Schisms and Parties

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 1]

     This article is one of a series. To be fully appreciated it should be read in the context of those which preceded it. Unfortunately, there are no extra copies to provide readers who are just now being introduced to our thinking. It is, therefore, necessary that we briefly review. We began by pointing out the fact that we live in a world of turmoil and tension. Our way of life is threatened by corruption and decay. The tried and true values of yesteryear are being abandoned. At the same time we are subjected to the pressure of a godless ideology in the form of the dialectical materialism of the Marxian theory which contemplates the destruction of what we cherish most, and the universal enslavement of mankind. It is our thesis that we cannot survive through the use of raw force or armament, and our only hope lies in the implementation of the philosophy which can meet the enemy upon a rational battleground and overcome.

     It is our contention that the rise of western civilization is the result of acceptance of certain great truths. Among these are the belief in one God as the creator of the universe, of the working and intervention of this Supreme Being in history, of the climax of such intervention in the sending of His Son, who entered our world clothed in human flesh nineteen centuries ago. The acknowledgement of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God, entails a recognition of His code of ethics as the only source of happiness in this life and the one hope of blessing in the world to come.

     We began a search to determine what religious organization now extant exemplifies the church of God on earth, in its original purity and power. We have studied the claims of Roman Catholicism and Protestantism and have stated our reasons for rejecting both. We next turned to the churches resulting from the Restoration movement sparked by Alexander Campbell and his contemporaries in the nineteenth century. We pointed out the schism which rent adherents of this movement at the beginning of our own century into the "instrument" and "non-instrument" churches. We investigated The Disciples of Christ and the Conservative Christian Churches, and expressed the view that these were but parties and factions, content to defend the status quo, and unwilling to rise up and pursue the ideal of true restoration.

     We come now to a study of "The Church of Christ" which claims to be the kingdom of heaven on earth, and the one body exclusively for which Jesus gave His blood, and whose chosen champions affirm that the church of which they are members is identical in origin, name, doctrine, and practice, with the church of the New Testament scriptures. By the term "The Church of Christ" as used in this article we refer to the great body of believers, distinct and separate from those

[Page 2]

who use instrumental music in the public worship. Many congregations of the latter also call themselves "Churches of Christ," but this review will not directly concern them. Actually, we are talking about those who would make, and do make, the use of instrumental music a test of Christian "fellowship" as they employ that term.

     Is "The Church of Christ" as manifested in its strength in Nashville, Tennessee; Dallas, Texas; Lubbock, Texas; etc., the one body of our Lord, restored to earth in this day, and does it include within its confines and membership, all of the saints of God on earth? It makes this claim, identical with that of the Roman Catholic Church, and, like the latter, calls upon all those who are not affiliated with it to return to it as "the true church." In my examination of these claims I will be treading upon familiar ground, for, having left the Lutheran communion at an early age, I have long been identified with one segment of the religious fellowship under review.

     I shall try to be objective, at the same time admitting the difficulty posed when one looks at a group from the inside, rather than surveying them from a distance, or as a non-member. However, I have been criticized more severely by members of "The Church of Christ" than by others, for they allege that my strictures against them are too severe, and are unjustly strong, that I am not as fair with them as with others. I doubt that these accusations are correct. They stem from several factors. (1) "The Church of Christ" makes a claim generally made by no other group except the Romanists. Both claim to be the one holy, catholic, and apostolic church of God upon earth. Such a bold contention must be handled in a factual and straightforward fashion. (2) Members of "The Church of Christ" cannot stand criticism. They equate themselves with the elect of God upon earth, and thus can unmercifully castigate all other religious peoples, assailing them both publicly and privately, but they cannot accept criticism with grace, for, as they view it, to criticize them is equivalent to attacking the Bible and the church of our Lord. (3) By its very nature "The Church of Christ," through an exclusivist attitude, has isolated and insulated its members from contact with the rest of the religious world, and any intimation that they may not be the only children of God upon earth, or that there may be members of God's family scattered among the sectarian hills, is regarded as a personal insult.

     We have no intention of being unnecessarily severe. We seek to be fair, equitable and honest. We do not desire to be prejudiced in favor of, or against anyone on earth. We are aware, that being allied with this segment of the Restoration movement, what we say will, in a sense, involve ourselves. The editor realizes that members of "The Church of Christ" merely reflect the philosophy and teaching of their leaders. If those leaders are correct "The Church of Christ" is represented by the particular faction they represent, and this faction is composed of the Israel of God, and those outside of its environs are pagans and Gentiles, members of other factions being apostates and heretics.

     The first difficulty we face in analysis of "The Church of Christ" is to designate which "Church of Christ" we are talking about. There are more than eighteen separate and distinct groups among the non-instrument churches, and each one of these claims to be "the loyal church" or "the faithful church" with but few exceptions. Each regards all of the others as being in various stages of departure or apostasy. In some cities, such as Dallas, Texas, there are as many as ten different factions, no two of which "fellowship" each other, yet, each one claims to be the church as it was set forth in the New Testament. The tragedy of this century is the rape of the Restoration movement which was inaugurated to promote the unity of all believers, by the party spirit. Satan has again demonstrated his ingenuity by bringing about an adoption of the very status we sought to destroy. In our fervency to rid the world of religious division, we have become one of the worst

[Page 3]

divided religious movements; in our zeal to overthrow sectism we have become sectarian.

     The first defection in the Restoration movement was caused by John Thomas, and the Christadelphians exist today as a result. The introduction of societies and instrumental music coupled with other things, produced a cleavage, and since that time, the brethren who use the instrument have divided into "The Disciples of Christ" and "The Christian Church." There is disharmony among these latter because of lack of discipline and de-emphasis upon godly living, in many places, and there are at least three parties represented by as many publications: The Christian Evangelist--Front Rank; The Christian Standard; and The Voice of Evangelism. But sad as this condition appears, it is not nearly so conglomerated as the one facing non-instrument brethren, who have been plagued with divisions, defections and schisms. Time would fail us to enumerate all of the current factions and no good end would be served in doing so. We shall mention a few, and perhaps the best means of identifying them for the average reader is by the papers which, in most cases, are actually official party organs and mouthpieces.

1. Gospel Advocate. This is the largest and wealthiest group. It is pro-college, pro-church supported orphanages, pro-Herald of Truth, and for this reason it is described as 'liberal" by the next faction, which attacks it in print and on the air in a constant barrage of propaganda.
2. Gospel Guardian. This faction is not opposed to extra institutions. It endorses Bible colleges, orphanages, etc., but objects to supporting these from the public treasury of the church. One of its leaders suggested as a compromise, an array of boxes labeled for the various institutions to be placed in the foyer of the church buildings, and into which contributions might be dropped. It opposes "The Herald of Truth" radio and television program because of centralization of support and control.
3. Firm Foundation. This paper originated as the mouthpiece of a faction championing the idea of re-baptism of those who came from sectarian bodies and who had previously been immersed, in opposition to the writers of the Gospel Advocate, who recognized that there were children of God in the various sectarian bodies. In the present controversy, it champions a "middle of the road" position which has actually resulted in a distinct third party in the institutional war.
4. Apostolic Review. This paper traces its origin to the American Christian Review published by Benjamin Franklin. The influence of the paper, also called Octographic Review, and published by Daniel Sommer, is still felt in many sections. Originally the official organ of an exclusive party opposing Bible colleges, church orphanages, the hireling ministry system, etc., its scope of impact was principally in the northern states. It was Bro. Sommer who wrote the "Address and Declaration" read at the convention held at Sand Creek, Illinois, which declared that those who persisted in certain practices would not be regarded as brethren.
5. Macedonian Call. This paper, first started as a mimeographed periodical, well before 1932, by D. Austen Sommer, a son of Daniel Sommer, was used after that date to promote a division in the ranks of those previously adhering to the position of the Apostolic Review. Contending that the editors of the latter were guilty of a compromise movement, the editor vigorously opposed members of his own family, including his aged father, and built up a considerable following, swaying many congregations.
6. Spiritual Call. This paper, resulting from a change in the name of the Macedonian Call, was used by D. Austen Sommer, in what has since proven to be an abortive attempt to further split the movement which he built around his editorship of the Macedonian Call. This faction virtually disappeared upon the death of Brother Sommer.
7. Word and Work. Published by a segment of the brotherhood who hold to

   [Page 4]

   views of the pre-millennial and forthcoming earthly reign of Jesus, not generally acceptable to other factions among the non-instrumental group. The faction is pro-college. The attitude and spirit of the writers is generally less partisan than that of most anti-instrument groups.
8. Old Paths Advocate. The official organ of a large faction composed of those who oppose classes for Bible study, women teachers, individual cups, etc. Due to extreme legalistic attitude these brethren suffer from almost constant agitation and turmoil. The question of how to support foreign missionaries created a recent stir, and they are now torn asunder in many places over the problem of divorce and re-marriage.
9. The Truth. The only journal known to us within the Restoration movement whose editor contends that Acts 2:42 constitutes a divine mandate as a specified "order of worship." Adherents of this segment are generally opposed to classes, individual cups, etc., and while some of the congregations persist in making "the order of worship" an actual test of fellowship, the editor asserts that he does not, and largely through his influence, congregations looking to him for guidance and counsel are divesting themselves of the intense party spirit.
10. Footprints of Time. A small monthly publication representing a faction of extreme legalistic views, whose members make a test of fellowship on the subjects of Bible classes, women teachers, colleges, orphan homes, etc., and who also recognize no congregation that uses individual cups, breaks the bread before passing, uses leavened bread or unfermented grape juice. It is possible that this faction is strongest in Texas, as most factions are.
11. The Church Messenger. This party is opposed to classes but believes in the use of individual cups. It is very dogmatic and arbitrary, exercising control of the membership to the extent that communicants are forbidden to attend elsewhere under threat of expulsion. This spirit has isolated a considerable segment who are branded as "liberals" because they do not seek to restrict the membership to such a degree as the original party.
12. The Christian Appeal. Members of this faction are among the "liberals" mentioned in the preceding group. In general they are in fellowship with those who support The Gospel Tidings, a Texas journal.

     In addition to these splinter groups there is another which makes a test of fellowship out of the manner of breaking the loaf. The one presiding at the table must break the bread in pieces and pass it to the assembled communicants before he personally eats of it. Another recent party has appeared among the no-class advocates, the break coming over the idea that there are no evangelists today, although there may still be elders and deacons. A considerable party is being built up among them on the question of whether there is any exception whereby the innocent party in a divorce case may marry again.

     That our readers may see the real extremes to which the party spirit will carry men, we reproduce herewith an appeal from "The Warrior," published in the issue of August 1, 1959:

     "Brethren: We wish to compile and publish a list of LOYAL congregations. We want to make a directory of loyal congregations for the benefit of the traveling brethren who wish to worship with loyal congregations; secondly, for the benefit of brethren who are desirous of moving to a loyal congregation. To compile this directory we need the following information. Describe every act of worship in your assemblies. Describe your position on the Communion. Do

[Page 5]

you have one or two communions on Sunday? Do you use only one cup and one loaf? Do you fellowship the Sunday School or clips brethren? Do you fellowship the Old Paths Advocate? Or other digressives? Do you advocate any doctrine or act of worship that is called a hobby by most of the brotherhood? If you want to be counted among the honored few, give us correct answers to all of our questions, otherwise you will be left out of our directory.... Are you living in a state of division, having pulled off from another congregation? Please answer all questions. Do you contend that the cup must have a handle on it? Do you contend the cup must not have a handle on it?"

     While it may seem amusing to some of our readers that there are congregations which have divided over drinking the fruit of the vine from a glass, because a cup must have a handle, and Jesus took the cup, this is but a tragic demonstration of the extent of division. Perhaps members of some of the larger and wealthier factions will look down upon those who go to such extremes, but it is altogether p05sible that the same root evil has produced them all, great and small, and the difference is merely one of degree, rather than of nature. The fruits of strife, division, and separation are coming to the harvest, but the seed was planted long ago, and not one single group in "The Church of Christ is innocent in the matter, as we shall some day prove!

     Those who study this sordid picture portrayed by those who claim to be the only hope of the world for peace and unity, will enquire concerning Mission Messenger, and ask if it is not the journal of a faction. To this we reply that it is not, and we do not propose to allow it to become so. A "Ketcherside party" or a "Mission Messenger party would be just as wrong and sinful as any other. For that reason, the editor regards as his brethren all immersed believers who belong to the various segments mentioned, whether among the instrumental or non-instrumental congregations. We are in fellowship with them, as the Holy Spirit uses the term "fellowship." They are a part of "the brotherhood" and we are commanded to "love the brotherhood." We propose to make nothing a test of our fellowship which God has not made a condition of salvation.

     In these days of decadent Christianity we go even farther. Like Thomas Campbell, Alexander Campbell, Barton W. Stone, David Lipscomb, Tolbert Fanning, Benjamin Franklin, and Daniel Sommer, we believe there are children of God among the various sects. God has a people in Babylon. Every person who has been born of the water and of the Spirit is my brother. We do not equate the Restoration movement with the church of God. There may be hundreds of God's children who never heard of that movement. We do not endorse all of the practices of any of these, but endorsement is one thing, and fellowship is a wholly different thing.

     We were reared in one faction of the Restoration Movement. We grew up believing that faction was the kingdom of God, and that Jesus reigned over it and it alone, to the exclusion of all other people in the universe. We refused to regard as "brethren" those who were not in our party. We believed that the boundary of God's kingdom was circumscribed by the spiritual lines we had drawn. Now we know that the party spirit is in the same category as adultery, idolatry, and drunkenness (Gal. 5:20, 21), and we would as soon try to excuse and justify one as the other. Any of these will keep one out of heaven. "I forewarn you, that they who practice such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God" (verse 21). Whether one can maintain such an ideal as ours in the face of pressure groups and opposition, such as we now experience, only time will tell. Of one thing we are convinced, that the Spirit of God and the party spirit cannot dwell together in the same heart. We also know that no man is a partisan or divisive or factious who recognizes and loves all of God's children and refuses to allow human lines of demarkation to segregate him from any of them. Satan wants no man to "love the brotherhood." He will threaten, misrepresent, and malign those who do. But our hope of heaven lies in the direction God

[Page 6]

has outlined and we must desperately try to reach that goal.

     It will be charged that we over-state the case with reference to division, and make it appear worse than it really is. Only the naive and ignorant will so contend. Take, for example, the largest factions among the non-instrument churches, those whose views are expressed through the Gospel Advocate and Gospel Guardian. These parties are in open combat with each other, and representatives of both sides lash out at each other through the medium of bulletins, papers, and over radio stations, as well as from their respective pulpits. On the front page of Gospel Guardian, July 16, 1959, appears the following:

     "As these lines are written division within the church is becoming more apparent and widespread daily. The line of fellowship has been, and is being, drawn in many places. Gospel preachers who were once united in the common cause are now engaged in pointed controversy. Men who a decade ago were in demand as gospel preachers throughout the brotherhood are not presently allowed in many pulpits. Sister congregations who have enjoyed the closest fellowship no longer announce each other's meetings. The civil courts have been employed in disputes over church properties. From the pulpit, over the radio, through the papers, on the streets and from house to house, brethren are engaging in sharp controversy. Many things point toward the final formation of a new and additional sect, as well as the eternal loss of innumerable humans."

     Of course, the writer who fears the formation of a new sect, does not recognize that, in the sense of the New Testament scriptures, both parties are sects even now. On page 10 of the same issue, another writer declares:

     "The Gospel Advocate and company of writers are determined to take the church into apostasy. If the Christian Church followed the "social gospel" route, The Advocate and supporters are on the "social gospel" route for their attitude is identical to the Christian Church."

     The bitterness and animosity manifested by these brethren who "bite and devour one another" is revealed in almost every issue of their periodicals. In the July 30, 1959, issue of Gospel Guardian, the editor speaks of "the humiliating spectacle of Brother Reuel Lemmons groveling at the feet of the Gospel Advocate hierarchy." Bro. Lemmons edits Firm Foundation. In the same issue, a staff writer speaks of abundant "proof that a great host of timeservers and moral cowards will follow Goodpasture down the broad road of popularity regardless of how crummy his logic (?) may be." He further says, "To see turncoats like Earl West, John Cox, Rex Turner, and several others bow down in Goodpasture's 'confessional,' kiss his toe, and confess that such reasoning as displayed in his recent article has caused them to 'change' is more than nauseating."

     In an editorial in Gospel Guardian, April 2, 1959, an associate editor replies to an article by Guy N. Woods, which appeared in the January 29, 1959, issue of Gospel Advocate. He charges that Bro. Woods is "the hired gun of the Gospel Advocate editor," and informs him, "You and your boss are drunk on your own wisdom, power, and popularity." He charges that Woods has "lied over and over again," and is guilty of "deceitful hypocrisy," and "full of conceit." In the same issue, another associate editor accuses his own brother in the flesh of "monumental gall," of "disturbing churches and alienating brethren over a theory which has become your hobby," and of making "an ugly insinuation and a miserable misrepresentation."

     The editor of Gospel Advocate has not remained silent under the written and verbal barrage. An illustration is found in an editorial appearing in the July 23, 1959, issue. In this he is replying to a charge by James P. Miller that the Gospel Advocate was trying to destroy Florida Christian College. The editorial calls the college "a hotbed of hobbyism," and says, "The churches generally are afraid of young preachers from FCC. They have heard of what goes on at the college; they have heard of the churches that have been disturbed or split by FCC preachers." It is also said, "Now throughout the brotherhood is it generally known that the head of the college is pillowed on the uneasy

[Page 7]

and unsteady lap of the Guardian. The names of nearly all the Guardian 'top brass' from Cogdill down or up, as you care to view the matter, appeared on the FCC lecture program last spring." The editor says, "We should like to add that some of the Florida churches are getting 'fed up' on what they call 'college domination.' Some of their leaders have recently so expressed themselves. They do not want the hobbies of the college in question, injected into the churches, either openly or 'under cover.'" He accuses Charles A. Holt and Yater Tant of having "cast anchor in the murky waters of 'Sommerism.

     As to the character of some of his op-posers, the editor of the Gospel Advocate asserts:

     "Sometime ago we cashed a 'cold check' in the amount of $40.00 for a 'Guardian angel', who was stranded in the 'Athens of the South.' His articles have appeared on the front page of the Guardian. Before long he was jailed for forgery, and soon thereafter another 'Guardian angel' 'skedaddled' with his wife. We have seen no repudiation of these men by their fellow-hobbyriders... The same papers which have given much attention to Pat Hardeman's lecture engagements have maintained a tomb-like silence on the delinquencies of these two Guardian henchmen."

     Some will be in high dudgeon because of this issue of our paper. They will accuse us of flaunting the problems of the "New Testament Church" before the world. But the "New Testament Church" does not act like these brethren do. It is with no sense of pleasure we must spread these exhibits of the party spirit before our readers. We take no pride in doing so. Our only aim is to show the real spirit manifested toward each other by those who boldly assert they are "the one body of Christ" and "the faithful church." The modern segment of Christendom known by the term "The Church of Christ" is one of the most schismatic, factious, split, and divided movements of a religious nature, in this generation. The only thing in which they will unite is an attempt to crucify those who refuse to be sectarian. This institution, in spite of its great boasts and high claims, can never unite the world in Christ. It will only serve to divide and fragmentize wherever it goes. That this is true in mission fields is evidenced by what happened in Germany. After the second World War, missionaries were sent to that land by churches generally of the Gospel Advocate or Firm Foundation parties. Other men, who were opposed to Bible classes, but imbued with zeal to take the message of Jesus to others, also went, but not with "official sanction" of the predominant clique, who had staked out their exclusive claim on Germany. One of the brethren wrote:

     "Almost from the first our brethren who were already in Europe began op-posing our work. They gave us writeups in their papers (not of commendation); they wrote on our posted signs of the time and place for prayer and praise, 'Anti Brethren.' They removed our sigils more than once."

     Thus was transferred to foreign fields the hatred, bitterness, littleness, animosity, and partisan spirit, of the American factions, which begged support upon the basis that they were going to preach the gospel of love, and "save" the poor benighted German people who had never heard "the truth" declared.

     This is not an isolated case. The same condition exists in Africa. Preachers of the Gospel Advocate group have been working there for a number of years. This was more than the anti-class, pro-cups brethren connected with The Christian Appeal faction could stand, so they sent Bro. C. B. Head to that land to save little heathen children from the terrible blight of being taught the Bible in a class conducted by a sister. This move spurred the Old Paths Advocate anti-class, anti-cups group into frenzied effort. After virtually "splitting at the already bursting seams" over how to get the money to the missionaries, they finally devised a measure which enabled them to send two men. Before they went, one of them, Paul O. Nichols, wrote in the paper for August 1, 1958, these words:

     "Brethren, this is the month that C. B. Head of the 'cups faction' leaves for Nyasaland from the states. As far as I know that persuasion does not have a single congregation there, but evidently

[Page 8]

he believes he can establish some... Also next month a whole group of 'Sunday School faction' brethren are supposed to leave for Africa--five adults and four children."

     Of course, Bro. Nichols was not going to represent a faction. He was a representative of "the faithful church." But that is what the others thought they were. Each party branded the others as factions, and in this, they were all correct! What a tragedy! It is conceivable that a community of African aborigines might have lived in the peace of simplicity until "The Church of Christ" came among them. Then, those who as heathen had dwelt in peace and unity, would be split into warring factions, and taught to unsheathe the sword of the Spirit and cleave each other in fratricidal strife. Not only do the factional missionaries refuse to recognize or to applaud the good, vast though it may be, done by those from various other communions, but they seek to undermine and proselyte from each other, and to confound and confuse the minds of the humble folk they came to "save." Imagine the effect on untutored minds of the variant claims of belligerent factions to be "the one true church."

     What is the underlying cause for this condition? We think it is plainly seen. Each one of the parties in "The Church of Christ" considers itself as having arrived. All have lost the meaning of "restoration." For them, nothing remains to be restored. Therefore, each is busy trying to bring forth congregations in its own likeness and after its own image." This is seen when ''missionaries'' enter northern cities where congregations have long been in existence, but which may differ in some respects from the "home congregation" which sent them out. Thus they seek to plant a "Southern-style Church of Christ," modeled either after the Texas or Tennessee faction which supports them. The ideal of planting congregations of the ancient order is completely forgotten. A church must be of the party stripe and wear the brand of the faction which supplies the money for its existence. The only "unity" which is now proclaimed is "partisan unity" based upon conformity with the norm of the unwritten creed. The various factions in the "Church of Christ" are so many miniature sects, in the fair import of that term.

     A couple of years ago the editor was invited to address several hundred preachers and others assembled for a debate between two factions. He announced this theme as the basis of his presentation: "The religious institution commonly called 'The Church of Christ' of which you are members, and of which many are preachers, is not a restoration of the primitive church of God, but is a twentieth century sect growing out of a non-sectarian restoration movement of the previous century. now employing all the means and methods of other sects, and should be regarded in that light." Ten valid points were given to sustain this thesis. Space will not permit a full discussion of all these, but it is our intention, God willing to develop this proposition in our next issue.

     A word of caution is necessary. We do not intend to imply that every congregation designating itself "Church of Christ" is sectarian. We know of many that have steadfastly refused to become narrow, intolerant, and partisan. Their struggle to remain non-sectarian is great because of the constant efforts to "line them up with this party or that. Moreover, we believe that there are brethren in every one of these factions who are not as sectarian as the faction with which they are allied. They hope, work, and pray for better days. They suffer much because of the isolation demanded by the party. They are bigger in spirit than the little group with which they are allied. There are hundreds whose hearts are galled by the bondage of the party spirit, and who sigh and cry over the fate of spiritual Jerusalem. Our hearts go out to them in their condition.

     But it is our firm conviction that most of the ardent laborers in every faction enumerated are striving to build up a narrow, bigoted, exclusive party of conformity, and they have brain-washed themselves into thinking that the party of their allegiance is the kingdom over which our Lord reigns in an exclusive sense. Each of

[Page 9]

these has its own unwritten creeds, its clerical domination, its coercion and compulsion of membership by threat and mental force. "The Church of Christ" has entangled and enslaved the hearts of men and women in a welter of hate, and has thereby destroyed the dignity of the individual. There is no real attempt to restore the primitive ekklesia of God founded upon love for all. Representatives of each faction seek to plant a reproduction of their own party wherever they go. The non-sectarian spirit cannot be tolerated. One must be taught to hate, sneer at, ridicule and revile those who differ, regardless of their honesty and sincerity. These are the stock in trade of the party spirit. They are the brand marks and the stigmata of "the holier-than-thou attitude" which God denounced and decried as a.smoke in his nostrils.

     "The Church of Christ" in order to become the church of Christ must be saved from itself! It must first be seen in its true light, recognized for what it is, and evaluated in its true sense. Then, the humble, sincere, consecrated, and sanctified ones, filled with a spirit of love for the Master, can begin to work as leaven and produce a better world. The false tests of fellowship, the humanly-devised creedal barriers, the spirit of arbitrary dogmatism--these must be cast to the moles and the bats, and delivered from them we can resume our march toward Jerusalem. In the meantime, let no one think that our strictures upon "The Church of Christ" indicate any lack of love for the church of God, for it is only our love for the latter that prompts us to write as we do about the other. Better days can never come so long as men confuse these two!

     To those who become angry because we make these matters public, and because the truth of their conduct and policy is exposed to those whom they call "sectarian" and whom they would like to have believe that things are different than they are, we simply point out that they rejoiced with "joy unspeakable and full of glory" when we were reviewing Roman Catholicism and Protestantism, and when we were dealing with our brethren in the instrumental music groups. But we propose to let the truth be known! We refuse to conceal our own faults while blastmg at others! "The Church of Christ" desperately needs to be saved. It is very difficult to save those who do not know they are lost, and yet that is the condition of those who persist in a course of partisan spirit, for it is plainly declared that such cannot enter the kingdom of God!

     It is our purpose in our next issue to show the deviations from God's purpose of the modern system calling itself "The Church of Christ." We propose to show that it is inexcusable, for in accusing others, it does the same things. Having done this, we propose to spend several issues discussing a remedy for the world situation. It will be our hope to appeal to all who love God in every branch of a divided Christendom. Upon completion of the current series, and starting early in 1960, God willing, we plan to begin an analysis of the basic underlying error which has led the whole Restoration Movement so far afield. We believe there is one great error in thinking which serves as the taproot of digression and which has betrayed us all into a spirit of factionism, nullifying our claim and stultifying our witness in this generation. If this seems to be too bold an undertaking for one whose talents are so meager, and whose scholarship is so limited, we rest in the hope that once more "He has chosen things of little strength and small repute, yes and even things which have no real existence to explode the pretensions of the things that are--that no man may boast in the presence of God." It is our feeling that what we have to say in the forthcoming series of studies, which will run the entire gamut of revelation, will commend itself to every honest heart on earth, regardless of sectarian affiliation. We can promise you that there are greater things ahead. Pray for us as we do for all of you! "May the God of peace make you holy through and through. May you be kept in soul and mind and body in spotless integrity until the coming of our Lord."