|
 We
continue quotation of article by Jesse P. Sewell, from CHRISTIAN
LEADER, Apr. 15, 1941. See last issue of Plain Talk for first
installment.
***********************
“One
congregation may cooperate with another congregation in any
worship or service permissible to a congregation, and each
congregation remain complete and independent within itself. The
congregation doing the thing makes its own decisions, determines
its own procedure, and on the basis of these, invites and
accepts the cooperation of one or more other congregations.
These other congregations remain complete and free under Christ
to determine for themselves, to cooperate or not to cooperate,
solely and entirely on their own understanding of and attitude
toward the thing in which they are invited to cooperate.
wo
congregations may not, on the basis of the doctrine declared in
this paper, cooperate together in planning, deciding or
determining anything. Cooperation together thus, means studying,
planning and deciding together. in joint consideration. with
reference to any given act or procedure. This cannot be done
except as the two or more congregations, as units or through
delegates, get together and jointly consider and decide the
matter in hand. This cannot be done without each congregation
forfeit its completeness and independence.
In
joint or mutual consideration and decision there is of necessity
a forfeiture of individual completeness and
independence.
|
|
When two
men jointly consider and decide any proposition neither of them
does it independently. When two congregations or more jointly or
mutually decide or determine any course of procedure for the
entire number (two or more) neither of them does it
independently. Two or more congregations, cooperating in this
way together in anything, great or small, to any extent, clearly
violate the doctrine of congregational completeness and
independence under Christ.”
Bro.
Sewell made the same ambiguous use of “cooperate” that is
common today; but he recognized a distinction within the
bounds of this word that is rarely seen by current liberals.
“Independent action” and “collective action” are NOT
COMPATIBLE. Being willing to enter into city-wide or
area-wide planning sessions, or to support and execute the
results of such, doesn’t change the fact that “congregational
completeness and independence under Christ” has been
sacrificed. Such “willingness” is a “willingness” to do
wrongly.
Whoever
first applied “cooperate” to the assistance of a church in
need (2 Cor. 8: etc.) confused a lot of people. The term is too
broad — which explains the seeming contradictions in bro.
Sewell’s article.
No
“collective action” of churches is involved when one sends
“alms” to a dependent church; and this is in no wise
comparable to “churchhood” projects like “Herald of Truth”
, however planned and executed.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
