# Vision for a Reformed Baptist Organic Church?



## PMBrooks

Hey Brothers and Sisters,
My wife and I are praying about starting a Reformed Baptist House Church in our city. I hold to the LBC 1689 and fully believe in elders and deacons even in an organic church model. 

I feel led to do a organic church model for a few reasons:
1) Pragmatically-Our city of New Orleans is land locked and real estate is VERY expensive. Meeting in homes or coffee shops is a great alternative.
2) Theologically- We want to emphasize the discipleship aspect in evangelism. While this can certainly be done in any church, and since we are hoping to do an organic church, meeting in homes or other places will help to emphasize the discipleship aspect of evangelism and engaging a community. 

These are a few of the definite things we will be doing:
1) Elders/Pastors- We will have elders/pastors who will be responsible for the groups meeting in homes and other places. 
2) Corporate worship service- Even though we will primarily meet in homes, we hope to meet corporately every week for service at various locations or wherever we may be able to rent a space. Technically then our church plant would not be an "organic church," but the emphasis would still be on small groups meeting in various places. 
3) Adherence to a common confession of faith- In our case, it would be the LBC 1689. It would be taught and would be central to any discipleship. 
4) Church membership- We would still maintain a organization of church membership for various reasons, including pastoral care, tithing, and church discipline. 
5) Church sponsor-We hope to find another Reformed Baptist Church under which we may become a daughter church. 

So, I post all this to ask you all to help me "vision" what a biblical, organic, small group based, Reformed Baptist Church may look like. I want to do this as biblically as possible, reaching the culture as much as possible, and within the confession of the 1689 as much as possible. 

I have already co-founded two church plants, one in Atlanta and another here in New Orleans, but they are not "Reformed" in the truest sense of the words. Nevertheless, praise the Lord they are still growing and reaching people with the Gospel!

Thanks for helping me do some "holy visioning!"

PMBrooks


----------



## Hamalas

Interesting vision. Could you elaborate on what you mean by the term "organic church" I don't know that I've heard that before.


----------



## LawrenceU

PM,
I'll post more tomorrow. We are a little over two years into doing exactly what you are describing. It carries its own set of unique challenges.


----------



## OPC'n

Hamalas said:


> Interesting vision. Could you elaborate on what you mean by the term "organic church" I don't know that I've heard that before.


----------



## PresbyDane




----------



## Jimmy the Greek

From the OP description, it appears that by organic, he means made up of smaller groups that never meet together as a whole. One home or one coffee shop would never hold them all. Therefore they would be spiritually and organically united, but not physically as one local body.

If this is true, then in effect it is not one local church but many -- since they would all have to function as separate local bodies. Remember that confessionally there are "marks of a true church" that must be addressed.


----------



## eqdj

What's an "organic church"

Organ instead of piano?

More greenery?


----------



## LawrenceU

What he may be meaning is a church that does meet regularly as an assembled body, but also has a significant ministry in smaller groups. Much more than the normal 'home Bible study'.

I don't have much time today to post. My truck problems are consuming me today.


----------



## PMBrooks

Everyone,
Thanks for your inout so far. 

First, let me define what I mean by "organic." This is more of a label and emphasis on certain aspects of methodology than any true change in theology, though the two certainly influence one another. In *true *"organic church plants," the church is diven by relationships dedicated to evangelism and discipleship. Each group that meets in a home would be considered a church, though the groups may be associated by a network. The emphasis is not on a building or program, but rather on discipling and evangelistic relationships. The idea is to GO to people with the Gospel rather than waiting for them to come to the church building. Isn't this what the Great Commission is about anyway? 

Gomarus's observation is correct that each local group is considered a church. However, that is why we are not wanting to follow a totally organic model, though it would be "more organic" than traditional churches. 

Also, the reason I wanted to post it on the PB is to have a brainstorming session with all of you so that we could make sure we stay within confessional lines. For example, our organic groups would be more of discipleship and Bible study groups, not independent churches. All would be a part of the same church. We would also come to gether as a corporate body EACH week to worship. We might have a baptism in a home, but only because we would not have a building at the early stages. And the baptism would be done under the authority of the entire church not just a particular group. 

LawrenceU, I will be interesting in hearing from you, as well as everyone else. 

Again, everyone, thanks for the input and brainstorming. I look forward to more comments. 

Pb


----------



## ZackF

PMBrooks said:


> Everyone,
> Thanks for your inout so far.
> 
> First, let me define what I mean by "organic." This is more of a label and emphasis on certain aspects of methodology than any true change in theology, though the two certainly influence one another. In *true *"organic church plants," the church is diven by relationships dedicated to evangelism and discipleship. Each group that meets in a home would be considered a church, though the groups may be associated by a network. The emphasis is not on a building or program, but rather on discipling and evangelistic relationships. The idea is to GO to people with the Gospel rather than waiting for them to come to the church building. Isn't this what the Great Commission is about anyway?
> 
> Gomarus's observation is correct that each local group is considered a church. However, that is why we are not wanting to follow a totally organic model, though it would be "more organic" than traditional churches.
> 
> Also, the reason I wanted to post it on the PB is to have a brainstorming session with all of you so that we could make sure we stay within confessional lines. For example, our organic groups would be more of discipleship and Bible study groups, not independent churches. All would be a part of the same church. We would also come to gether as a corporate body EACH week to worship. We might have a baptism in a home, but only because we would not have a building at the early stages. And the baptism would be done under the authority of the entire church not just a particular group.
> 
> LawrenceU, I will be interesting in hearing from you, as well as everyone else.
> 
> Again, everyone, thanks for the input and brainstorming. I look forward to more comments.
> 
> Pb



This sounds interesting. How would come up with enough Elders that handle the Bible well enough to pull it off?


----------



## Reformed Baptist

I suggest discussing a different language than the word organic. When I started reading I envisoned half naked hippies. Not I pretty vision.


----------



## PMBrooks

Reformed Baptist said:

I suggest discussing a different language than the word organic. When I started reading I envisoned half naked hippies. Not I pretty vision. 




Good point!


----------



## Reformed Baptist

PMBrooks said:


> Reformed Baptist said:
> 
> I suggest discussing a different language than the word organic. When I started reading I envisoned half naked hippies. Not I pretty vision.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Good point!



hahha...glad you took the humor. In all seriousness, I LOVE the idea of home fellowship meetings, meeting from house to house, et. It is probably just my personality, but I like the concept of an exposition of the Scripture, discussion, et. more than the lecture hall.

-----Added 4/8/2009 at 11:05:57 EST-----



KS_Presby said:


> PMBrooks said:
> 
> 
> 
> Everyone,
> Thanks for your inout so far.
> 
> First, let me define what I mean by "organic." This is more of a label and emphasis on certain aspects of methodology than any true change in theology, though the two certainly influence one another. In *true *"organic church plants," the church is diven by relationships dedicated to evangelism and discipleship. Each group that meets in a home would be considered a church, though the groups may be associated by a network. The emphasis is not on a building or program, but rather on discipling and evangelistic relationships. The idea is to GO to people with the Gospel rather than waiting for them to come to the church building. Isn't this what the Great Commission is about anyway?
> 
> Gomarus's observation is correct that each local group is considered a church. However, that is why we are not wanting to follow a totally organic model, though it would be "more organic" than traditional churches.
> 
> Also, the reason I wanted to post it on the PB is to have a brainstorming session with all of you so that we could make sure we stay within confessional lines. For example, our organic groups would be more of discipleship and Bible study groups, not independent churches. All would be a part of the same church. We would also come to gether as a corporate body EACH week to worship. We might have a baptism in a home, but only because we would not have a building at the early stages. And the baptism would be done under the authority of the entire church not just a particular group.
> 
> LawrenceU, I will be interesting in hearing from you, as well as everyone else.
> 
> Again, everyone, thanks for the input and brainstorming. I look forward to more comments.
> 
> Pb
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This sounds interesting. How would come up with enough Elders that handle the Bible well enough to pull it off?
Click to expand...



I would suggest that it isn't only elders that can teach. An elder must be able to teach, but they do not need to be the only one that does teach.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek

If the small groups come together for corporate worship, administration of the ordinances, and ministry of the Word, my earlier reservations are alleviated. 

In my humble opinion, Elders may appoint Deacons over each smaller group. There is nothing that necessarily prevents effective oversight through delegation. Especially if regular communications and perhaps rotational/periodic observance/participation by the Elders is provided.

Peace.

Definitely worth


----------



## PuritanCovenanter

I am leery of groups that start out with laymen teaching and an undefined Elder oversight. I have good reason for such criticism. And I am not unfamiliar with this approach. I have even participated as a teacher in this kind of setting. I am leery of this in the sense that it would be the goal to assimilate into a corporate body and not have direct oversight by those who should be responsible. I have seen things go poorly because of a lack of authority and oversight. 

The problems that arise in these situations can be very damaging because you are assimilating wretched sinners into a group. And we all have our problems. There is a Devil that still lurks around. Therefore a very well defined authoritative Eldership with oversight is very important. When I look into the New Testament I see a well defined responsible mature oversight by the Elders who teach and lead. Even St. Paul didn't go off on his own or on his own whimsical notion that he was to build the church. He went with the oversight and recommendation of his Church in Antioch. And that was after he had a commission by God. He still placed himself under the leadership of the Church.



> Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you.
> (Heb 13:17)



I guess what I am getting at is that a defined biblical oversight needs to be in place or you will end up with everyone else's opinion taking the home groups where ever. The most popular questions answered will be, "How do you feel about this, and what does it mean to you?" Plus there will be problems that people bring from their sin filled lives that will need very mature guidance. We live in an abused, carnally desirous society.


----------



## KMK

I came out of the house church movement and this sounds similar. I agree with what Randy said and I will add this as well.

It is near impossible to have a 'public' ministry when meeting in people's homes. Homes are not a public place. No matter how hard you try to get the word out that everyone is welcome, it remains private property and you only get people who have been specifically invited. Because of this it becomes a kind of 'clique'. Meeting in private homes, in the end, is not as effective in following the Great Commission as having a church building. 

This is not to say that meeting in homes is not sometimes necessary, but it is not ideal.


----------



## tcalbrecht

"Reformed Baptist Organic Church"

Does that mean you only serve free range chickens for fellowship dinner?


----------



## Rich Koster

I would love to see this happen in my town. I see many plants going this way in an increasingly cost prohibitive environment for big buildings.


----------



## MrMerlin777

tcalbrecht said:


> "Reformed Baptist Organic Church"
> 
> Does that mean you only serve free range chickens for fellowship dinner?






And the milk for the lattes has to be from cows not treated with BGH.


----------



## shelly

I would bring the free range chicken if you were just a few states closer I don't have any turkeys.

Seriously though, small groups need authority over them to keep them from becoming dangerous and controlling and following the strongest personality. Spoken from over 10 years and 4 churches experience. 2 good and 2 very bad-nightmare level of bad, very scarring

I hope you get a lot of good counsel.


----------

