The stage was set for a gathering of preachers and other interested persons to discuss what steps should be taken to unite our forces against the "Rough Draft." Kansas City was a central location. An invitation was extended by the elders at 26th and Spruce Streets to use their facilities. W. E. Ballenger, a widely recognized preacher and a member of the congregation presided over most of the meetings. Man after man mounted the platform to speak against "the departure from the faith" of the Review publishers.

It was generally agreed the Review was gone. The time had come to look elsewhere for "brotherhood leadership." Since the Macedonian Call was already being published and D. Austen Sommer had stood firm against his brothers we decided to back his journalistic effort. Those who continued to write for or report through the columns of the Review would be regarded as having departed from the faith. A document entitled "The Rough Draft — Its Sponsors — Also Its Outworkings — Why We are Against It" was drawn up by D. Austen Sommer. A great many men signed it. Like John Hancock, I wrote my name big and bold. I also collaborated with Brother Sommer in drawing up another paper analyzing "the Rough Draft" and urging all who loved the Lord to lift up their voices against it.

Our action served to create another schism in an already divided movement. It also doomed the exclusivistic Sommer faction to death. Our actions were injudicious and our reactions unwarranted. I was wrong in what I did. A lot of things I wrote and said in the time of tension were absurd. I do not try to excuse them on the basis of youthful immaturity. I was sectarian in attitude and filled with pharisaic pride. I helped to create another arrogant and hostile party even though I acted in all good conscience. That I became a recognized leader in it was a tribute to my dogmatism and aggressiveness. I am ashamed of both of them. They only added to the sin.

If we had regarded the so-called "Rough Draft" as merely another newspaper article and allowed people to read it for themselves without trying to inject political prejudice into their minds it would not have caused a ripple. But when we took up our cudgels and attempted to beat brethren into submission we made a grievous error. It was a sin to call a central meeting in Kansas City for the purpose which prompted it. And it was a sin to create another party among those in the undivided Christ. That it fell my lot to become a "chief of sinners" in promoting the resultant mess is no comfort.

Legalistic sects secure no peace by division. So long as the spirit which prompted and encouraged the division remains, they only lay the ground-work for additional strife. Before it was all over Brother D. Austen Sommer, motivated by fear of the growing popularity of Mission Messenger which I published, became increasingly hostile to my work and refused to even meet with me to effect a reconciliation. When I laid my whole sectarian spirit down before the Conqueror of my person and heart, some of the brethren with whom I had long been associated as a champion, took up arms against me, regarding me as a Benedict Arnold or a Judas Iscariot. They were acting as sincerely as I had acted when I engaged in the same tactics and they were employing toward me the methods I had taught them by precept and example. One should not complain too much if he is fed from a spoon he polished himself. But there is something wrong about a system which breeds jealousy and envy instead of love, and which forces us to reject those who grow closer to Jesus, while accepting those who stagnate or wither on the vine!

Our new association flourished. Some of the most outstanding preachers of the gospel in the I 930's were a part of it. They were men who knew the Book and were powerful proclaimers of its message. There was no dearth of congregations and they were scattered from the Atlantic to the Pacific. In Missouri alone there were 1 20 congregations with which we could labor. Our cause was relatively strong in Indiana, Illinois and Ohio. We were now "the faithful church" as distinguished from the "Rough Drafters." We were separated from each other by a newspaper article and the interpretation we placed upon its value. It is of such fragile cobwebs that sects are born with the strands being reinforced by human pride, fear and stubbornness.

It was during this period I was called upon to make a decision which would affect the remainder of my life. I went to St. Louis to conduct meetings for the brethren who met at 7121 Manchester Avenue. There were two meetings, each of two weeks duration. The first was in the autumn of 1934, and there was such an ingathering of souls that, after the meeting ended the brethren had to remodel the building and install a balcony to take care of the increased attendance. While I was there the leaders approached me about moving to the city which was known as "The Gateway to the West." They wanted me to labor with them by personal visitation to build up the cause. I promised to think about it but the bigness and noise of the city with its frightening dehumanizing influence had little appeal to me.

During the next two years the labors in Nevada and the harvest field were very satisfying and rewarding. Our children were growing and the relationship with the saints was pleasant and encouraging. In spite of this the suggestion planted by the brethren in St. Louis was beginning to appeal to my sense of purpose.

The congregation in St. Louis began with five women who had moved to the city from rural areas. The leading light was Bertha Robinson who came from north Missouri. With the help of her sister Mabel she began the work. Nell and I are agreed that, of all the people we have ever met, Bertha Robinson was the most saintly. Neither she nor her sister ever married, but both were truly wedded to the Lord and to Him gave their unstinted devotion. They did home baking for a select clientele and were famous for their cakes and cookies which graced many parties given by the socially elite.

When they moved to the city they never missed a Lord's Day of remembrance of Jesus. They set the Lord's Table in their home and were led to find three other sisters who had gone to the city and who met with them. Realizing that many would not meet in a home they decided to rent an upstairs hall on Vandeventer Avenue. They placed a modest advertisement in the classified section of the Saint Louis papers, alternating in the three news journals. Every Sunday Bertha prepared the items for the Lord's Supper and carried them on the streetcar to the meeting site. Here the five women sang hymns, prayed, studied the Word, and encouraged one another in the Lord. For weeks they petitioned God to send them a brother who could help by conducting the meetings.

The first man to attend was Edward Burtchinger, a Swiss gardener and yard man who had been brought to the United States to care for the grounds of a large estate. He was more of a problem than a help. He could not do anything in the public meetings and did not believe the women should. Bertha Robinson questioned him about every item in turn, but he could not sing, would not teach, and contributed only his presence and objections. The women, confronted with the dilemma of offending God or man, quickly reached a decision. They continued to carry on the meetings as before. Brother Burtchinger still attended.

The first real break came when Robert Morrow moved to the city from near Dixon, Missouri, having been reared in the faith in a rural congregation where all participated, he was capable of edifying and exhorting. With his advent others soon followed. The little group multiplied in number until they decided to purchase a place of their own. They soon learned of the meetinghouse at 7121 Manchester, located one block from the city limits, and with excellent trolley service from all sections of the city. This was an important consideration in a day when few families owned automobiles.

I first spoke for the brethren there when I was still a "boy preacher" and was passing through the city en route to a meeting in the Lead Belt area. When I came back in 1934, which was eleven years later, I was 26 years old. The congregation was growing in numbers and in knowledge of the truth. There was an array of talent and I have seldom seen such a wealth of teaching and speaking ability. Robert Morrow lived next door to the meetinghouse and acted as a wise counsellor. He was aided by a number of brethren who had gravitated to the city from Missouri and Illinois — Wilson, Thompson, Bilyeu, Janes, Smith, Baldwin, and many others, capable proclaimers of the Word. The greatest asset, however, was the number of young married couples, and the alert and spiritually aggressive young people, many of them still in high school.

The brethren wanted me to come for two reasons. First, they held the concept that congregations should be small and active, keeping every member occupied and busy in spiritual things. They wanted me to train every man to function in whatever capacity he could, and when the congregation attained to approximately 150 in regular attendance, take 30 or 40 and plant them as a nucleus in a new locality. They spoke of moving into the world by colonization, with the idea that the original congregation would supply the new group whatever was necessary until they could stand on their own feet.

As we discussed it, they used the illustration of a strawberry plant which puts out runners on all sides and starts new plants, until eventually a garden plot is covered and the fruit is abundant. The idea was not to erect huge material buildings, but to keep them small, and when the congregation outgrew the facilities, to plant a new one rather than to "tear down the barns and build greater." Repeatedly it was said that when bees fill a hive they swarm and the number of hives increase as a result. It was believed that so long as the brethren could maintain a family feeling, visiting one another in their homes and in hospitals, all sharing together at picnics and basket dinners, there would be less loss by attrition and desertion.

All of the men, some of whom were skilled in business and held trusted executive positions, felt that the same principles which were being used to weld together into a team the workers in industry, could be applied in modified form to build a congregation into a fighting unit in the army of the Lord. As they outlined it, my work as an evangelist, would be to go with each new group that was planted, remaining to teach and train them until they could function on their own. When bishops had been developed, selected by the saints, and ordained to function, my work in that congregation would end. I would then be free to go elsewhere and duplicate the process.

There was a general consensus of opinion that nothing would weaken a congregation quite so much as hiring a man to do the work which God ordained for all the members, and while rapid numerical growth would be experienced by such a method, it would amount to increasing the number of weak and dependent members whose trust was more in man than in God. My task would be with new congregations where I would work myself out by working others in.

Secondly, the brethren felt that my knowledge and insights, which they greatly over-estimated, should be made available on a wider scale so that young men could be imbued with a desire to take the Good News to a world of suffering mankind and could be trained for more effective service in their communities. It was proposed that I teach an annual Bible Study to which men and women might come without charge for enrollment or tuition. In connection with such a study I would teach public speaking, vocabulary expansion and word studies, employing the Bible as the only textbook.

The prospect was appealing since many congregations had young people of promise who were anxious to learn the word of God more perfectly. It appeared to be an opportunity to strengthen the future potential leadership of the churches. I had already decided 1 would like to have our children reared in a large city environment where they could have cultural benefits not available in a more restricted area. St. Louis was a historic spot which attracted men and women seeking jobs, from every section of the Missouri Ozarks, as well as from states like Arkansas, Kentucky and Tennessee.

What I did not realize at the time was that we were considering becoming a part of the restless current flowing from rural areas to urban centers and that we would be on the cutting-edge of a tremendous national transformation which would eventually upset and destroy many of the traditions we had cherished. It seemed wise to move because I could better promote the cause to which I was dedicated. As I talked with the brethren the question of support arose. I expressed my opposition to making a contract or having agreement on a fixed salary. I told them I was willing to come and they could provide for my needs as they saw fit. One of them said, "You make the move and we promise you we will not allow Nell and the children to starve. It was the only financial agreement we ever had.