Both Right -- Both Wrong
The present discussion between the Firm Foundation and the Gospel Advocate will be of interest to brethren all over the world for several reasons. These two journals are engaged in a serious difference as to the Bible teaching on the care of orphan children — more particularly, as to the scripturalness or unscripturalness of certain types of orphan homes.
It is the Gospel Advocate position that the benevolent work of the church, specifically the care of orphan children, MUST BE DONE through some separate and independent organization, society, institution or agency; that the church does not and can not act in the field of benevolence on the same basis that she can act in the field of evangelism. Brother Roy Lanier and brother Reuel Lemmons through the pages of the Firm Foundation have attacked this contention most vigorously, and in our judgment, most effectively. They have shown that the Gospel Advocate position, as set forth by the staff-writer, brother Guy N. Woods, is a blatant denial of the "all sufficiency" of the church, and is clearly parallel to the Missionary Society. Brother Lanier wrote:
"The work being done, caring for the needy, is a church work. All work of the church should be done under the oversight of the overseers of the church. But these homes under boards insist and persist in doing under the oversight of a board what should be done under the oversight of elders." (F. F. Feb. 26.)
Further:
"If it was sinful for brethren of a century ago to activate the universal church in forming the missionary society, why is it now right to activate the universal church in forming a benevolent society ?" (F. F. Feb. 26.)
It is the contention of brethren Lanier and Lemmons that the only kind of "orphan home" the church can support is one under the oversight of the elders of the congregation. That this position is clearly right is, we believe, beyond question. But brother Woods responds by affirming that when elders of a congregation supervise such institutions as Lubbock Children's Home, Tipton Orphan Home, and Maude Carpenter Home, they are NOT ACTING AS ELDERS OF THE LOCAL CONGREGATION, but are functioning as directors of an institution. He writes:
"It may, indeed, be expedient, as this writer believes it is at Tipton, Oklahoma, for the same men who are elders of the church there to conduct the home as members of the board of Tipton Orphan Home; but, in this latter capacity they are not serving as elders, but as Christians. The Tipton Orphan Home Corporation, of which one of the brethren there serves as President, is an activity apart from, and independent of, the framework of the Tipton Church." (G.A., April 11.)
We believe Woods' point is well taken. These "homes under an eldership" as now functioning are in reality "brotherhood" homes, and are not within "the framework of the local congregation" where they exist. The elders of the churches who are also overseers of such homes are in effect serving in two capacities — as elders of a church and as directors of a separate institution. It is what the business world would describe as "inter-locking directorship"--the same individuals being directors of two or more corporations or organizations.
It will be highly interesting, and, we hope, profitable to follow the discussion as it develops. It is a most hopeful turn of affairs. We believe it will have considerable effect in dampening any wholesale "quarantine" campaign, and give time for brethren to calm down a bit and agree to further studies and discussions. Our congratulations to both the Gospel Advocate and the Firm Foundation — each for exposing the fatal weakness in the other's position.
— F. Y. T.
Brother Reese's "Open Letter"
Elsewhere in this issue you will find the first section of a lengthy "open letter" addressed by brother John F. Reese, Highland Church elder in charge of Herald of Truth, to this writer. We publish his letter to give our readers, once again, the opportunity of noting that almost the TOTAL effort of defenders of Herald of Truth to find scriptural warrant for their operation consists in trying to discredit, disparage, and stigmatize those who oppose their promotion.
There is nothing new in brother Reese's letter. It has all been replied to in previous issues of this journal. But just for the record, let us state: (1) Brother Reese makes the same mistake in his "Bible School" argument that the digressives make — a failure to distinguish between general authority and specific. (2) We proposed the "boxes in the vestibule" arrangement for churches who were contributing to orphan homes as the lesser of two evils, feeling that this might be a way to avoid division within a number of congregations. (3) The decision of North Park elders to discontinue their contribution to Herald of Truth was made several months before we ever attended that church even once, and we had nothing at all to do with it. (4) The Otis Gatewood deceit and trickery has been exposed too often to need further comment.