Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 12
June 2, 1960
NUMBER 5, PAGE 11a-12

Antics Of The Advocate's Angel -- II.

Charles M. Campbell, Nashville, Tennessee

The "termites" swarmed on Louisville, Kentucky, recently where their undercover operators had prepared the churches for their sinister operations. Although the editor of the Advocate, the president of Lipscomb College, and others among their group had frequently visited and preached for two factions of the city in recent years, two of the Louisville preachers, who had pretended to be unalterably opposed to the Nashville notions, and the current craze for modernistic trends, collaborated in an all out effort to ingratiate the movement into the good grace of the churches. The treachery was committed under the pretext that the prospective college students among the congregations of the city should become acquainted with the advantages of "a Christian education." Yet the very men who prompted the move and promoted the scheme have been arduous students in one of Louisville's better known denominational schools — The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Moreover, many of the teachers in the "Christian Colleges" have studied in such schools, even state universities. So, why all the bother and palaver about safeguarding our boys and girls from the destructive tendencies of such institutions? Especially since the teachers on the faculties of the majority of the schools that are maimed by members of the church imbibe the spirit of those institutions and virtually inculcate it into the minds of the students?

When a preacher who does not accept the dogma of institutionalism is invited to come to Nashville to work with a congregation, he is assailed and maligned on every hand. Such an infamous attack was made upon a man recently. The false story was investigated and contradicted, but as of this date no correction has been made by the one who instigated the nefarious plot. However, the man is moving to Nashville, as he and the church that invited him had planned. Men, good, godly men, have been mistreated and maltreated in this city of "over one hundred and ten churches" because they would not bow the knee to Baal nor accept his idols of institutionalism. Yes, "they work in the dark out of sight."

Contrary to Brother Wallace's report, there is no opposition at Franklin Road Church to taking money out of the treasury to help an orphan. As a matter of fact, considerable money has been taken out of it for that very purpose. There is, however, unyielding opposition to taking money out of it to support a human institution to do the work that God assigned to the church. And, we are not nearly so concerned about what the church has been doing since the days of David Lipscomb as we are about what it was doing in the days of the inspired apostles of Jesus Christ. For this reason we would be glad for Brother Wallace, or any of the supporters of the current benevolent society movement, to inform us regarding any Orphan Home which the churches of the first century supported.

During the meeting at Granny White Pike Church last fall, Brother Batsell Baxter made the unequivocal, unqualified statement that he preferred orphans being taken into private homes. He added that he and his wife had given a home to some fatherless children. His only exception to this bona fide rule was where "a little red-haired, freckle-faced, cross--eyed, pigeon-toed spastic" was involved. He thought an institution was the place for such unfortunate children. Of course, there are parents who have and who love children with one or more of those physical handicaps who would in no wise agree with his abstract conclusions.

However, according to the reasoning of the spokesman for the vast majority of the "over one hundred and ten churches" — they agree with the position generally — the one justifiable reason for taking money out of the treasuries of the churches, as far as orphans are concerned, is simply to care for those little fellows upon whom nature frowned, or, at least, bestowed no particular beauty. And this type of reasoning is significant. It represents the sympathy that is extended to the less fortunate. For a congregation to be burdened with the responsibility of caring, directly, for a family, for some orphans, is entirely too much. Especially if one of them is a little red-haired, freckle-faced fellow. You see, the work of the deacons is obsolete, and it therefore, has been committed to a board of directors over a human — sometimes very inhuman — institution. The elders can direct the treasurer to write a check and send it to an orphan home, and that relieves all of the good sisters and brothers of any further responsibility in the matter.

Regardless of the fact that there are some wee ones and other little folk who could not qualify for a beautiful baby contest, they are hardly sufficient in erection and maintenance of the numerous homes which constantly arise to demand the support of the churches.

But, in direct opposition to the position of Brother Baxter, Brother Guy N. Woods asseverated with vehemence, if not with vengeance, in his Radnor rantings, that the orphan home is an absolute necessity. He emphasized and reiterated that "the children deserve security," that "adoption into private homes is against their best interests." However, inasmuch as the private home is the preference with Brother Baxter, it is remarkably strange that he cooperates so freely with those who promote the organizational homes, even to the exploiting of the Herald of Truth programs on which he is the featured speaker. The truth is, the orphan homes, the majority of the colleges, and the Herald of Truth are so directly, organically, and inseparately connected that they refuse to be disconnected. Still they try to impress people with the idea that the Churches of Christ are autonomous in government. Well, some of them are, but it is in spite of the fact that every conceivable system of digressive, denominational origin has been introduced among them, and, when and where it was possible, imposed upon them. Schools have actually attempted to appoint "chairmen" in congregations, even after the elders disavowed any and all interest in such a movement.

Notwithstanding all of Brother Wallace's contemptuous remarks, the very unfortunate child is the very kind that families in Franklin Road Church received into their midst, and upon whom they showered sympathy and affection. When the case proved beyond their ability to cope with it, the church spent a considerable sum in trying to rehabilitate the girl by utilizing the best agencies available for that purpose. The elders worked tirelessly in her interest, spending their personal funds on long trips, and actually exerting themselves in trying to save her from herself. Kind treatment and tender care were shown her brothers and sisters, and they were placed in proper homes. Now, if Brother Wallace wants to apologize, let him do so. He has the facts before him.

The charge that Franklin Road Church is set against "helping sister congregations to preach the gospel by way of radio and television to the lost and crying people of the world" is a ludicrous manner of misrepresenting a misnomer. The gospel of Christ is not being "preached by radio and television to the lost and dying people of the world." Little amateurish semi-sectarian skits are being presented in cities like Nashville, Tennessee — with its boasted "over one hundred and ten churches" that should be preaching the gospel to the lost. And the thousands of dollars that are being wantonly wasted could and should be spent by individual congregations in actually preaching the gospel. Hundreds of preachers could be adequately supported while they preached the word publicly and from house to house, if the churches would retain their autonomy and do their duty. The preacher would not require fine automobiles, (an Oldsmobile like G. K. Wallace's would satisfy most of them, no doubt), fine homes, or even big black cigars. They could smoke some of the home spun raised by brethren, who sell it and use the money to support the Herald of Truth. And most of them would not require two or three salaries, like so many of those who serve David Lipscomb College five days a week and some of the "over one hundred and ten churches" in Nashville a few hours a week, receive.

If brother Wallace knows of a Biblical example that will justify the Herald of Truth of Highland Church in Abilene, Texas, in securing funds — by every pressure method that ever characterized the Missionary Society — let him produce it.

The sponsoring church idea is developing rapidly, and, like the Herald of Truth, is usurping all of the authority that is practical, and imposing itself in every way that is possible. Recently some self appointed brethren assembled in Lubbock, Texas, the home of the incubator of the sponsoring church theories, and conceived a plan known as "Millions For Billions." According to one suggestion which is being advanced in the interest of the widely publicized plan, most of the money is to be extracted from the pockets of the preachers. They are to work for two churches for one salary. (That is to prove how liberal and sacrificial churches can be when they want to.) An Oklahoma church is to keep all records, various congregations are to "sponsor" certain men and other churches — all who do not know better — are to contribute to them. It is but a modified — not very modified, form of the Missionary Society. Let anyone who doubts this fact read the history of the origin of the respective societies as they were formed in Cincinnati, Ohio, and Louisville, Kentucky. An "ecumenical council"? Well, well, just look who is talking.

Regarding the faith and practices of the Franklin Road Church concerning evangelism, the proposed indictment of G. K. Wallace, like all of his other charges, is gratuitous. He handles facts about like the Herald of Truth handles the gospel — very carelessly.

The Franklin Road Church has spent many thousands of dollars, both at home and abroad — some of the latter being misspent, contrary to the desire of the brethren — in striving to spread the gospel, and advance the kingdom of God. At present it fully supports one man in North Carolina, and partly supports eight men in as many states. And it supports its own evangelist in some meetings where congregations are unable to support their own. And it does not quibble about the support of preachers being sent to a church, or assisting a sister congregation, as Guy N. Woods very foolishly and falsely charged at Radnor on the evening of March 10th.

Surely any college for training Episcopal priests would be welcomed among the Nashville clergy — including the doctors of David Lipscomb College and the editor of the Gospel Advocate. They could prove of invaluable assistance on the "Know Your Bible" television program of which Dr. Ira North is the master of ceremonies. You see, he has had a Baptist preacher, a Congregationalist preacher, and a Lutheran preacher to sit on his panel. So an Episcopal priest, in his ecclesiastical robes, would enhance the program considerably. At least the Lutheran pastor — emeritus wore his, and they fitted very well with the titled men of the cloth.

We, too, are wondering. Wondering if those who constantly cry "anti" and engage straw men in controversy are so anxious for both sides of these issues — all of them -- to be heard in the congregations where they preach. One thing is certain the Gospel Advocate is not willing for both sides of the controversy to be heard through its columns.

If, however, some of the doctors have had a change of heart, and are anxious for both sides of the issues to be heard in the congregations where they preach, surely arrangements to that effect can be made. And, surely, they have the advantage, as far as prejudice is concerned. For it is hardly conceivable that the avalanche of propaganda and the tirade of trumped up, trivial treatises — piecemeal — that have erupted from several allied quarters simultaneously recently are merely coincidental in point of timing. They have all the marks to identify them, not only as the by-product of an "ecumenical council," but of the menial, fawning subservience of those who have capitulated to the uncompromising control of godless totalitarianism in the Kingdom of God.