What Happened?

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 57]

     How did the heirs of a consecrated effort to unite the Christians in all of the sects, become so hostile to one another that they ended up as one of the most fragmented movements on the current American religious stage? What happened to those who started out to restore the one body, to cause them to add as many as a couple of dozen additional factions to the already frightful mess into which the followers of Jesus had been betrayed?

     In the beginning it was not so. Thomas Campbell, the genial unfrocked Presbyterian preacher wrote, "The cause that we advocate is not our own peculiar cause, nor the cause of any party, considered as such; it is a common cause, the cause of Christ and our brethren of all denominations. All that we presume, then, is to do what we humbly conceive to be our duty, in connection with our brethren; to each of whom it equally belongs as to us, to exert himself for this blessed purpose."

     When Aylett Raines, a brilliant young preacher for a branch of Universalism, who was immersed, asked to be admitted to the Mahoning Association with which the Campbells were identified, the question arose as to whether one holding his philosophy could be received. Thomas Campbell arose and deprecated the introduction of such questions relating to opinion. He said, "Brother Raines has been with me during the last several months and we have fully unbosomed ourselves to each other. He is philosophically a Restorationist and I am a Calvinist, but notwithstanding this difference of opinion between us, I would put my right hand into the fire and have it burned off, before I would hold up my hands against him. And from all I know of Brother Raines, if I were Paul, I would have him in preference to any young man of my acquaintance, to be my Timothy."

     In a spirit of submission to one another, since all had submitted themselves to the Lord, those who had grown up under the teaching of Barton W. Stone,

[Page 58]

and those who had come under the tutelage of Alexander Campbell, met in Lexington, Kentucky, and with tears of joy received one another and embraced in the unity of the Spirit. Their differences were so great that a mere mention of them would fracture any of our fragile factions now, but these men were giants in understanding and in brotherly love.

     It was when a third generation arose that lesser men began to shiver the trunk of the tree which had borne such noble fruit. Confronted with changes, many of which were more cultural than spiritual, they became frantic because of fear that all would be lost if unwritten creeds were not devised as bulwarks to protect the gains of the past. Boastful and arrogant men became the heroes of the divergent groups. It was then they developed the fallacious notion that purity of doctrine could only be maintained by division of the body, and agitation for disunity began under the guise that true unity could only come by conformity of all to the party standard and programs.

     In 1906 formal division was recognized even by the United States Census Bureau, and men began to deal with issues by debate rather than by dialogue. The party spirit, a work of the flesh, was enflamed. Open hostility burned in the hearts and flashing eyes of men who warred with one another "in the name of the Lord." Problems were approached with cold hearts and hot heads, rather than with warm hearts and cool heads.

     The result is that we have made a travesty of a noble plea and a tragedy has marred our approach to the purpose, plan and prayer of Jesus for the unity of all believers. But we no longer live in an age of religious infighting, bitterness and sectarian emphasis. That stance is as outmoded as transportation by horse and buggy. It is time for us to re-think our approach, which grows less tenable with each passing year. We have divided ourselves out of influence with thinking people, and rendered our plea for unity a joke.

     But we need not remain in the trap in which our fathers were ensnared. Our repetition of their error will not endear us unto God. To perpetuate their follies will not honor them, but disgrace us. Let us renounce once and forever that forlorn and tragic philosophy which has severed us from one another in the past and will only serve to splinter us further in the future. I propose that we return to our first schism and undo it. Unless we have the courage to do that we will always be a fragmented people, resting under the stigma of our own division while vainly pleading with others to unite.

     It is silly to try and salvage our pride at the cost of losing our souls. Instead of trying to patch up a craft which is not seaworthy, let us abandon it and board the larger vessel which the Lord launched, and not man. Are our traditions more precious to us than God's other children? Shall we maintain our parties while we heedlessly set at nought our brethren? There will never be a more propitious time than now to rise above the narrow and circumscribed limitations of factionalism. Division is a dead carcase which needs to be interred without a wayward tear, and buried without remorse of conscience. It has served no purpose except to confuse and confound the saints and throw a blockade across the highway of holiness.

     Division among brethren is a sin. It is carnal and immature. It is a work of the flesh. It murders the best sentiments in human hearts and turns men into spiritual cannibals, biting and devouring those whom they should serve in love. Turn your ears from the raucous cries of partisans who would make of you all that God has condemned and blight all that he has commanded. Let the light shine in! Let the darkness flee away! Let brotherhood come into its own and fellowship be the source of joy of which even angels sang.