Response To The "Special Issue"
We have been greatly encouraged by the fine reception accorded the "Special Issue" of the Gospel Guardian which we mailed out last month. We are still in process of mailing them out, and orders continue to come in nearly every mail. We do not know what the final count will be, but we sent out forty thousand the first month, and are still mailing at a fairly good rate into the second month. We urge all who may desire the paper to get your orders in at once. The supply diminishes every day; and we probably will not attempt a second printing.
Letters received? Too many to count. They have come from all points of the compass, from old and young; newly converted saints and those who have been in the service for sixty years or more. As of this writing (early in June) two papers have been returned, and one letter has been unfavorable. All other comment received has been favorable. Many feel that this "Special Issue" may well mark a turning point in the current controversy, causing many people who had been inclined to ignore the whole matter to begin a serious, objective study of Bible teaching on the questions considered. We have seen one church bulletin that struck a note of criticism, and tried to dismiss the entire problem on the ground that the men who wrote the articles for the "Special" confessed that they were "not in agreement" on some phases of some of the problems; and therefore, churches ought to ignore all criticism and questioning of their projects, and go ahead as if nothing had ever been said. But apparently the vast majority of brethren are too deeply concerned, too seriously disturbed over the problem to take so childish and belittling an attitude and solution. They recognize that the future of the church, and the eternal destiny of their own souls may well be at stake. A careless wave of the hand is not the answer. An attempt to dismiss it all as the excited fuming and fussing of a handful of fanatics will not satisfy those who are concerned about serving God. An appeal to prejudice or to "the endorsement of our great brotherhood" (as one brother has done) is still not enough to satisfy the truly honest and conscientious heart. Perhaps this "Special Issue" will serve a useful purpose in turning the thoughts of all of us more fully to the Bible — for therein is the only right answer to our problem.
Three articles in the "Special" have called forth particular comment: Brother Hugh Clark's earnest plea for brotherly kindness and sympathy one for another as the problem is studied; Brother Robert Farish's article on "When Is A New Testament Example Binding?"; and Brother Marshall E. Patton's article on "How To Establish Scriptural Authority." If the two articles by Farish and Patton can be seriously studied in the spirit and attitude so earnestly advocated in Brother Clark's article, we believe the real solution of this particular controversy may well be in sight. For the whole issue revolves around the question of AUTHORITY! Is the kind of cooperation now being practiced AUTHORIZED by the scriptures? Or, do we actually need authority for the method of cooperation? Recently some are making quite an argument out of their contention that (1) we have no authority for Sunday School classes; (2) we have no authority for building a meeting house; (3) we have no authority for a baptistry in the church.
But we all admit these things are right. Therefore, (the conclusion is) we do not NEED authority for the kind of cooperation we are practicing! These arguments we have seen lately in mimeographed sheets distributed all over the Texas panhandle; we've seen them on the pages of the Gospel Advocate; and we've seen them in letters from the Highland Avenue (Abilene) elders to other elderships who were declining to go along with the Herald of Truth promotion.
Now, the articles by Patton and Farish deal particularly with these matters. A careful study of them would have prevented some of the extreme and uninformed argumentation which brethren have advanced. And as they are studied, we look for a most wholesome reaction and response on the part of all right thinking people. That some will not study goes without saying. For them we can have no hope. But we believe that number is not nearly so large as some may have supposed. And for those who do study, the course will lead to truth.
In this connection, we mention an article in this issue by Brother Roy Key. Brother Key has in the past years written some things that to our understanding clearly reflect the influence of modernism. In his article he insists that he is NOT a modernist, and pleads for patience and brotherly love on the part of all brethren. We are sympathetic toward such a plea. We have little tolerance for that sectarian attitude that refuses fellowship to a man who does not "line up" with some paper or some group within the church who may be powerful politically (we mean in church politics, not national). Such an attitude is subversive of the very nature of Christianity, and is repugnant to every man who has partaken of the spirit of Christ. That the "Special Issue" called forth this article from Key, we take to be a good sign. Perhaps it will help even in the problem of modernism, even though it was not designed nor produced particularly with that field in view. But regardless of the problem — modernism, institutionalism, premillennialism — there must be a Christian attitude in our discussions. The "Special Issue" was a plea for unity. That unity will not come over night. The promotions that have brought disunity did not develop suddenly. But by diligent study, fervent prayer, brotherly love, and a supreme respect always for "thus saith the Lord," the goal can be reached.