Introduction

The repeated New Testament use of the term oikos (112 times) and oikia (94 times) indicates the contextualization of the epistles and gospels within this "house" environment. Historically, "household" and related terms described the foundation and context of the Christian movement.

Religiously, this movement originated in and owed its growth to conversion of entire households or of certain individuals within households. Generally speaking, cultic activities like the Eucharist took place in the house.

Economically, the household constituted the context for the sharing of resources among believers as well as with the wandering charismatics.

Socially, the household provided a practical basis and theoretical model both for Christian organization and for its preaching.(1)

While we translate the expressions oikos, oikia by terms meaningful to us, "house", "home", "household", we must be careful not to read into these words the meanings which the English words have for us. Words change with each generation and sometimes with each writer. What Paul meant by the "house church" depended on the Hellenistic culture of his time, with both its Gentile and Jewish components.

I. Hellenistic Background

l. The Household

The two words Paul uses, oikos and oikia, meant roughly the same, namely, the household with its persons and property. Classical Greek maintained some distinction between the two words: oikos brought to mind especially the idea of wealth, possessions, or a physical room, whereas oikia suggested more the relatives, servants, or even clients of a household. Both words were used for the dwelling, the family, or kin.

Paul's Greek, however, shows much more affinity with the Greek of the Septuagint [LXX]. The translators of the Septuagint needed to translate the Hebrew word bait. Bait in different contexts meant a room in a building (Esther 2:3; 7:8); the whole family, including father (Gen 50:8; 1 Sam 1:21), wife, second wife, sons, daughters (Gen 36:6), dependent relatives (Gen 13:1), servants (Gen 15:2-3), attendants (Gen 14:14), and slaves (Gen 17:13, 27); relatives who formed a group between the immediate family and the tribe (2 Sam 9:7); household possessions, including wealth, tools, slaves, and cattle (Ex 20:17; Est 8:1). Without any apparent distinction, the LXX translators chose both oikos and oikia to express the broad concept of bait. The only perceived difference between the two Greek words is the greater frequency of oikos over oikia.

Considered from either its Hellenistic or its Jewish roots, the concept of oikos is thus considerably wider than our concept of "family". Even the word "household" does not do justice to the extension of the Jewish/Hellenistic concept.

A comment by the Roman orator and poet Cicero about one's hierarchy of duties reflects his understanding of a "household". Our duties, he says, begin with one's country, then one's parents, "next come children and the whole household (domus), who look to us alone for support and can have no other protection; finally our kinsmen".(2) Besides one's immediate family, Cicero has in mind unattached relatives, slaves, freedmen, hired workers, sometimes tenants, business partners and clients.

Cicero defines the domus or household by a relationship of dependence, not kinship. In fact the family or household was constituted by the reciprocal relationships of protection and subordination. At the top of the pyramid was the paterfamilias, the family father or other "head of the house", whose power extended at times to that over the life and death of his children. At the bottom of the structure was the slave, who nevertheless could exercise considerable responsibility in his household duties. Supporting this authority was the subordination of the members of the household, who by this subordination enjoyed a sense of belonging and security not provided by any other social or political structure of the time.

Were all the members of the household expected to share the same religious practices? Although our information about this expectation is scarce, we can probably presume that all members, especially those of the smaller households, felt some pressure to share in the household cults. Yet the religious solidarity characteristic of the old agrarian society gave way under the pressures of urbanization. In imperial times, Romans became more laissez faire about the religion of their slaves. This latitude regarding religion appears in the strongly Romanized cities more than in the Greek East.(3)

2. The Jewish Household

Where we find household religiosity dominating and where we find the closest background to the Christian house church is in the Jewish household. In the Jewish world at the time of the New Testament, the family was the primary place for the transmission of the faith. The family prayed in common daily, mornings and evenings, and especially at the blessings of the mealtime.

The preeminent family feast was Passover. This feast was the high point of the year and during New Testament times was held in the homes. As Philo wrote concerning Passover, "each house at this time took on the character of the holiness of the Temple. " We still know very little about the life of the ancient Jewish household with its multiplicity of customs and its inner piety. This silence and privacy concerning the Jewish home, however, was its strongest asset. Whenever external difficulties threatened the public practice of Jewish worship, the Jewish home could assume full responsibility for the practice of religion. As long as the Jewish household maintained itself, Judaism as a religion was protected from any threat.

The writings of the Essenes discovered at Qumran have shed great light on the New Testament, providing as they do expressions and evidence for practices in striking parallel to those of the early Christians. These writings frequently use the term "house" to designate the community, much the way the Old Testament spoke of Israel as a house. The ancient Jewish writers, Josephus and Philo, however, tell of communities of Essenes throughout Palestine numbering as many as 4,000. These Essenes outside of Qumran apparently lived and assembled in private homes. Josephus refers to a "house" where they met for meals and instructions, while Philo speak of them sharing their houses. Such home-based communities would be close parallels to the Christian house churches.(4)

3. Hellenistic Private Cults and Social Associations

In New Testament times, the local church had an important parallel in the Hellenistic clubs and cults which existed in the ever widening social space between the order of the individual households and the public life of the state. These voluntary associations filled an important vacuum in Greco-Roman life. As political power was concentrated in the hands of fewer people for longer periods of time, many citizens experienced a general disenchantment with the polis ("city"). The alternative to closing oneself simply in one's oikos was to become involved in some voluntary and private organization.

Some of these associations were fundamentally cultic, others were predominantly social. Most groups formed around households and their meetings took place in private houses, but they included more than one family. They became, as it were, a community around a family.

The analogies between these Hellenistic clubs and the early church are striking. It does not appear, however, that Christian Groups consciously modeled themse1ves on these clubs. Nevertheless we should not underestimate the more or less spontaneous and diffused influence of these associations on the early Christians.(5)

4. The Jewish Synagogue

The influence of Hellenistic associations on the early Christians may have occurred through the Jewish institution that by far shows the closest parallels to the Christian ekklesia, namely, the Jewish synagogue. Recent studies have detected very specific influence of the Hellenistic associations on Jewish counterparts.

The origins of the Jewish synagogue remain obscure and are generally thought to be rooted in the Babylonian exile experience. The earliest inscriptions evidence their existence from the third century B. C. In New Testament times we have the references in the gospels to the Galilean synagogues (Mt 4:23; 9:35; Lk 4:15, etc.). Philo refers to Diaspora synagogues as "prayer houses".

In the earliest synagogues uncovered by archaeology, we have the same pattern of a Jewish community beginning with a private house, probably using that home for religious purposes, then at a particular point renovating the home to develop a special assembly area, and finally redoing the whole building to build a dedicated synagogue.(6)

1.Michael Crosby, House of Disciples (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1988) 33.

2.(De Officiis, 1, 17, 58).

3.Wayne Meeks, The First Urban Christians. The Social World of the Apostle Paul (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1983), p. 30. Vincent Branick, The House Church in the Writings of Paul (Wilmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1989) 36-38.

4.Branick, op. cit. 45-46.

5.Ibidem 46-49.

6.Ibidem 52-55.