The Herald Of Truth -- No. 3
For more than fifty years we have defended the teaching of the word of the Lord to the effect that the "official authority" of the elders begins and ends with the oversight of the local congregation in which they are elders, that they have no authority at all to oversee members or work of any other congregation.
The elders of Fifth and Highland Church in Abilene, however, have assumed the authority ("the power, or right, to act or command") of spending the money from more than 1,000 other congregations, and of preparing the sermons that these 1,000 congregations send out over the "Herald of Truth" broadcast. They declare:
"the elders of this congregation direct every phase of the work from the preparation of sermons to mailing the printed copies of these sermons. The Highland elders have never delegated any authority to any person, but have as a unit directed this work." (November Report)
If this is not a clear declaration that Highland elders assume the authority to speak for more than a thousand other churches, in both teaching and practice, then plair words have lost their meaning. The large number of contributing churches can have no way of knowing what is put in the sermons until they receive the bulletin, more than a month later. This is a matter that deserves the most serious consideration by the contributing churches Are they willing that Highland shall exercise a censorship over the kind of teaching that is broadcast all over America? God has placed the responsibility on each eldership as to what shall be taught those over whom they have been placed as overseers. Paul gave solemn charge to the elders of Ephesus, "Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit hath made you overseers, to feed the church of the Lord which he purchased with his own blood. I know that after my departure grievous wolves shall enter in among you, not sparing the flock: and from among your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the disciples after them." (Acts 20:28-30.) To Titus, Pau wrote, "For there are many unruly men, vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision whose mouths must be stopped." (Titus 2:10-11.) These verses are cited for the purpose of showing that God has made the elders of each church responsible for teaching to the local members, and has not turned it over to one church to do this: work for a multitude of congregations. It is not intimates here that any false teaching has yet been broadcast from Highland Church, but merely to call attention to the fad that God has made the elders of each local congregation responsible for the teaching. This responsibility canned be delegated or turned over to somebody else. Delegating authority to those at a distance from the local church is in violation of the charge placed upon the local elders by the Lord.
The Lutheran Church is an organized ecclesiasticism. The authority is vested in its official head. It selects a man to speak over a radio network, and the program is called "The Lutheran Hour." All who listen to the broadcast know they are listening to the authoritative voice of the Lutheran Church. Whatever is heard on that broad-east is recognized as the teaching of the Lutheran church.
There is a broadcast sent out over a network from Abilene, Texas, named "The Herald of Truth." On the front cover of the report we find "CHURCHES OF CHRIST SALUTE YOU." Would any listener who is not well informed (and most listeners are not) form any other conclusion than that this is the authoritative voice of the Church of Christ in America? Is it possible for the uninformed to know that there is any difference with reference to the authority of the two broadcasts? The stubborn fact is that the Abilene board of managers declare that they have not "delegated any authority" to anyone else than themselves.
No man on earth can possibly estimate the damage to the Cause of Christ in their thus laying the foundation for the belief that the churches of the Lord have a central head or seat of authority. With this impression spread abroad, how effective will be the plea for the autonomy of the local church? How does the terse truth stated more than an hundred years ago that "in their congregational capacity alone they moved" now sound since more than 1,000 churches are functioning through one managing board of elders in Abilene? Who selected this board in Abilene to be the medium through which so vast a number of churches of Christ should "salute" denominations and sinners all over America? Or did they appoint themselves to that position of authority? Who will be so bold as to attempt a defense for exalting themselves to this ambitious height? Worse still, where is the congregational independence for which we have so long and so strongly pleaded, and which we have so successfully defended against denominational opposition. Where is the equality between and among all churches when one church is so exalted above the many? After their check is mailed, contributing churches have no authority in the work, or who shall perform the work. Who can have the courage to face a well informed audience and harmonize this practice with our plea for the equality and independence of all congregations?
Again I quote: "The elders of this congregation direct and oversee every phase of this work from preparation of sermons to mailing of printed copies of these sermons. The Highland elders have never delegated any authority to anyone else, but have as a unit directed this work." Note that word "authority," and that it has never been "delegated to anyone else." We know that the Lord has given duly qualified and appointed men the "authority" to oversee the local congregation. But who gave them the "authority" to manage and oversee work for a large number of congregations? They most certainly have not been given this "authority" by the word of the Lord. In the absence of any scriptural authority for exalting themselves over so many churches we are left to but one possible conclusion. They have assumed to themselves the responsibility of overseeing the work of other churches.
More than fifty years ago I began the battle against digressives, and for at least twenty-five years was closely in touch with their program of maturing an overall, central authority. Try as I may I cannot recall anything that equaled the claim of Abilene. They affirm that it is their "program," that they "direct every phase of it, and have never "delegated any authority to any person." They affirm that they are the absolute "authority" through which a vast number of churches function. Even in human government some measure of "authority" is delegated to competent men.
Who made it the "work" of the Highland Church? Will they, or anyone else, affirm that God has laid on that church a burden so heavy that it must ask so vast a number of other churches to contribute hundreds of thousands of dollars to help them bear it? Has God required more of it than he has of each of the other churches according to ability?
I will here state a principle, and earnestly call on any one to attempt to disprove it. God has never at any time demanded more of any man than he was able to perform. God has never at any time required more of any church than it was able to perform. Will any man deny the truth of these statements? God has laid upon every church a responsibility of work measured by its ability to carry it out. No church can assume the responsibility of another church, and no church can shift its work upon any other church. There is no more God-imposed duty nor scriptural liberty for Highland to launch a greater work than it can perform than there is for each of the more than one thousand churches contributing to Highland.
We come now to consider the foundation of the whole structure. It is the vital point on which the whole issue turns.
Not one hour of their work is the official work that God has placed upon the elders of the church of the Lord. Here the battle line is drawn. Here the issue must and will be finally decided. If it can be proved from the word of the Lord that elders can perform scriptural oversight of work outside of their local congregation, that they can scripturally take the oversight of much of the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of dollars of a great number of other churches, we will have to abandon the position that we have held and defended for many years, and change our whole church work and government. We will have established the scripturalness of the diocese — that an elder has the oversight of a district of country not limited to the local congregation. We can well afford to waive every other question as secondary, and come to grips on the above statements. For more than three years, in papers and in "Living Issues," I have urged that some one of the defenders of centralized setups try to disprove the truth of the above statements. Till this date, May 25, 1954, I have not heard or read of a single word in opposition. Who will come forward and affirm that the work of the Highland elders is the official work that God has assigned as such? The official work of elders begins and ends with the oversight of the local church. Whatever work they do outside of the local church comes under some other head than official work. The position that we established and have successfully defended for more than fifty years is stated in these words: The official work of elders is confined solely to the oversight of the local congregation. If we abandon this basic position we launch out on the "diocese" doctrine that elders have the oversight of a district of country, outside of and beyond the local church membership. That is the position that developed into the universal rule of the Pope of Rome. We have taken a small step on this road. We must hastily retreat from this step or we are at the parting of the ways.
The Parallel
No one has claimed that there is as yet any formally organized institution among the churches of the Lord identical with missionary societies. But many of as good, pious and intelligent members, preachers, and writers as we have, are convinced that there are some "centralized control" setups that are now performing every essential function performed by missionary societies in the early days of the Christian Church apostasy. There is most certainly a striking parallel in their work on a number of points. That is, before their numerous societies were merged into the United Christian Missionary Society. As an example for comparison I will take the Illinois Christian Missionary Society, date, 1907. J. Fred Jones, the state evangelist, attacked the Sand Creek Church of Christ in a speech at Winsor. That attack, after fourteen months of strong pressure, forced J. B. Briney to defend missionary societies in the Otey-Briney debate in Louisville, Kentucky, September, 1908. I had to know much about the Illinois society because Briney was affirming "the Illinois Missionary Society is authorized in the New Testament scriptures." An analysis of the operation of the "Herald of Truth" will be made to determine if there is a very close likeness between them.
Any group of several men acting as a unit must be called by some name that will fairly describe the group. Very nearly universally the term "board" is so used. In our church work we speak of the official board of the church, meaning of course the elders in particular, and sometimes the deacons are included. The word board, when applied to a group working as a unit is defined, "a number of persons elected to the management of some public or private office or trust." Beyond any doubt it is respectful and correct by usage to refer to the brethren who manage the "Herald of Truth" program as the board of managers. They affirm that they are the "sole managers of every phase of the work," that no "authority" is delegated to any one. But in their management of the "Herald of Truth" they are not acting in the capacity of the official board of the Highland Church. In their capacity as overseers or managers of the "Herald of Truth" they have the oversight of a work not confined to the scriptural limit of the local church but nation-wide, and for more than one thousand other churches, and more than seven hundred thousand dollars of money not contributed by their own church. The propriety then, of referring to them as the Board of the Herald of Truth, is incontestable.
Now For The Comparison
| 1. Illinois Christian Missionary Society. | 1. Herald of Truth. |
| 2. Printed Constitution and By-Laws. | 2. No printed constitution and by-laws but governed by accepted rules of procedure. |
| 3. Board of Managers. | 3. Board of Managers. |
| 4. State evangelist as its field agent. | 4. Two or more to travel over many states. |
| 5. Solicited contributions state-wide. | 5. Solicits contributions nation-wide. |
| 6. Board had full authority to disburse all funds. | 6. Board has full authority to disburse all funds. |
| 7. Hired and paid all employees. | 7. Hires and pays all employees. |
| 8. Delegated no authority to any one. | 8. Delegates no authority to anyone. |
| 9. Made reports to contributing church of conversions and churches established. | 9. Makes no reports of conversions or churches established. |
| 10. Briney affirmed that it was authorized in the New Testament. | 10. Defenders of Herald of Truth say it is New Testament cooperation. |
| 11. Purpose to preach the gospel. | 11. Purpose to preach the gospel. |
Every reader can see that there is perfect agreement between the Illinois Society and the Herald of Truth on very essential point. It has been said that "Brother Otey's parallel is crooked." Here are two fairly stated. It will be a service to the Cause of Christ if some able man will take the two, analyze them, and show, if he can, the difference on any essential point. All sincere Christians desire only the truth about all practices. A large number of us are convinced that there is a dangerous similarity between some central control agencies among us and missionary societies before they were merged into the UCMS. On many points of comparison there is an exact identity. I think the deadly parallel will shock many sincere defenders of the Herald of Truth.
Now let someone tell us what was wrong with missionary societies as they were previous to 1910. Except written constitution and by-laws we guarantee that there will be found a counterpart of function on every essential point.
The idea of making the church function as a whole led to centralizing the authority in one man, the Pope of Rome. But it required nearly six hundred years.
The idea of making the church function in a larger group than the local congregation led to the United Christian Missionary Society. It required about seventy years.
The idea of making the church function as a unit, composed of more than a thousand churches, brought into existence the Herald of Truth. If it is not dissolved, what may be expected in twenty-five years?
Mark well these parallels.