Churches of Christ and Christian Churches . . .

MERGING CHURCHES: EYE TO THE FUTURE?

The readers of this journal, who are disturbed by the senseless divisions of the Stone-Campbell unity movement, will be pleased to learn of two recent mergers in Michigan. The University Church of Christ (non-instrumental) has merged with the University Christian Church (independent, instrumental) in East Lansing. The Fenton Church of Christ (nonisntrumental) and the Fenton Church of Christ (independent, instrumental) have also merged.

The correspondent bearing this news pointed to the advantages of a combined ministry and to the savings in double property costs and general expenses in running but one church instead of two.

Of far greater value of course is that Jesus Christ is obeyed in that those who were once separated from each other are now together, united as one church and working together. All such instances are a small part of the answer to our Lord’s prayer for the unity of all believers.

We do not of course have to merge in order to accept each other as equals and work together as one people. But in those areas where one of our churches or perhaps both are struggling to have a meaningful ministry it makes so much godly sense that it is embarrassing that it happens so seldom. But now it has happened twice in the course of a year, both instances in a state where our witness has never been strong. This could well be the eye to the future. It is so wise and appropriate that we may conclude that it will grow more common with the years. The churches in Michigan, with a few other instances here and there, are showing us that it can be done with Christian grace, and what is more gracious than brethren meeting together and working together in unity?

As to how merging congregations will resolve the instrument question is the business of said congregations. Since the instrument question must be regarded as a matter of a church’s personal conviction or opinion, the issue must be settled on that basis. If a merger, which can be a beautiful testimonial to unity, means more to the non-instrumentalists than the instrument, they can join the instrumentalists without any problem. If the instrumentalists, on the other hand, see that their non-instrument brethren, while committed to unity, are sincerely locked-in to acappella singing, they can give up the instrument for the sake of a merger.

Or they might strike a compromise, a virtue that must be recognized if mergers are to become common, and be both instrumental and non-instrumental. At least one church in California resolved to be instrumental for one service, acappella for another. A church in Nashville is acappella for congregational singing and instrumental for special music.

Those of us in non-instrument churches must recognize one crucial fact as we think realistically about the uniting church of Jesus Christ upon earth: the non-instrument posture is an anomaly in the church at large. We are virtually alone in holding to such a practice, especially in making such a big deal of it, even a test of fellowship and the one sure mark of identification. If we were acappella because we love great congregational singing in which an instrument appears as an obstruction, but allowed for it when it was needed, our position would be much more defensible. We are gradually coming to see, it appears, that our traditional argument that the instrument is anti-scriptural and therefore sinful, is untenable. If the matter were as “plain gospel” as we have made it, we would not be alone in such a contention.

So as more mergers become a possibility we must realize that, in the light of the universal church, we must make some compromise as to instrumental music. Otherwise we have to take the position that the universal church of Christ can become one around the world only by becoming acappella, wholly acappella in its corporate worship. No one with any sensitivity at all for the catholic church upon earth could hold such a view. So, if we are to be a unity people, we must make compromises in this matter, especially when mergers are in the making. We can of course remain strictly acappella in most of our churches in a uniting, universal church, but we will not make it a matter of fellowship and will accept other Christians as equal to ourselves.

But in the many instances where it would be appropriate that we merge with Christian Churches, who are so very near to us in many ways, we cannot make a non-instrument position a condition for the merger. We will have to make some compromises.

The end result could be that our merged churches, some of them at least, could be among the world’s greatest singing churches, acappella, but also instrumental for special music and special occasions.

You will notice that in being strictly acappella we have had to reject special music, which is to our hurt, and thus have only congregational singing, which hardly conforms to the likes of 1 Cor. 14:26, which calls for other than congregational singing. In fact we would be hard put to prove. congregational singing from Scripture. I take it to be our own arrangement, but it probably (but only probably) has antecedents in the primitive churches.

It will be simple enough for Churches of Christ to remain acappella so long as we sing only congregationally. But can you imagine Pat Boone or Amy Grant, both of whom are Church of Christ folk, conducting a concert acappella? I was on a program with Amy in a Nashville Church of Christ a few years back. We sang acappella as a congregation, while she exhorted us with “psalms, hymns and spiritual songs” with instrumentation, her own guitar. And to hear her sing My Father’s Eyes, as she did that night! Despite a houseful of non-instrumentalists there was apparently no problem to anyone.

When a tradition gets in our way and keeps us from drawing upon the varied gifts of our people and unnecessarily restricts our possibilities, we need to modify (but not discard) our tradition.

There is hardly a question but our folk are changing along these lines for the good. Two mergers with Christian Churches in a single year would have been unthinkable a few years back. And the news item from Korea, which we noted in these columns in our last issue, of Churches of Christ and Christian Churches uniting in one convention of churches, which now numbers 300, instrumental and non-instrumental. The instrument question was resolved in a reasonable and dignified compromise. Churches will be instrumental or non-instrumental, according to conviction, with no lines drawn, while in convention of two or more churches the singing will be acappella. Christian compromise!

It is noteworthy that the American editors of non-instrument persuasion have not published this epoch-making news from Korea. Think of it, 300 churches of the Stone-Campbell Movement settling their differences and working together in fellowship! And the editor-bishops say nothing about it! It only reveals their fear that “the System” over which they “preside” (sort of) is going to get away from them. People who are not yet themselves free are uncomfortable with liberating news. The truth is we have leaders who do not want our people united, except on their terms. And so they will have no good word for the merging churches.

But the handwriting is clearly on the wall, and the “bishops” would do well to face facts. Take this letter which came from deep in the heart of Texas while I was writing this essay. It reflects a reaction that is taking place all across the land. Since the writer does not want persons or place identified, I will honor that in quoting from him:

The mainline Church of Christ here is looking for a minister and we were wondering if you know of anyone with a more open view that might be interested. I assure you that this church is not “open” yet and probably won’t be for sometime. Yet there is a remnant that is pushing in that direction. Fellowship with the Christian Church would be a good place to start. The applicants we have heard, especially from the preacher schools, are arrogant and dogmatic and seem incapable of preaching the gospel in simple terms.

You will notice that the brother has little doubt but what his church will change. It is but a matter of time! And the handwriting is there: the rank and file of our folk have had it when it comes to arrogance, dogmatism, sectarianism, and exclusivism --- and they want out of it! But they are not leaving. They will stay and work humbly for change --- and they will win! Mainly because they are right. Wrong can occupy the throne only so long.

I tell Ouida that by the time I am “absent from this planet” (to use one of Campbell’s favorite phrases) we will have the majority of Church of Christ folk on our side, which we believe is the side of freedom. She says that that will be a difficult role for us and we might not know how to handle it!

(The majority is already with us, or we with them. It is a matter of getting them to break their silence and speak up and act. The rank and file are beginning to do this. As for our leaders, it is partly a matter of their having the courage to speak up and reveal what they really believe.) --- the Editor