As we noticed in the previous section, there are many who use funds from the church treasury for things other than just the works of the church – evangelism, edification, and limited benevolence. Some use money from their treasury for these works, but they do so by sending funds to another organization (either a human institution or another congregation) so that organization can carry out these spiritual works. We often refer to this practice as either institutionalism or the sponsoring church arrangement, depending on the nature of the organization to which the funds are sent. Does God authorize this in His word?
First we need to be sure we understand what exactly is being done before we can compare the practice with Scripture. Institutionalism refers to the forming or use of organizations separate from the church to carry out the works of the church. The sponsoring church arrangement has to do with one or more churches sending funds to another church that collects funds from these various churches and uses that money to do the work of the church. Much could be said about these issues; but so as to not divert too much attention away from our topic of the collection, we will briefly compare these concepts with the word of God.
Institutionalism
As we look at the work God has given the church, we find a great amount of work to do. Jesus told His disciples, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few” (Matthew 9:37). What this tells us is that there is plenty for all of us to be doing. Each local congregation must be busy doing the work it has been commissioned to do. There will never come a time as long as the earth stands when the Lord’s church has done all the work it can do.
Some look at the overwhelming amount of work to be done and try to devise a “better” way to do the works of evangelism, edification, and benevolence. One method men have created is what we refer to as institutionalism. In institutionalism, brethren form organizations separate from the church to do the work of the church. But when we look at the New Testament, we find no organization other than the church that God has approved to do these works. This is not to say that we, as individuals, cannot perform these works. Individuals can spread the gospel (Acts 8:4), edify other Christians (Hebrews 3:13), and help those in need (Galatians 6:10). In fact, we ought to do these things. But the only organization, or collectivity, we find in Scripture authorized to do these works is the local church. There is simply no authority to be found for Christians to form human organizations to do the work God gave the church to do.
As controversy has arisen in the past on the issue of institutionalism, the primary point of debate had to do with churches funding these organizations from their treasury. Again, we read of no organization in the New Testament other than the local church to do the works of the church. One of the basic rules of hermeneutics is that when God has specified something, everything else is excluded. This principle is applied in Hebrews 7:14. The Hebrew writer was arguing that Jesus could not have been a priest under the Old Law. Why? “For it is evident that our Lord was descended from Judah, a tribe with reference to which Moses spoke nothing concerning priests.” Since God specified that priests were to come from the tribe of Levi, all other tribes were excluded from this role. Likewise, God has specified the church as the organization to do the works of evangelism, edification, and benevolence. Since God has specified the church, all other organizations are excluded and therefore unauthorized.
However, it seems as though this point has been largely ignored in the institutional controversy. The primary argument used against institutionalism has to do with churches funding the institutions from their treasuries. Because of this, it seems that some in the church see this as the only thing wrong with the concept of institutionalism. Therefore, they reason that an institution is acceptable as long as it does not receive funds from churches. But the primary problem with the concept of institutionalism is that it forms an organization to do the works of evangelism, edification, and benevolence when God has specified the church as the organization to do these works.
The church in the New Testament did not use the aid or agency of a human organization to carry out its work. We see local churches doing these works among the brethren in their location (Acts 4:32-35; 5:28). When they engaged in the preaching of the gospel in other locations, they did so by supporting preachers directly (Philippians 4:15-16). When they sent aid to needy brethren, they sent it to the elders of the congregation(s) where the need existed (Acts 11:29-30). We find no organization being used by the church to carry out these works. Therefore, for a congregation to take money from its treasury to fund these unauthorized collectivities is a clear violation of the New Testament pattern.
The Sponsoring Church Arrangement
This concept refers to a practice in which one or more churches send funds from their treasury, not to a human organization, but to another church. The receiving church then assumes oversight of the funds and uses them as the elders of that congregation see fit. No human organization is employed in this arrangement, but is this arrangement Scriptural?
In the New Testament, local congregations were autonomous. That means they were self-governing. There was no organizational structure to the universal church. Jesus is the head of the universal church (Ephesians 1:22-23). Local congregations were designed to be overseen by a plurality of elders (Acts 14:23; 20:28; Philippians 1:1; Titus 1:5). These elders were to “shepherd the flock of God among [them]” (1 Peter 5:2). Elders were to oversee the congregation where they were, but they had no jurisdiction over any other congregation.
The way the sponsoring church arrangement works is that elders of various congregations surrender their oversight to another group of elders in another location. Elders are to submit to Christ (1 Peter 5:4), not other elders. This is different from what was done in Acts 11:29-30. Here the Antioch church sent funds to Judea to meet a specific benevolent need. The Judean elders simply distributed the money. They were not collecting money in order to fund some great evangelistic undertaking which they would be unable to support on their own. For evangelism, churches sent money to preachers (2 Corinthians 11:8), not other churches. With the sponsoring church arrangement, one church sends funds to another. The receiving church then decides how the contributing church’s money is spent. The contributing church is now subordinate to the receiving church. This creates a hierarchy in the Lord’s church that should not exist.
The problem with both of these – institutionalism and the sponsoring church arrangement – is the apparent disrespect for the local church. Is there work to be done? Of course. There always will be. But God has ordained that this work would be done by local, autonomous congregations. We should restrict ourselves to God’s plan and not resort to human institutions and sponsoring churches to do the work God has given the local church to do.
Now Concerning the Collection | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
