ON GETTING BACK TOGETHER
JAMES P. SWINNEY

We regret to report that the author of this piece was killed when his private plane crashed near Lake Tahoe in Nevada, a short time after sending it to us for publication. Church of Christ in background, Jim Swinney in recent years discovered to his delight that he had far more brothers in Christ than he realized. He died a growing person. One of his new friends, a Christian Church pastor, prepared a statement about the deceased, which follows this article. It says something important. There is drama here—Christian drama. A brother from First Christian writing about his new Church of Christ friend in this way. It is a loving illustration of the point of the essay.—Ed.

The quest for rapprochement among the three major splits of the Restoration Movement is gaining popularity. Certainly many members of the three groups—mostly ministerial personnel insist it is an impossible dream. But on a grass roots level there is considerable interest, maybe even impatience. For example, in recent issues of The Christian, a Disciples magazine, no fewer than four articles have appeared probing the question of our getting back together again. Those who feel that such attempts are futile have considerable reason. Anyone of considerable information who has studied the curiosities of the split of 1906 and the later split of the 20’s, has reason to suspect that the motives for division were not always as honorable as might be thought. Especially when one discovers that it was a group of eight men from Nashville who approached Washington D.C. to separate the instrumentalists from the non-instrumentalists, thus taking into their own hands the making of division in he most precise way they could—affecting a difference in the fellowship titles for their chaplains.

I remember a professor of psychology at one of our Church of Christ schools feeling that there were more differences among denominations than between them. His feeling is particularly well justified when one looks at the heirs of the Campbell-Stone movement. Opinions have driven us far from each other even though we claim the same heritage. And each of our factions is further splintered into groups each claiming to be the one with the right opinion. Opinions will characterize us as long as we live. And one of the interesting things about humanity is that opinions within a man change from time to time. Recognition of this dynamism of opinion is hardly a vice. But imposing conformity of one’s opinion on others, and deprecating their thinking for themselves is.

I am more familiar with the Church of Christ than with the other divisions of this movement, although I have been moving rather freely among them all recently. Hence, the several splinters of the Church of Christ are more obvious to me, and there are some twenty of them. One might well wonder if we shouldn’t first try to reunite our own “fellows-in-name” before trying a broader scheme. But this points out a faulty method of union. We will, I think, never be able to reach total agreement of matters concerning practice. We shall never be able to unite in one total opinion in which there are no disagreements. Therefore, the union must come in the area of toleration and love. It is hard to like someone who is different. But is it right to refuse to fellowship someone who disagrees with us on some point of doctrine? If a brother expresses his opinion that the book of James is not inspired, would this provide grounds for disfellowship? How about burning him at the stake? Is belief in the virgin birth really necessary for salvation, or can a man entertain honest doubts? Opinion s characterize us. Christians must learn to tolerate those who hold different opinions. Then we will be making headway toward unity.

The Restoration Movement was begun as a unity movement. Oddly, there were several basic issues which divided the early restorers in opinion, but not in purpose or practice. How was that possible without the exercise of brotherly tolerance? But what began as a unity movement has now matured into apathetic, satisfied division.

I sincerely hope that we can get back together. But I know it cannot be done on the basis of total agreement. It will be done only on the basis of toleration for others. It will be in understanding that because one believes a certain opinion to be true, it gives him no right to use the disfellowship syndrome to liquidate the opposition. In short, when the Restoration Movement starts acting like a movement with restoration on its mind, and when the church starts acting like the church, then we will have hope of unity. It will come when we understand the real purpose of the church, and not before.

The church exists not to protect men, but to prepare them. Of the several resources which the church can provide, one of the most fundamental is the free market place of ideas where, without fear of retribution, men can express, debate, analyze, test, and forever search for the truth, wherever that search may lead.

However considerable the struggle to maintain the freedom of the marketplace, it is made rational and effective only if those who use it do not abuse it. Only disciplined faith in the time honored and time tested principles of integrity, honesty, objectivity, and a respect for the beliefs and rights of others can avoid that abuse.

Intolerance, ostracization, boycott, pious condemnation and public vengeance, which are old and familiar devices of the protectors of tradition, never seek the reality but only the sham of religious mystery. It is a frightened, artificial, shallow, irrelevant and irreverant sect which discourages men from thinking for themselves, and which threatens honest inquiry with hollow give but casual honor to ispunishment. In the name of truth, the tegrity, honesty, objectivity and tolerance.

—James P. Swinney is professor of speech, University of Nevada, Reno.