Use of Church Buildings and Day of Week to Meet for Worship

[Ernie]

Ernie would you be willing to have your services on a different day to share a building?

Yes, however, I don't know of any conservative Anabaptists who use their buildings all day long every Sunday. So, until that becomes a reality, the question is not very front and center in mind.

More thoughts…
I think the early church precedent is to meet in homes on a regular basis and use other buildings for special occasions, larger gatherings, joint services, etc. Many Christians have employed this model all over the world for nearly two millenniums and I think it is a very successful model.

I prefer meeting on Sundays.
As long as believers can meet in homes on Sunday, I don't particularly care what day of the week larger gatherings are held. If everyone normally met in homes, church buildings could be used by multiple groups on Sunday and other days throughout the week.

If meeting in homes was forbidden by the government, but meeting in religious/commercial buildings was permitted, I would have no problem meeting on another day of the week if needed. (as long as the government didn't dictate matters pertaining to the organization and teaching of the church)

During times of persecution, churches have met on random days of the week, in the middle of the night, etc. I think Jesus made it clear how and where true worship happens.

I don’t feel any need to rebuke seventh day worshippers for meeting on Saturday, unless they make it a test of communion or orthopraxy.

[ken_sylvania]

Agree. I'm thinking several conservative Anabaptist congregations (at least a couple) would do well to share a building in the same area if they were not worried about competition but rather welcoming people into the body of Christ.

I'm thinking that three separate services in the same building on Sunday morning would be rather confusing.

Why do they all need to be in the same building at the same time?

By definition, if they are sharing a building then they would all be having their services in that building.
Our services last long enough that there isn't reasonably time enough for even two separate groups to have morning services without overlapping times.

[Soloist]

Ernie would you be willing to have your services on a different day to share a building?

Yes, however, I don't know of any conservative Anabaptists who use their buildings all day long every Sunday. So, until that becomes a reality, the question is not very front and center in mind.

No of course not. There is however a point to asking the question. West coast Mennonites tend to have services on Sunday evening and when we chop up the time block we end up with something like this:

0930-1300 morning service
1730-2030 evening service
Time overlap is due to social interaction and estimated turn over time.
That would leave a slot for a sunrise service which most people do not do except on Easter, a mid day service which would be a dramatic change for anyone, or a late evening service which would only appeal to night shift workers.
When you consider the times… the point is quite obvious.

More thoughts…
I think the early church precedent is to meet in homes on a regular basis and use other buildings for special occasions, larger gatherings, joint services, etc. Many Christians have employed this model all over the world for nearly two millenniums and I think it is a very successful model.

I think the early church didn’t have buildings certainly not common and meeting in homes for everything was more common.

I prefer meeting on Sundays.
As long as believers can meet in homes on Sunday, I don't particularly care what day of the week larger gatherings are held. If everyone normally met in homes, church buildings could be used by multiple groups on Sunday and other days throughout the week.

As noted by several people, the church at home model has some serious problems and you either sacrifice leadership that knows it’s members, or have multiple small churches with all the problems to stability that come with it.

If meeting in homes was forbidden by the government, but meeting in religious/commercial buildings was permitted, I would have no problem meeting on another day of the week if needed. (as long as the government didn't dictate matters pertaining to the organization and teaching of the church)

I’d be more inclined to start meeting in homes if they did that.

During times of persecution, churches have met on random days of the week, in the middle of the night, etc. I think Jesus made it clear how and where true worship happens.

I don’t feel any need to rebuke seventh day worshippers for meeting on Saturday, unless they make it a test of communion or orthopraxy.

How did “ Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. ” turn into once a week with occasionally an extra meeting?
This is one area the JWs do very well at last I heard…
We have done a poor job of supporting one another as we have church, and we have family. We go to church, we have family. We tithe to church, we share with family. We attend church, we fellowship with family.

[joshuabgood]

If folks were willing to meet on different days, since all days are holy now, it could be 7 times more efficient.

[Soloist]

If folks were willing to meet on different days, since all days are holy now, it could be 7 times more efficient.

Well that would cause chaos for the government and businesses.

[Praxis+Theodicy]

We have done a poor job of supporting one another as we have church, and we have family. We go to church, we have family. We tithe to church, we share with family. We attend church, we fellowship with family.

Soloist, you summed up my inner angst about modern western church models. My church preached community but in practice was much like you described here. The syncretization of American Christianity with political conservatism also helped promote the "strong nuclear family" over the family of God in every tangible way. I wanted to have more church fellowship, and it was almost seen as an attack against conservative values.

Preaching that church was "community" was fine in theory, but any sort of practical steps to live that out were seen as dangerous. I spent time at a Bruderhof community and was almost shocked at how strong and healthy and happy their families are, despite their communal church life, if not BECAUSE of it. But my conservative baptist church denounced the Bruderhof as a false church, because it was a church you fellowshipped with instead of a church you attended. When it came down to brass tax, my baptist church insisted that a true church was a place (or an event) that Christian's attend, not a community of believers that one joins.

[Sudsy]

I think churches that teach tithing as 10% of gross income, are often the ones that have extensive church facilities. Even though some tithe the tithe to foreign missionary support, there is lots of money left over to spend on the local church building and programs.

The two largest member churches in our city both promote 10% of gross tithing. One is the Mennonite Brethren church, the other the Pentecostal church. Cafes, comfortable seating, overhead TV screens, musical instruments of sorts, play areas with play equipment for children, supervised nurseries with kitchenette, huge kitchen, gymnasium, separate youth center decorated in modern youth styles, welcoming center, special visitor parking, Sunday school rooms for various age categories, boardroom, youth center, etc, etc.

I doubt either of these churches would support sharing these facilities on a Sunday with other church groups and the Pentecostal church has multiple services on a Sunday.

I'm sure that much more money could be given to missions, especially if the MB and Pentecostal groups would work out sharing one facility throughout the week and Sunday.

I really wonder what Jesus thinks of all of this separate 'Christ following' with our distinct faith groups and facilities to fellowship. My guess is He would once again get out the whip and drive us all out of these 'dens of thieves'. He came to save those who are lost and empowered believers to carry on His mission. However, many groups are all taken up with their religious ways while the lost are ignored. What might Jesus do if He returned today to get The Church back to being The Church and not all taken up with everyone doing church their way while ignoring those He came to save.

[Josh]

Soloist, you summed up my inner angst about modern western church models. My church preached community but in practice was much like you described here. The syncretization of American Christianity with political conservatism also helped promote the "strong nuclear family" over the family of God in every tangible way. I wanted to have more church fellowship, and it was almost seen as an attack against conservative values.

A strong Mennonite church that used to have Sunday evening services, regular social activities throughout the week, etc. can often find itself transforming into a church where people are simply associating with their extended family instead and don't have time for people in the church that aren't their own kin. This is a negative change. Eventually, this decays into the "strong nuclear family" where people seem to have no time to do anything except spent time with their own spouse and kids and their folks. (If homeschooling is practiced, this becomes even worse, because the mom is already tied up all day with the children, there is no interaction between families at school, and there is not the frequent influx of new youth every year when the new teachers arrive.)

When it came down to brass tax, my baptist church insisted that a true church was a place (or an event) that Christian's attend, not a community of believers that one joins.

I cannot describe how strongly I disagree with this model.

[Josh]

I think churches that teach tithing as 10% of gross income, are often the ones that have extensive church facilities. Even though some tithe the tithe to foreign missionary support, there is lots of money left over to spend on the local church building and programs.

I don't think believers should tithe 10% of some computed income amount (when people say "gross income", I'm always fond of asking if they include their employer-provided benefits and share of payroll taxes), as the New Testament doesn't teach this. Instead, we should be willing to give whenever there is a need. The apostles appointed deacons to see to it that church members who didn't have enough food would be provided for.

I'm sure that much more money could be given to missions, especially if the MB and Pentecostal groups would work out sharing one facility throughout the week and Sunday.

I would push back on the idea that money needs to go to "missions". Missions themselves have turned into money pits that seem to always have their hand out begging for more money, with seemingly no connection to results. (Does spending more money result in more souls being won? Does the Holy Spirit rely on budget line items, donations, and expenditures before He can touch souls to respond to Christ's gospel of peace? I think not.) The simple fact is, most people have no difficulty finding places in need of their money, but the sad reality is that many Christians are poor nowadays and don't have excess money to give. Many of them are even deeply in debt.

I really wonder what Jesus thinks of all of this separate 'Christ following' with our distinct faith groups and facilities to fellowship.

Well, I think there is supposed to be one united, undivided church of God, but at the same time such a church should be faithful to following the scriptures. I don't find the Canadian or Australia "Uniting Church" to be following the scriptures at all and would prefer not to try to unite with them or fellowship with them, sadly.

[Sudsy]

I think churches that teach tithing as 10% of gross income, are often the ones that have extensive church facilities. Even though some tithe the tithe to foreign missionary support, there is lots of money left over to spend on the local church building and programs.

I don't think believers should tithe 10% of some computed income amount (when people say "gross income", I'm always fond of asking if they include their employer-provided benefits and share of payroll taxes), as the New Testament doesn't teach this. Instead, we should be willing to give whenever there is a need. The apostles appointed deacons to see to it that church members who didn't have enough food would be provided for.

I'm sure that much more money could be given to missions, especially if the MB and Pentecostal groups would work out sharing one facility throughout the week and Sunday.

I would push back on the idea that money needs to go to "missions". Missions themselves have turned into money pits that seem to always have their hand out begging for more money, with seemingly no connection to results. (Does spending more money result in more souls being won? Does the Holy Spirit rely on budget line items, donations, and expenditures before He can touch souls to respond to Christ's gospel of peace? I think not.) The simple fact is, most people have no difficulty finding places in need of their money, but the sad reality is that many Christians are poor nowadays and don't have excess money to give. Many of them are even deeply in debt.

I really wonder what Jesus thinks of all of this separate 'Christ following' with our distinct faith groups and facilities to fellowship.

Well, I think there is supposed to be one united, undivided church of God, but at the same time such a church should be faithful to following the scriptures. I don't find the Canadian or Australia "Uniting Church" to be following the scriptures at all and would prefer not to try to unite with them or fellowship with them, sadly.

God knows how stingy or generous we are with our giving. I personally don't believe 10% to be a NT practise but I do know there are missions that do handle monies well. One just needs to do their research first.

Monies can be used to win souls, for sure. It provides a means to go places and provide materials to reach the lost. Some tithe oriented church groups will help any poor Christians to learn how to tithe. I was taught as a youngster to tithe my allowance. And just what is a 'tithe' was not a big issue for my family who tithed on their net pay cheque each week but that was just a start point to their entire givings which included additional offerings and also went beyond the local church giving.

Well, regarding uniting with other professing believers that you don't believe are following the scriptures, you just might be forced into it when we get to heaven. But perhaps, some will be quite disappointed in who God allows in and will be given the chance to leave.