not a material edifice; it consists of living persons, all believers in the Lord. Because the New Testament temple is spiritual, therefore the question of meeting-places for believers, or places of worship, is one of minor importance. Let us turn to the New Testament and see how the question of meeting-places is dealt with there.

When our Lord was on earth He met with His disciples at times on the hill-side and at times by the sea; He gathered them around Him now in a house, again in a boat, and there were times when He drew apart with them in an upper room; but there was no "consecrated" place, where He habitually met with His own. At Pentecost the disciples were gathered in an upper room, and after Pentecost they either met all together in the Temple (Acts 2.46), or separately in different houses (Acts 2.46), or at times in Solomon’s Porch (Acts 5.12). They met for prayer in various homes, Mary’s being one of them (Acts 12.12), and we read that on a certain occasion they were assembled in a room on the third floor of a building (Acts 20.8). Judging from these passages, the believers assembled in a great variety of places and had no official meeting-place; they simply made use of any building that suited their needs, whether a private home, or just a room in a house, or else a wide space like Solomon’s Porch. They had no buildings specially set apart for church use; they had nothing which would correspond to the "church" of to-day.

"And upon the first day of the week, when we were gathered together to break bread, Paul discoursed with them. . . And there were many lights in the upper chamber, where we were gathered together. And there sat in the window a certain young man named Eutychus" (Acts 20.7-9). In Troas we find the believers meeting in the third story of a building. There is a delightfully unofficial air about this gathering, such a contrast to the present-day conventional services, with the church members all sitting stiffly in their pews. But this Troas meeting was a truly scriptural one. There was no official stamp upon it; it bore the marks of real life, in its perfect naturalness and pure simplicity. It was quite all right for some of the saints to sit on the window-ledge, or for others to sit on the floor, as Mary did of old. In our assemblies we must return to the principle of the "upper room." The ground floor is a place for business, a place for men to come and go; but there is more of a home atmosphere about the upper room, and the gatherings of God’s children are family affairs. The Last Supper was in an upper room, so was Pentecost, and so again was the meeting here. God wants the intimacy of the "upper room" to mark the gatherings of His children, not the stiff formality of an imposing public edifice.

That is why in the Word of God we find His children meeting in the family atmosphere of a private home. We read of the church in the house of Priscilla and Aquila (Rom. 16.5; 1 Cor. 16.19), the church in the house of Nymphas (Col. 4.15), and the church in the house of Philemon (Philem. 2). The New Testament mentions at least these three different churches that were in the homes of believers. How did churches come to be in such homes? If in a certain place there were a few believers, and one of them had a house large enough to accommodate them all, they quite naturally assembled there, and the Christians in that locality were called "the church in the house of So-and-so."

Everything must begin at the beginning. When a church is founded, the believers from the very outset must learn to meet by themselves, either in their own homes or in some other building which they are able to secure. Of course, not every church is a church in a "house," but a church in a "house" should be encouraged rather than considered as a drawback. If the number of believers is great and the sphere of the locality wide, they might need to meet, as the saints in Jerusalem did, in different "houses" (which may mean homes, halls, or any other building) instead of in one house. There was only one church in Jerusalem, but its members assembled in different "houses." The principle of "houses" still applies to-day. This does not mean that the whole church will always meet separately; in fact, it is important, and of great profit, for all the believers to gather together quite regularly in one place (1 Cor. 14.23). To make such meetings possible, they could either borrow or rent a public place for the occasion, or, if they have sufficient means, they could acquire a hall permanently for the purpose. But the meeting-place for the believers could generally be in a private home. If this is not available, and not suitable, of course other buildings could be acquired. But we should try to encourage meetings in the homes of the Christians.

The grand edifices of today, with their lofty spires, speak of the world and the flesh rather than of the Spirit, and in many ways they are not nearly as well suited to the purpose of Christian assembly as the private homes of God’s people. In the first place, people feel much freer to speak of spiritual things in the unconventional atmosphere of a home than in a spacious church building where everything is conducted in a formal manner; besides, there is not the same possibility for mutual intercourse there. Somehow, as soon as people enter those special buildings, they involuntarily settle down to passivity, and wait to be preached to. A family atmosphere should pervade all gatherings of the children of God, so that the brothers even feel free to ask questions (1 Cor. 14.35). Everything should be under the control of the Spirit, but there should be the liberty of the Spirit too. Further, if the churches are in the private homes of the brethren, they naturally feel that all the interests of the church are their interests. There is a sense of closeness of relationship between themselves and the church. Many Christians feel that church affairs are something quite beyond them. They have no intimate concern in them, because in the first place they have their "minister" who is specially responsible for all such affairs, and then they have a great church building which seems so remote from their homes, and where matters are conducted so systematically and with such precision that one feels overpowered and bound in spirit.

Still further, the meetings in believers’ homes can be a fruitful testimony to the neighbours around, and they provide an opportunity for witness and Gospel preaching. Many who are not willing to go to a "church" will be glad to go to a private house. And the influence is most helpful for the families of the Christians. From early days the children will be surrounded by a spiritual atmosphere, and will have constant opportunity to see the reality of eternal things. Again, if meetings are in the homes of the Christians, the Church is saved much material loss. One of the reasons why, during the first three centuries of Church history, the Christians survived the Roman persecutions, was because they had no special buildings for worship, but met in cellars and caves and other inconspicuous places. Such meeting-places are not readily discovered by their persecutors; but the large and costly edifices of today would be easily located and destroyed, and the churches would be speedily wiped out. The imposing structures of our modern times convey an impression of the world rather than of the Christ whose Name they bear. (The halls and other buildings required for the Work are quite another matter; we are speaking here only of the churches--city of believers whether they gather in one home, many homes, one hall, or many halls.)

So the scriptural method of church organization is simple in the extreme. As soon as there are a few believers in a place, they begin to meet in one of their homes. If numbers increase so that it becomes impracticable to meet in one house, then they can meet in several different houses, but the entire company of believers can meet together once in a while in some public place. A hall for such purposes could either be borrowed, rented, or built, according to the financial condition of the church; but we must remember that the ideal meeting places of the saints are their own private homes.

Meetings connected with the Work are arranged along totally different lines, and are entirely under the auspices of the workers. They are on the principle of Paul’s own hired house in Rome. As we have seen, when Paul reached Rome a church was already in existence there, and the believers already had their regular gatherings. Paul did not use the meeting place of the church for his work, but rented a separate place, as he stayed for a prolonged period in Rome. In Troas he only stayed for a week, so he rented no place there, but simply accepted the hospitality of the church. When he went away the special meetings he had been conducting there ceased, but the brethren in Troas still continued their own meetings. If a worker intends to remain for a considerable period in any place, then he must procure a separate centre for his work and not make use of the church’s meeting place; and frequently such a centre will demand more extensive accommodation than the meeting place of the church. If the Lord calls some of His servants to maintain a permanent testimony in a given place, then the call for a special building in connection with the Work may be much greater than the need of premises is in connection with the church. It is almost essential to have a hall if the Work is to be carried on in any place, whereas the homes of the brethren will nearly always meet the needs of the church meetings.