“should we accept any human tradition in the lord’s church?” reviving the concept of autonomy...

Isaac Owusu Nsiah

“Should we accept any human tradition in the

Lord’s church?” Reviving the concept of autonomy of

the local church.

(A THEORETICAL STATEMENT)

Abstract: Human traditions have widely opened the gates for several

innovations. These innovations have eroded and altered the government of

the church and also the doctrinal foundational elements of the church. With

respect to the effects of the changing world, the lord’s church is being

handled without the full consideration of the New Testament’s doctrines. It

is very clear that the doctrines are the foundational underpinnings that hold

the church in its form. On the one hand, there are aspects of these directional

doctrines that demand the method of the (constituents of the church)

Christians. On the other hand, there are certain principles that provide (fixed

/unchanging) directional guide that are used to help steer and in the

administration of the church. But these doctrines are being tampered with,

as human traditions or ideas or directives are held in primary order and

thus these doctrines being secondary. This work brings to light the nature

and thus revival of the doctrinal concept of the autonomy of the local

congregation. The paper establishes theoretical claim and facts with

references to the scriptures that there is no revelation of an organization of

churches tied together under any kind of ecclesiastical government. As the

work explains indepthly, local congregations are independent from each

other, but not providing a shield for doctrinal error and thus can be rebuked

by other local churches if it goes wayward. There is no provision for

universal officers under Christ in the church on earth. Any form of body of

people who decides for a group of churches in the form of mass organization

is a step in the APOSTATIC direction as against the doctrines of Jesus Christ.

However this work does not reject the idea of one church providing a helping

hand to other local congregation.

Keywords: Autonomy, human tradition, doctrine, church of Christ,

apostasy.

Introduction

The doctrines of the church as provided by the apostles through Christ are

fixed and unchanging in the sense that, there were through the inspiration

of God and thus were upheld by the early Christians without any

alteration.1 The church of Christ has been in existence for several years

since AD 33 and it was Christ our lord Jesus who purchased it.2

There were dark ages in historical perspectives where the crude /core

nature of the church was lost. But the truth was restored again and thus

finally the church of Christ has gain root and strength as far as the

restoration of the lord’s church is concerned. Would we want to let the

changing world engulf the lord’s church and accept any human tradition?

The Apostle Paul in his one of the epistles to the church at Galatia warned

the church to desist from any other directives apart from the doctrines of

Christ.3

The autonomy of the local church has been misunderstood and

misconstrued, lately by the churches of Christ. Due to this there has been

gradual breed of ideas on the formation of body of government to regulate

the affairs of churches that may tie together as one under this auspices.

Wallace (1981), in his words explains that the church may be well

described as a monarchy. Other than Jesus, the absolute monarch and

head of the church who possesses all authority the New Testament

authorizes no organization for the universal church.4In the absence of any

1 2 Tim 3:16 advances that the scripture is the inspiration of god and thus should be

upheld holistically without any alteration. Acts2:42 Those who submitted to the

kingdom reign of Jesus continued in unity with the apostles by

submitting to the inspired teaching that was given by the apostles

2 Acts 20:28 explains how Paul warned that the Ephesian elders must watch out for themselves. His first exhortation was to them personally, that they remain faithful to

the Lord. They must then care for the spiritual well-being of the flock of God’s disciples.

They had been set forth as shepherds of God’s flock (1 Pt. 5:1-4), and therefore, they

must care for the sheep, knowing that the sheep

Belong to God and not to them. Jesus, not any man, had purchased the flock with His own blood (Rm 3:25; 5:9; 1 Co 6:20; 11:25; 12:28; Mt 16:15)

3In Gal 1:8, the point is for emphasis. Paul is serious about this matter. It is not that

there are angels preaching the Gospel, but if such were the case, they would be

accursed from God for preaching anything but salvation by grace, the free gift of God (See comments Act 8:26).

biblical authority for the church universal, any assumption of the

authority beyond the local congregation not constitute a government not

sanctioned by the scriptures. He explains further that God did not permit

ambitious men to wield undue influence on the church universal.

The modern denominational concept of all the Presbyterian churches(or

catholic,Episcopalian,Baptist, Methodist)by organized into a body with

elected officials overseeing the various congregations as a single unit is

not found in the bible( Willis 1993). Willis (1993) expresses in a question

form that why would God so carefully direct the local church in its

appointment of office but says nothing about officers in the universal al

church? This establishes the fact that the nature of the silence of the

scriptures on thus note pre-cludes universal church offices and officers or

in any form of mass organization with appointed leaders to decide for the

churches tied to this organization

This work is in three broad phases. The first section deals with a literature

review and conceptualization of the church autonomy and human

tradition. The second phase shines the spot light on the bibles projections

on local organizations and thus any form of government forms to oversee

the church is a step in the apostate direction. The third section elucidates

the local church organization as accepted doctrinal approach. We finally

draw conclusions from the study.

CONCEPTUALIZING “CHURCH AUTONOMY” AND HUMAN

TRADITION

(Brief theoretical framework)

The church autonomy as a concept has received several scholarly and

theologian attention. (Willis 1993; Wallace 1981; Wayne 1998).

In the words of Willis (1993), he defines the word autonomy as the quality

or condition of being self-government or any state that governs itself. He

contends that the word “autonomy” does not appear in the English

Bible .however the concept of “church autonomy” certainly does. Wayne

(1993), opines that one aspect of the New Testament church government

4 Eph 1:20-23 and Mt 28:18 signifies the unlimited measure of the power of Jesus

Christ and thus reigns over all things.

is the concept known as the concept of “congregational autonomy”. He

explains further that, the term autonomy is derived from two roots. “Auto”

means self. The second syllable reflects an anglicized form of Greek word

“Nomos”, which denotes law or rule. The word establishes the idea of self-

rule. Each local church in some sense is to be self-ruling. Wallace (1981)

identifies the church autonomy in the sense that a plurality of elders with

equal authority and responsibility in each congregation with no authority

beyond their local congregation to oversee or take decisions of the local

churches.

Within the context of this work, the church autonomy would be

conceptualized biblically as the total self –independence of the local

churches and thus no exterior body of framework of rule to make decisions

that will be binding on churches tied together under this mass

organization. The elders appointed in the various should govern the

church with Christ as their king “chairman”.5

What the autonomy of the church “is and it’s not”: constructing a nexus

between doctrine and human tradition.

The doctrines of Christ to the church have two phases and thus

comprehensive approaches. The first phase deals with the fixed and

unchanging divine law (doctrine), that are provided and thus not to be

interfered with by human directives. They are to be exercised and executed

in the way and manner given unto the church.

The second approach, relates to doctrines that have been provided but

there is no method or order of execution in the church. Due to this the

directives are left in the hands of the elders of the church to decide the

expedient method of execution of such doctrinal obligation. Wayne (1993),

5 Ibid, 1 pet 5:1

provides an example in the sense that for example, Christians have a

responsibility to meet every Lord’s Day for the purpose of worshiping God.6

We are not told, however at what time of the day to assemble or whether

the church has to purchase a facility for these meetings. These are matters

for the leadership of the local congregation to decide. No other church has

the right to dictate policy in these areas .so with respect to this approach

human directive comes in here exclusively for the elders.

Human traditions: human traditions are part and parcel of

existence.McNutt (1981) identifies that the original meaning of the word

tradition has to do with delivering something into the hands of other. In a

religious sense as he adds, would refer to delivery practices, opinions,

doctrines rites and customs to affect a course of action. We have already

identified earlier that these decisions are binding and solely remains

within the jurisdiction of the leaders of the local congregation in the area

where the doctrine do not provide a method for executions.as a matter of

biblical fact human directives on areas where the bible doctrine is fixed

and unchanging is unacceptable and thus becomes erroneous.

Mc Nutt (1981), again contends that human tradition is not determined by

its oral or written form alone, but by its original source and content. Is it

from God or men? Is it biblically correct or does it contradict the word of

God? Is it from heaven or from men? The apostle Paul praised the

Corinthians for holding fast the ordinances (traditions), which he had

delivered.7 This tradition even though was from Paul but was a divinely

inspired instruction for he says “for what I received from the lord that

6 See Acts 20:7: Here, as in 1 Corinthians 16:1,

reference is to Sunday which was the primary day on which disciples

in the 1st century regularly assembled for mutual edification

7 In 1 Cor 11:2 Paul praises the church in Corinth for holding steadfast to the

traditions. and doctrines do one should certainly not confuse Paul’s use of the word “traditions” here with the man-made religious traditions by which false religions are

constructed (see comments mk 7:1-9)

which I delivered unto you.8 Human traditions, man-made principles set

up barriers to fellowship and set aside the authority of the bible. Human

traditions introduces its own laws and restrictions. It binds which God has

loosed and losses what god has bound (Mc Nutt 1981)

Table 1

Source: established by author

The table above describes and adds to the issue that a doctrinal approach

with fixed method of execution should not be tampered with by leadership

or any other human effect. But doctrinal obligation without a clear cut

executions method are left to the elders and leaders of the church to decide

and thus to be done accordingly and in orderly manner.9

What the autonomy of the church is establishes that the autonomy of

the local church is a biblical concept which advocates with a fixed

structure and unchanging restrictions. Each church is self-governing.

Each church has elders or leaders to help run the affairs of the church.

8In 1Cor 11:23 what Paul now explains came to him by revelation of the lord (15:3; Gal

1:11, 12; Cl 3:24). 9 See 1 Cor 14:40… The Corinthian were behaving as the assemblies of the pagan

temples. It was for this reason that Paul wrote with instructions that they behave themselves during their assemblies

in order that they not be identified with the assemblies of the pagan temples

( Doctrinal phases )

Human tradition (local leadership effect)

(Yes or no )

Fixed doctrinal obligation with method of execution.

NO

Doctrinal obligation without clear cut execution.

YES

There should be no external body of mass organization to represent a

number of churches and make a collective decision. This is never found in

the bible. However churches of Christ can come together and embark on

a project such evangelism but there should not be a body of to regulate

the affairs of collective churches.

What the autonomy of the local church is not establishes that because

there is autonomy , it should provide a shield for error(see Wayne

1993).that is due irrespective of the concept of autonomy when a church

goes way wad as far as doctrines are concerned it is the responsibility of

other churches to straighten and rebuke that church. So the autonomy of

the church is not that it is immune to rebuking and also shielded for

erroneous practices.

THE BIBLE PROJECTS LOCAL ORGANIZATION: MASS OR UNIVERSAL

ORGANIZATION WITH ANY FORM OF GOVERNMENT TO OVERSEE

CHURCHES IS A STEP IN THE APOSTATIC DIRECTION.

There is no formal, earthly organization of the universal church. The

concept of the universal church is not a group of churches but all of the

saved churches in the world.10 The only officer in the universal church is

Christ as the head of the church (Willis 1993). There is no form of body of

government that over sees or make binding decisions for the churches.

Local churches are independent from each other. The authority of the

elders in a local church is limited to the “flock” God which is among you

10 see Eph 5:23

and the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers.11 Elders

have no authority to rule over anything larger than the local church.(see

Willis 1993).our lord Jesus Christ has proclaimed the local the local

organization of the church and thus the bible is silent on the issue of

any body of elders overseeing a group of churches and thus gets in the

path of apostasy if a group of men in the lords church brings this tradition

up since the doctrine precludes.

Brief historical perspectives on (apostasy): early development of body of

government over the church.

In the words of Wallace (1981), one of the first departures from the New

Testament pattern was the development of monarchical bishop. There was

mass organization of elders to oversee certain churches.one man from the

elders accepted the title of bishop (a term scripturally referring to an elder)

and was elevated above the rest. He became the chairman of the elders. “One

by one monarchical bishops were ordained until around 150 AD. It became a

general accepted practice. The position of the “bishop” continued to gain

prominence as the church evangelized their areas. The bishop with the group

of elders accepted the total oversight of the new congregation. With the

establishment of these tradition, the bishops and these organizations saw

11 In I pet 5:1The elders of the church were a group of men who had been designated as

spiritual leaders of the flock of God (See 1 Tm 3:1-7; Ti 1:7-9). They were designated by

the church to shepherd the church (At 14:23). Depending on one’s translation, in the New Testament elders are also referred to with the English word “bishops,” “shepherds,”

“pastors” see also acts 20:28

themselves as not representatives but as authorities to dictate to the churches.

This approach in the long run breaches the doctrines of Christ.

LOCAL ORGANIZATION STRUCTURE: AN ACCEPTED

DOCTRINAL APPROACH FOR THE CHURCH.

Wallace (1981)| contends that the scriptures presents gods plan for the

organization of the local church. He adds that God commands the plurality of

men in each congregation to serve a shepherds of the flock. These men are

Scripturally referred to as elders. Each local congregation should have its own

elders or leaders. In some of the epistles of Paul to the churches, he addressed

his letter to all saints in Christ Jesus that were at Philippi, with the bishops and

deacons.12Paul instruct the church to appoint elders in every city. This shows

that each church should have its own leaders or elders.13

Wallace Johnson reinforces that the elders in each locality has specific

responsibilities to teach, oversee, rule and set examples to the flock of God

under their care. The leaders in one city had no authority or responsibility in

another city. However all elders in a congregation had equal responsibilities

12 In Phil 1:1 Paul writes to the all the saints and overseers of the lords church. Since

Timothy was with Paul in Rome at the time of writing, the letter came from both Paul and Timothy (See “Writer” in intro.

To 1 Tm). Such would have only been natural since Timothy aided in both the

establishment and nurturing of the Philippian church. Evangelists who have dedicated

their lives to the preaching of the gospel are the slaves

Of Jesus. They have submitted to the necessity of preaching the gospel in order to serve

their Master (Gal 2:20). 13 Titus 1; 3) projects as Paul instruct the church to appoint elders in every city. This

shows that each church should have its own leaders or elders.

and authority in the local church. Other forms of government such as practices

by many religious denomination with synods, general assemblies, councils,

Conferences, and the like did not occur suddenly. The departure from the New

Testament pattern in organization began early in the history of the church and

has gradually evolved into the many form of organizations today. However

any deviation from the New Testament pattern must be rejected for what it is-

a deviation (see Wallace 1981).

Fig 1.Doctrinal contradiction, as there is no form of government to

oversee several churches: Apostasy

MASS/UNIVERSAL

ORGANIZATION.

(Chairman, secretary

and other and

appointed members

CHURCH

A

CHURCH

B

CHURCH C

CHURCH D

From fig 1... There is a clear indication that the formation of a body of

government is unacceptable as far as the doctrines of the church are

concerned. Due to this it becomes a form of apostasy if there is a gradual

acceptance and adoption of this practice.

Figure 2. Doctrinal structure of the local church: accepted way of

organization in the lords church

JESUS CHRIST

WIELDS POWER AND

AUTHORITY OVER

ALL THE CHURCHES

CHURCH A

ELDERS OR

LEADERS

CHURCH B

ELDERS OR

LEADERS

CHURCH D

ELDERS OR

LEADERS

CHURCH C

ELDERS OR

LEADERS

From fig 2. It can be seen that there is no need for any form of organization

and thus even not doctrinal as Christ is the head or absolute monarch. But

each local congregation has elders and leaders who oversee the church on

earth on behalf of Christ. But the autonomy does not provide shied for error

and going contrary to the doctrines, as other churches can rebuke and direct

a church’s path when going wayward.

CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSIONS

Do we have to listen the judgment of men or the voice of our lord Jesus Christ?

As Wayne Jackson contends, in the first century, when the churches operated

under the oversight of the apostles, congregations were independent. There

was no superstructure by which they were tied together. There was neither

pope, bishop nor councils to regulate the affairs of the church. It was

abandonment of this pattern that eventually gave rise to the hierarchy of the

Roman Catholic system with all of its tyrannical dominance. This work has

shown that there is no eldership which has authority over anything larger than

the local church. No outside individual has the right to intrude into the affairs

of a local church to make decisions for that church. However the notion of

autonomy does not shield the local church against rebuking and directions

when going way ward.

This work has made clear that the doctrines of Christ should be followed as it

is and thus no human tradition should be upheld in its primary status and thus

the doctrines becoming secondary. Again human traditions that go contrary to

the church doctrines should be overruled from the church as these man made

approaches will cause conflict and thus will lead the church astray and into

apostasy. Paul warned the church at Galatia to be vigilant as not to accept any

other tradition even if they are from angels except the doctrines of Christ.14

The argument remains the issue of the nature of the changing world and its

effects on the church. But would we allow the changing world change

Christianity? God says if we love him we should keep his commandment.15

One of the commandment is the local organization of the church and thus the

upholding of the autonomy of the church in that highest order. The Bible is

silent on any form of organization to oversee churches that should be tied up

and receive directives from that governing body. But makes doctrinal

provision for organization in the local church.

Jesus Christ is the absolute monarch of the church ads thus administers the

church through his doctrines as directed by the plurality of elders in the local

churches. There is no authority beyond the local church that administers or

14 In Gal 1:8, the point is for emphasis. Paul is serious about this matter. It is not that

there are angels preaching the Gospel, but if such were the case, they would be

accursed from God for preaching anything but salvation by grace, the free gift of God

(See comments Act 8:26). 15 In john 14:15The love about which Jesus speaks is the love that motivates one into

action (15:14; Gal 5:6; 1 Jn 2:3-5). “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. For this is the love of God, that we

keep His commandments”

rule over the local church. Each congregation must be autonomous and work

within the framework of the New Testament doctrines.

REFERENCES

Wallace Johnson (1981) self-governing under Christ: in distinctive features

of the church of Christ.

Wayne Jackson (1998) congregational autonomy: not a shield for error

Willis mike (1993) guardian of truth xxxvii: 18p2

McNutt J.A (1981) no tradition of man is accepted binding: in distinctive

features of the church of Christ.

“should we accept any human tradition in the lord’s church?” reviving the concept of autonomy...

Spiritual