The Next Step
From all directions we are receiving letters, bulletins, editorials, and continuing comments of one kind of another on the Arlington meeting. It is all but an indication of the overwhelming desire and longing that brethren have for unity and peace. Some letters express apprehension; some doubt that anything can be accomplished; some are fearful that the truth of the gospel is about to be "sold down the river." But ALL of those who write are obviously interested in the meeting, and expect it to be but the fore-runner of other things to come. Some think that future developments portend trouble for the faithful; others are hopeful.
For what it is worth, this editor would like to put in his contribution to the thinking that is being done. Not having participated in the Arlington meeting, perhaps we are able to be a bit more objective about it than if we had been involved in it. Certainly, the Gospel Guardian through all years of controversy has over and over again pleaded for brethren to DISCUSS their differences, seeking always to maintain confidence in one another and to approach every question with an absolute determination to maintain communications — and to talk and study and pray together until they come to common ground.
All of us know that that has not been done. Attitudes have hardened, brotherly feelings have deteriorated, bitterness has often developed, and the resultant emergence of hard and fast lines of division has been evident to all. Now, at long last, it would seem that men of good will are trying to make some effort to reverse the trend, and to halt, hopefully to reverse, the drifting apart. Whether such can be done remains to be seen. But, at least a beginning has been made. The first small step has been taken; there will be many, many others ahead of us if the desired unity is to prevail.
On The Local Level
The nature and structure of God's kingdom is such that there can be no "handed down" decisions from any ecclesiastical authority. Unity must be achieved person to person and brother to brother. It will come at the local level, in communities and towns where Christians know one another — and where they care enough about each other and about the Lord to make an honest, persistent effort to find common ground which both "sides" can occupy with no violence to anybody's conscience.
Does such ground exist? And can it be so clearly set forth as to be acceptable to all? We answer both questions in the affirmative. We believe it DOES exist? and we believe it can be clearly set forth. But let it be understood at the very beginning that this will only be acceptable to brethren who are sincerely seeking to walk "by the Book." For beyond all peradventure of doubt or question there has been developing in certain segments of the brotherhood a far different attitude toward the Bible as such from the attitude that prevailed twenty, or even ten years ago. Classical "liberalism" (using the term in its historical sense as denoting those who deny the supernatural in religion) is becoming a force to be reckoned with. No religious body in American history up to this time has ever reached the size or affluence that the Churches of Christ have now attained without splitting over "modernism" or "liberalism." If the Churches of Christ avoid such a rupture, it will be an unprecedented thing in modern religious history.
And let it be recognized at the very beginning, and by all, that there is NO HOPE and never can be any hope for a reconciliation between conservative Christians (hitherto and in some circles referred to as "antis") and that growing segment within the Churches of Christ infected by classical liberalism. Our very bases for communion with God simply make it impossible that we ever be reconciled. We do not worship the same God, we do not respect the same Bible; we are not even striving for the same goal. The liberal or modernist is seeking to make a "heaven" on this earth; his aim is an earth-centered "social" gospel. wants the church of the Lord to have her primary interest in social welfare — benevolent institutions, summer recreational camps, a wide variety of "social progress" projects and programs. To him, that is what the church is for; that is what Christianity is all about. At present this kind of liberalism is not very strong among the Churches of Christ (it does not even exist among those branded as "anti"), but it is growing. And it will continue to grow, of course, as increasing numbers of the Bible teachers in the various "church related" colleges are selected on the basis of their academic degrees — degrees obtained after many years of study under some of the most "liberal" theologians in the world. It is quite likely (in fact, we are convinced that it is certain) that many of these men do not even recognize their own fundamental loss of faith. It has been a gradual and almost imperceptible shifting in their thinking. Little by little, they have surrendered the basic convictions held by others of us, yet have retained an outward association with the Churches of Christ — perhaps more emotional than rational.
With these brethren (and their influence is growing!) we can never hope for reapproachment. But with others, less extreme and more fundamentally conservatively, there certainly should be, and, we believe, CAN be reconciliation. Indeed, the very fact that the Churches of Christ are now so seriously threatened by growing modernism, and the fact that so many good men recognize it, is itself an important factor in the effort toward reconciliation.
It is a time for study, prayer, and self-examination. We shall have further things to say about this in succeeding weeks.
— FYT