Institutionalism
By - Clarence W. Fell
That They all May Be One
John 17:21
Chapter Eight
Institutionalism
“What
in the world is institutionalism?” you ask.
Institutionalism is one of those big words used mostly by
preachers. It refers to the practice of
using man-made institutions to do the work God assigned tothe church. It also includes the practice of churches
making donations to institutions.
This
is a topic that many people would rather skip, because they think it is too
complex. But, if we skip this topic, we
are not being faithful to our restoration goal.
If we really want to follow the Bible, topics such as this must receive
attention. Actually, this topic is no
more complicated than any of the previous chapters. We can easily manage this topic as we pursue
New Testament Christianity.
Our
conservative stand makes us look strict in comparison to most modern religious
groups, but our members actually enjoy much liberty. They are free to send contributions privately
to colleges, hospitals, and charity organizations. We openly acknowledge that many man-made
organizations make positive contributions to our society. We are simply keeping the institutions
separate from the church and out of the church treasury. Our goal is to follow the Bible and get to
heaven. We won’t take chances with our
eternity, and we won’t take any chances with your eternity, either.
One or the
Other
The very
essence of restoring New Testament Christianity naturally opposes modern
innovations such as institutionalism. It
is just that simple. We can restore New
Testament Christianity or be institutional, but not both. If we practice institutionalism and claim to
be restoring New Testament Christianity, we are not consistent with our
claim. In an effort to be consistent
with our claim, and to stay on target with our goals, we reject the practice of
institutionalism.
A Matter of
Authority
Institutionalism
is a symptom of a deeper problem. The
deeper problem concerns respecting authority.
The principles of authority that lead us to:
Sing
a cappella.
Observe
the Lord’s Supper each Sunday.
Practice
baptism unto the remission of sins.
Reject
the modern day tongues movement.
Speak
where the Bible speaks and be silent where the Bible is silent.
Use
Bible words in Bible ways.
Do
Bible things in Bible ways.
The same underlying principles also lead us to reject
institutionalism.
We
simply have no authority given in the Bible that authorizes a congregation to
collect money and then donate it to other organizations. We are certain that congregations may help
some people on a limited basis, but nowhere in the Scriptures do we find
congregations supporting institutions.
We do not have the right to change God’s design to suit ourselves. John warned us about making changes when he
wrote, “For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of
this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that
are written in this book; and if anyone takes away from the words of the book
of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the book of Life, from the
holy city, and from the things which are written in this book” (Rev.
22:18,19. See also Prov. 30:5,6 and Gal.
3:15).
Respecting
God’s Design
Any
change from the Bible pattern is a step down.
Man is not smart enough to improve upon God’s design. Jeremiah warned us, “O Lord, I know the
way of man is not in himself; It is not in man who walks to direct his own
steps” (Jer. 10:23). When men mix
institutions with the church, they are trying to direct their own steps. They are trying to improve upon God’s design. We must resist the temptation to make changes
in God’s design.
When
men mix institutions into the church they also show disrespect for God. They show that they think they have found a
better way than God’s way. Paul warned
us about trusting in our own wisdom, “Let no one deceive himself. If anyone among you seems to be wise in this
age, let him become a fool that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness
with God. For it is written, ‘He catches
the wise in their own craftiness’” (I Cor. 3:18,19. See also I Cor. 1:18 - 31). The question of institutionalism can not be
decided based upon what men think is best.
This question must be answered based squarely upon God’s word.
To God be
Glory in the Church
Paul
wrote, “To Him [God] be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations,
forever and ever. Amen.” (Eph. 3:21).
We think it is a shame when other organizations take anything away from
the church. We oppose institutions
doing the work of the church, taking the glory, and the church being placed in
a back seat. We oppose congregations
being looked down upon and demoted to fund-raising farms that support man-made
institutions. We realize that
institutions appreciate and thank the congregations that support them, but the
man-made institution is still positioned ahead of the church.
We
want to guard the church from any and all that would detract from her the
slightest bit. We are zealous for the
name of Christ that is to be above every name (Phil. 2:9). We believe that the church must focus on
being the church and sowing the seed, not raising funds to support other
organizations in the pursuit of their goals.
Limited
Benevolence
The
primary focus of the church is on spiritual benevolence, not physical. Most people understand and accept the
practice of limited benevolence. This is
a common practice in our society. Some
organizations focus on cancer research and benevolence needs related to
cancer. Other organizations focus on
kidney research and limit their benevolence to kidney-related needs. There are many organizations that practice
limited benevolence in our society.
Likewise, the church’s limited focus is seeking the lost and building up
members in the most holy faith.
People
do not condemn other organizations for practicing limited benevolence.
Most people praise these organizations for focusing on the limited areas
they have chosen. But, when we turn our
attention to the church and say that it has a limited focus also, suddenly
limited focus is cruel and mean spirited.
But, the moment we turn our attention back to secular organizations,
limited benevolence is once again acceptable and receives much praise.
Souls First
Various
institutions in our society have good causes and do good work, but no cause is
worthy enough to divert money from the soul saving work of the church. We do not deny colleges, hospitals, and
charity organizations the right to exist.
We do not deny the good that they do.
We do oppose taking money that should be used to seek the lost and
diverting it to other matters. The work
of sowing the seed and leading lost souls to Christ is absolutely the most
important work that a congregation can pursue.
We dare not deviate from that mission.
Christians
Working
Another
danger of Institutionalism is that it causes some people to feel relieved of
their individual duty. They contribute
to the institutions that actually do the work and conclude that they have done
their part. Some people forget that God
wants each of us to work, not just make donations to people who do the work.
Titus 2:14 teaches that we are to be, “...zealous for good works.” A Christian’s duty is not fully performed by
just providing money for someone else to work.
James taught us that, “Pure and undefiled religion before God and the
Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep
oneself unspotted from the world” (James 1:27). If a person wants to privately make a
donation to a worthy institution, that is their own business, but they must not
think that they have fulfilled all that God expects by making such donations.
Token
Contributions
Another
danger of institutionalism is that contributions made by a congregation are
sometimes merely token contributions that average less than a dollar or two per
member. Most people would be ashamed to
write a check for just a dollar and mail it to their favorite charity. But, let them combine their dollar with
several other people and they will think that they have done a great and
wonderful deed. It is not wrong to pool
our money together to help another, but we must guard against the danger of
deceiving ourselves. Tossing a couple of
dollars into a pool is a kind thing to do, but it is not a great sacrifice.
Violating I
Timothy 5:16
Paul
taught, “If any believing man or woman has widows, let them relieve them,
and do not let the church be burdened, that it may relieve those who are really
widows” (I Tim. 5:16). Another
problem with institutionalism is that it violates this teaching. Donating the church’s money to institutions donates
money to cases contrary to Paul’s instruction.
How can a congregation rightly give money to institutions that disperse
it contrary to Paul’s teaching?
A
Misappropriation of Funds
We oppose donations
to institutions because such expenditures are a misappropriation of funds. The concept of authority involved here is
simple. A congregation has been
authorized to assemble for worship, to teach the Word, and practice limited
benevolence. God has not authorized the
church to collect money and give it away to man-made institutions. When people use the Lord’s money in ways that
He has not authorized, it is a misappropriation of funds. In other words, they are stealing from
God. If such a thing were done in any
other organization it would be recognized as illegal and punished according to
the laws of our land. Tragically, many
people will learn too late in the court of God that they have been stealing
from God.
Double
Overhead
When
a church takes up the collection on Sunday, overhead expenses come out of that
contribution. When a portion of that
money is sent to an institution, overhead expenses come out of the Lord’s money
a second time. If the elders directly
manage the money themselves, double overhead is avoided. When money is sent directly to the person in
need, 100% of the money goes to the need.
In other words, institutions reduce the bang we get for our buck.
Autonomy and
Oversight
Another
problem with institutionalism is that the practice erodes the autonomy of local
congregations. Institutions send their
representatives to appeal for funds.
These representatives put pressure on congregations and persuade them to
take a certain course of action. While
congregations have their own leadership and are technically free to make their
own decisions, the elders know that if they buck the popular trend, trouble
will soon follow.
Institutions
exercise a degree of power and influence over the congregations to which they
are connected. There is also a certain
degree of peer pressure that exists among congregations and brethren. In the case of institutionalism, this peer
pressure is used to manipulate congregations to the benefit of the institutions.
The
institutions, however, are not accountable to any church or eldership. They have their own constitution, their own
bylaws, and their own rules separate from the Bible. They pursue whatever course they choose
according to their own wisdom, while being funded with the Lord’s money.
Arguments in
Defense of Institutionalism
In
any religious issue there are always opposing points of view. This is not necessarily bad. We don’t want people accepting the
restoration movement on blind faith. The
Bible encourages us to examine all teaching to make certain that what we accept
is based on a solid Biblical foundation (See Acts 17:11). In the remainder of this chapter we will look
at various arguments advanced on behalf of institutionalism.
Galatians
6:10
Paul
wrote, “Therefore, as we have opportunity, let us do good to all, especially
to those who are of the household of faith” (Gal. 6:10). This verse has been used to justify
everything that man judges to be “good.”
Few people pause to ask the important question, who defines good? Men simply labels their plans “good” and
considers their plans authorized based on Galatians 6:10. They forget that they do not have the right
to redefine Bible words in a self-serving manner. Man’s duty is to use Bible words in Bible
ways.
Paul
taught us that the Scriptures equip us “...for every good work” ( II
Tim. 3:16,17). A work is not good merely
because man has judged it to be good. A
work is only good when God says it is good.
Before we accept institutionalism as a good work, we need to first find
the Scriptures that teach us that it is good.
In the absence of proper authority, adding institutions to the church is
not good.
But They Do
Good Work
“Oh,
but look at all the good they are doing,” someone will say. We do not deny that colleges, hospitals, and
charities do good works. But, the
question of institutionalism cannot be decided based merely on the fact that
they do good things. We must first have
a solid book, chapter, and verse foundation that authorizes congregations to
add institutions to the church.
Paul
taught, “If any believing man or woman has widows, let them relieve them,
and do not let the church be burdened, that it may relieve those who are really
widows” (I Tim. 5:16). Paul makes it
clear that benevolence is to be regulated and not just given out to anyone
anywhere (see also II Thess. 3:10). Just
because men are excited and pleased with a project, that does not prove that
God agrees. Men thought the church at
Sardis was a good church doing good things, but God said it was dead (Rev.
3:1-3). The end does not justify the
means, and good intentions don’t magically make everything pleasing to
God.
The Utilities
Company Argument
Some
people argue that since the church can buy gas, water, and electricity through
local utility companies, it can also send contributions to colleges, hospitals,
or charities. This argument mixes up two
different things and thus blurs the issue.
Buying
gas, water, and electricity, is not the same as making a donation to a college
or charity. The difference is easy to
illustrate. Go to your local department
store and purchase some supplies. Did
you make a donation to the department store?
No, of course not. Anyone can
easily see that making a purchase is not the same as making a donation. Next, go back to the store and make a
donation. Don’t purchase anything, just
give them your money and leave. Do you
see the difference? Of course you
do. Making a purchase and making a
donation are not the same thing.
The
tragedy of this argument is that people are actually following these teachers who will not or cannot make
this simple distinction between purchasing and donating. There are people who will be forever lost
because they blindly followed teachers such as these into eternity (Matt.
15:14).
Individual or
Congregation
Some
people argue that if an individual member can contribute to a college,
hospital, or charity, congregations can, too.
This argument fails to consider Paul’s teaching. He taught, “If any believing man or woman
has widows, let them relieve them, and do not let the church be burdened, that
it may relieve those who are really widows” (I Tim. 5:16). Paul makes a distinction between the
individual and the church. We dare not
deny this distinction. (Also see Matthew
18:15-17 where Jesus makes a distinction between the individual and the
congregation.)
The No
Treasury Argument
Some
people argue that there is no authority for a congregation to have a treasury,
therefore it does not matter how the money is spent. Advocates of this argument maintain that the
distribution of local funds is entirely up to the discretion of the local
leadership. This argument fails to
consider Paul’s teachings. Paul taught,
“If any believing man or woman has widows, let them relieve them, and do not
let the church be burdened, that it may relieve those who are really widows”
(I Tim. 5:16). How could Paul regulate
the way churches spent money if churches did not have a treasury in the first
place? Paul clearly gives instruction
concerning how to manage the congregation’s funds. Congregations are not free to spend money in
whatever manner they think best.
Emotionalism
Some
people craft arguments that tug at our hearts, but basing a position on an emotional
appeal is a dangerous practice. Solomon
warned us, “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way
of death” (Prov. 14:12). Again, he
warns us, “He who trusts in his own heart is a fool” (Prov. 28:26). Emotions have a place in Christianity. This
we gladly admit, but emotions must be built upon a solid book, chapter, and
verse foundation. Emotions do not
authorize changes or additions to God’s pattern.
If
emotions could make the addition of institutionalism acceptable, why stop at
institutionalism? Why not stir up
emotions in favor of every issue and thus make everything an acceptable change
in Christianity? That would obviously be
an absurd practice. Just because men
feel that they are right that does not make them right. Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 7:21-23 clarifies
this point. Jesus taught, “Not
everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but
he who does the will of My Father in heaven.
Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in
Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’
And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who
practice lawlessness!” Relying upon
what feels right without a solid book, chapter, and verse foundation is a
dangerous practice (see also II John 6 and Rev. 3:1-3).
Ministering
to the Whole Man
Some
justify institutionalism by claiming it is a necessary step that leads to
further teaching opportunities. Advocates
of this argument reason that you can’t teach someone until you have fed
them. As long as someone is thinking
about their physical hunger, they won’t pay attention to their spiritual
hunger. This line of thought seems
reasonable enough until we pause to consider that Jesus let people go hungry
for three days before He decided to provide food (Matt. 15:32). He did not follow the “feed first and teach
later” philosophy. We must make a
decision, are we going to follow the wisdom of Christ or man? Who will our leader be?
But the
Elders Approve
Paul
warned us, “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel
to you than what we have preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again,
if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him
be accursed” (Gal. 1:8,9). The
elders do not have legislative power to make changes in the New Testament
pattern. Just because the elders and
members of a congregation agree to make donations to a college or charity, that
does not make it right. Man does not
have legislative power. We are regulated
by the Word of God and have been clearly warned about making or accepting any
changes (Rev. 22:18,19).
While
it is certainly commendable to follow the leadership of the elders (Heb.
13:17), we must not forget to be like the Bereans and verify the things we are
taught (Acts 17:11). Our first duty, our
first responsibility, and our accountability is to God (Acts 5:29). If we blindly follow an erring eldership, we
will not be excused in the day of judgment (Matt. 15:14).
Appealing to
Tradition
The
practice of congregations donating funds to institutions has been around for
many years. In some groups the practice
has become an accepted tradition handed down from one generation to the
next. But, we must remember that the
traditions of man do not carry authority in the court of God. Jesus warned, “And in vain they worship
Me, teaching as doctrine the commandments of men” (Matt. 15:9). If mere tradition could justify a practice,
eventually every practice imaginable would be justified if it could just hang
on long enough to become a tradition.
Arguing Over
Methods
Some
say that institutionalism is a matter of methods. They claim that the disagreement is merely
over the method a congregation uses to
accomplish its work.
Unfortunately, this argument misstates the issue. When a congregation makes a donation to a
college, the college then does its own work.
The church did not do any of its own work. If God had assigned the work of supporting
man-made institutions to the church, churches could rightfully claim that they
were doing their own work by making donations to institutions. But, God never
assigned congregations the work of supporting man-made institutions.
Donating
money to institutions is not a question of methods. The institutions are not a method that
churches use to accomplish their own work.
In institutionalism congregations merely support other institutions as
those institutions go about their own work, according to their own plans,
pursuing their own goals, under their own leadership, separate and apart from
the church.
But the Bible
Doesn’t Say that You Can’t
It is true that the New
Testament does not specifically state Thou shall not add institutional
programs to the work of the church.
But, the New Testament does specifically state
that we are not to add to or take away from the Word. The Bible is undeniably clear on this point.
Paul wrote, “Brethren, I speak in
the manner of men: Though it is only a man’s covenant, yet if it is confirmed,
no one annuls or adds to it” (Galatians 3:15).
John wrote, “For I testify to everyone
who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these
things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; and if
anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take
away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things
which are written in this book” (Rev. 22:18,19).
The absence of a specific prohibition
against institutional programs does not automatically authorize
institutions. God has told us what He
desires. Our duty is to respect His will
without assuming that He also desires other things in addition to what He
said. (See II Sam. 7:7)
Those people who insist that a specific
prohibition must be given before
something is wrong turn the Bible into an impossible monstrosity. Can you imagine how many volumes it would
take to specifically list everything that is allowed and everything that is not
allowed? Can you imagine the depth of
detail that would be required to assure that someone did not presume to find a
loophole? Fortunately, God did not
pursue such an overwhelming course. He
simply told us what He wanted and then told us not to add to or take away from
His word.
Next, consider
that if everything that is not specifically forbidden is allowable, then
Galatians 3:15 and Revelation 22:18,19 are virtually meaningless. Consider the Lord’s Supper as an
example. We observe It using unleavened
bread and grape juice. This is our
practice as taught in Matthew 26:26-30.
There is never a specific statement in the Bible that says we can’t use
something else in the Lord’s Supper.
There is not a prohibition against using cookies and soda pop or burgers
and fries in the Lord’s Supper.
According to the But It Doesn’t Say That You Can’t argument we must conclude that such changes are acceptable
because there is no verse that specifically states Thou shalt not change the
Lord’s Supper. Once this way of
thinking is accepted, the door is open to almost any change that men desire, and Revelation
22:18,19 and Galatians 3:15 mean nothing.
Most people will reject the But It Doesn’t Say That You Can’t argument
in connection with the Lord’s Supper and other changes that they don’t approve
of, but they will turn around and accept it as their authority for adding
institutional programs to the church.
Intimidation
Some
people will attempt to intimidate others into accepting institutionalism, “If
you don’t support colleges and charities, then what do you do?” they
demand. The fact is that what we are
doing is irrelevant. If we do absolutely
nothing at all, that does not prove institutionalism is right. A person does not prove himself right by
proving another person wrong. They might
both be wrong! What we need is a solid
book, chapter, and verse foundation authorizing institutionalism. Intimidation and bully tactics have no place
in a serious study of God’s word.
People
who use bully and intimidation tactics to manipulate others often do little, if
any, work themselves. These are often
the same people who toss a dollar or two into a pool with others and send their
sad little contribution off to help the needy.
They haven’t adopted an orphan, or taken in foster children, or given a
college student a place to live, or
donated their time to charity, or sat with a family in a time of trial, or held
the hand of the dying, or helped the elderly, and only rarely do they make it
to the hospital to visit the sick. But,
because they toss a dollar or two into a pool that goes to a college or
charity, they think they have the right to push other people around.
Extreme Cases
Some
people appeal to extreme cases to justify the common practice of
institutionalism. They forget that the
restoration of New Testament Christianity is not built on extreme cases, but
rather upon a solid book, chapter, and verse foundation. It is a mistake to create extreme cases and
then reason backwards from these to establish daily practice. This is often done in the baptism debate. A story is told about a man in a desert who
hears the gospel for the first time, but dies before finding water to be
baptized. The debater argues that this
man was saved without baptism, and concludes that no one needs to be
baptized. This conclusion is not based
on scripture, but rather upon a hypothetical case. Restoring New Testament Christianity requires
a book, chapter, and verse foundation, not hypothetical stories. Institutionalism must stand upon the Bible,
or be excluded from our restoration efforts.
Closing
Thoughts
Institutionalism
is a topic that many people would rather skip, but if we skip this topic, we
are not being faithful to our restoration goal.
Topics such as this must receive attention if we really want to follow
the Bible. The topic of institutionalism
can actually be simple. All we have to
remember is that restoring New Testament Christianity naturally opposes modern
innovations. It can be just that simple
if we will let it. We can restore New
Testament Christianity or be institutional, but not both. If we practice institutionalism then we fall
short of the restoration goal. We end up
practicing something that is close to the Bible, but isn’t really in the Bible.
We
believe that the church is completely capable of doing all God wants it to
do. We trust God’s design completely and
resist the temptation to change it. We
believe that if God wanted the church to function as a fund raiser for colleges
and charities, then He would have made that known.
Our
strict stand is different from most modern groups, but our members are truly
free. They are free to volunteer their
time or send contributions to colleges, hospitals, and charities that are not
contrary to Christianity. We openly
acknowledge that many man-made organizations make positive contributions to our
communities. We are simply keeping the
institutions separate from the church and out of the church treasury. Our goal is to follow the Bible and get to
heaven. We won’t take chances with our
eternity, and we won’t take any chances with your eternity, either.
YOU
ARE INVITED
Come visit with us, look us over, and ask any
questions that you have about the
Sunday
9:00 A.M. Bible Study
Sunday
Wednesday 7:00 P.M. Bible Study
If
you prefer, you may write or call, and ask us any question that
you have. Mail your questions to:
7115 West 65th Street
Little Rock Arkansas 72219-0062
E-Mail—donmcclain@sbcglobal.net
Call—(501) - 568-1062
Web-Site— http://www.w65stchurchofchrist.org/My_Homepage.html
—————————————————–
Elders Deacons Evangelist
George
Rumker Glen Gray Don
McClain
Louis
Sharp Brady
Speer
Bill
Wharton Bennie
Stephens
Karl
Vandevender
Kevin
Webb