Highlights from Our Past . . .

HOW WE TEXANS FUSSED AND DIVIDED
(But there were some heroes)

J. D. Tant, one of our pioneer preachers in the Lone Star state, used to say in his declining years, "We have 16 different kinds of loyal Churches of Christ in Texas." It was (and is) barely an exaggeration. There is probably no town in Texas with a population of 2,000 or more that does not have a Church of Christ (non-instrument), and many of our towns have two or three different kinds of Churches of Christ and a few places have as many as six or eight, none of which has any fellowship with the others. Here in Denton we did have four different kinds until the "premill" Church of Christ disbanded. Now we have three different kinds, not counting the new "walk out" church where Ouida and 1 are now attending. Since they accept all baptized believers as within the fellowship and do not draw the party lines that we are talking about, it would not be fair to list them as "a different kind," but in one important sense they are certainly different. And scores of people in this city thank God for the difference! But since they do not exclude from their fellowship those in other congregations (the Christian Church minister was recently a visiting speaker) they cannot be listed as a separate faction in our Movement. Even so, counting the Christian Church and the Disciples we now have five different kinds of Restoration Movement churches. There are five "main line" Churches of Christ, counting the "walk out" group, one non-Sunday School and one "conservative" (non cooperative) group.

But at this time a century ago we were still one people, even though the Movement was 70 years old and had been in Texas almost a half century. In our recent surveys we have said something about how all this happened. In this piece we are telling more about our fussing and dividing by pointing to a particular instance or two. You will find it interesting, and, 1 hope, profitable. We ought to be able to learn from our mistakes.

Back at the turn of the century we had a little college here in Denton known as Southwestern Christian College, which was of the "conservative" persuasion and opposed the "progressives" who were beginning to use the instrument and the missionary society. The "conservatives" were also known as the "Firm Foundation faction" (many of them were) in that they not only opposed the organ and the society but also constituted a "re-baptism" party, which set them in opposition even to other Churches of Christ outside Texas. They insisted that one had to understand that baptism was for the remission of sins in order for it to be valid. So they went about re-baptizing not only Baptists, whom we had always theretofore accepted, but even those in our own churches who did not realize when they were baptized that it was for the remission of sins. This practice was vehemently opposed by David Lipscomb, editor of the Gospel Advocate in Nashville, the brother that we respectfully and not without justification call "the bishop of the south." This faction was led by Austin McGary of Austin, who started the Firm Foundation for that purpose.

The dean of our little Denton college was also a physician, Dr. H. G. Fleming, a "Campbellite" if there ever was one, for he was well read in Campbell's writings and he understood the genius of the Movement. When a "progressive" brother came to Denton to lecture on the freedom believers have in Christian ministry, he issued a special invitation to the conservatives. Dr. Fleming was one of those that accepted. Back in those days it was common practice for a speaker to allow his audience time for response once he had concluded. Dr. Fleming, aware that "progressives" and "conservatives" were on a collision course toward division, stood and made the following statement, which is still preserved in the archives of the Denton Record-Chronicle, and which still stands as probably the most glorious paragraphs ever to come out of our Texas history, certainly from Denton, including whatever merit one may find in the columns of this journal which emanates from the same little city. Here is what he said:

On coming to Texas I found a condition that would make angels weep and the blessed Lord bleed afresh . . .

I am convinced, brethren, that all division is of the devil. I do not believe that God's children can divide so long as they love one another from the heart fervently. The evil one must first expel love, `that golden chain that binds the happy souls above,' and filled the heart with malice, hatred and evil speaking before he can succeed in preaching strife and division.

Brethren, a most serious problem confronts us. It is a war of consciences.

Brother McPherson (the speaker for the occasion) tells us that it is his conscientious conviction that he can best serve the purpose of God in the spread of the gospel by cooperating with what is styled a missionary society; and that not to do so is a violation of his conscience. Another brother, equally honest, does not feel that he can cooperate with a missionary society, without sinning against his conscience. What is to be done?

Is the conflict of conscience a justifiable ground for division? 1 do not believe it is. Why should Bro. McPherson hate his brother who had a conscience against a society? And why should the brother hate Bro. McPherson because he has a conscience for the society? Must they place each other under the ban of non-fellowship because of differences over a missionary society? I answer, let Bro. McPherson not force the society on the conscience of the brother, and let the brother accord to Bro. McPherson his individual liberty in the exercise of his conscientious convictions concerning a missionary society, Or, as Brother McGarvey suggests, let each brother be free to give to a missionary society as an individual without molestation, but where unpleasant division would be caused in a congregation, let the contributions be individual and not the congregation as a whole.

That ends the quotation and it also ended the beloved physician. The college fired him for making that speech! That reveals better than any words could tell why we have divided and sub-divided in Texas. It was not the society or the organ that divided us, but the ugly spirit that sought to destroy Dr. Fleming for being a man of peace and for reminding his brethren of the principles that gave birth to the Movement. Notice his reference to J. W. McGarvey. The doctor went on to publish six articles on "Alexander Campbell and the Society." He wanted to remind his brethren that in rejecting his plea for peace they were rejecting the very principles of Restoration that they were supposed to believe — and if they could not accept him they couldn't accept Campbell either.

The feudin' and the fussin' went on until finally by 1906 the Churches of Christ, including those in Texas, were recognized as a separate denomination. Our folk had only a few formal debates with each other, but there were a few in Texas on the societies, the instrument, and the rebaptism question. In Paxton, Texas in 1910 one brother affirmed in a debate, "That baptism being for the remission of sin, all the designs of baptism must be understood before it becomes valid."

It was primarily the editors that kept the divisive fires aflame. For instance, the editor of the Christian Preacher wrote of another editor in 1880: "I challenged him upon stating as a reason for not debating with me that I was too rough. And well he may, for if I can ever get a chance at him I will not leave a sectarian bump on him. I have no use for a milk and water slick. I hear that he is a pig on the mountain and a puppy in the valley. Let him keep his tongue or bite it off, as it is better to go to heaven with half a tongue than to hell with one as long as your arm."

Outside the areas influenced by the editors, the brethren paid little attention to the "issues." As late as the 1930's one "progressive" kept being invited to a non-organ church. When he asked them why they didn't invite an anti-organ man, they replied, "Oh, it's all the same to us. We thought the reason we didn't have an organ was that we couldn't afford to buy one."

And there were some vicious lawsuits along the way, the one in McGregor, Texas going all the way to the state's Supreme Court. Once the party spirit got the upper-hand, they sponsored rival gospel meetings and locked each other out of the building. They went to court in Waco in 1898 in a quarrel over the property. The "progressives" argued that they were following the original practice of the Movement by making nothing a test of fellowship except faith and baptism. They alleged that the "conservatives" had departed from the original plea by making a test of fellowship over three things: organs, societies, and understanding the purpose of baptism. The judge listened to witnesses on both sides, men who told of the Movement and its original purposes and practices. It was agreed that the whole case hinged on who was faithful to "the Reformation that started about 1810."

The judge decided that those who made no tests of fellowship except faith and baptism were the true heirs of the Movement and ordered the property to be turned back to them (they had been locked out by the other side changing locks). The "Firm Foundation faction," as it was referred to in court records, appealed to a higher court and finally to the highest court of the state. Both courts agreed with the lower court that those who followed the simple creed of faith and baptism as the only basis of fellowship were the true heirs of the Restoration Movement.

Well, if we turn a deaf ear to our own heroes who dare to stand up in our assemblies and remind us of the simple, trusting faith of our pioneers who launched a Movement to "unite the Christians in all the sects" on the basis of faith and obedience to Jesus, and that only, we are not likely to pay any attention to the "unbelievers" in our courts of justice who look at our history and tell us the same thing. So, to our lasting shame, we Texans ignored it all, and went on fussing and dividing. Now we have not two sects but several, and not just three tests of fellowship besides faith and baptism but a dozen or more.

There is only one who can teach us, and that is the Holy Spirit, whose unity we have long since been instructed to preserve in love, peace and forbearance.   — the Editor