|
 Several
years ago I wrote something about the practice of
"signing" newspaper articles and highway billboard
advertisement with "Churches of Christ Salute You!" A
plurality of local churches, acting independently, might decide
to "salute" the general public with holy kisses —
but both the propriety and scripturalness of such is
questionable. Further, many single congregations were presenting
statements to the public, and indicating by the
"signature" that this was from "Churches of
Christ."
Since
then the practice has increased, and I have seen several
statements by the press and other world sources that indicate
some are thinking of "Churches of Christ" as a proper
designation for a denomination — "our" denomination,
if you please. What else can one expect from presswriters who
know "us" as they see us. The Herald of Truth has
presented the "work of one church, Highland church
of Christ in Abilene" under the banner of "The
Churches of Christ." (?)
In
a recent brochure Christian Benefits, Inc., is said to be
"a non-profit organization, operated by Members of the
Churches of Christ." The capital "M" and "C"'s
were their idea. If they meant to say members of several
churches, why the "caps"? The blunt truth is that
"Church of Christ" and now "Churches of
Christ" are not party or denominational labels, even though
"our" brethren use them.
It
is bad enough when brethren use "brother-hood" as
though it were a "hood" of "Churches" —
"church-hood." With "Churches of Christ" as
a proper designation
|
|
for "our" brotherhood, we
make congre- gations the units of the universal church in name as
well as in concept. Now we can have "Churches of
Christ" preachers, doctrines, and practices — as well as
"Members"!!
Maybe
this is the solution for a problem that has bothered many a
sectarian minded member recently. As one Tyler, Tex. sister
asked me, "If the church divides, who will get the
name?" It occurred to me she was more interested in who got
"the name" than in who stayed with the truth of the
Lord. But now we have enough to go around — for awhile at
least. One "side" can be "Churches of
Christ" and the other "Church of Christ." It will
be permissible for both to use Rom. 16:16 to justify
their claim — even though, of course, both will have to
mis-use the passage.
The
Lord's people belong to God, in Christ, and it is wholly in
keeping with the scriptures to speak of the church (called out
people) of (belonging to) God — or Christ — or the Lord —
etc. The local church is a functional entity (Phil. 4:15) and in
addressing these saints grammatical and copy rules may dictate
the use of a capital "C" — but we must not allow
ourselves to accept an unscriptural concept of the Lord's church
on the basis of such practices.
Our
concept of "brotherhood" must never become smaller
than "all the saints in Christ Jesus;" and the basis
for that "fellowship" must never become more nor less
than the revealed truth of God -- That "light" in
which we walk and live.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
