Hello brother Sharp, Howard Justice here:

I just read the article by brother Ronnie Milliner on "Does Acts 6 Authorize Church Committees?" While I share brother Milliner's concern regarding the use of committees to rule congregational activities in a congregation where no men qualify as elders, I believe that some form of joint participation is necessary to expedite matters of relevance and importance within the embryonic congregations. And, I believe that whatever method they use, as long as it does not violate scriptural principles, is proper and right (1 Cor 14:40).

Further, I suggest that the title of the argument is a straw man argument I personally know of no one who takes such a stand in this matter. I certainly don't take that approach in this regard.

As with brother H.E. Philips, brother Milliner seems to "throw out the baby with the bath water" when he cites that "The New Testament church can and did perform its full mission without 'committees', and it can do so now. All such are innovations in the local organization of the church" (p. 10)." His proof is somewhat lacking. Frankly, we do not know exactly how the embryonic congregations of the New Testament actually made the proper decisions for their continued growth and work. Are we to assume that such an assembly never appointed men to investigate certain matters that affected them? I believe that brother Milliner neglects teh definition of the word "committee."

Webster defines "committee" as:
"1 archaic: a person to whom a charge or trust is committed
2a: a body of persons delegated to consider, investigate, take action on or report on some matter; especially : a group of fellow legislators chosen by a legislative body to give consideration to legislative matters
2b: a self-constituted organization for the promotion of a common object"

Allow me to say, at the outset, that the preferred and scripturally taught system of oversight and limited authority in any local church is that the curch decisions be made by the elders and with the approval of the whole congregation (Acts 15:22). But, reality tells us that there is a period of time when any embryonic assembly will lack men with the proper qualifications to become elders. Does brother Milliner propose that no action at all be taken in any matter because they lack qualified elders? I hope not.

If one takes brother Milliner's apparent position that committees within all congregations are unauthorized and are therefore unlawful, then the brethren cannot select (and thereby appoint) any man or group of men to "consider, investigate or report on any matter" before the congregation.

While I understand and do agree with brother Milliner that there should never be any authority vested in such beyond their limited and defined mission, I see no violation of authority (implied or otherwise) in assigning duties to certain qualified men to fulfill a responsibility to the local brethren.

And, if all such man made innovations are unscriptural, then would it not equally be unscriptural:

1. to abide by any system of order such as "Robert's Rules of Order" (1 Cor 14:40)? What Biblical system must we employ?

2. to have what we commonly call "business meetings" other than what Paul specifically and clearly defined in 1 Cor 5 and 6? Where is the pattern?

3. to appoint a man or a group of men to investigate or explore the ramifications of any matter before the church?

Thus, I am of the opinion that if one maintains that there is no authority for any committee in the business of any congregation (especially those embryonic or newly formed ones), then there is no authority for our present day "business meetings". I believe that God has given brethren the right and responsibility to manage the affairs in an "honest and arranged fashion" that must not violate any applicable scriptural teaching or established principle (1 Cor 14:40).

Note that brother Milliner cites brother Wallace when he quotes him:
"Brother Foy E. Wallace, Jr. wrote in the December, 1938 issue of The Bible Banner, "All organizations larger or smaller than the local church, whether Sunday School, Missionary Society, Ladies Aid, Young People's Meetings, Inter-Church Committees and Boards, or What-Have-You, are not only unnecessary but unscriptural." (emphasis mine, hj)

Brother Wallace did not say that Bible classes were unscriptural but that the denominational concept of an organized "school" with its systematically authorized appointment of classes and teachers is wrong. As far as I know, brother Wallace was not an "anti Bible class" brother but spoke out against the denominational concept or organization such as their "Sunday School, Missionary Society, et al."

Note also that brother H.E. Philips is quoted: "Brother H.E. Philips in his classical work, Scriptural Elders and Deacons, affirmed, 'The New Testament church can and did perform its full mission without 'committees', and it can do so now. All such are innovations in the local organization of the church" (p. 10)."

Were not Barsabas and Silas appointed to go with Paul and his entourage to see that this letter was delivered and read at Antioch (Acts 15:22)? Were they not an "ad hoc committee" that was assigned a specific duty? I say that they were and that brother H.E. Philips was wrong when he said:
"The New Testament church can and did perform its full mission without 'committees,' and it can do so now." He knew not whereof he spoke.

in Him:
Howard Justice
witht he saints at the Taylor church of Christ
Dothan, Ala. 36305

My Answer

Dear Brother Justice,
Thanks for your lively but reasonable response to Brother Milliner's article. Yes, I think his article could be construed as opposition to all committees in congregations. I took it as opposition to rule by committees. However, I will forward your response to brother Milliner for his consideration. I will include with it a question I received from a preacher in Tanzania and the answer I gave in the April 30 "Mediate on These Things." Would you be open to having your material and a response from Brother Milliner in the July issue of "Meditate on These Things"?
Brotherly,
Keith Sharp

Question

Dear Keith,
Thank you for let me ask you questions about the bible, by now ther eis one thing I failed to understand, that is committees in the church, such as evangelism committee, benevolence committee and etc. for me it does not sound biblical, what do you think about it?
love in him,
Timothy

Answer

Dear Timothy,

Pleaes forgive me for being slow in replying. I have been traveling.

The scripturalness of committees in the local church depends on the authority they exercise.

Elders are to rule the local church (1 Timothy 5:17; 1 Peter 5:1-4). In the absence of men qualified to be elders, the men of the local church should rule (1 Corinthians 11:3; 1 Timothy 2:12). Deference in decision-making should be given to men who are mature in the faith (1 Peter 5:5), but they cannot act as elders unless they are qualified for the office, have been selected, and have been appointed (1 Timothy 3:2-7; Titus 1:5-9; Acts 6:1-6; 14:23). No committee has the right to usurp the authority to make decisions for the church.

However, all the members of the church are to be involved in its work (Romans 12:4-8; 1 Corinthians 12:14-27). God approves of His people functioning in an orderly manner (1 Corinthians 14:33,40). Thus, it is scriptural and helpful for the church to be organized under scriptural leadership for each member to be involved in its work in an organized way.

The best example of the proper application of these principles I have seen was the Pruett & Lobit Church of Christ in Baytown, Texas, where I preache dfrom 1972-77. Roy H. Rowland was a school principal who also served the church as one of its four elders. By his guidance, the elders set up committees for every scriptural function of the church. A deacon was over each committee. Members could volunteer to be on as many committees as they wished. The elders decided what the church would do and shepherded the souls of the members. Deacons led members in the various committees in carrying out these decisions.

Brotherly,
Keith