8th Annual Unity Forum . . .

TULSA, HOUSTON, AND INDIANAPOLIS

The 8th Annual Unity Forum was held this year on the campus of the University of Tulsa. It was arranged and conducted by a committee of concerned believers, chaired by Larry Bradshaw, a professor at the university. It was well attended, with some sessions attracting 400 or more; and there was enthusiastic response in the sharing sessions and question periods. The speakers were from varied backgrounds of the Restoration, as was the audience, and both speakers and audience had a rather large representation of “Church of Christ charismatics.”

Emphasis was given to questions regarding the Spirit, not only because this is of great concern to many in Tulsa, but because the committee realized that oneness among God’s people is, after all, the fruit of the Spirit.

During the planning stage the committee was resolved to bring J. D. Bales, professor of Harding College, and the controversial Pat Boone together in the large auditorium on the campus of Oral Roberts University. I was not enthusiastic about this prospect, not for a unity forum at least, for there is a different atmosphere created in the big blowout kind of an affair and the humbler type of gatherings of a unity meeting. But the committee was gung-ho for a Bales-Boone shootout, and since I knew both men they handed me the assignment of belling the cat.

I talked by phone with Pat in Beverly Hills and found him most responsive to the notion. In fact he roared with enthusiastic laughter when I informed him that J. D. would be his respondent, going on to assure me that the professor would behave in a manner consistent with a unity effort, an assurance that I did not particularly need, realizing that brother Bales is a Christian gentleman. But Pat was most cooperative, and he was raring to go, convinced that this sort of open and frank discussion is appropriate. He spoke of schedule problems, and offered to approach Oral Roberts as a substitute if he himself could not arrange it.

Then I called J. D., realizing that he might not be able to expend all that energy due to his recent illness. But the prospect of meeting Pat at such a place as Oral Roberts University was sufficient motivation to energize an old warhorse like brother J. D. And I was pleased to note an attitude of love and respect moving in both directions, Pat toward J. D. and J. D. toward Pat.

Pat sent me his schedule for the months ahead, including the time we had set for the unity forum, and there was no way to schedule him unless we simply built the meeting around him. So we resorted to our alternate plan, which I suspect was just as well, and that was to bring Warren Lewis from West Islip, N. Y., who is known to be one of our most knowledgeable men on charismata, and to have Marvin Phillips of the Yale Blvd. congregation in Tulsa, to respond to him.

This part of the program did not seem to satisfy the charismatics, and I am not sure why. Marvin did unusually well, partly due to his irenic spirit and partly due to his more open stance on the Spirit’s work. He believes in a real indwelling of the Spirit and certainly does not limit his ministry to the composition of scripture. But he does not believe the gifts of 1 Cor. 12 are applicable to the modern church, as does Warren. Warren, too, was brilliant. The disappointment may have been that the issues that most concerned people were never really joined. Too, I am persuaded that our charismatic brothers, bless their hearts, are very intent upon advancing their cause, and I do not object to this necessarily, if the crusading is not sectarian. Well, the cause was hardly advanced. I was told by several that we had selected the wrong men for the study, and one of our tongue-speakers, who was one of the dearest souls there, was so candid during a sharing session as to express his disappointment with the discussion on the Spirit.

One charismatic brother supplied us with some tongue-speaking, only a sentence or two in a sharing session along with a testimonial, but there was something about it that led some to wonder if this is really what the Holy Sprit is doing. But there was really no untoward incident at any time and a beautiful spirit prevailed throughout.

Perry Gresham of Bethany College was our keynoter, sharing with us his conviction that our great heritage as disciples has within it the healing ingredients that our people so badly need. Perry is as resourceful as he is reasonable, and he has the rare talent of coupling these to charm. I overheard one sister say to him, “You are the most charming speaker I’ve ever heard.” The men were also impressed!

Carl Ketcherside spoke unto us a parable, drawn from his boyhood experience, showing that the problem of estrangement between brothers is really a problem of proper relationship with the Father. Carl did not get along with his younger brother until he had a talk with his father, and once that relationship was in good repair and he saw his proper role in the family, he had no trouble accepting his brother, despite the differences. It was sort of a Mark Twain kind of story, with young Carl as obstreperous and cunning as Huck Finn, and it had the Mark Twain wit and humor, as well as his simple profundity. Vic Hunter, editor of Mission, who presided over one of the forums, is considering publishing the parable, so maybe you’ll get to read it.

Waymon Miller, Stan Paregien, and Thomas Langford led us in a helpful discussion of some of our slogans, such as “No creed but Christ” and “In matters of faith, unity; in matters of opinion, liberty; in all things, love.” And one innovative highlight was a discussion on the ministry of women, led by women. Ruth Ash of Dallas and Gloria Bradshaw of Tulsa read papers on how they see it (seated quietly behind a table!) and even fielded questions that left no doubt but what there is much yet to be said. Cleona Harvey of Indiana was scheduled to appear also, but was unable to be present.

This particular series of yearly forums will end with ten. The ninth one will be next summer in Nashville, and in 1975 it will end where it began, at Bethany College where the first one was held in 1966.

The North American Christian Convention, which is the major gathering of the Independent Christian Churches, was held just after our Tulsa forum, July 10-1 3, and I was pleased to be among the 31,000 that attended the Indianapolis affair. Upwards of 50,000 registered in the churches, so the number who actually attended was a near record, and the evening sessions had impressive audiences of 12,000 to 16,000. The program book ran almost I 00 pages, so one can imagine the wide scope of the convention, with something for all age groups and all ministries of the church. Over 400 people were on the program in some capacity, not counting the entertainment groups, which helps to explain the large attendance. Too, the leaders seek to make it a family convention, which makes for bushels of kids all over the place who have their own little sub-convention going.

The convention leaders apparently have no idea but what the affair is to be a great gathering of Independent Christian Churches, but those of us who are interested in the unity of our Movement would hope that it could be used for more substantial crossing of sectarian lines than appear evident. True, the NACC has from time to time invited non-Independents, a Disciple here and a Church of Christ leader there, and even an occasional Baptist or Presbyterian; but for the most part it has all the characteristics of one more giant denominational gathering. And with that goes the usual trivia and superficiality that was evident enough at Indianapolis. The NACC leaders have succeeded in achieving bigness, which is a just tribute to a lot of hard work and careful planning, but as to how significant it is to the critical needs of Christian Churches-Churches of Christ is a question.

At one luncheon I overheard a Disciple from Bethany remark that we need an “umbrella convention” where all our disparate groups can feel at home together. My answer to that is that if we all loved each other enough and were really concerned for the prayer of Jesus for the oneness of his people, then we would find a way to make all our great meetings umbrellas, whether they be lectureships in Abilene and Nashville or annual conventions such as the NACC and the International Convention of Christian Churches (Disciples of Christ). Those of us who are responsible for Fellowship, the new publication issued jointly by concerned ones from our three major groups, passed out sample copies to hundreds of convention visitors. This provided opportunity to get reactions. Some saw it as the most encouraging thing that has happened in our Movement’s history, while many showed little concern. One sister from an enterprising Independent congregation would not even accept a copy once she was told that Disciples had something to do with it. “They don’t even believe in the Virgin Birth,” she assured me, “so I’m not interested in reading anything they write.” The fact that the president of her own convention was one of the editors did not influence her.

Next came a meeting in Houston with a group of Church of God folk. This grew out of a visit I had with Max Gaulke, president of Gulf Coast Bible College, which resulted in our decision to have an invitational unity meeting between some of our people. He invited 12 from the Church of God, while I invited 12 from the Church of Christ, all from the Houston area. We had young and old, black and white, laymen and clergy, students and Ph.D.’s. I was eager for this experience, for I am persuaded that it is this kind of approach that we need more of. There was no advertising and no announcements. It was quietly arranged as one more way to break down barriers and build bridges. No speeches were planned. It was a matter of meeting and sharing together, looking to God’s Spirit to lead us however and wherever.

The first night we encouraged each person within the circle to say something about what God has done in his or her life. It was an important way of getting acquainted. The testimonials were substantial, encouraging and edifying, leading us to realize that we have so very much in common. The Church of God folk kept expressing their amazement that such a meeting was occurring, for all their previous experiences with our people had been negative.

The second night we discussed a number of differences between us, and while the exchange was vigorous and frank it was always brotherly and irenic. And some time was spent in a sharing of information, people with different backgrounds probing one another as to what they believed, points of agreement as much as disagreement. We prayed together and rejoiced that God had brought us together. It was observed that this is the unity of the Spirit and that our task is to restore such mutuality throughout our ranks. We were, after all, baptized believers together, which made us brothers, and that for two nights at least we had treated each other as brothers. No one seemed to have any notion that all our differences would have to be settled before we could accept each other as brothers.

I observed an interesting distinction between the two groups that went far deeper than any “denominational” differences. They were people well within the mainstream of their own branch of the Church of God, the Anderson, Indiana group, for they were ministers, professors, administrators, and students associated with their Bible college. Ours was “the dirty dozen” in that for the most part we are not exactly kosher among our own people. Two of our number came from the non-class group. One was a black minister. Four or five were young ministers who, even though in a sense “in”, are among our revolting young princes. One was a bona fide elder from a respected Houston congregation, but one who is a country mile ahead in his thinking and daring. One was a business man and another an educator, both of whom represent the freer church within the Church of Christ. If follows, of course, that such ones are the only ones who would attend such a meeting with any degree of openness.

This made for an interesting study. I discerned more of an inclination on their part to defend prevalent beliefs and practices in the Church of God than on the part of our people to defend our known positions. We could well be tagged Church of Christ “liberals,” whereas they did not seem to have any comparable group in the Church of God. They were at times a little on the defensive when their status quo was questioned, whereas our people were as quick to criticize some of our practices as they were. It was something like an anti-institutional group of one church in conference with the institutional group of another church.

In spite of all this they were as open as any of us in their fraternization, for they had no problem in recognizing Christians in other churches and enjoying fellowship with them. This means that even at the starting point the Church of God folk have not been as sectarian as ourselves, and they therefore haven’t as great a need for a revolt. We all agreed that it was a delightful and enlightening experience. —the Editor