Study of Denomintions 09/19/2010

The Church Treasury, I: Benevolence

A Study of Denominations
Cont. from last week

Argument: James 1:27 shows that we are to help orphans and widows; why can't we as a church?

Answer: The text:

Pure religion and undefiled before our God and Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.


James is very specific in this passage as to whom the burden of visiting the orphans and widows falls upon: "oneself." Since these two principles consist of "pure and undefiled religion," and one is qualified as to be done as "oneself" and the other shows no qualification, it is clear that James intends this pure and undefiled religion to be practiced by the individual.

Retort: Are you saying that the church cannot practice pure and undefiled religion?

Answer: James 1:27 is not discussing the church in any way, shape, or form. James is making no comment toward the nature of the church or its function. We learn the following from Ephesians 5:27 :

That he might present the church to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.


We see that the church is holy and blameless, thus "pure and undefiled...unstained from the world" The need for "practicing religion" as seen in James 1:27 needs not be a burden placed upon the church, and thus neither is it to be burdened with the assistance of non-saints.
Expediencies?

Argument: We give to the church so that the church can give to the poor as an expedient for us to fulfill our commands.

Answer: As discussed in Instrumental Music , an expedient is the way that one fulfills a command. Expedients are surely to be used when a command has been given, i.e. a songbook so that we know what to sing, a car to transport ourselves to assembly and back, and such things, but there is no Scriptural right to have an expedient for a command which has not been made. An expedient in the case of benevolence for a non-saint would be if a Christian financially supported an institution that assists the poor and needy (if that were a profitable way to go about assisting the poor). Involving the church constitutes an addition not sanctioned in the Scriptures.
Distinctions Between Responsibilities

Some, when discussing this issue, wish to cloud the matter under consideration by attempting to discuss orphans in general. The church has the responsibility to help anyone who is a saint no matter what he or she happens to be, a widow, a mother, a father, a "child," or an "orphan." If they have called upon the name of the Lord and have been added to His church ( Acts 22:16 ), the church is under obligation to help them in any need. The church, however, has no such responsibility to anyone who is a non-saint, be them mothers, fathers, widows, children, or orphans, for this is the responsibility of the individual Christian (as discussed above; James 1:27 , Galatians 6:10 ).
The Ends Justify the Means?

When discussing giving benevolence to non-saints, some will argue that the church can give money to non-saints in order to help convert them. They argue since some of these individuals will convert, what could be wrong with assisting them beforehand?

It is very true that we are to convert any and everyone we can ( Matthew 28:18-20 ), and that the church ought to support evangelism ( Philippians 4:15-16 ), yet does anything go when converting people? Should we do whatever we can to convert people? For instance, if a Christian would go into a bar to spread the Word and he buys a prospective Christian a drink, and the prospect later converts, does this justify the purchase of the alcohol? By no means! We are to lead others to Christ by our example ( Matthew 5:7-13 ); what kind of example do we set when we implicitly approve things which God has not? We must always strive to evangelize and help those in the lost world, but we must not do so at the expense of our own purity and holiness, as evidenced in James 1:27 .

Furthermore, to what are we converting people if we use benevolence? Are we converting people to the spiritual Kingdom of God or to a handout? Let us consider the example of John 6 and see that we need to preach the Gospel to convert people to the Gospel, and that we ought not preach food or benevolence.
The Missionary Society

Many denominations have established what are called "missionary societies," institutions established to fund the needs of missionaries throughout the world. These missionary societies generally receive funding from individual churches within the denomination or denominations and distribute the funds to the missionaries. Do the Scriptures allow for such a practice?

There is no command or example in the Scriptures of any church or churches giving to a separate institution to support missionaries. It is argued, however, that since evangelists were funded in many different ways in the Scripture, by their own work ( Acts 18:3 ), by the church they are currently working with ( 2 Corinthians 11:7-10 ), or by different churches supporting them ( Philippians 4:15-17 ), that God has established a liberty in the way that missionaries may be funded.

It would be possible to justify a group of Christians coming together to pool their resources to fund an evangelist/missionary with the argument given above, yet, as we have seen earlier, the individual and the church are different entities. The difficulty within the Scriptures concerning the establishment of the missionary society is not in how the missionaries are funded but because of the means by which they are funded. A church is required to give up its funds into the hands of a different organization which determines who shall receive the funding in the missionary society system; where is the Scriptural pattern for a liberty in this regard?

The Scriptures teach that each individual congregation of the Lord's people is an autonomous entity: it is self-governed. Each congregation is to have its own elders shepherding the flock and deacons to serve its needs. We read the following in Acts 20:28 and Titus 1:5 :

"Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you bishops, to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood."


For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge.


It may be noted here that Paul's words in Acts 20:28 are directed to the elders of the church in Ephesus, and the elders of the church in Ephesus only ( Acts 20:17 ). We have no evidence in the Scriptures that any of these churches were governed by any higher official of any kind.

Therefore, since each individual congregation is an autonomous entity, each congregation is responsible for encouraging and edifying one another and to support evangelism. There is no pattern or example in the Scriptures of churches combining their efforts into a separate institution to fund evangelism. How can a local church wield any form of control over the funds they send to the society? If their funds go to pay for the support staff of the institution, have they fulfilled the commandment to fund evangelism or have they spent the money improperly? The local congregation evidently has no control over where the money goes, and if asked cannot definitively claim that their funds were spent directly on evangelism nor can they affirm the soundness of those to whom funds were given. Thus, the "missionary society" is an institution without Scriptural foundations, and churches which fund these societies violate the Scriptural pattern of local church autonomy.
The Sponsoring Church Arrangement

There have been some, especially in some congregations of churches of Christ, who do not have missionary societies but instead fund evangelists through a "sponsoring church arrangement," where one local church supports a missionary in a given place and all other churches who desire to fund that missionary send aid to that church. Another church may support a missionary in another place, and other churches would send money to that church to help that missionary. Is this a pattern established in the Scriptures?

The idea is quite similar to the missionary society, with a local church taking over the responsibility of the society. While this system would have less bureaucracy, there is still no Scriptural support for such an arrangement. The local church would still not be directly funding the evangelist, and the pattern of the autonomy of the local church would again be violated.

It is argued by some that such an arrangement was in place with Paul and the church of Jerusalem in Acts 15:22 and Acts 16:4-5 with the churches of Antioch and Asia Minor. Since the church in Jerusalem gave a message of truth to Paul to proclaim to these churches, it is argued that this is an example of the church in Jerusalem assisting the other churches in evangelism. What do the Scriptures say?

We read the following in Acts 15:22 and Acts 16:4-5 :

Then it seemed good to the apostles and the elders, with the whole church, to choose men out of their company, and send them to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas called Barsabbas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren.


And as they went on their way through the cities, they delivered them the decrees to keep which had been ordained of the apostles and elders that were at Jerusalem. So the churches were strengthened in the faith, and increased in number daily.


It is difficult not to notice that the Apostles factor heavily in this episode; but why are the elders in Jerusalem involved? The reason is made clear in Acts 15:1 :

And certain men came down from Judaea and taught the brethren, saying, "Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved."


This matter was discussed by not only the Apostles but also the elders of the church in Jerusalem because the source of the conflict came from this area. We know from 2 Corinthians 3:1-2 that the men teaching this error would come with letters of commendation, and since they were at least formerly part of the church in Jerusalem ( Acts 15:5 ), the elders of that church stood up for the truth of the Gospel because the error originated in their own congregation.

The source of the authority of the message proclaimed by letter through Paul and the others is the approval of the Holy Spirit, understood by the apostles and the elders of the church of Jerusalem. This decision was not proclaimed by the church in Jerusalem to the churches in Asia Minor: the decision was proclaimed through Paul and the others with the approval of the other Apostles and the elders of the church in Jerusalem by the authority of the Holy Spirit.