"That The Brethren May Know" -- No. 3
The elders of the Highland Avenue Church in Abilene have been accused widely of doing two things: (1) violating the New Testament principle of local church autonomy by begging and taking the oversight and control of funds of one thousand and eighty-eight other churches, for the promotion of a nation-wide radio program, which originally was the brain-child of two young preachers who were not members of the Highland Church, and which the Highland Church is not able to support; (2) using unfair and unethical "pressure tactics" to suppress the opposition of Glenn Wallace to their sponsoring church system of centralized control of the funds of one thousand and eighty eight other churches.
In their defense against these two charges, the Highland elders have compiled and distributed an eighteen page booklet, entitled, "That the Brethren May Know"; because, they say, they "have reason to believe that a booklet such as this will bring the truth to more brethren in the shortest amount of time than by any other means." (Highland booklet, page 1, paragraph 2.)
This is the third article in my review of that booklet by the elders of the Highland Church.
In article number one of this series, I called attention to the testimony of the Highland elders themselves; which testimony, as I see it, proves beyond reasonable doubt that that they are doing everything that H. A. Dixon, a college president, says it takes to constitute a violation of the New Testament principle of local church autonomy.
In article number two of this series, I presented the testimony of one of their preachers, E. R. Harper; which testimony, "from where I sit," proves beyond reasonable doubt that they did use (though unintentionally) "old Digressive pressure tactics" to suppress Glenn Wallace.
Now, in this third and final installment of my review of the Highland brochure, I must deal with some offensive and repulsive statements, written in the booklet by Brother E. H. Harper, one of the best friends I ever had.
A discussion of these ugly things which Brother Harper has written is no pleasure at all to me; but his spiteful darts make an answer mandatory.
Here is a sample of what Brother Harper now thinks of some of the best friends he ever had:
"That fine group of men against whom no man could stand, has now lost its power for good as it once had and the church has lost its confidence, to a great degree, in the sincerity of those of us who so valiantly fought the battles of the church during the past twenty years. The reason of this is that too many of you boys have changed your positions too many times on too many things. To so do is to establish yourselves as novices and men without the power to make up your minds once and for all as to what is really the truth. Some of you can be used on both sides of many issues. Your rapid changes are creating in the minds of a great number the impression that you change with the necessity. That is a man's privilege and each time to think it right but still it destroys confidence and renders your influence weak in some places where it should be strong. You boys do not agree among yourselves on the question you are trying to kill. Which one of you shall we believe? Suppose we decided to make a change, which one of you shall we follow and what guarantee do we have that tomorrow, after the change has been made that something will not arise that will change your minds and you will be fighting for the very thing that today you are set to destroy ?" (Highland booklet, pages 6 and 7.)
Before beginning my analysis of this sample of vituperative sarcasm, I want to say that Ernest Harper is not as ignoble and mean as the above excerpt indicates. What he has written in the Highland pamphlet does him a greater injustice than everything others have written about him. As a rule, he is not unbrotherly and churlish, though his language here does imply that he is.
For thirty years I have known and loved E. It. Harper for his work's sake. We have worked together in protracted meetings on many occasions through the years. He has spent much time in my home, and when I am in reach of the town where he lives, I always feel free to make his home my home. Ten pages in the Gospel Guardian would not afford adequate space for enumeration of all his noble traits and benevolent deeds.
Helping others seems to be his greatest delight. I have requested favors of him, and he never failed to respond immediately and joyfully. Through the long years of our priceless friendship, I have never known a man more loyal to his associates and co-workers than Brother Harper.
How, then, can his sarcastic outbursts in the Highland booklet be explained? Some may think the weakness of his position is the cause; though I think he is trying to defend an untenable practice of the Highland elders. I do not think that is the explanation.
The answer to what may appear to be a man's dual personality can be found sometimes in the man's physical or nervous condition. Ernest Harper is not a well man, and has not been for some time. He had to undergo surgery and spend considerable time in the hospital while he was writing his two chapters for the Highland pamphlet. He was not able to preach at all for several weeks, and was in no condition to preach or write anything, when he was preparing his contributions to the booklet. His bitter meanders cannot be explained on any other ground. (Highland brochure, postscript, page 6.)
If the Highland elders had used their time in restraining Brother Harper from writing while he was sick, instead of wasting it in trying to stop Glenn Wallace from criticizing their Romish centralization methods, they would have displayed much better judgment. "From where I sit," Brother Harper is more sinned against, than sinning.
These things have I written that all may know that it was not depravity of soul, but malady of the body, that caused Brother Harper to write as he did. Ordinarily, I would not reply to these things at all. But Brother Harper is backed, encouraged and supported in the things that he has written, by the elders of a great church; vital issues are involved; his unfortunate utterances are being circulated all over the world. This makes an answer imperative.
Now, let us analyze the quotation from Brother Harper.
1. "Too many of you boys have changed your positions too many times on too many things."
For three reasons I do not believe that any man as capable, wise and good as Brother Harper, would have made such a statement, if he had not been sick: (1) He knows it is hypocritical, egotistic and stubborn for a person to refuse to change, when he discovers that his views are wrong; (2) every sermon he preaches is an effort to persuade somebody to change; (3) Brother Harper has changed his "positions" as " many times" on as "many things" as any gospel preacher I ever knew.
About twenty years ago when he lived in Jackson, Tennessee, and I lived in Birmingham, Alabama, we were together a great deal. I know he did believe then that it was scriptural and right for churches to contribute money to Freed-Hardeman College, and I know he did advise churches to do that very thing; but, thank God, he has changed his "positions" on that issue.
In 1938, Brother Harper said in the Tulsa Lectures, "A congregation has no right to build anything larger than it is able to support." Now, he argues that the Highland congregation does have a right to build a radio project "larger than it is able to support." No man ever made a more obvious change than that.
If I wanted to be nasty, I would ask Brother Harper, in his own words, "What guarantee do we have that tomorrow something will not arise that will change your mind and you will be fighting for "church contributions to Freed-Hardeman College, as you did twenty years ago, "the very thing that today you are set to destroy"? Or, "What guarantee do we have that tomorrow something will not arise that will change your mind and you will be" preaching that "a congregation has no right to build anything larger than it is able to support," as you were preaching in 1938? But I do not want to be nasty; therefore, I shall not ask him that. Nor will I stoop to imply "that you change with the necessity."
The only passage of scripture in Highland's eighteen page booklet is Romans 2:21-22. "Thou therefore that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal? thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou rob temples?" (Highland booklet, page 14, first paragraph.) That scripture has no application today more fitting than when applied to Ernest Harper. He has done many times what he is accusing others of doing.
2. "You boys do not agree among yourselves."
As far as I know, all the "boys" to whom Ernest refers agree pretty well that "a congregation has no right to build anything larger than it is able to support"; but Ernest may know something about our "positions," which I do not know; therefore, I shall not argue with him on that point.
I wonder just what one could do to persuade Ernest to state that he, James Nichols, James Willeford and Logan Buchanan "agree among yourselves on the question you are now trying to kill." "Suppose we decided to make a change, which one of you shall we follow?" If these brethren do not agree among themselves "on the question you are now trying to kill," then the brochure passage, Romans 2:21-22, hits Ernest hard again.
In order to "bring the truth to more brethren," the Highland elders have included in their booklet the testimony of a witness who says, "There is a parallel between an orphans' home that has a board of trustees other than the elders of the church to do the work of the church, and the United Christian Missionary Society." (Brochure, page 17, paragraph 2.) Boles Home is an orphan home that has a board of trustees other than the elders of the church.
Now, I wonder just what one could do to get Ernest and the Highland elders to tell Gayle Oler which they believe: (1) there is a parallel between Boles Home and the United Christian Missionary Society; or (2) there is no parallel between Boles Home and the United Christian Missionary Society.
(1) If they believe the thing they say "will bring the truth to more brethren," then they believe there is a parallel between Boles Home and the United Christian Missionary Society. (2) If they do not believe there is a parallel between Boles Home and the United Christian Missionary Society, then they do not believe the testimony of their own booklet which they say "will bring the truth to more brethren." I should like to have an answer to the question, "Which one of you shall we believe?" If they stick to their booklet and say there is a parallel between the two, then I shall leave them at the mercy of Gayle Oler; he has a bigger vocabulary of bitter words anyway, than I do.
3. "You change with the necessity."
Here, Brother Harper slanders the Highland elders, and doesn't know it. They say in their booklet, page 3, "Brethren, we realize we have made mistakes and for that reason we continue to solicit your prayers and help." "Changes have been made from time to time and no doubt shall continue to be made."
When the Highland elders make a mistake, and then change, they "solicit your prayers and help." When one of us makes a mistake, and then changes, they give us Ernest Harper's sarcastic insults, which we do not "solicit."
I think the Highland elders should apologize to us for Brother Harper's insults, because "the judgment is before us" all. But that is their way of bringing "the truth to more brethren," and I do not know of anything we can do about it. I certainly do not want to resort to "pressure tactics" to get them to repent of this glaring sin against some of Brother Harper's "you boys."
Repentance is a "change." (Matt. 12:41; Jonah 3:10.) The only person who never needs to "change" is the person who never needs to repent. The only person who never needs to repent is the person who has attained sinless perfection in his daily life.
If Ernest thinks he has attained sinless perfection in his daily life, and does not need a daily "change," then, there is nothing we can do about it, but give him to the Holy Rollers.
The Highland elders confess that they have made mistakes and changes, and will continue to do so. Ernest says, "To so do is to establish yourselves as novices and men without the power to make up your minds once and for all as to what is really the truth." Are novices qualified to be elders? (1 Tim. 3:6.) Be careful, Ernest; you might raise some question as to the qualifications of the Highland eldership.
3. "Influence weak in some places where it should be strong."
I do not know to what places Brother Harper refers, where the influence of the Gospel Guardian is weak. But I do know one place where its influence is not "weak"; that place is Abilene, and especially Highland Church. Its influence there may not be the kind that Ernest likes; but the kind it does have is not "weak." How could anything with a "weak" influence ever obtain the response that the Gospel Guardian has received from Ernest and the Highland elders?
Conclusion Brother Harper knows the pages of the Gospel Guardian are open to him, and he can reply therein to anything and everything I have written. I would not write anything about him in any paper in which I knew he would not be permitted to reply in his own way; and I do not think he will resort to the cowardly and dishonorable tactics of replying to me in a paper in which he knows I would not be allowed the privilege to write one word in answer to him. I think Ernest Harper will "take thought for things honorable, not only in the sight of the Lord, but also in the sight of men." (2 Cor. 8:21.)