Paradoxology: Learning to BE Church: An Interview with a House-Church Team, part 1

Home Archives Profile Subscribe

Slaves of Christ?

Valuing the Right Questions... AND Answers.

Learning to BE Church: An Interview with a House-Church Team, part 1

August 13, 2004

Matt and Dawn Segawa left the staff of a denominational megachurch over two years ago, embarking on a journey where God led them out of a traditional way of doing church and into a new way (for them) of being church. As ordained thirty-something pastors who are part of “Third Day Churches” – Matt and Dawn have developed some amazing insights into culture and ministry and what’s ahead for the universal Body of Christ.

Over the next 2 weeks, Paradoxology will be featuring the results of an interview I conducted with the Segawa’s. What has me really excited about all this is the fact that Matt & Dawn are house-church practitioners (rather than simply thought-leaders). In addition, the Segawa’s are regular readers of Paradoxology and are looking forward to interacting with those of you who end up posting questions or comments. My hope, is that we’ll see more interaction like this throughout the blogosphere. That said – I hope you enjoy the interview!

Chris:
What was it that led you out of the institutional church structures you had previously been involved in for years, and into the house-church movement?

Matt:
We were still attending a large institutional church when God moved on our hearts to start a home fellowship. This was a gathering of believers, meeting every other week, who wanted to pursue more of God in their lives – to experience more of God than what we were experiencing on Sunday mornings. We were careful to leave “church politics” outside and focus only on Jesus. We had potluck dinners together, worship that was not rushed, had great discussions about God and his Word, prayed over each other, and held each other accountable for the difficult things in our lives. Since “the clock” had no relevance to us, some meetings would last 4+ hours.

A year-and-a-half later, sensing a new direction in our calling, we left the IC. At that time, it was obvious to us that we were getting more spiritual nourishment out of our home fellowship than from the church we’d been attending. God began to speak to us, moving us to do something more with our home fellowship. And that fellowship became church for us.

Dawn:
I’d like to say that we didn’t purposely set out to make the shift from an institutional church into what we’re doing now. If God had made it clear that he wanted us to stay within the institutional church, we would have done that. It was all about obeying where we felt God was leading us, rather than reacting or rebelling or turning against the institutional church. We were simply open to wherever God was leading us. And that happened to be under Gary Goodell. And he happened to be the one who was saying “yes” to us and affirming, “yes, you have a call on your life.” And so it was where God was giving us an open door.

Matt:
Gary ended up blessing our calling by God and released us. And so we went back to our fellowship and shared with them about our plan to become a network of house churches. This meant reorganizing into three groups which would meet each week, and then all come together once a month to see each other, worship together and party with God together. And so that’s how we got started. And when we started we had about 30 people with us, but the majority were still attending institutional churches as well as ours. We had made the shift that this was our “church”, and since then God has sent us others who are like-minded.

Chris:
You undoubtedly still have many friends within institutional churches. How has your journey out of a denominational structure and into house-church ministry affected these relationships?

Dawn:
This has been a rather painful process and the area where we have had to pay the highest price on this journey. The things we once had in common with people who were very close to us and with us on the journey ended up shifting dramatically. Those who were with us in the home fellowship were not able to, or were not willing to make the change into a house church with us originally, for various reasons. This “breaking away” has had a pretty high price on us personally.

Matt:
Occasionally, these friends still contact us via email or phone calls, and they ask “how’s it going?’ – or basically, “how’s it going without me?” That’s a hard one to answer. Some have supported the idea of what we’re doing, but have chosen to support the activities and programs of the institutional church.

Dawn:
I don’t get the sense that anyone thinks we are outside of the will of God at all. They know us, they trust us, they know our walk with God – I think it’s more of an issue of “success” or not. Does it look successful? Is it drawing a lot of people? I often sensed an attitude from several people of… “well, IF this takes off… THEN I can take a foot out of the institutional church I’m in and put them here, in the house church.” It boiled down the outward appearances of success.

Chris:
So, do house churches struggle with “retention” as much as institutional churches do?

Matt:
Absolutely!

Chris:
Why?

Dawn:
It’s our culture. It’s the consumerism in our culture – it’s something that’s been bred into us as Americans living in the 21st century.

Matt:
Sometimes people are just uncomfortable with letting God deeper into their lives – they’re not able or willing to go there right now. But the truth is, that there are a wide variety of reasons why they choose not to stay involved.

Chris:
Why do house-churches seem so appealing to people -- especially right now to those in their 20’s and 30’s?

Dawn:
People in their 20’s and 30’s are considered “Gen-Xr’s”, and I think it has to do with a value system. Gen-Xr’s typically don’t believe in a structure or an institution or a corporation as much as they believe in a “cause” or a “purpose.” So [the idea of house churches] speaks to a value system and a deep hunger for something authentic and something genuine. I see people in their 20’s and 30’s really seeking and looking for relationships where they can be authentic and real with one another. Many of these people come from broken homes, come from divorced homes. And this ends up putting even more importance on looking for authentic encounters with genuine people and real, authentic encounters with God. And that’s why there may be this shift towards house churches rather than an institutional church with something “splashy” or “showy.” It’s like they’ve been burned. So if you’ve been burned by something that “looks” like that, then it doesn’t seem comforting or God-accessible when you encounter something similar. It’s funny, because our experience has been “multi-generational” in our gatherings. We have people in their 60’s and people in their pre-teens, so it may appeal to Gen-Xr’s right now, but our experience has taught us that house churches are appealing to people on a much broader basis.

** be sure to catch "part 2" of this interview, which will post in a few days**

Posted at 05:33 PM in The Emerging Church | Permalink | Comments (3)