Institutionalism - What is it all about? - Sermons

Sermons

Institutionalism - What is it all about?

Lynn Huggins
03/02/25 - Sunday AM Worship

Institutionalism

What is it All About, And Are These Issues Significant?

Introduction: In the 1950s and 1960s churches were dividing over issues that effected the work and organization of the church. We have called these issues “Institutionalism.” This division effected families and friendships. Preachers were fired and meetings were cancelled because a preacher took a different position than the church he was to preach for. I think there were mistakes that were made on both sides in how brethren dealt with these issues, but I want to ask the question, were these issues significant? Was it important for brethren to discuss and debate these issues?

A new generation has arisen, and many in this new generation, even among those we call conservative or non-institutional churches, have decided that these issues are not all that significant, that this division was much to do about nothing. Some have suggested that it was about money. Some have suggested that it was an outgrowth of jealousy on the part certain key figures because they were not allowed to do this or that. Therefore, they have concluded that these issues are not significant, they are not of any importance, and that leads them to the conclusion that we can worship and work with any church of Christ regardless of what they may teach and practice in these areas.

In this lesson I am going to raise three questions, and discuss these questions, and then ask you if you think these issues are significant or not.

I. Should Oversight of the Work of a Local Church be Provided by the Elders of that Local Church,

OR by an Institutional Board?

A. What began to happen was the formation of institutional boards. There would be, maybe, two

Christians from this church and one from another church and three from another, and so on, and

these men would form a board of directors. And this institutional board would serve as an

overseer of, maybe a school, or a college, or an orphan home, or an old folks home, etc. The

board would oversee the work done, and churches would send their money to fund the work.

But, the oversight of the work was done by the institutional board.

B. What you basically had was an institutional board providing oversight of the work of churches of

Christ.

1. And so here is a church where some of its work was under the oversight of the elders of that

church, and other parts of that church’s work was under the oversight of an institutional

board.

2. Let me ask you, do you read anywhere in scripture about an institutional board providing

oversight of the work of local churches? Is this a significant issue?

C. What do we read in scripture?

1. The Lord ordained that each local church be organized with a plurality of elders.

Acts 14:23; Titus 1:5

2. These elders were also called “bishops” or “overseers.” Acts 20:17, 28

a. Who were the overseers of the local churches? The elders of the churches.

b. The elders had the responsibility to oversee the work of the local church.

c. Do we read in Scripture of disciples appointing an institutional board to oversee the work of

local churches? No!

D. But today we find institutional boards providing oversight for the work of churches of Christ that

we read nothing about in the scriptures. Is that significant? Is it something we need to be

concerned about?

E. One argument that was made is that the institutional board was just a METHOD used by the church

to do its work. Someone says, “The Lord didn’t tell us how to help the orphans, or how to help

the elderly, and the institutional home is just a method in doing what the Lord said do.”

1. But we're not talking about methods, we're talking about OVERSIGHT. The methods are

providing housing, food, medical care, etc. for those in need. The institutional board is not a

method, but the ones who oversee the methods. After the money gets to the board of directors,

they have to still determine what methods to use in order to take care of the needy. So, it's not

a matter of HOW, but a matter of WHO. It is a matter of whether the how is to be done under

the oversight of the elders, or whether the how is to be done under the oversight of the board

of directors.

2. God did not give the oversight to an institutional board, but to the elders of the church.

F. IS THIS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE?

II. Should the Elders of One Church Elevate Themselves to Become Overseers of the Work of Many

Churches of Christ, OR Should the Elders of Each Church Limit Themselves to the Oversight of

The Work of That Church?

A. Examples:

1. At the conclusion of WWII there was a great emphasis on evangelizing, and especially

evangelizing those nations that had been defeated in WWII. The elders of the Broadway

church in Lubbock, Texas, said to the churches, send us your money and the elders of the

Broadway church in Lubbock will take on the evangelizing of Germany.

a. Here are many churches working to evangelize Germany, but all the work being done is

under the oversight of one eldership.

2. The Union Avenue church in Memphis, Tennessee, said to the churches send us your money

and the elders of the Union Avenue church will see to the evangelizing of Japan.

3. Later the elders of the Highland church in Abilene, Texas, decided to oversee the national radio

and TV program called “The Herald of Truth.”

B. What we have is one eldership providing oversight for the work of many churches of Christ.

Is this significant? Is it of any importance that one eldership would take on the oversight of many

churches?

C. What do we read in scripture?

1. The elders were instructed to oversee and shepherd ONLY that church of which they were a

part. 1 Peter 5:1-3; Acts 20:28

2. Do not these passages limit the oversight of the elders of a local church?

3. The elders of the New Madrid church have oversight of that church and of the work of that

church, They have no oversight of anything beyond that church and the work of that church.

D. Someone raised an interesting question: If some of the evangelism of some of the churches can be

done under one eldership, why could not all the evangelism of all the churches be done under just

one eldership?

E. IS THIS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE?

III. Should Local Churches Limit Their Activities to Those Authorized by the Scriptures, OR are

they Free to Engage in Any Activity that They Think Will be Good to Do?

A. Many churches today are spending millions of dollars on dining areas, kitchens, gymnasiums,

etc. to provide opportunities for people to eat together, socialize, play games, so that they can

have fun together. These are activities that are purposed, planned and financially provided for by

the local church.

1. Where in the Scriptures is the passage that provides authority for a local church to expend

money for such activities?

B. One of the arguments that was made to justify the church support of recreation is that “whatever

the individual Christian may do the local church may do.” The view is “since the church is people

(Christians), when the people (Christians) act the church is acting. And since there is authority for

the Christian to engage in social and recreational activities (Mark 6:31-32; 1 Tim. 4:8), there is

then authority for the local church to provide for social and recreational activities.”

1. The problem with this argument is that the Scriptures make it clear that there is a distinction

between what the local church does and what the individual Christian does. Consider the

following passages.

2. Matt. 18:15-17

a. When the two or three go to the brother who has sinned to gain the brother, is it the church

going? No. The church is not involved until you go and tell it to the church.

b. Notice, there is a distinction between the efforts of two or three Christians, and the efforts

made by the church.

3. Acts 4:35,37; 5:4

a. After Ananias and Sapphira sold the possession, the money belonged to them and was under

their control (v. 4).

b. After they laid a portion of the money at the apostles’ feet, it was no longer theirs. It was

now a part of the work of that local church.

c. If Ananias had taken his money and bought a donkey with it, it could not be said the church

bought a donkey. But when the money was laid at the apostles’ feet into the collection

of funds of the church, and when it was used to help the needy saints, it was the local

church working.

Notice, there is a difference between an individual’s possessions and what he does with

those possessions, and the local church’s possessions and what it does with those

possessions.

4. 1 Tim. 5:16

a. When an individual Christian has a widowed mother who is in need, who is to take care of

her? The individual Christian is to take care of her, and Paul makes it clear, the church is

not to be burdened.

b. Notice, the individual Christian acting is not the church acting.

5. Since there is a distinction between what the local church may do and what the individual

Christian may do, we cannot find authority for what the local church may do by finding

authority for what the individual Christian may do. We find authority for what the local

church may do by looking at the instructions given in Scripture concerning the local church’s

work.

C. From scripture we know what the work of a local church is.

1. Evangelism (Preaching the gospel) – 1 Tim. 3:15; Phil. 1:5; 4:15-16

2. Edification (building up, strengthening the church) – Eph. 4:11-16; 1 Cor. 14:5,12,26

3. Worship (worshiping God together) – Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 14:26

4. Benevolence (relieve needy saints) – Acts 4:34-35; 6:1-6; 1 Tim. 5:16; 1 Cor. 16:1-5;

Rom. 15:25-26

D. We never read in scripture of local churches engaging in or supporting social and recreational

activities. Is this significant? Is this an issue we need to be concerned about?

Conclusion: Is the idea of a board of directors providing oversight for the work of churches of Christ rather than the elders of each local church providing that oversight a significant issue??

Is one eldership overseeing the work of many churches of Christ instead of limiting themselves to the oversight of the work of the church of which they are a part a significant issue??

Is churches spending lots of dollars out of its treasury to provide social and recreational activities for its members and for people of the community a significant issue??

If these are significant issues, then this church must take its stand on the truth, and against those practices that have been introduced by men for which there is no authority.

And if these are significant issues, then when you one day may leave here and move to another place, make sure you identify with a church that is practicing those things that are authorized by the Scriptures.