Contradictions And Inconsistencies Of Our "Liberal" Brethren
Brethren Warren, Deaver, Guy N. Woods and their satellites have had much to say in months past about inconsistencies and contradictions which have allegedly characterized those who oppose the "institutionalism" and "centralization" for which the Warren-Deaver-Woods combination contends. Much ado likewise has been made concerning a supposed retreat further and further into so-called "anti-ism." It seems in order, therefore, that these brethren be confronted with the multiplicity of examples of their guilt in the matter of contradictions and inconsistencies along with their headlong plunge into gross "liberalism." It is paradoxical indeed that men so vulnerable in this matter should have the temerity thus to address themselves. In the series of articles of which this is number one, we shall call attention to the self-contradictory course their reasoning has pursued. Since Brethren Warren and Deaver are the most vociferous in charging inconsistencies and contradictions, we shall deal first with their famous "syllogism" which they imagine establishes the scripturalness of the "total situation" that is characteristic of such cooperatives as the Herald of Truth radio program.
The Basic Element Of The Minor Premise Of The "Syllogism."
The most important element in the Warren-Deaver syllogism is a "constituent element" of the "total situation" which, while not expressly mentioned in the minor premise, is clearly understood; namely, that whatever work over which a church assumes oversight becomes its own exclusive work. This is the most vital link in the chain of inductive proof that characterizes the Warren-Deaver reasoning and, incidentally, is the basic fallacy of the entire argument. Refute this hypothesis, and the whole structure of the ingenious "total situation" argument collapses.
Refutation Made Unnecessary By Abandonment
Strange as it may seem, Brother Warren with the help of Brother Woods has made a refutation of this fallacious concept completely unnecessary by their abandonment of it. In the Birmingham debate between Brethren Woods and Cogdill, in which Thomas B. Warren served as moderator for Woods and Roy Deaver as projector operator, Brother Woods with the unquestionable endorsement of Warren and Deaver unequivocally abandoned the hypothesis in question. Note what Woods had to say in the definition of his proposition on the Herald of Truth question:
"Now, friends, the essence of this proposition is simply this: may a group of New Testament churches cooperate in the preaching of the gospel over the radio and television stations, where one of the participating congregations takes care of the details? It's just that simple. It just boils down to that, a matter of churches of our Lord, in their obligation to God, under the Commission, discharging it in preaching the gospel when one of the participating congregations takes care of the details regarding the program in the relationship to the network." (Cogdill-Woods Debate, p. 194.)
Brother Woods further says in his second speech on this proposition:
"And you will remember, please, that our position is that the Herald of Truth is nothing more than the cooperation of New Testament churches where one of the cooperating churches takes care of the details." (Ibid. p. 237.)
From these statements and others like them, it can be seen that Woods, with the endorsement of Warren and Deaver, affirmed that the Herald of Truth radio program is a work of all the participating churches in the fulfilling
of their obligations to God under the Great Commission with one of those churches having the control and over-sight of the arrangement. This is a clear-cut abandonment of Warren's idea that "the assumption of oversight" makes the Herald of Truth the particular, exclusive work of the Highland Church of Abilene, Texas. Brother Warren's justification of the Herald of Truth on the basis of his "total situation" argument is predicated by him on "the right of a New Testament church to help another such church do her own work." From his entrance into this controversy on the "liberal" side, Warren has affected to believe that one church cannot scripturally do the work of another church. If the Herald of Truth is the work of all the participating churches under the oversight and control of one of them, as Woods contends, it involves a "total situation" not contemplated in Warren's syllogism, hence the syllogism is rendered utterly worthless with reference to its proving the Herald of Truth cooperation to be scriptural.
In the Porter-Woods Debate at Indianapolis, Indiana, Woods described the Warren syllogism as one of the strongest arguments he had heard in twenty-five years of gospel preaching and one hundred debates. Yet, without even a blush, at Birmingham, he consigned it to the junk heap in his statement of the total situation which characterizes the Herald of Truth. Who is it, Brother Warren, that has retreated from what? Draw us a cartoon of this! Do you yet affirm that the Herald of Truth is Highland's "own work" by reason of the "assumption of oversight?"
An Interesting Sidelight
Having thus defined the Herald of Truth, in the Birmingham debate, Brother Woods had the unmitigated audacity to deny that centralized control and oversight characterized the situation. He affected to oppose centralized control and oversight while justifying the Herald of Truth cooperative. A child should be able to perceive that what Woods declares to be the situation characteristic of the Herald of Truth is, in fact, centralized control and oversight.
Woods and his colleagues attempt to cloud the issue by seeking to make it appear that those who oppose the Herald of Truth charge that the arrangement involves the organic control of the churches themselves by the Highland Church. Such is a cleverly concealed subterfuge and a willful misrepresentation. Those who oppose the Herald of Truth do not argue that it involves the organic control of the participating churches by the Highland Church and her elders. For that matter, neither do the directors of the Southern Baptist Convention, the American Baptist Association, nor the United Christian Missionary Society cooperation's exercise organic control over their participating churches. The Herald of Truth arrangement is characterized by centralized control and oversight of the work and resources of many churches by the elders of one church. Better evidence of this fact could not be desired than Woods' own statement concerning the matter in the Birmingham debate. This is the control and oversight characteristic of the convention, the association, and the society mentioned above. This is that for which there is neither precept, approved example, nor necessary implication in the word of God. This is that which antagonizes the equality of bishops and congregations so clearly taught in the New Testament. This is that which is an infringement on the independence and autonomy of New Testament churches.
Brother Warren has fervently and eloquently endorsed Woods' arguments made at Birmingham. His endorsement is the finest kind of refutation of his vaunted syllogism. Truly, Warren vs. Warren is an intriguing combination! Did someone mention "inconsistency?"
(More to follow)