Why Divisions Come
In reading the book, The Disciples in Kentucky, by A. W. Fortune, I was particularly struck by the following quotation:
The controversies through which the Disciples have passed from the beginning to the present time have been the result of two different interpretations of their mission. There have been those who believed it is the spirit of the New Testament Church that should be restored, and in our method of working, the church must adapt itself to changing conditions. There have been those who regarded the New Testament Church as a fixed pattern for all time, and our business is to hold rigidly to that pattern regardless of consequences. Because of these two attitudes, conflicts were inevitable.
As a result of these controversies the Disciples have divided into two bodies, the one designated as Disciples of Christ and the other designated as Churches of Christ...." (p. 383)
I must agree with the author that division is inevitable when such diverse attitudes toward the authority of the Bible exists. That attitude toward the authority of the New Testament that says, "It is the spirit of the New Testament Church that should be restored...." produced the Christian Church. It opened the door for all innovations that came in. It was this attitude that opened the door for the Missionary society and later for instrumental music. This attitude produced the open membership policy of the Christian Church that allows fellowship with any denominational person. It produced the fellowship of denominations to the extent of merger with them in so many places. There can never be merger without compromise. The attitude toward authority manifested by those in the Christian Church would easily allow for such a compromise.
I am one who believes that the "New Testament Church is a fixed pattern for all time, and our business is to hold rigidly to that pattern...." And I weep to see that so many in the churches of Christ today are turning from that attitude to accept the same kind of thinking that produced the Christian Church. When brethren begin to argue, "There is no pattern," and to say, "We do many things for which we cannot bring authority" (this was the exact statement of a brother in a debate with me on the issues some time ago), they are doing exactly what the digressives did 100 years ago. It is this thinking that allows human institutions (such as orphan homes, colleges, "Gospel Press," etc.) to be placed in the budgets of churches. This attitude produces the recreational practices of churches. This attitude opens the door for sponsoring churches and centralized control. In fact, it opens the door for the beginning of another denomination, and this is exactly what is developing. Let us all take the safe course and go back to the pattern of the New Testament. It is indeed the fixed pattern for all time. It is our business to hold rigidly to that pattern.
— 5140 Planet Parkway, Sacramento 23, Calif.