The Missionary Society
As we pursue our study of the MS and its modern counterparts, we face the question of what is really wrong with the MS. What is fundamentally wrong with it? How many sermons have been preached on this in the last few years? Seldom, if ever, is such a lesson delivered. Perhaps the failure to keep "hammering" at the real, basic wrongs of the MS is responsible for the institutions among "us" having gained the ground and popularity that they have. If we had been properly taught along this line through the years, no doubt brethren would not be "taken in" by the human arrangements of today.
The MS had its birth in 'Cincinnati, Ohio in 1849. Even before this, there were held numerous "Cooperation Meetings," as they were described. Into the ranks of the "Restoration Movement" was introduced this human organization, that along with some other things, mainly instrumental music, worked havoc in the great movement back to pure Christianity. The idea of the MS was born in the minds of men who were dissatisfied with the seeming failure of churches of Christ working as independent congregations to get the gospel to the whole world. They labored under the mistaken notion that such could not be accomplished unless all the churches combined their efforts and cooperated in some central organization. As they reasoned about this they became more convinced of the necessity of such an organization. These men were not ungodly men. For the most part they were honest and sincere in their efforts and reasoning. As they continued to think and talk along this line, they came up with the idea that God had placed upon the whole church, as a great brotherhood, the responsibility of preaching the gospel to the whole world. Their idea was that this was the obligation of the church in its universal capacity. The following quotation from Volume 2 of Brother Earl West's book, THE SEARCH FOR THE ANCIENT ORDER, is so well-put and descriptive of the situation that I transcribe it here. Read it carefully. It has been carried in this paper before, but it needs to be emphasized over again.
"The basic apology Pendleton based upon his conception of the church universal, and in this he followed closely the reasoning of Alexander Campbell. No man is prepared to see the Society as Pendleton saw it without beginning where Pendleton began. First, he filled his mind with the thought of the church in its universal aspect, ignoring for the time being the local church. God gave to the church — in its universal sense — the responsibility to convert the world. But God did not give the method by which the church — in its universal sense — was to convert the world. Therefore, whatever method the church — in its universal sense — uses is acceptable. The method is a matter of expediency. The church universal is left free to decide for itself....
"The church is spoken of in the New Testament in a universal sense . . . There are some things about this truly significant. It is significant, for example, that the church universal has never known but one officer — Jesus Christ himself, who is the head over the body.... The study of church history reveals the fact that every time men thought in terms of the church universal, they ended up by forming organizations which in their work substituted themselves in the place of Christ... In the restoration movement, brethren thought in terms of the church universal, and with that conception formed the Missionary Society . . . .
"That Christ intended for the world to be converted through individual congregations being established in every local community and thence, exercising a saving influence over that community seems too obvious for dispute . . . . The only church organization in the New Testament is that of a local church, not the church universal. The only officers of the church are those of the local church, not the church universal. The individual congregation of Christ's disciples is the only missionary society known in the scriptures."
We can see from this that this unscriptural organization came into being because of an unscriptural concept of church action. This organization was unscriptural long before the abuses and extremes to which it later went. It was unscriptural before it dictated to the churches or exercised ecclesiastical power. This organization was wrong in its conception — based upon an unscriptural concept of church action. The idea was for the church universal to do its work of preaching the gospel by centralizing its resources under a single agency — the MS. "This, then, is the BASIC fallacy of the MS. It is a rejection of God's plan for work on the INDIVIDUAL and CONGREGATIONAL LEVELS, and contemplates a still higher level of INTER-CONGREGATIONAL activity. It is not particularly important what shape or form the super organization might take; the very idea is wrong. It is based on an unscriptural concept. Whether the governing body be made up of individuals selected by many congregations and from among themselves (as in the Missionary Societies), or of a body selected by ONE congregation, and all holding membership in that one congregation (as in Herald of Truth), or whether it is a self-perpetuating hierarchy of clergy (as in Roman Catholicism), THE FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPT IS WRONG." (Yater Tant)
Thus we can see the unscriptural thinking behind the birth of this human institution. Can we not learn from the past? Has not the same unscriptural concept of universal church action been the beginning point from which men have reasoned today to the forming of similar human arrangements? Surely it has. The same arguments are being made today in behalf of the institutions and human arrangements among "us" that were made by the advocates of the Society a hundred years ago.
In the language of Brother Farris J. Smith, "I am persuaded that the foundation of our ills today regarding INSTITUTIONALISM is to be found in this same unscriptural concept of universal church action." It may not be that it has been contended for to the same degree nor on such a broad scale, but whether for a city, for a given area( even if not too limited, such as West Texas), or fore the churches everywhere, the idea is there of universal church action. We get to thinking in terms of what the whole church can do, or at least what a large number of churches working together THROUGH some Board of Directors or some local eldership (as "Supervisors") can do in the general sense — all together. Then since God has given no organization through which such action can be taken, such thinking results in the creation of an organization for this concerted action. "Thinking unscripturally we act unscripturally." These organizational arrangements are the result of thinking in unscriptural terms and of failing to think in scriptural terms. It is this unscriptural concept of general church action that makes out of a local eldership a society for "brotherhood action." When this wrong concept is corrected then is precluded the possibility of any organization for universal church action — either for the whole brotherhood or for some section of it, such as Boles Home, Childhaven, and the Missionary Society. Also, it makes impossible a society of a local eldership for brotherhood action as is seen in THE HERALD OF TRUTH, Tipton Orphan Home and others. A study of the New Testament reveals an amazing lack of organization. The main stress in New Testament days was laid upon INDIVIDUAL action.
The basic error in the MS then is the rejection of God's plan for work on the congregational and individual levels, and calls for a centralizing and controlling organization through which the church universally may work in carrying out her divinely-given mission. If this is not the main error of such, then it can only be wrong in its extremes and abuses. Hence, if these should be corrected then it would be scriptural. Are we prepared to accept this?
That the institutions and human arrangements of our day are parallel with the MS in this basic unscriptural concept it shall be the purpose of the next article to show.