"Human Institutions, an Unimportant Issue?"
In the forties, fifties,
and even into the sixties, churches of Christ were
battling the issue known as "institutionalism." This issue pertained, at
first, to churches sending monies (from their treasuries) to various human
institutions such as orphanages and homes for widows and even later,
building and maintaining such institutions. Many verses were ignored and
slaughtered in the process, verses such as James 1: 27, which clearly
show visiting the orphans is an individual responsibility, not the work of the
church, and I Timothy 5 that teaches the primary responsibility of providing
for parents and grandparents belongs to the children and grandchildren,
not the local church (see addendum 1). The list
of supported institutions soon grew to include
colleges and missionary societies. If churches could support and build
orphanages, why not colleges, they reasoned.
Some who stood opposed to
such institutionalism took the position that if
members wanted to privately support and even build these institutions, this was
their choice and there would be no opposition offered (addendum 2).
Hence, the view that a human institution such as a missionary society may
preach the gospel, just as long as monies from churches were not used was
fostered and became the neo-institutionalism among us today.
In my life, there have been
two periods, based on my observation as an amateur
historian, in which those who believe in the institution preaching the gospel
system has plainly emerged, in the seventies and in this century.
Some among us say, "Why all the fuss, this is a non-issue." I
contend that the private support of institutions such
as the Guardian of Truth Foundation to preach
the gospel through its organizational structure and under its board of
directors, president and with its treasury, is a violation of basic Bible
authority (see addendum 3). I say this because as far as organization and
entity structure is concerned, we only read about the local church under
its elders and by its treasury collectively preaching the gospel (cp.
Acts 13: 2f.). Consider what I believe to be a parallel in logic and Bible
authority:
God has stipulated that vocal
music be used in praising Him (Eph. 5: 19). When God has specified, man has no
choice if man is to please God (cp. Heb. 7: 14). God has stipulated that
as far as entity function is concerned, the local church is to preach the gospel
(cp. I Tim. 3: 15). When God has stated what and
how the gospel is to be presented, man has no choice. To
thus build human foundations in and through which to collectively preach
the gospel is a basic violation of Bible authority. If we can thus effect
this violation, why not commit and practice other
violations, disregarding what the scriptures teach in
other areas as well? Some foundation promoters have
even told me, "Don, we believe our foundation can do a better job of
preaching the gospel than local churches are doing!" These
entities, moreover, functioning as aberrant local
churches, have been a perpetual source of politics,
cliques, and divisions among us, saying nothing of the fact that there is no
authority for their existence (performing as local churches).
In one debate that I had on
the privately supported missionary society issue, I asked the following question
of my disputant and he honestly answered it: