" Some Observations "
In January 16 Firm Foundation I notice a quip from the editor at the close of an article written by brother F. 0. Howell. I'm not inclined in the least to criticize the article of brother Howell. I'm only made to wonder why the editor had to take some quips or punches at those who stand against one church usurping the authority that does not belong to it. Certainly no one should cause division in the church because of his personal likes or dislikes of one who does not agree with him.
—O—
This thrust of the editor causes me to wonder if it is because of his personal dislike of those who oppose THE BIG CHURCHES securing from weaker churches their contributions sent through the big church to support a work that is thousands of miles from their oversight. Why does this editor permit those who oppose THE GOSPEL GUARDIAN and it's stand against encroachment on the independence of the local congregations to have all the space they desire in Firm Foundation, but never invites criticism from those who contribute to the Gospel Guardian a reply to their critics?
The accusation of causing division because one stands for N. T. doctrine or practice smacks with the same plea of those who wanted instrumental music and the societies. The Christian church people have always accused the church of Christ of being the cause of the division. The church of Christ opposed those who drove the wedge that split the log. Any group that wants to do a thing their way instead of following New Testament example will be the first to raise the howl against loyal brethren "that they are dividing the church" This comes with poor grace from those who in days gone by have stood so staunchly against innovations.
—O—
I respect gray hair and old age, but truth is too precious and the practice of the New Testament church too sacred to cause any of us to become wobbly and weakened when issues that if followed to their climax will lead the church to apostasy. It is high time that all lovers of truth more than lovers of men take their stand and say to the usurpers of authority where they have none be stopped. The sad lamenting and weeping over the fact that the church might be divided would be more seriously considered by a lot of us if the editor had taken his editorial pen in hand and said more against the encroachment of one congregation into sister congregation affairs.
—O—
Religious Racketeers can have access to the columns of F. F. and even receive write-ups boosting their work, and later the racket fall to pieces.
The dear old Firm Foundation in days gone by carried write-ups and appeals by the late Don Carlos Janes. Good brethren who thought they were doing mission work would send in their contributions. These brethren were honestly deceived to the extent of $40,000.00 that was left in the will of Don Carlos Janes to spread or promulgate Premillennialism. The same Pre-Mils accuse those who oppose their doctrine as being the cause of division over that issue. I wonder if they wouldn't say it is all because of the personal dislikes of brethren that has caused division over this issue?
—O—
I'm made to wonder is it because of the personal dislikes of some editors among us that causes them to rush into print with any thing that will cast a reflection on their fellow editors or their publications. I WONDER. Is there such a thing as editorial jealousy among editors? I've heard of preacher jealousy, but have my first preacher to find that will admit he has the disease. Could this be true of editors? If so I wonder why?
—O—
Yater, you and Cled and Roy are doing a swell job of it in my way of thinking and also many churches and elders feel as you do in this matter. Keep the good work going you are not standing alone. Others will yet see the light. Those who fear the light and will not accept it love darkness because their deeds are evil.
—O—
It is O.K. in the eyes of some for an elder of A BIG CHURCH to tell the editor of the Gospel Guardian he is committing suicide and will have none of the big churches to preach to all because he opposes a method adopted by the big elders and the big church. That has no smacking of Popery does it? What has the editor of F. F. had to say about such thrusts as that?
I've read the Firm Foundation since a boy and presume that I'll continue to read it as long as I live if it is published that long. I have no personal dislike for the editor, but I think he is human, subject to mistake as are all human beings. I don't think the F. F. is inspired. The Gospel Guardian is not inspired either, but I like its ring and its fairness in going much further in allowing space to THE GREAT WRITER (?) from Searcy, Ark. In my way of thinking that writer would do well to listen to others awhile and do some sober meditating before he pops off so much. I don't think too many take him too seriously and I guess he feels a lot better when he gets it off his system. The proper title to his articles might be better if it had this heading, "The Wanderings of the Arkansas 'Wind-jammer."