BROTHER BALES AND “VOICES OF CONCERN”

In a recent issue of Action, published by James Lovell, Prof. James D. Bales of Harding College suggested to the brotherhood that it would be well if some of our scholars could be provided with such financial resources that they could devote more of their time to research and writing. He mentioned in particular that somebody ought to review every chapter of Voices of Concern, and the implication was that if enough money were available such things as this could be done.

I can appreciate the problem that brother Bales refers to, for I too find it difficult to do research and writing, along with editing this journal, while serving as a university professor, not to mention part-time responsibilities in a pilot course at our local high school. And when one adds ministerial responsibilities to various congregations to that, it is confusing as to just how many jobs he does have. Ouida affirms that it is three jobs, and not just two as I usually number them.

So I know what brother Bales means. We could all do so much better if we had more time. Or could we? It may be our involvement in the onrushing world that gives our writing what little substance it does have. And brother Bales gets a lot done too, and he does it well. He invested a lot of time on the Altizer affair, and he came near getting what he wanted, it seems. It is probable that most of us get done what we really want to do. So I am persuaded it will not take a financial grant from some foundation for a few of the professors to get around to reviewing Voices of Concern. Brother Bales himself can find time for it if he really wants to do it. Here is hoping he will want to, and we stand ready to make it as convenient for him as possible.

There is one thing about his comments in Action that disturbs me, however. Here is a renowned professor in one of our colleges, a Ph.D., a man trained to be objective and calculating in his approach to problems, who speaks of answering every chapter of a book that at the time had not even been published. He had not even seen the book and had not read one word of it, and yet he wanted somebody to answer every chapter of it! How did he know but what he would agree with it, or at least some of it? Is this the kind of liberal education that students are exposed to at Harding College? Does not an educated person approach a thesis or a book with an open mind, giving its propositions a fair and impartial investigation? Once he has studied the material and passed judgment upon it, it is then appropriate for him to call upon someone to answer it. Brother Bales, bless his heart, was asking for money to reply to a book that didn’t even exist!

This is not a particularly important matter, and I do not intend to be making roo much of it, but little things like this can be very revealing of the kind of people we have allowed ourselves to become. It is typical of our Church of Christ mentality to negate anything that holds promise of being the least bit critical of our way of doing things. It was the same mentality that burned Wycliffe’s translation of the scriptures without bothering to read it, or that condemns a man without first giving him a fair trial.

It is assumed that if anything is critical of the Church of Christ it must be fostered by ulterior motives, and is thus to be treated as some threat to our well-being. Criticism is rejected as if it were by its very nature evil. It is something that must be “answered” even before it is heard, somewhat like physicians view preventive. medicine.

It would suggest much more maturity on our part if some of our college professors or editors issued complaints of a lack of criticism, perhaps even to the point of suggesting the raising of funds to assist those who might be willing to write helpful criticism of our system.

Well, Voices of Concern is now published and is being widely read. If brother Bales still wants to review it, we invite him to do so in the pages of this journal. We will allow him two full pages each month through six issues, 12 pages in all. And that might be extended beyond six issues if it seems wise to all concerned. We will invite someone else, perhaps Bob Meyers, editor of the book, or the writer whose article is under consideration, or perhaps Carl Ketcherside, the publisher of the book, to make reply with equal space. We would be pleased if the same material could be published in some journal that brother Bales writes for, but we will not make this a condition.

Speaking of Carl Ketcherside as a possible respondent to James Bales’ evaluations, I have a letter from brother Bales in which he expresses a willingness to enter into a written discussion with brother Ketcherside on these issues, perhaps in the form of a book. But he says he is not interested in any face-to-face encounter such as the contest with Altizer would have been. We are pleased to accept his preferences in this regard and only hope that some kind of written discussion might materialize. We might start things off with a discussion of Voices of Concern, whether with Ketcherside or with others connected with the book.

It must be conceded, however, to be a bit strange that Bales is so eager to have a discussion with Altizer, even to the point of trying to pressure him into it, and regarding a matter that is more of a fad than an issue, being one that almost nobody believes; while at the same time having no interest in a similar type discussion with Ketcherside. Brother Lovell asks some embarrassing questions along this line in a recent issue of Action. He asks: Are we Goliaths in some areas and cowards in others?”

Brother Lovell points out that nobody in the Church of Christ could have much concern for such an absurd notion that God is dead, but that the issues raised by Ketcherside are of great concern to many in our own midst. He says: “Brother Ketcherside’s influence in religious circles would make Dr. Altizer appear as an amateur.” He strongly implies that if brother Bales has such a hankering to take on someone, why doesn’t he accept the challenge brother Ketcherside his issued to brother Lemmons (for a discussion at one of the Christian colleges), which Lovell assumes could be passed along to Bales.

His remark that men are like Goliaths in some circumstances and cowards at other times may be a bit harsh, if he means to apply that to brother Bales. I do not believe that James D. Bales is a coward, and I see no particular virtue in being like Goliath.

We hope we may soon provide for our readers some kind of dialogue between brother Bales and some of those responsible for Voices of Concern. I have not asked either Bob Meyers or Carl Ketcherside if they would be interested in this king of exchange, nor any of the essayists for that matter, but I am confident that some of them would be glad to exchange views with Bales on “this most vital question,” to use Lovell’s description. If none cares to reply, we will let Bales write on, maybe as long as he cares to, for we are eager for our readers to see what he has to say, whether anyone responds or not.