The West Articles

In this issue we publish the first of a series of articles by Earl West on the subject of congregational cooperation. These articles were originally published in the Gospel Advocate, and have created the highest interest of anything published in that journal within the last several years. Already the articles have been re-published in the Preceptor, have been mimeographed and widely distributed not only in this country but among the workers in foreign fields as well. We have received letters from as far away as Germany, Japan, and Africa, not to mention almost innumerable requests from here in the States, urging that the articles be reprinted in the Gospel Guardian. We have intended doing so from the very first, but have awaited their completion in the Gospel Advocate. We feel that the impact of the articles was somewhat weakened by their being spread out over a period of several months in that journal, and hence are doubling up on them and will run all the material in only three installments in the Guardian.

First of all, we want to offer our sincere congratulations to Brother Goodpasture for his decision to publish these articles in the Gospel Advocate. We realize it must have been a most difficult decision for him to make, inasmuch as it would reveal to all how far the present policy of the "Old Reliable" varies from that of the illustrious Lipscomb. For a paper which prides itself on "never changing" as does the Advocate, this must have been particularly galling. All the more honor then to the man who was able to rise above petty personal desires and feelings and publish this highly informative and revealing series of articles!

In the second place, we think all of us owe a real debt of gratitude to Brother Earl West for having presented so objectively and so honestly the rich material of these articles. That he has done a monumental piece of research is, we think, apparent to anyone who will read what has been written. That he has done so with the sole desire to present something helpful to the cause of Christ in this crucial hour of the present is also obvious. Brother West has not written with any thought at all of embarrassing anybody or of either attacking or defending any present practice or policy; he has sought to give a detached and scholarly review of a problem that has been often met by Christian men in ages of the past. And he has called for a frank, brotherly, and friendly discussion of that problem as it presents itself to this generation.

We wish to second Brother West's plea for a re-study of the matter. The Gospel Guardian has been rather vigorous these past few years in her advocacy of the Lipscomb position — not because we were concerned with Lipscomb, or were even aware of the degree to which we were in agreement with him, but simply because we felt a real departure was developing from the simple, fundamental teaching of the New Testament on the matter of congregational adequacy, equality, and autonomy. It has seemed to us that some startling developments in recent years were leading precipitately away from the common belief which we supposed all Christians had in these matters. So we have raised our voice in protest and warning.

That our words of caution have not always been as genteel and polite as they should have been is probably a justifiable criticism. But when the most sacred and holy things of life seem to be endangered, it is difficult to be as calm and suave as one might sometimes wish. If we have seemed caustic at times, it has been because the calm and gentle words were ignored and disregarded. Surely, Brother West's articles will reveal to many for the first time that the Gospel Guardian has not been the first to sound a note of warning on these matters — and neither has he had any monopoly on blunt language. David Lipscomb's pen was as biting on occasion as anything in print.

We have not questioned ever the sincerity and the good intentions of those brethren and congregations who seemed to us to be leading in this movement away from the truth. On the contrary, it was because we felt they were sincere that we have been so insistent on reasoning with them about the various practices and policies. We have sought no kind of break in fellowship, but have tried rather desperately to discuss the problem while maintaining and promoting fellowship. The writer of this page has himself gone almost to the point of embarrassment in letting some half a dozen or more churches know that he desires no break nor change in the relationship which he has had with them through many years. These are churches which could be described as "sponsoring churches," but congregations where this writer has held meetings, or has preached, through the years. With some of them the relationship is as cordial as ever, in spite of our differences; with one or two others the relationship is frigid — on their part, not on ours.

It would be well for all of us to recognize that these problems did not develop over-night nor will they be resolved over-night. And while all of us are in the process of thinking them through, and seeking to bring all our practices into harmony with New Testament teaching, we might as well stay in good humor with one another and maintain that spirit which should always characterize brethren in Christ. Let us be forthright and absolutely uncompromising in our speech on matters of principle and conviction. But let us not forget that nobody has a monopoly on sincerity.

We hope that these articles by Brother West may bring forth a full study of this matter of "congregational cooperation." Was Lipscomb unduly apprehensive over the danger he thought he saw in his day? And what in reality is the New Testament teaching on these matters? Will the brethren write on it?

Particularly would we like to have discussion from Brother Brewer. Brother Brewer (a man who is often in error but never in doubt) is rarely at a loss for words; inasmuch as he is the dean of the present Gospel Advocate staff, we are much interested in his evaluation of the West articles. And surely Brother Goodpasture should have something of interest to offer. Also, we'd like to hear from Brother Norvel Young, associate editor of the Firm Foundation, and preacher for the Broadway church in Lubbock which has figured so prominently these last few years in these controversies. What is your idea, Brother Young, as to Lipscomb's position on church cooperation? Do you believe Lipscomb was mistaken and extreme in his views? Or do you feel that some very real dangers have been developing these past few years. And how about a word from Brother John Allen Hudson through his Bible Advocate? Brother Hudson is well acquainted with the Restoration history; we believe he could make a truly constructive contribution to the settlement of the present controversy.

Are brethren willing to try for a dispassionate brotherly discussion of the New Testament teaching on the matter of congregational cooperation? Only by full, free, and frank discussion can we hope to arrive at unity and truth. The Gospel Guardian will welcome articles dealing with this matter, and urges a sincere restudy of the whole question. We hope other journals will also publish such material. Let personalities be forgotten as much as possible, and let us seek to arrive at common ground which is New Testament ground.

— F. Y. T.