Questions About The Missionary Society

Clarified

By Carl O. Cooper  

            The debate within the church of Christ over an organized entity to collect funds and to oversee mission work has now lingered on for over 100 years.

            Some very well respected preachers in the church have stood against the formation of a system such as this. However, one such famous preacher who was perhaps one of the most outspoken in favor of the Missionary Society was Alexander Campbell. Campbell wrote many articles in favor of establishing the Missionary Society and at one time he served as president. On the other side of the fence were men like David Lipscomb and Tolbert Fanning and others who felt that there was no authorization given in the Bible for any outside organization to do the work of the church; Nor was there any authorization given to establish any other church offices to take the place of local elders in local congregations.

            It needs to be said and understood that there is more involved in authorizing a Missionary Society than only establishing an unauthorized entity that is formed to do the work of the church. The objection also includes the question of how does the church collect and oversee and distribute money and authority in a project where church cooperation is considered. How do churches cooperate and oversee funds for missionaries and for that matter, benevolence work? Many of those who objected to forming a Missionary Society also objected to any local church collecting funds for a multi-church project that required the elders of one local church to oversee and distribute funds that were collected from many separate congregations. David Lipscomb wrote many articles in the Gospel Advocate objecting to a local church collecting and distributing funds from other congregations other than their own. His view was that God gave no instructions for one congregation to abdicate authority to another congregation to do the work of the local church. Today, 100 years later, this system is common place in church co-operation everywhere.

            But here is my take on this situation of church co-operation and Missionary Societies.

            A few years ago I encountered, while on a mission trip to Guyana, South America, a group who called themselves “The Guyana Church of Christ Board of Trustees”. They sent me a letter and they said they wanted to be involved in selection or rejecting an American Missionary who I knew. I thought it was unbelievable that there was such an organization that did actually exist in Guyana. But it did exist. I took issue with them as a board and told them that there was no such office in the church of Christ. They told me that the Government in Guyana required them to exist and to be the spokesman for all the churches of Christ in Guyana. As I questioned them and their authority to make decisions for the church they tried to tell me that they understood that they had no authority to exist and they denied making decisions for local churches in Guyana. However, as time went on I discovered that local congregations were taking their problems and disputes to “The Board of Trustees” for them to settle disputes among the members. I knew that would happen as soon as I heard of their existence.

            Here is my reasoning on church co-operation and entities such as a missionary Society and a Board of Trustees.

            There are two ways the church of Christ is presented in the New Testament. There is reference to individual local congregations such as the church in Corinth or the church in Philippi. And these local churches are governed by the rulers (or Sheppard’s) of each congregation. Each congregation is self governing and autonomous and there is no higher office for the church on earth higher than the elders of each local congregation. And in addition to this way of describing the church, it is sometimes referred to as “the church universal”. This reference includes all the congregations of the church worldwide. In this case the only head of the church in this category is Jesus Christ.

            There is no Bible authorization, what-so-ever, that would describe or allow another entity to be formed by man that God did not design. No institution can be designed by man that would claim to do the work of the church God designed. This includes a missionary society, a benevolence society, or a board of trustees in order to make decisions in place of local elders in local churches. These entities are not described or authorized anywhere in the Bible.

            We do have an example of church co-operation in the Bible about collecting money to be sent to the poor Saints in Jerusalem. Paul gave instruction for a local congregation to collect funds on the first day of every week so that when he came to them he would either take the money himself or he would designate another person to take it to those in need.

            To me, this seems to justify the process of the elders of a local church to collect and oversee funds that could be used for special projects. These funds could be collected by contributions from other churches or individuals and distributed according to the oversight of the elders of the local congregation.

            I do not deny that there are some congregations of the church of Christ who disagree with many forms of church co-operation. These call themselves “non-institutional” churches of Christ. My explanation does not attempt to define their doctrine at this point.

Carl O. Cooper