"Forced Opinions, Intellectual Pulpiteering, And Sheep Herding"
An article bearing this heading appeared in the Boles Home News of July 25, 1957, having been taken from "The Home Journal," the official publication of the Maude Carpenter Home. We take it that its appearance in the Boles Home News means that Brother Oler gives it his editorial endorsement. We wish to review some of the contents of the article.
In the first paragraph, Brother Rhodes, who originally wrote the article, said, "In spite of all the fuss and noise we have heard the past few years over cooperation and institutionalism, only three churches have discontinued their contribution because they decided it was wrong to do so. In two of these cases we have received a great deal more from those who believe in caring for the fatherless in these congregations than we ever did from the church. In fact, all the homes are doing better today than ever before." Now, we wonder just what Brother Rhodes hoped to prove by the above remarks. We suppose that the fact that the homes are doing better financially (that is the claim made by Rhodes) than ever before, that is supposed to prove that those of us who oppose the church doing her work through human organizations, have lost our fight against such. If it were a fact that these human organizations were doing better financially than ever before, would that prove that it is scriptural for the church to do her work through them? Too, Brother Rhodes made a false suggestion in one of his remarks. He said, "In two of these cases we have received a great deal more from those who believe in caring for the fatherless in these congregations than we ever did from the church." There is the undeniable suggestion here that those who are opposed to doing their work through a human organization, are opposed to caring for the fatherless. The implication of the statement is false to the core! There is not a one of us who have opposed the encroachment of the human institutions upon the church, who does not believe and teach that it is a Christian duty to care for the fatherless. Furthermore, if all the churches were to cease their contributions to the institutions and if the income of the institutions were doubled as a result of it, you would not hear one further word of criticism from me. But until the institutions are put upon a scriptural basis, I shall continue to oppose them with all the vigor which I am able to command.
In the following paragraph, Rhodes told of the notice of the decision of the elders of one church to stop their contribution to the Maude Carpenter Home because they believed it to be out of harmony with the teaching of the New Testament. The notice also stated that to make such contributions, was to force an opinion on those who could not conscientiously participate. Brother Rhodes ranted about this considerably and had quite a bit to say about anti preachers undermining the church; all of which does not get us excited enough to overlook the fallacy in his remarks. He went on to say that two of the elders, who believed in the church support of the homes, resigned before the decision to discontinue the contribution. As to the reason for these men in resigning, we have not the slightest idea. We are thankful however, that these men had enough grace to resign before FORCING AN OPINION ON THE CONGREGATION in which they were members. We only wish that elders all over the country, who advocate the church support of human organizations, would have the grace to resign. Any man, who advocates the support of human organizations by the church, in the absence of authority in the New Testament scriptures, is not qualified to be an elder in the Lord's church. Rhodes went on to point out that those of us who write in and read the Gospel Guardian, are forcing our opinion on those who disagree with us. That is one falsehood which Rhodes could have withheld and not have had to be accountable for. Those of us who write in and read the Gospel Guardian are not trying to force our opinions upon anyone. To the contrary we are simply insisting upon Bible authority for the support of human institutions by the church. Thus far, the scripture containing such authority has not been forthcoming. And as long as no scripture is given which constitutes authority for the support of human institutions by the church, it will be those who advocate such support who are forcing their opinions. Some have advanced some scriptures in support of their claims but there has not been one used yet which has not been misused and misapplied.
Brother Rhodes joined in on the theme-song of the other institutional brethren in strongly suggesting that those of us who oppose human institutionalism, be marked and quarantined.
In order for the later part of our heading not be misunderstood, we will say that we put it in because the heading was a quotation. The remarks of Rhodes in regard to that part of his article were of such character that we do not even wish to notice them in this article.