"Autonomy" is a compound word, composed of
autos, meaning "self," and
nomos, meaning "law." An
ordinary dictionary will tell us the word means "self-ruled," so that an
autonomous church is "self-governed, without outside control."
There
are those who reject the concept of God and revelation, saying ultimate
authority is in man. To them there would be no limitations placed upon
self-rule. Of course most of our readers accept Christ as King, and know
that a church which wishes to exercise "self rule" in
all things is not the church of
Christ. But our brethren are far from clear on the legitimate
(scriptural) field of self rule, and how this affects the relation of
one church to another. Some seem to think "autonomy" means the right to
devise organizational arrangements for which there is no N.T. authority;
while others think calling attention to such error violates the
"autonomy" of the erring brethren.
A
church can not "rule" on the importance of Christ' death, the necessity
of faith, the meaning and purpose of baptism; for these are legacies of
truth which Christ gave the world and by which we are called. The church
is the product of the gospel, not its author. One would not violate some
church's autonomy by teaching along these lines, for no church as a
legitimate "say" in such things.
Does
God give a local church the right to decide the day of worship? May they
"rule" on the need for assembling, or the so-called "items" of
acceptable worship? It is not clear that even in those things assigned
as church (team) activity, a distinction must be made in that which is
part of "the faith, once for all delivered unto the saints" (over which
the congregation has no rule), and such details as are left to human
judgement. The field of church autonomy is that of human judgement, and
that only.
As an
example: God's word indicates the day on which saints are to partake of
the Lord's Supper---but it does not specify the
time of day. The
time is left to human judgement,
and therefore to the "rule" of brethren. A church exercises autonomy
when it sets its own time of
assembling---and we might add, that
time rests upon human authority, not upon divine mandate. Each
church has this same right and may choose different times. If one sought
to unduly influence or alter another's
time of meeting, this would be interfering with "autonomy."
But if
one church should declare Thursday the Lord's Day, others could seek to
teach them more perfectly the way of the Lord---and violate no
legitimate "autonomy" in doing so---for no church has the scriptural
right to "rule" in matters God has settled.
When
brethren have honest differences in their understanding of what God has
said, one church may believe their "ruling" is done in matters of
judgement, while another may believe they violate plain teachings of
God. If both parties are equally interested in serving God, neither will
rest the case in "our rights," but will be happy to study God's word
together so that God can rule supremely in all.
Other Articles by Robert Turner
The Last Fight
Two Ways to "Soundness"
Toning It Down