We cannot
visit former days in a time machine and alter the past. Such is the material
of science fiction. It may be beneficial, however, to look at past events
and consider "what might have been" if men and women had chosen to speak up
at various crucial points in history. While this will not change the
present, it might very well help us to consider our own need to make choices
in our own time that just might create a better future than otherwise would
have unfolded.
I grew up
just south of Akron, Ohio. If you drive through the many towns and villages
of that area you are sure to see many signs in front of church buildings
that read "Church of Christ." You will see others that read "Christian
Church." Not having actually made the count, I suspect that there are a good
many more such churches that use instrumental music in their attempts to
worship God in that part of the country than there are churches that have
remained with the New Testament pattern. These are confusing for brethren
who travel there and look for a place to worship. When they stumble into
such churches they are shocked to see that many things are practiced and
taught that are not found in the New Testament. The drift away from the
Restoration Plea and ideal has continued for well over a century. There was
a period of time in which those churches were identical in teaching and
practice to those churches that have remained with the New Testament
pattern. The drift that ultimately led to division began many years prior to
the "official" division that came about in 1906. Those who ushered in the
novelties that brought the division about were not in any respect different
from those who are attempting to do the same thing in our own time. In
principle, the issues are the same even if the doctrines and practices being
pressed into passive churches today are somewhat different and more
numerous. We lay the blame for division at the feet of those who pressed the
innovations of a century ago. This is reasonable and fair. The axiom is
true: Those who drive the wedge are responsible for splitting the log.
There is
also room for culpability at the feet of those who remained passive and
silent. The church is not a log and must not sleep like one. Those who
stand by and watch a crime taking place without attempting to help save
human lives share in the guilt to some degree. Our laws recognize this
principle. Those who stand by and watch the Body of Christ being mistreated
by human hands -- in our day or at any time -- share some of the
responsibility for the harm that results.
We need to
keep this in mind as we participate in the history that is being written in
our own day. Our silence can contribute to division. Our speech can allay
it.
In Akron,
Ohio... a similar situation occurred. Ben Franklin was invited in April,
1868 to conduct an evangelistic meeting. The church had in the past on
various occasions used the instrument, but in Franklin's presence had always
refrained. But on this occasion, Franklin went into the building and took
his seat, waiting for the singing to start, and then for his time to preach.
But when the singing began, so did the instrument. Franklin, opposed as he
was to the instrument, was faced with a serious problem of what to do. He
informs us of his thoughts during these few moments:
We have not been more tried in a long time. While this
was going off, we reflected and turned the matter in every way possible.
What was to be done? We never felt more unhappy. Are brethren determined, we
involuntarily thought, to deteriorate the worship into music and compel us
to endorse it? If we refuse to preach, it may, we further thought, create a
lasting trouble, and some may blame us for it. We decided to preach, and did
so, but with a heavy heart, in view of the worship having been thus
degenerated before our face (Earl Irvin West, THE SEARCH FOR THE ANCIENT
ORDER, Vol. 2, pp. 81, 82).
We admire Ben Franklin for so much good that he did in
his lifetime for the cause of Christ. We can sense the shame and regret that
he had for his own silent course of action when duty called upon him to
speak. We cannot go back and nudge him to do otherwise. He could not alter
his course after this meeting closed.
In our own
day we can expect to find ourselves in situations where the tide might
possibly be turned if we speak -- and might possibly be encouraged along its
present course if we are silent. Ben Franklin was right in thinking that
some would have blamed him for speaking. If he had it to do over again, I
believe that he would have willingly born the reproach of Christ for the
sake of the lasting good that his words may have done. He had to make a
choice in a matter of minutes that had lasting consequences. You see those
consequences when you drive through the country around Akron. Apostasy won.
You have
choices to make today. What effect will your choices -- either to speak or
to remain silent -- have upon the future of the Lord's people and upon those
who seem ready to go out from among us?