..
Local Church Autonomy and Exposing Error
When speaking of the church, we refer to it in either the local or universal
sense. From looking at the biblical record, we find that local churches were
organized to be independent from each other (1 Peter 5:1-3), answering only to
Jesus, the Head of the church (Ephesians 1:22-23). In passages where the
universal church is under discussion (Ephesians 5:23-27), scripture is silent
concerning any formal organization. The Lord’s church has been organized without
earthly headquarters and bureaucracies. Jesus is the head of the church and
elders in local congregations answer directly to Him.
While “autonomy” is not mentioned in either testament, the principle is
understood. Autonomy is defined as the power or right of self-government. In
writing on the concept of autonomy Robert L. McDonald has written: “when the
word autonomy is used with reference to the church of our Lord, it should be
understood that each church has the divine right to govern itself.” In the New
Testament we find:
Autonomous congregations supporting the preaching of the gospel. Philippi,
(Philippians 4:15-18), Corinth (2 Corinthians 11:8), and Jerusalem (Acts 11:22)
are good examples.
Autonomous congregations providing benevolence for its needy. The Jerusalem
church is an example. See Acts 2 and 4.
Autonomous congregations selecting their own elders, deacons, servants, and
messengers. For example, in Acts 14:23 Luke says they appointed elders in every
church. Epaphroditus was a servant of the church in Philippi ministering to
Paul. (Philippians 2:25-30)
We may properly conclude that each local church did its own work, under the
oversight of local elders, without outside interference or control.
Over the last decade and a half, there has been much written on the subject of
autonomy and exposing error. Some believe that since congregations are
autonomous, the only criticism they receive should be from members within.
Others maintain that preachers should have full reign in exposing error
whereever and whenever they see it. Can preachers expose error in congregations
in which they are not a member? Within scripture, we find Paul warning the
Colossians of false teachers in general (Colossians 2:4, 8). We know he was not
a member of the church of Colosse when writing these words. We also observe Paul
rebuking the Galatians for allowing Judaizing teachers to advance their error
within the congregations of Galatia, even though not a member in any of these
congregations (Galatians 1:6-9; 5:4). The conduct of the false teachers was well
documented and they had publicly slandered the motives, character, and teaching
of Paul. He had the right to directly respond to their charges, and did so
effectively. Those who teach publicly may expect to be criticized publicly if
their teaching does not align itself with truth.
These passages prove that church autonomy is not violated by teaching the truth
whenever and whereever the opportunity presents itself. Truth should not be
harnessed. But, while preachers have the right to expose error, it does not give
them the right to make blanket assumptions and accusations, judging motives and
creating suspicion and fear about brethren they do not know. I recently read
about an article where a preacher referred to “churches of Christ” that decided
to abolish the evening service. In his writing, the preacher asked what reason
would justify such a decision? And by the usage of quotation marks around
“churches of Christ” he questioned the faithfulness of churches who made that
decision. He then concluded his remarks with the short sentence, Brethren, we
are drifting. Nevermind the fact that each local, independent, autonomous
congregation can be presented with unique reasons and circumstances for
determining the number of times they meet on the Lord’s Day. (A good example
would be a congregation in a remote area where brethren are forced to drive many
miles to worship.) Meeting more than once on Sunday is a matter of judgment.
And, the congregation who decided to meet only once on the Lord’s day should not
be forced to justify to the entire brotherhood as to the reasons behind their
decision. Remember, we are autonomous!
Preaching the truth does not excuse a person from common courtesy. Jesus said,
So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is
the Law and the Prophets. (Matthew 7:12 ESV). Later Jesus would teach that
brotherly love is an identifying mark of the Christian. A new commandment I give
to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to
love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you
have love for one another (John 13:34-35 ESV). Paul wrote that we should let our
love be genuine and to love one another with brotherly affection. Outdo one
another in showing honor (Romans 12:9-10 ESV). If one reads something, or hears
someone speculating about another preacher or congregation do not Christian
principles teach that we assume the best and not the worst out of our brethren?
Is that not the honorable thing to do? Do not Christian principles teach that we
attempt communication with the other party before we address an issue publicly?
There can always be misunderstandings. Things may not be as they seem. But yet
in case after case we hear of those who launch out in accusing others of error,
when no direct communication has been made to find out otherwise. When godly
principles are ignored and accusations are made it amounts to little more than
evil suspicions (1 Timothy 6:4). Having evil suspicions involves the impugning
of motives. This person wants nothing good to come out of the other person, and
only expects and hopes for the worst. In his comments on this verse Hendrickson
says, all looks yellow to the jaundiced eye. In this case, brethren are turned
into adversaries and every action is suspect. It is imagined that there is
something behind every move of the person and/or congregation. Such an attitude
is dangerous because it is contagious. This is why it is forthrightly condemned.
When motives and intentions are judged without investigation, reputations of
good brethren and churches are damaged. These attitudes may be more prevalent
than we’d like to admit. We must always apply Romans 12:9-10 in our attitude.
How can we correct the problem? Here are four simple suggestions:
1. Open up the lines of communication. Are there
not principles we can apply from Matthew 18:15-17? Giving the benefit of the
doubt involves talking about the situation and not assuming anything. When these
situations arise we must remember we are working with Christians! They are
brethren!
2. Once communication has taken place, accept what they
say. Our word is to be our bond (Matthew 5:37). If others are relating
false information – tell the truth and exhort them to correct their story. It is
not our place to judge motives! (Matthew 7:1-2) Judgment can be made on deeds
and attitudes expressed (John 7:24).
3. We must learn to keep our mouths shut. Know
this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak,
slow to anger (James 1:19 ESV). The temptation to talk negatively about someone
else can be great. It is easier to be negative than positive. And yes, it can
take effort to see positive, but it is absolutely necessary if we wish to
glorify God. The last thing we need to do is to be the talebearer of something
that is fabricated, exaggerated, or embellished.
4. Put forgiveness into action. Let all bitterness
and wrath and anger and clamor and slander be put away from you, along with all
malice. Be kind to one another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, as God in
Christ forgave you. (Ephesians 4:31-32 ESV.) I am convinced that this passage is
not practiced as much as it should, and it is to our detriment. Imagine how much
more vibrant, joyful, and unified the church would be if we fully embraced and
practiced what is contained in these verses.
We are reaching a critical point within the church today. Great damage is being
done, young Christians are being discouraged, and souls are in danger. We need
to take the microscope off of each other and once again turn our focus onto the
lost. We must slow down and stand down on the desire to ramp up the suspicion
about good men and congregations who work in their respective areas. We need to
once again renew our commitment to work together with one another when
opportunities present themselves. We be brethren!
By Matthew Allen
From Expository Files 12.9; September, 2005
