FRESH WINDS OF GOD
ROY KEY
Brother James Bales’ comments on my “Letter
to Mother and Daddy” were gracious. To read them was to rejoice
in the awareness that someone is opening the windows to let the
breath of God blow in. I appreciate the evident spirit of good will
and grace even to forgive.
I would not try to refute the commentary. Much of it is
what I preached and still preach. I am grateful that Bales is not
called to pay as high a price for saying it as others of us had to
pay.
To three particular comments I respond. First, Bales
implies that the narrow, sectarian background in which I was nurtured
is not at all typical, but is the unfortunate exception to the happy
rule. We generalize from our own experience. My letter was penned
after forty-two years’ observation, twenty of them from the
pulpit. I am about the same age as Bales, a graduate of two of our
best schools (Lipscomb and Pepperdine), contributed to ten different
publications, and served in the South, West, Northeast and Midwest.
Bales tends to look with paternal spirit on my
experience, while I must conclude that he grew up in a privileged
area. Also, I conclude that conditions have over the years improved,
and that improvement is now accelerated. That he was able to do what
others of us in other situations could do only at the peril of
ostracism is a matter which he is hardly in position to understand.
But I assure him and you that it is for me a matter of rejoicing and
thanksgiving.
Second, Bales affirms, “In a lapse of charity and
in a manifestation of unfair judgment, Key accuses us of being
self-righteous, like the Pharisees (pp. 122-123).” He calls it
a “blanket . . . accusation” and “wholesale
charge.” If that is the message my words convey, I apologize. I
did not mean them so. I have not to this day meant to stand aside
from “the self-righteous” and thunder judgment.
Such expressions as “we generally” and
“many of our brethren” were intended as qualifying
phrases introducing my discussion. The difference between us, as I
see it, though, is that while we both know “self-righteousness”
has been around, Bales believes it has not been characteristic of the
mainstream Brotherhood life, and I believe it has been there as big
as day for any who have eyes to see.
Let my comments about “self-righteousness”
be studied in the light of a single question: What is the ground of
our hope? You will see that my contention is that our people have, by
and large, rested their confidence on their right understanding of
and compliance with a select number of doctrinal commands.
Ultimately our security lay in our “rightness”
about these “essentials.” As pride in our cardinal sin,
so self-justification is our prime temptation. This is our common
condition in a world of sin. And note how subtly temptation can rear
its head at the very moment we are discussing salvation through Christ, security not
in our own knowledge, but
in Him on Whom we with
perpetual penitence trust. Bales says,
An attitude which I have long heard preached,
and which needs to be stressed, is that none of us is right within
himself, but the Bible is right, and we should study and measure
ourselves in the light of the Bible.
The assumption, unstated but plain, is that when I have
conformed myself to the Bible, then I am right. This, however, is not
the Gospel. The “righteousness of faith” is a “rightness”
God gives us (imputes,
accounts, reckons) when we are clearly in the wrong
as measured by the Bible. This “Good
News” is for us who have failed and are not “right”
in ourselves, but God accepts us for nothing but the willingness to
be accepted.
It is “the scandal” of affirming, “But
if without any works to his credit (one) simply puts his faith in him
who acquits the guilty, then his faith is indeed ‘counted as
righteousness’.” (Rom. 4:5, TEV).
Paul left himself wide open to misunderstanding. So had
Jesus. So will everyone who preaches the same Gospel. We dare not
disparage the Bible. We must know about our
Lord in order to know Him. But
somewhere, sometime we must face this truth: so
long as my trust is in measuring myself by the Bible well enough to
fulfill its requirements for salvation, it is grounded in SELF and
not in CHRIST!
Unless my confidence is in the “rightness”
of Christ, not my fulfillment of God’s requirements, however
“right” and however “right” the Bible which
details them, I have fallen away from grace! I
conclude unequivocally that any view which rests on my
“rightness”—intellectually,
ethically, legally—is destructive of the Gospel and is in
reality a doctrine of “self-righteousness.”
Only when I quit pleading my rightness about anything
as the ground of my standing before God do I turn away from
justification by works to salvation through faith. Then at last I
simply hurl myself upon the mercy of Christ. Until then I have not
given up every ground of boasting and every occasion for pride.
My attempt here has been to make clear my usage of the
term “self-righteousness.”
I employ it with care and intended precision, not as a sanctified
curse-word to hurl at others. Nor do I limit it to a few. The sin is
universal. Brother Bales does well to warn against it, for when we
feel most free from it, we may be most ensnared. There is never a
moment when we do not stand before God through sheer mercy.
Third, Bales indicates that there was no need to change
fellowships to find freedom to live and work. I confess that had I
been a better Christian, I would doubtless have done many things
differently. All I can say is that given who I was, where I was, the
particular circumstances, and the demands of Christian discipleship,
I could not do otherwise. Looking back over seven years, I still do
not see how I could do differently.
There is but one Church of Jesus Christ. I did not
leave it, nor have I any intention of leaving. Through the years one
must choose where in
the Church he is called to serve. In any move I always seek the will
of God as best I can discern it. And here is the procedure I use:
study of Scripture, seeking counsel of the best and wisest people at
hand, discerning the movement of events and pressure of circumstance,
and wrestling the whole matter through in prayer. In it all I try to
use the best sense I have been given.
Through such a procedure there came a moment when the
climatic decision of Paul spoke to me. He was a Jew, always a Jew,
loving the Jews and wanting to work with them and for them, giving to
them all that he had. Yet, with a knife thrust in his heart, he
finally had to say, “Lo, I turn to the Gentiles!”
He did not mean, “I withdrew fellowship from you
and no longer consider you my people.” No! He meant, “Since
you will not let me work with you, I am compelled to go to people who
will receive me.” He did not quit loving them or praying for
them or even working for them wherever he could. And I have tried to
follow the same course.
For the communion that nourished me I am grateful. To
the friends with whom I studied and worked and played and prayed, my
heart is still open and my hand extended. I pledge myself even now to
do all I know to bridge the gulf, except to alter the Gospel and
compromise the Saviorhood of Christ.
I conclude with the closing words of Brother Bales,
changing only my name for his. “My attitude toward Bales is one
of good will and personal friendliness. I pray the Lord will have
mercy on him, and on me also.” And I thrill to remember a
promise that begins, “Whenever two of you on earth agree about
anything you pray for . . . !” (Matt. 18:19, TEV).—First
Christian Church, Sixth and Clark Streets, Ames, Iowa 50010.