This
is the story as it was told to me. A successful businessman and his wife
were driving through the state. She observed and made some remarks about
some nice meetinghouses under construction. Some of them were for the
use of churches of Christ. She asked her husband why these people
appeared to be enjoying a steady growth. His answer was that they are
still exercising some evangelistic fervor but indicated that he thought
they would get over it in time. Religious movements display a large
amount of zeal in their youth, press their claims with fervor and fight
hard for recognition. They grow up, ardor cools and the original
convictions that started them rolling are diluted. They become
institutionalized and depend more on that than they do individual zeal
and personal consecration. Popularity and respectability bring in large
numbers of adherents who know little and care less about original
principles and aims. What individuals and congregations formerly took
care of is now routine work for institutions who look after it for
everybody. Individuals and congregations toss in a little money, and it
requires little sacrifice if the field has been thoroughly propagandized
by a trained headquarters, boast about their institutions, relax and go
to sleep with a good conscience. The emphasis is more and more on money
and less and less on the strict standards of doctrinal conviction and
personal devotion. People being what they are it is a comfortable
feeling to make a comfortable contribution and let the institution do
it. What is the result? The movement acquires definite denominational
characteristics. The bigger and older it gets, the weaker it becomes in
the things that really count. Doctrinal convictions and standards of
conduct are diluted to meet the minimum requirements of the prevailing
sentiment of an institutionalized constituency. Settling down to lower
and lower levels is the inevitable tendency in this process of
degeneration sometimes boasted of as growth.
The
history of Christianity in its pure and corrupted forms offers some
striking testimony to such developments. In the early church individuals
and congregations continued in "the apostles' doctrine and fellowship".
It was the time of "the simplicity that is in Christ". Denominational
organization with its inevitable institutional setup was unknown. The
church grew, became popular, triumphed over persecution, conquered the
government and became recognized. Organization broke out of the bonds of
"the simplicity that is in Christ". Progress was the order of the day.
In a few centuries the church had a pope and a hierarchy. The influence
of it is still strong in religious movements that originally started in
protest against such abuses. The process is gradual. One departure from
original simplicity calls for another. What is taken for granted today
would not have been tolerated a generation ago. It is growth or is it?
John Wesley would not recognize the Methodist church of today with its
highly organized modernism. Some of the sects which have broken away
from it would more nearly harmonize with the ideals he zealously
campaigned for.
Paul
recognized the trends at work even while he was active and called it
"the spirit of lawlessness". The law was the gospel order which came by
inspiration. It was the doctrine, organization, worship and manner of
life revealed from heaven. "The spirit of lawlessness" was rebellion
against the restraints of divine law, no doubt in the name of progress
and growth. Many were ready to contend that the Lord's way could not
triumph over the world. Something more impressive had to be employed.
Was
the business man right? Will churches of Christ in time get over their
evangelistic fervor and settle down on an institutional basis and
respectably carry on in a denominational sort of way? It looks like we
are on the way in spots. The Christian Church with its diluted doctrine,
its emphasis on a social gospel and its general liberal attitude except
in the despotism of its institutional organization has set us a good
example once we drift away from simple and divine standards. We are
already hearing about "What the church of Christ teaches", "our papers",
"our schools", "our orphan homes", "our institutions" and other
denominational terms which clearly indicate that some of us do not know
what the church of the New Testament is. Denominational language is a
sure symptom of denominational thinking and if widespread enough will
eventually lead to a denominational setup. Sure, a warning along this
line will bring sneers and mockery from many just as it did a generation
or so ago when the digressive movement started.
What,
if anything, can be done about it? Form an organization to combat trends
hostile to and leading away from the ancient order of things? The only
remedy there is will be overlooked and spurned by the institutionally
minded. It is too simple. It means "contending for the faith once for
all delivered to the saints", "holding the pattern of sound words" found
in the New Testament, "guarding that which is committed unto thee",
faith in God and suspicion of everything in religion of a purely human
origin. What is the New Testament and what does it teach will have to be
the consideration. Every step in the right direction and every protest
against trends and worse will have to be made within the framework of
the New Testament order. The church in its widest usage includes all the
children of God, all who have obeyed the gospel, baptized believers in
Christ. Any use of the word church, which is smaller than this and
larger than a local congregation is unscriptural and therefore
misleading, unless it is properly qualified by some geographical term,
such as "the church throughout Judea, Galilee and Samaria." There is the
church or congregation in or at a certain place which is independent of
any jurisdiction except the law of the Lord revealed in the New
Testament. With its elders and deacons, t is the nearest approach to
institutionalism you can find in the New Testament. Individual disciples
are the units which spark the whole movement. A knowledge of, and
loyalty to the teaching of the New Testament on the part of all who care
anything about it is the sina qua non of the whole situation. The right
kind of preaching and teaching and plenty of it will keep us on the
track and spare a wreck.
--- Gospel Guardian, 1949
Other
Articles by Cled Wallace
Present
Day Church Problems - Part 1
Present Day Church Problems - Part
2
Present
Day Church Problems - Part
3
Present
Day Church Problems - Part
4