Does the Church Need Buildings?

Historically, the church has usually met in buildings. Those buildings were temples (Acts 2:46, et al.), homes (Acts 2:46, et al.), lecture halls (Acts 19:9), and any other building they could find. During the first three centuries, while Christianity was persecuted, the building of choice for most local congregations was the house of a believer. The excavated house church at Dura Europas (241 A.D.) shows how some Christians even put baptisteries in their homes! (Yes, it was a baptistery that people could be immersed in!) The house has always been a great place for the church to use as a base of operations.

When Christianity became legal in the Roman Empire, many of the local churches began to meet in remodeled temples of the Roman gods. As time passed, the beautiful basilicas were built by local churches. The Reformation brought new structures built by disciples of the reformers. When North America was colonized, buildings appeared according to the area of the local church. If the local church was in a city, the building would reflect the look of the city. If the local church was in the country, the building would be rustic like the country.

When the Southern Baptist Convention was founded, many of the local churches that formed the convention were already established in a building. Mission work in North America was destitute during the tumultuous years from 1845 to 1881 as only 321 churches were planted with the support of the Home Mission Board.

It all changed when I. T. Tichenor became the corresponding secretary of the Home Mission Board in 1882. From 1882 to 1900, over 11,000 churches were planted! Tichenor advocated planting churches anywhere and anytime, but he also pushed for the HMB to assist the new churches in land and buildings. During his tenure, 1134 “houses of worship” were constructed for new churches and 595 existing churches received aid to update their “houses of worship.” Tichenor was given authority by the Board to buy 100 acres in Texas, which he did. With the cooperation of the two state conventions in Texas, Tichenor sent church planting missionaries into Texas, often (not always) telling them to go to an area he had purchased and begin winning people to Christ. Usually, these missionaries had three or four “mission stations” in which they won people to Christ and planted churches. When the local church had about 20 to 40 people, they began building a small structure, often assisted by a grant given by Tichenor’s Home Mission Board. The local church would then become the hub of the community. In addition to the church using the building, the building was often used as a local school, a meeting place for the political meetings, a meeting place for businesses, or a meeting place for social activities.

Although Tichenor encouraged church plants to begin anywhere, he knew church plants would struggle for permanency until they had a building of their own. In 1883, Tichenor pushed the SBC for more funds to build “houses of worship,” stating “With a house of worship, a church will soon care for its own wants; without it, the effort at permanent establishment is prolonged into years of toil. In many places more can be accomplished by money to build houses than to support Missionaries.”

Tichenor also reasoned that the SBC would eventually see a financial return from these local churches. He stated in 1884, “For in building a house of worship in a destitute section, or in stimulating the community to build, we give prominence and dignity to the cause of Christ, we contribute to the efficiency of the laborer, we insure permanency to the results and we practice a wise economy in handling the Lord’s money; for generally when an organized church gets into a house of worship it ceases to be a missionary station and becomes self-supporting, and if properly instructed, at an early day becomes a contributor to the cause of missions.”

By the time of Tichenor’s retirement in 1900, over a thousand Baptist churches built a building with the help of the Home Mission Board (just look at your own church’s history!). The same year, the SBC put together the Tichenor Memorial Building Fund to give grants and interest-free loans to new churches. This practice filtered down to the state conventions and many of our state conventions held property for many years. Nevertheless, this is not the practice of our state conventions or SBC today.

I am not saying a building is a church. I am not saying a church needs a building to be a church. I am not saying a network of house churches is not a good idea (it is actually a great idea! Nevertheless, they still meet in “buildings”). I am saying, in a free society, a church plant that is helped with purchasing land and building a building that is used for more than the activities of the church was, and still is, a great idea.

11 comments (Add your own)

1. John lopez wrote:
Right on bro come on somebody!

Mon, May 16, 2011 @ 11:41 PM

2. D.L. Frugé wrote:
The following quote really captures one of the final and necessary steps of gospel transformation in a society.
“For in building a house of worship in a destitute section, or in stimulating the community to build, we give prominence and dignity to the cause of Christ, we contribute to the efficiency of the laborer, we insure permanency to the results and we practice a wise economy in handling the Lord’s money; for generally when an organized church gets into a house of worship it ceases to be a missionary station and becomes self-supporting, and if properly instructed, at an early day becomes a contributor to the cause of missions.”

Tue, May 17, 2011 @ 8:40 AM

3. Aaron Meraz wrote:
Thanks, John. We often forget that our church plants need this type of help. Although I am thankful for the Baptist Foundations and their lending to churches, I wish we would go back to either granting or lending interest free. As Tichenor stated, a church's giving to missions would increase. I forgot to write that giving to the Home Mission Board went from about $20,000 in 1882 to over $400,000 in 1900. Giving to missions increased because the Home Mission Board increased giving back to the churches. By 1915, which was 10 years before the Cooperative Program was formed, 60% of the funds given to the Home Mission Board were given by churches that had been helped financially by the Board. That is good stewardship!

Tue, May 17, 2011 @ 5:20 PM

4. KJ wrote:
I would love to see this happen again. Groth is coming, especially in what was once the, "Bible Belt" and it would be fantastic to own properties to erect "Houses of Worship" in the areas where growth will happen. I vote, "Yes," to this idea.

Wed, May 18, 2011 @ 8:54 AM

5. Panya wrote:
Good Article Aaron.

Mon, May 23, 2011 @ 4:17 PM

6. Nathaniel Meraz wrote:
Great thoughts, Brother (and my brother) Aaron!!

Thu, May 26, 2011 @ 9:47 AM

7. Nathaniel Meraz wrote:
Great article, Aaron!

Thu, May 26, 2011 @ 9:47 AM

8. Johnnie wrote:
And house churches that have proven their stability and contribution to the sending mother church, association, and conventions should receive long-term assistance in securing land and a first-unit building.
Good article!

Thu, June 2, 2011 @ 4:37 PM

9. Richmond Goolsby wrote:
Well done. The vitality of a church in our culture (as in most) demands stability which is communicated with a permanent meeting structure. Our communities do not view a church as "legitimately established" until they have this is in place. Good research, we should remember what practices originally spread Baptist churches into every community.

Thu, June 16, 2011 @ 8:20 AM

10. vernon wrote:
Brother, what a message. I hope all of the heads of the SBC, SBCT read your blog and put it to mind to consider doing again. I know if the Way had land and a building of its own we would be more free to help missions. I Vote Yes to the Tichenor Bill of Intrest Free Loans to New Churches.

Fri, July 8, 2011 @ 3:11 PM

11. Mark Christy wrote:
Hey Aaron, I read your article and comments and I wholeheartedly agree. Church planting is a faith venture born primarily in these days by the planter. The planter takes many risks as he sets out on his tasks. While these risks will always be a part of the faith process, what if the larger community of Baptists find more ways to bear some of these risks. That will take more than just money, it will take faith.

Thu, October 13, 2011 @ 12:24 PM

Add a New Comment

Enter the code you see below:
code
 

Comment Guidelines: No HTML is allowed. Off-topic or inappropriate comments will be edited or deleted. Thanks.