House church & finances

Maintaining churchianity costs big money. Most of that goes into buildings, equipment and pastors' salaries. The good thing about house church is that it's very cost-effective and you can invest substantial amounts in ministry among the poor and pioneer missions. Like a house church network in the States that releases one million dollar a year (yes, you read that right: ONE MILLION), and not by selling pixels. More here.

Comments

[_dave_]

I read the story. It's just amazing. That will give me some hope, that not only the the "expression of church" is shifting. Even parts of the sceleton (financial issues f.e.) will get a new form. There are some, who are not only talking about, they are doing it :-)

[Steve Bufton]

They don't release one million dollars each year; that's their total income. They've donated around $1 million over a period of 13 years.

[Marc]

Really... that's a bit disappointing then. That's only 80,000 a year. They could do much better.

[Uwe Rosenkranz]

Nice Theory!
Paul worked hard in his Job- for 3 Years.
Germany Governement gives a 3-year-gift (ICH-AG). I started in 2005.
This works, building up a home cell group in Your own home and growing as House Church. Now I want to spread the idea.
Since 1992 we finance with 10% LOGOS MISSION INDIA, last year we supported a van and the publishing of 10 books. Now we work out the writing of 2 other books.
This works in practice!
God´s silver revolution keeps on running.

[_dave_]

I would agree. 80'000 is not impossible, but still a good piece. Steve, do you know, how many home-churches they have in their network?

[Marc van der Woude]

The article says: "Our mission was to be a 1,000 member church meeting in 50-80 homes with a $1,000,000 budget with 80% going to benevolence and missions (local and foreign)." My interpretation would be that this HC network has 1,000 believers involved. Then one million a year would be 1,000 USD per believer per year, and 80,000 a year would be only 80 USD per believer per year. That's why I said: "In that case they could do much better." But perhaps Steve can clarify whether this network really has 1,000 believers involved or whether this is their growth target.

[Steve Bufton]

I don't know the network myself. However, John White mentioned this in a recent report: "Over the last 13 years, that network of house churches (which currently includes 6 churches) has contributed approximately one million dollars to benevolence and missions."

So, their 1,000 members in 50-80 churches and a budget of $1m is quite a way off. (They are in Texas, though, so those house churches could be much bigger than normal :-) ). Given those figures, $1 million over 13 years is quite impressive: that's an average of around $75,000 p.a.. That's around $1,000 per church and month. Assuming 4-6 families per church, that's around $200 per family and month. I suppose they didn't start with 6 churches, so their giving is certainly higher. If we assume linear growth from 1 to 6 churches over 13 years, each church would have had to give around $23,000 per year, or $350 per family and month. If we assume exponential growth, the big annual donations come later, so each church would have to donate $31,000 per year, or around $500 per family and month. That's significantly more impressive than $80 per year!
(Those growth and membership figures are only plausible guesses, but give some impression of the scale of their giving. Don't quote these figures as facts, though.)

[Uwe Rosenkranz]

To my mind You saddle the horse from the back.
Don´t make figures on how much each one may have given or should give by linear or progressive schedules.
Just ask,what does the house church give to the people envolved with. (The word of God only, or materialized charismatic ministries?) Then you can imagine, how much love gifts come back. Then reassume the goal "what I´ve got by grace, I will give by grace.
This rule works significant.