Pilgrimage of Joy. . . No. 33

THE STORMY FIFTIES
W. Carl Ketcherside

Anyone who reads the history for 1953, of the particular restoration attempt of which we are heirs, will surely recognize that this year represented a peak in the battle between those who advocated a mutual ministry of all the saints and those who defended a professional ministerial caste. Although the central issue was the rise of a clergy system, there was always in the background the question concerning the right of disciples o(the Master to create and endow human organizations to develop a special class of men to hire themselves out to congregations on a contractual basis to feed them.

It was a year of high tension manifested in public debates. We were attacked in articles in papers from whose columns we were barred and in which we could make no defense. Walter Henderson, at 2nd and Walnut, in Paragould, Arkansas, kept up a running fire against me in his little weekly paper called Pause, Ponder and Profit. Guy N. Woods devoted an article to me in Gospel Advocate. G. C. Brewer, who was as dignified in error as when he held the truth, stooped a little from his high plane and let loose a barrage in the same paper. He was perturbed because I held a meeting in Rutherford County, Tennessee, without consulting with George W. DeHoff of Murfreesboro and clearing it with him. I wrote a reply but Brother B. C. Goodpasture returned it with a note that my writings could not be published in his journal.

Glenn L. Wallace made a vitriolic attack on Leroy Garrett in the April 30 issue of Gospel Guardian. Rex A. Turner wrote an “Open Letter to Leroy Garrett” which was published on the editorial page of Gospel Advocate, for February 12. His opening sentence read: “Now that some of the details of certain maneuvers are in, the evidence points to the fact that you are definitely opening up a front for W. Carl Ketcherside and Sommerism here in the South.” Leroy filed a reply. After a month went by he wrote to Brother Goodpasture and asked him why it had not appeared. In a letter which Leroy published, Brother Goodpasture ignored the question of the personal attack published in his own paper. But the Gospel Advocate had an editorial in the March 19 issue which said: “We do not feel that we are obligated to furnish a medium for radicals and hobbyists to ventilate their hobbies, nor are we obligated to become an agency for the dissemination of error. It is not our remotest intention to give brotherhood publicity to every hobbyrider and his fancies.”

Brother J. W. Roberts, of Abilene Christian College, entered the arena through the pages of Firm Foundation. He was disturbed by Leroy’s “peculiar ideas,” and said, “Brother Leroy’s ability and training deserve better things than the use to which he is putting them.” Leroy pointed out that the Greek scholars, both Christian and otherwise, agreed with his position.

All of these men who took up the cudgel were eminent in “Church of Christ” circles. The fact that they felt pressured into writing against us, and even had to misrepresent our position, gave us the courage to press on. This was an indication that what we said was being read, that people were being made to question some of the entrenched practices. Although these men had been very active in debating with Baptists, Methodists and others, now they were being forced to defend what they had. For the first time in their history it was being demanded that they “preach what they practiced.”

April 14-17 found Leroy Garrett and Floyd I. Stanley in a debate in Cowden Junior High School auditorium in Midland, Texas. The proposition was: “The Scriptures teach that a congregation of the Church of Christ with elders may employ a gospel preacher to serve as the minister of the congregation at a regular salary.” Brother Stanley was the minister of the Southside Church of Christ in Midland. Reports from those in attendance universally mention his sarcasm and abusiveness, and Brother Garrett’s calm and dignified demeanor.

On June 30 - July 2, L. E. Ketcherside of Peoria, Illinois, debated Obert Henderson, of Walnut Ridge, Arkansas, at Peoria. The propositions dealt with the organization of Christian colleges and the work of evangelists. Those favoring the views of Brother Henderson absented themselves from the debate. He could not get one of the brethren to even come and keep time for him. I moderated and kept time for both men. The debate was very gentlemanly. Brother Henderson proved himself to be a person of real Christian character and demeanor. Later I became better acquainted with him and we enjoyed a real sense of fellowship in the Spirit.

My second debate with Brother G. K. Wallace was held in Saint Louis, November 26-30. It attracted hundreds from fifteen states and Canada. In addition to the debate two sessions were held daily at the Manchester Avenue meetinghouse. Those who presided over these sessions by invitation of the elders were L. E. Ketcherside, Peoria, Ill.; Vernon W. Hurst, Bristol, W. Va.; Hershel Ottwell, Hartford, Ill.; and Fred Killebrew, Senath, Mo. Brethren from everywhere were free to speak. They considered such questions as: What sectarian tendencies among us need to be eliminated? What scriptures are commonly misapplied? What are the bases for fellowship and disfellowship? What factors are essential to a complete restoration of the primitive order? These sessions were highly practical and free from controversy.

The debate itself was one of the most interesting in which I have been involved. Brother Wallace had argued himself into a dilemma. In Arkansas he contended vociferously there was no difference between preaching and teaching and between gospel and doctrine. He was on record as being opposed to any human organization to preach the gospel such as the missionary society. It was easy to prove from Florida Christian College bulletins that it was a human institution and that it existed to teach doctrine set forth in the new covenant scriptures. Brother Wallace was thus caught participating in and defending the scripturality of a human institution to preach the gospel.

He either had to take the position there was a difference between preaching and teaching and between gospel and doctrine, or else withdraw his opposition to the missionary society, as a human institution to preach the gospel. Later I learned from brethren who were present in the daily conclaves in which they sought to patch up the matter for Brother Wallace that the preachers knew they were hard hit. Their consolation lay in the fact that if Brother Wallace spoke forcefully and loud and hit his chart with the pointer the brethren might overlook the corner into which he had driven himself. He did both but it did not work!

As soon as that debate ended I had to start preparing for another. It was with Flavil L. Colley and was held in Beckley Theater at Dallas, Texas, December 1-4. It was limited to the scripturality of hiring a minister of a congregation having elders “as generally practiced among the churches of Christ in Dallas.” Attendance was excellent and behavior above reproach. The debate was put into print and can be read in those libraries which have preserved such accounts of what transpired.

Before we close the account of debates we need to mention two more, which were held in 1954. One was conducted in Ivanhoe Temple, Kansas City, Missouri. It featured Leroy Garrett and Bill J. Humble. Pat Hardeman was the moderator for Brother Humble. Carroll Wrinkle served in the same capacity for Brother Garrett. To me, one of the outstanding things about this debate, which drew large audiences of eager listeners, was the question about the content of the gospel, whether the gospel was designed to be preached to the saved. Can the saved be evangelized? Despite the careless writings on this theme, it is ignorance with regard to it which underlies so many grave problems in the whole world of believers in Jesus as God’s Son. It is the foundation of many of our own tragic and disappointing deviations from the divine purpose. The rise and development of a special clergy, the multiplication of divisive parties, the whole question of fellowship are all linked to it.

Brother Garrett debated George W. DeHoff at Nashville, Tennessee, June 1-4. The debate was conducted in a large tent pitched on Caldwell Lane, not far from David Lipscomb College. Pat Hardeman moderated for Brother DeHoff. Henry Clay Grayson moderated for Brother Garrett. From his very first speech Brother DeHoff seemed intent upon turning the debate into a burlesque. He dealt in personalities and it was obvious he was out to destroy anyone who opposed his practice. After the debate Pat Hardeman sought me out to tell me that the two of us would have to meet in a debate on the issues to end all debates. The time never came.

We were engaged in other things besides debating. In January of 1954, Leroy and I attended the David Lipscomb College Lectureship at Nashville. It was my pleasure to spend several hours with the venerable James A. Allen, editor of The Apostolic Times. He was seventy years old but his memory had not dimmed. He gave me a great many insights into the causes of modern defections within the church. I could see that a great many problems stemmed from the ambitions for leadership of men who allowed pride to rule their lives.

Leroy and I went to visit Brother B. C. Goodpasture in his office, and later in his home. Everything was cordial. We presented to him a proposal for a panel discussion by representative men dealing with principles and not personalities. He could not see the wisdom of it and preferred going on as we had with him printing but one side of an issue. The lectureship turned out to be a mediocre presentation.

The following month Nell and I attended the lectureship at Florida Christian College at Temple Terrace, near Tampa. The theme was “Persistent Problems in Preaching.” Featured were men such as Basil Overton, J. A. McNutt, G. K. Wallace and Pat Hardeman. One night after the session a man stopped Nell and myself just outside the tent. Within a few minutes about a hundred men were gathered around us. They began bombarding me with questions from every side with all of them talking at once. Franklin Puckett mounted a chair and began to quiz me while many others were talking at the top of their voices.

I told them I would talk to anyone whom they chose but would not become a part of such a hullabaloo as they were engaging in. Since Brother Puckett already had “the chair,” they nominated him. We talked about two hours and no one left. Occasionally someone would yell out a question and had to be reminded of the agreement. I left about midnight feeling good. Some of those who had started out so bravely were silenced.

We were in Birmingham where we spent three days in the home of O. C. Dobbs, Sr. I visited a number of people including John T. Lewis. We had a long discussion about the clergy system and our brother attended one night when I spoke. Brother Dobbs took the floor after I had finished and proposed an open forum on the issues in Birmingham. Brother Lewis opposed it strongly. He felt that he could speak for the congregations in Birmingham.

The year of 1954 drew to a close with a great deal of excitement prevailing. The status quo had been disturbed and men hardly knew what to do!