Sunday Ayandare | Ibadan, Nigeria
One of the principles of the New Testament church that is grossly misunderstood by many is the autonomy of the local church. There are those who opine that congregational autonomy has to do with each local church being an island to itself, having nothing to do whatsoever with Christians in other local churches. Some even go to the extent of asserting that congregational autonomy confers on each local church the right to bind and loose anything under the sun!
On the other hand, there are those who consider the concept of congregational autonomy as not only unbiblical, but also divisive and therefore, devilish. These views are wrong!
What Is Congregational Autonomy?
Autonomy is derived from two Greek words, namely, “auto” and “nomy.” “ “Auto” means self, while “nomy” has to do with the quality or state of being self-governing. Hence, when we talk of congregational autonomy, we are expressing the idea that each congregation is self-governing and is independent of every other.
Congregational autonomy does not mean each local church can make laws for itself. We have only one lawgiver who is Jesus Christ (James 4:12). He is the head of the church (Ephesians 1:22-23); the King of the kingdom (1 Timothy 6:15). Autonomy of the local church simply means that each local church reserves the right to make decisions as to what expediencies it will employ in executing God’s laws.
Let us illustrate: In Hebrews 10:25, we read, “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another, and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” The direct command here is, “not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together.” Implicit in this command, however, is the need for a time and place of meting. It is inconceivable that there can be a meeting without a specific place and time. The Lord does not bind any specific place or time.
This is where congregational autonomy comes in. Each local church has the right to decide at what time it is going to meet, how many times within the week, who is to do the preaching, for how many minutes or hours.
Autonomy of each local church does not mean a congregation could decide to make a 25 year old, unmarried preacher an elder. The Lord states in His word that an elder must be the husband of one wife and have believing children (Titus 1:6) A local church cannot decide on which day to eat the Lord’s Supper. The Lord has decided that – the first day of the week (Acts 20:7). To break bread on any other day is to transgress the doctrine of Christ (2 John 9-11). The Lord has specified the elements of the Lord’s Table – unleavened bread and fruit of the vine (Matthew 26:17, 26-29). To eat garri and drink coke at the Lord’s Supper in the name of congregational autonomy is to eat damnation (1 Corinthians 11:29). The Lord has given the method we should follow in giving of our means to support the work of the church (1 Corinthians 16:1-2; 2 Corinthians 9:6-8). Any other method is to go beyond that which is written (1 Corinthians 4:6).
Congregational Autonomy Is A New Testament Concept
After Paul and Barnabas had preached and established churches in several cities on their first journey, they came back to appoint elders for each of these churches (Acts 14:23). That elders were appointed in every local church in apostolic times underscores two principles which form the basis of the concept of congregational autonomy. One, the independence of each local church. Two, the equality of all the churches.
Let us keep in mind that Barnabas and Saul were sent out by a local church – Antioch (Acts 13:1-3). Having accomplished their task, they returned and gave report to the same local church (Acts 14:26-27). The church at Antioch did not oversee these local churches in spite of the fact that it (Antioch) was responsible for the sending out of the preachers who established the churches.
In the New Testament, there was nothing like “mother church” or “supervising congregation.” Every local church was independent and all the congregations were on the same footing – equal before God – in spite of size or location.
Moreover, the principle of congregational autonomy is seen in the limitation of the authority of the elders. Elders in the New Testament period were local officers, not state or provincial or national officers. Each church had its own elders. What was the jurisdiction of these elders? Paul, addressing the Ephesian elders charged them to, “take heed … to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers” (Acts 20:28). That is how it should be today. The jurisdiction of elders should not extend beyond the congregation where they are appointed. Apostle Peter says, “the elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder … Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof…” (1 Peter 5:1-3). That conclusively shows the limit and extent of the authority of elders. Succinctly put, the elders of a large congregation cannot, by divine approval, oversee the work of another nearby, small church. The New Testament teaches that each congregation did its own work under its own elders. The church at Jerusalem, for example, sent out Barnabas to Antioch (Acts 11:22). The church at Antioch on the other hand sent Barnabas and Saul (Acts 13:1-4). There was no centralized, inter-congregational pooling of funds. The church at Jerusalem relieved its own needy members (Acts 2:44-45; 4:32-37). When the need became greater than the ability of the Jerusalem church, other churches like Macedonia, Achaia and Galatia sent benevolence to “the poor saints at Jerusalem” (Romans 15:25-26; 1 Corinthians 16:1-4).
While Paul was working at Corinth, he was supported by many churches (2 Corinthians 11:8). How was this done? It was not done through any committee or Board or agency. Each church sent directly to Paul through its own chosen messenger (Philippians 4:15-18). This is the principle set forth in the New Testament for the Lord’s church.
Autonomy and Jerusalem “Conference”
It has been argued by some that the meeting held at Jerusalem in Acts 15 to consider the matter of circumcision was a precedent for inter-congregational organization. It is asserted that since the church at Antioch sent “Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them” to Jerusalem, that is veritable proof that today local churches can send representatives to an organization, or a Board or a committee for “the work of God.” That is just not so!
In the first place, the meeting at Jerusalem recorded in Acts 15 was a one-time event. It was not a regular or a continuing “conference” arrangement. Secondly, it was not composed of representatives from various congregations of a state or a country, but of members of just one congregation (Acts 15:2). Thirdly, it was occasioned by a question of doctrine which nobody could answer except the apostles who constituted the repository of divine revelation at that time (Acts 15:28). Fourthly, it featured the apostles of Christ who had special qualifications and special authority and had no successors.
Abuse of Congregational Autonomy
Like every other arrangement ordained of God, we have seen and heard of instances where the principle of congregational autonomy has been abused and bastardized. We have heard of some of our preaching brethren shouting, “autonomy, autonomy” to the high heavens when their blatant sins were about to be exposed. To such we would appeal that they repent before their sins find them out (Numbers 32:23). Others, like Diotrephes, love pre-eminence and lord it over God’s heritage and invoke the principle of autonomy to cast people out of the church (3 John 9-11; 1 Peter 5:1-3). Apostle Peter admonished, “Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility. Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time” (1 Peter 5: 5-6).
Congregational autonomy is not and should not be used as a cover for the sin of any Christian or any preacher. It is not a cloak for false teaching. Rather, it is a divine arrangement whereby the Lord protects His church from wholesale apostasy.
