Anent A Couple Of Things
First: The "Box in the Vestibule" is being resurrected once again. I hesitated to be the first to offer a complaint. Since brother Pryde Hinton has broken the ice I feel the necessity of speaking my mind on the subject.
I did not like the idea when it was first introduced and I have not seen any argument that would change my mind to this day. To me, it seems to "smack" of compromise; to tolerate that which we know to be unscriptural. The whole proposition stems from the desire on the part of some to support such institutions which, in the light of New Testament teaching, are unscriptural. I find it a bit difficult to have fellowship with a brother who insists on supporting a function which is without authority. If such "box in the vestibule" is allowed who gathers and disburses the money placed in it? Does the duly elected treasurer of the congregation do this? If so then I have a difficulty. The local treasury is a part of the business of every faithful member of the congregation. I do not want a part of this treasury used to support that which I sincerely believe to be unscriptural. Do those who want to support these human organizations gather and disburse the money? If so why could they not just make a personal and direct contribution to that which they insist on supporting? Even then we have a problem! How can we hold in fellowship the brother who engages in an unauthorized function? Is this not "bidding him God's speed?" Yes, there is a problem!
Second: I note with some degree of anxiety that a couple dozen brethren, half "conservative" and the other half "liberal" found it convenient to rendezvous in Arlington, Texas for three days and nights in an effort to "explore our differences and discuss ways by which we might enjoy the unity Jesus prayed for." In the only report I have seen of this meeting it was pointed out that the association contributed to "loving and appreciating one another more." A good attitude is said to have prevailed and seemingly every one had a good time.
One or two significant things seems to have been accomplished. One thing is; there shall be a cessation of using such terms of identification as "anti" and "liberal." I am at a loss to know just how to identify those who possess "liberal" tendencies without calling them "liberal." Nor do I know how those who are of that persuasion could identify me except to call me "conservative" or its equivalent! This is a problem!
In this report brother Dudley Ross Spears suggests that a possible solution to the difficulties of supporting human organizations as agencies through which some of the work of the church is done would be to have a "second contribution." This is just another way of saying "box in the vestibule." After we meet for worship and conclude, to all intents and purposes, our worship service including the contribution to support scriptural works we would now be called upon to "sit by" while the liberal (?) brethren make their contribution to their idols! Again, in my tolerance, do I become a partaker Of the "evil deed?" Just wondering!
The combination to these two things reminds me much of the Old Testament incident of Nehemiah's rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem. Sanballat and Tobiah invited Nehemiah to meet with them in the plains of Ono for the purpose of searching out ways and means of cooperation. Nehemiah didn't buy the idea. To him it was a waste of time. I am wondering if brethren are not "whistling in the dark" in a pretended effort to effect unity. One thing I know, and have been preaching for forty years, the basis of unity and acceptable cooperation is to be found in the revealed truth of Jesus Christ. "If we walk in the light as He is in the light (then, and only then) we have fellowship one with another" (I John 1:7). The plan of the Lord cannot be improved!
Human judgment and human arrangements did not effect unity in the split of a hundred years ago, why do we think it will now?
19201 Nordhoff St., Northridge, Calif