| 
			 
			Why do some brethren call others "antis" 
			or "liberals" 
			
			Why do some brethren oppose church 
			support of colleges and other institutions? 
			
			What are some of the issues in the 
			controversy? 
			For over 40 
			years there have been differences among brethren in churches of 
			Christ regarding the nature and work of the church in both the 
			universal and local sense. These disagreement have resulted in the 
			division of many local congregations and the separation of many long 
			time friends and brethren. 
			
			Many young people and new Christians do 
			not know what these differences involve. The purpose of this tract 
			is to briefly analyze these disputes in a simple and fair way. 
			THE REALITY OF 
			APOSTASY 
			Since 
			creation there has always been a tendency among God's people to 
			gradually leave His way. For that reason the Bible is full of 
			warnings against apostasy, gradual departure from God's principles
			(Deut. 8:11-14; Acts 20:29-31; II Tim. 3:1-5; 4:3,4, etc.). 
			The 
			apostasy of the second and third centuries: 
			In spite of the many warnings against falling away, history tells us 
			how Christians of the second and third centuries began to abandon 
			God's pattern. Powerful bishops began to control large numbers of 
			churches and pagan influences began to be seen in the worship. The 
			apostasy accelerated when "Christianity" became the official 
			religion of the Roman empire and many Christians were prosperous. 
			The Roman Catholic church is the final result of this gradual 
			departure from God's principles. 
			The 
			apostasy of the 19th century: 
			In the late 1800's, Christians whose parents and grandparents had 
			been careful with Christ's pattern, began to enjoy increasing 
			prosperity. As they climbed the economic and social ladders they 
			began to look around at the denominations and copy their practices. 
			They became less careful with the scriptures and began to establish 
			institutions to do the work of the local churches. New practices 
			such as instrumental music became popular among the richer churches. 
			The brethren 
			who opposed this apostasy were called "antis". and were generally 
			poorer than their less strict brethren. The brethren with looser 
			attitudes towards the scriptures became so liberal in their thinking 
			that they eventually formed a denomination called "The Christian 
			Church, Disciples of Christ" which exists until today, although it 
			is losing members. 
			
			Developments in the 20th century: 
			After the second world war, the descendants of those who opposed the 
			apostasy of the previous century, began to enjoy prosperity. With 
			that affluence came a change of attitude towards the authority of 
			the scriptures. They weren't as strict as their parents and 
			grandparents and began to want to copy projects they saw in the 
			denominations. For example, they began to let large churches 
			supervise some of the work of many smaller ones, promoted church 
			supported orphan's homes, colleges and recreation programs. 
			
			As was the case in the apostasy of the 
			previous century, some have opposed this centralization of the work 
			in it's various forms because such arrangements are not found in the 
			scriptures. The promoters of these activities have used the word 
			"anti" to describe those who cannot conscientiously support their 
			projects. 
			
			SOME POINTS OF CONTROVERSY 
			Generally 
			speaking, brethren who advocate church support of human institutions 
			and those who oppose it agree on basic points such as baptism for 
			the remission of sin, the Lord's supper, the need to sing praises to 
			God without instruments of music, etc. Also, it should be pointed 
			out that some brethren who advocate church support of human 
			institutions are very careful in other aspects of serving the Lord. 
			A few would agree with me on points 4 and 5 mentioned below. A few 
			have expressed eloquently their concerns about brethren who want to 
			go even beyond the differences discussed in this short tract. 
			 
			In general, 
			however, the differences have been the result of different attitudes 
			towards authority which have produced differences such as the 
			following: 
			
			(1) What is the universal church? 
			It appears that most brethren who promote church support of human 
			institutions consider the universal church to be an alliance of 
			local churches. To put it more bluntly, they seem to consider the 
			church of Christ universal to be represented by the list of local 
			churches seen in various brotherhood directories of churches. 
			(Unfortunately, some brethren who oppose church supported human 
			institutions seem to have that concept as well.)  
			Expressions 
			of this misconception abound: 
			* A popular 
			correspondence course in Spanish states, "The universal church is 
			divided into local churches".  
			The Bible teaches, however, that the church is composed of saved 
			individuals (Acts 2:47, Hebrews 12:23) and not local churches 
			* Another 
			tract regarding the church of Christ in its universal senses makes 
			this appeal: "become a member of a church that is bound by the 
			authority of the New Testament." 
			While such 
			encouragement could be given to a Christian regarding his need to 
			become a member of a faithful local church, the Bible does not talk 
			that way concerning the universal body of Christ. One does not 
			become a member of the universal church in the sense of choosing it, 
			but rather he is added to it by the Lord when he obeys the gospel 
			and is saved (Acts 2:47). 
			* The 
			Spanish Hymnbook published by Star Bible Publishing company states 
			on its title page, "Published by the Church of Christ." Of course it 
			is impossible for all the saved people in the world to publish a 
			hymnbook, but "the body of saved people" is not what these brethren 
			have in mind when they say "published by the Church of Christ." They 
			seem to mean that the songbook is published by those belonging to a 
			religious alliance, which in their minds is "The Church of Christ." 
			Thus the "Church of Christ" in their minds "publishes" the hymnbook. 
			* With this 
			erroneous concept, some brethren seem to feel that it is possible to 
			count the number of members in this alliance. I have a tract that 
			proclaims with pride, "the church of Christ is already established 
			in 115 countries and has 3,000,000 members organized into 20,000 
			congregations.  
			his way of thinking involves treating the universal church as a 
			sect. 
			In Mexico 
			and El Salvador (and probably in other countries), institutional 
			brethren have taken these principles to their logical conclusion and 
			have an official "Associations of Churches of Christ" with their 
			Presidents, Vice Presidents, annual conventions, delegates and other 
			trappings of denominationalism. 
			Bible 
			teaching: As has already been pointed out, the Bible teaches that 
			the universal church is not composed of local churches but of saved 
			individuals (Acts 2:47; Hebrews 12:23). It is impossible to 
			count saved individuals because only God knows the number. The 
			universal church in the Bible was simply a spiritual family. 
			
			(2) The centralization of the work of 
			many churches in institutions. 
			This error proceeds from an institutional concept of the church 
			already mentioned. Many obviously feel that local congregations are 
			incapable of doing the work and for that reason the churches of the 
			"alliance" should support institutions like orphan's homes, homes 
			for the elderly, clinics, colleges and publishing houses to do the 
			work for them. 
			Of course 
			there is nothing wrong in and of itself with businesses and 
			institutions like schools, stores, clinics, bookstores, etc.. 
			Businesses or institutions can accomplish good and if individual 
			Christians want to operate them, that is their choice. The problem 
			comes when these businesses or institutions begin to try to work 
			their way into the affairs of local churches, accepting 
			contributions from them and even trying on some occasions to direct 
			aspects of their work. When such happens, in a short period of time, 
			people begin to consider these institutions as pertaining to the 
			"alliance" and in that way sectarian concepts flourish. 
			Bible 
			teaching: In the Bible, local churches did not support institutions 
			of human origin. They were capable of doing all the work which God 
			assigned to them. If we desire to stay within what is written (I 
			Cor. 4:6) we must be content with working local independent churches 
			because there is no larger divine organization in the scriptures.
			 
			
			(3) Centralization of the work through 
			sponsoring churches: 
			Many brethren believe that smaller churches should make donations to 
			larger ones, called sponsoring churches, so that these can supervise 
			the work of many congregations in various projects such as "World 
			Radio", "The Herald of Truth", "One Nation under God," etc.  
			Bible teaching: The Bible authorizes the elders of each local church 
			to be responsible for "the flock of God" comprising that 
			congregation (I Peter 5:2). When elders take on the responsibility 
			for the work of many flocks, they go beyond what is authorized in I 
			Peter 5:2.  
			Response of 
			promoters of institutionalism: In the Bible local congregations sent 
			funds to others, for example Acts 11:27-30; II Corinthians 8,9, 
			etc. According to defenders of institutionalism, this authorizes 
			the sponsoring church arrangement. 
			Answer: In 
			the Bible congregations sent alms (Acts 24:17) to 
			needy congregations to help them in their own need. The 
			sponsoring church system is much different. According to it, 
			churches send contributions to large congregations to spend 
			in some project. In no way do Bible examples authorize the 
			sponsoring church arrangement. 
			
			(4) The social gospel:
			Many (perhaps most) 
			brethren who defend institutionalism, have also been contaminated by 
			what historians call the social gospel. The social gospel involves 
			an emphasis on political, social and medical projects and by its 
			very nature distracts congregations from spiritual and eternal 
			concerns. For this reason, many "institutional" congregations divert 
			congregational funds from purely spiritual needs to spend them on 
			parties, recreational centers (called family life centers), 
			hospitals, clinics, dining halls, and other purely social projects. 
			Bible 
			teaching: The Bible teaches that the local church is a purely 
			spiritual entity. Although it should provide benevolence to needy 
			saints, it offers non believers what they need most, the gospel of 
			Christ. 
			Although 
			brethren should get together often to enjoy each other's company and 
			recreation, such diversions are the responsibility of individuals 
			and not the local churches. The position of local churches as purely 
			spiritual entities must be carefully guarded.  
			
			(5) Titles: 
			As a part of the tendency to imitate the denominations, more and 
			more brethren are using high sounding titles to distinguish some 
			brethren from others. For example, the term "minister" is used often 
			in some congregations not as a simple description of a servant, but 
			rather as a prideful title with a capital letter. Thus a simple song 
			leader becomes a "Minister of Music." The brother who helps organize 
			the Bible studies becomes the "Minister of Education." The "Pulpit 
			Minister" is careful to distinguish himself from the "Youth 
			Minister" and "Associate Minister" and even the "Involvement 
			Minister". Such vanity would be laughable if it did not indicate 
			that many of our beloved brethren are very far indeed from the 
			humble Carpenter from Galilee. 
			Bible 
			teaching: Jesus condemned the use of such titles to elevate certain 
			men over others in texts such as Matthew 23.  
			
			Certainly other categories illustrating 
			differences could be cited but perhaps these five reveal some of the 
			more visible points of disagreement. 
			WHAT CAN WE DO? 
			To ignore 
			the apostasy or act as if it didn't exist is to allow Satan to 
			gradually turn brethren away from Christ's simple pattern without 
			challenge. If brethren do not teach with love about the dangers of 
			institutionalism, in 25, 50 and 75 years, congregations that may be 
			partially down the road of apostasy (like Sardis, Thyatira, Pergamos 
			in Revelation) will become completely enveloped in error and form a 
			denomination just like the "Christian Church, Disciples of Christ." 
			Although 
			these problems hurt us, much can be done to fight the apostasy with 
			love: 
			(1) Keep all 
			eyes on Christ: All who follow Christ and not human traditions will 
			go to heaven. 
			(2) Be 
			careful with prosperity and with new ideas that accompany 
			prosperity. It is a biblical and historical fact that where 
			prosperity abounds, there is more temptation to abandon God's 
			principles. 
			(3) Demand 
			New Testament authority for every arrangement and practice. (I 
			Peter 4:11) 
			(4) Study: 
			In the coming years the apostasy will grow and take on new 
			characteristics just like it did in the second and third centuries 
			and the 19th century. Churches contaminated with institutionalism 
			and liberalism will become more and more like denominations. It is 
			essential that all who love the Lord and His people educate 
			themselves with the word of God so that they can rescue the faithful 
			remnant from unhealthy spiritual influences. 
			May God help 
			us to have the love and the wisdom to deal properly with these 
			difficult problems.  
   |