Reply to Brother Zerr

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 2]

     Of the many reasons I am glad that Brother Zerr is writing his objections to our plea for restoration, I will mention three. (1) He may point out errors in my thinking so I can correct them; (2) I will have an opportunity to correct any misconception he may hold as to my position; (3) It will provide a demonstration that men may be in fellowship as brethren, yet disagree upon some matters. I learn from those who differ rather than from those who agree with me. The latter but confirm my views, the former cause me to re-study them in the light of new evidence. I love our good brother, but I never did fully agree with all of his interpretations. That fact has never lessened my regard for him.

     I have read the article "One Church" a number of times. I cannot see the point our brother seeks to make. He implies that in our plea for restoration we consider the various sectarian bodies "as parts of the 'one church' the New Testament recognizes." This is exactly opposite to my position. I have repeatedly said that the church of God is not a sect. No sect is the church of God. No coalition or aggregation of sects constitutes that church. The various sects exist in opposition to

[Page 3]

the word of God. They are a manifestation of a work of the flesh. I think our beloved brother is confused because we contend there may be children of God among the sects. That is far from saying that the sects are a part of the one body. There are citizens of the United States in Russia, but Russia is not a part of the United States. There are citizens of the United States in every foreign country, but these countries do not constitute the United States. There may be citizens of the kingdom of heaven scattered among the denominations, but the denominations do not constitute the kingdom of heaven. The one church is composed now, as it has always been, of all the saved ones. It embraces within its membership every child of God on this earth.

     Our brother concurs with the view that we do not have perfect knowledge of all truth. All we plead for is that we recognize and acknowledge truth where we find it. Since it is now granted that "If a group must 'know all the truth' in order to be a true church, then the Lord has never had a true church," the question arises as to how much truth a group must know before it is a true church. What truth must it know, and what truth may it not know, and still be a true church? Who is to determine that? This is no problem with our Roman Catholic friends, but who is to assume the papal authority among the various segments of the disciple brotherhood?

     If our brother's reasoning is correct, could a group be a true church in one century, and the same group not be a true church in another century? Could a group be a true church in one part of the world with part of the truth, and another group in another place be a true church at the same time with another part of the truth? If not, just which part of truth must either have to be a true church? My answer to the problem is that it is not so much a question of how much truth a group has at any time which makes it acceptable to God, but the attitude toward truth as such. A group having but little truth may be eager to discover and accept all truth, and God will bless them; another may have a great deal of truth, but resent any discovery of new truth, and thus be rejected.

     In dealing with fellowship and exclusiveness our good brother chides us for seeking to lead out of sectism those who have been immersed in the name of our Lord. He asks, "Why wish to lead him out? If he is a child of God, is in a saved condition, and the Lord has already added him to His church, why disturb him?" Because, after the Lord added him to His church, the person added himself to something the Lord does not approve. The party spirit is carnal (1 Cor. 3:3). It is a work of the flesh (Gal. 5:20). God does not want His children to be divided into religious parties and factions. Those children of God who exhibit the party spirit displease the Father. They thwart the divine purpose.

     Our brother asks, "What could we offer him that would be any better than what he has?" In many places -- nothing! Many brethren would not destroy the party spirit at all. They would merely channel it into defence of another party, perhaps one referred to as "The Church of Christ." That is what we oppose. It is as wrong to be a Church of Christ sectarian as any other kind. But, in many places, brethren have seen the folly of the partisan spirit, or setting up unwritten creeds and human tests of fellowship. They can offer a man who has been enmeshed in sectarianism the liberty and freedom which are the heritage of all who are in Jesus.

     Our good brother poses the problem, "Since we do not know all the truth, this man may know as much of it as we, and hence we just as well 'leave him alone in his glory.'" Perhaps, measured by quantity, many know as much, or even more truth than we do. But we have learned the truth about the sin of division among God's children. It is this truth we must share with our brethren in the toils of sectism. Most of them have not learned it. In turn, they can convey to us the truths they have learned and all of us will profit. We cannot leave a brother "in his glory" if he is enveloped in sectism, for religious division is not a glory,

[Page 4]

but the greatest scandal of modern Christendom. It is disgraceful and sinful!

     It is true I think we should have an open mind for reception of newly discovered truths, and since our brother admits we do not have all the truth, he would not suggest we close our minds against more of it. Many of the arguments I once made on certain issues have been proven by study to be illogical and unscriptural. I will not make those arguments again. I was sincere when I made them, but I was sincerely wrong! Toleration of others who are honestly striving to learn is not restoration. It is only the atmosphere in which restoration studies can be pursued.

     To join The Christian Church or The Methodist Church would be to ally myself with a human party. This would no more help save humanity than creating another sect called "The Church of Christ." I love all of those who compose The Christian Church and The Methodist Church. I acknowledge all truth taught by any of their members, and I fervently pray that God may use me as an humble instrument to show them there is "a more excellent way" than the partisan road. To that end I will go among them, and thankfully welcome any opportunity to plead the Cause I love. By such contacts in charity and sincerity we may all of us come closer to each other as we come closer to Him who died for every one of us.

     In our next issue Brother Zerr will present additional objections to our plea. Read them carefully and studiously. I will also reply at length to Brother Loney who is filing his objections to restoration. May God help all of us to be humble followers of His Son, and brethren in the Lord, is my fervent prayer! We need each other very much.