Category Archives: Church of Christ

A mansion, a harp, and a crown

Leave a reply

no_harps_allowedI was at a funeral of a longtime member of the Church of Christ the other day. The family requested several traditional hymns be sung by the entire congregation. The person who prepared the slides apparently retrieved the lyrics to those songs from the Internet, rather than “approved” brotherhood sources. Therefore, when we sang the traditional Mansion Over The Hilltop, I was surprised to see these lyrics in one of the verses:

Don’t think me poor Lord, deserted or lonely
I’m not discouraged, ’cause I’m heaven bound
I’m just a pilgrim in search of a city
I want a mansion, a harp, and a crown.

If you didn’t grow up in the Church of Christ, you’re probably not surprised by those lyrics. That’s how the song was originally written. But most of us in the CofC grew up singing: “I want a mansion, a robe, and a crown.”

There are hundreds of examples of lyrics that were changed to protect our brotherhood from false doctrine. But this one surprised me. And pained me. For it was changing away from a biblical concept* in order to protect a treasured doctrine: a cappella singing. This song appropriates a lot of images of heaven and the afterlife that the Bible uses; a harp is one of those images. It fits the song’s use of biblical imagery, but it doesn’t fit our doctrines.

I’ve run into this before. At one church, during a singing night, I dared to read Psalm 150. I naively thought no one would question someone reading a portion of Scripture. I was wrong. How dare I read about instrumental music during a singing night!

I’m not here to discuss the rightness or wrongness of our stance on instruments; I may address that one day. But when you start avoiding Scripture and scriptural terms just because they make you uncomfortable… that’s a pretty bad precedent to set.

*Please note that there is a lot to question in general about the “doctrine” in this song, from the mistranslated “mansion” to the literal approach to symbolic language… not to mention the materialism expressed.

Will big church buildings become dinosaurs?

3 Replies

cathedralThe future of the church, specifically churches of Christ, has been a popular topic recently. I guess it’s always a popular topic, but articles detailing different aspects of our present and future realities seem to come in spurts. A lot is being said these days about what is happening with younger generations and what will become of the church.

I’ve been talking with a number of people about the future of church buildings. I’m optimistic about the future of the church; less so when it comes to buildings.

Back in January, Thom Rainer wrote a piece called The Death of the Mall and the Future of Church Buildings. It echoed a lot of the things that I’m seeing and hearing.

Rainer referred to an article about the decline of shopping malls and forecasts of what is to come for them. Rainer then said:

The Boomer generation has been the generation of bigness and sprawl. Their parents, in the aftermath of World War II, moved numbers of them to the new and massive suburbia. Large malls would soon follow. Most large megachurch buildings were constructed primarily for the favor of the Boomers.
But the children of the Boomers, Generation X and, even more, the Millennials, have been pushing for more intimacy and smallness. They triggered the unprecedented growth of Starbucks. They have been the key movers in social media, which has fostered a new online intimacy.
Among the Christian Millennials there is a desire for greater intimacy in church. They are in many ways triggering a new small group revolution. And though they may not have an explicit aversion to large church facilities, neither are they attracted to them.

There is a generation that sees big buildings as a plus and small buildings as a hindrance. And there is a generation that sees things just the other way around. Rainer notes:

A Boomer church leader looks at a small building and limited acreage and sees challenges. He sees the limitations of size and space. A Millennial leader looks at the same building and acreage and sees opportunity. He immediately thinks multiple venues, multiple services, and multiple days.

And he ends his article with a line that I hadn’t heard before: “After all, only college football stadiums are utilized less than church facilities.”

So what do you think? Are big church buildings destined to become a thing of the past? If so, will that be a bad thing or a good thing?

 

photo from MorgueFile.com

Is pacifism on the rise?

16 Replies

Is pacifism on the rebound within churches of Christ? It certainly seems so to me. Just as the period between World War I and World War II saw a return to pacifism, so I think cultural conditions in recent years have allowed for a similar rise.

Barring an actual enemy invasion of U.S. territory, I think that pacifism can only grow within our brotherhood here in the U.S. The generation most vehemently opposed to pacifism is the World War II generation, followed closely by their children.

I want to spend some time exploring some topics related to pacifism and violence/non-violence. Some will tire of this discussion, and that’s fine. I long ago gave up any illusions of writing a wildly popular blog. I’m well aware that there is lots of reading material out there on the Internet, so if someone wishes for a change of topic, they will have more than ample opportunity to find something. If nothing else, just follow some of the links on the right side of this page.

But writing these things out helps me to think them through. And the response I get often steers me back on course when I opt for a disastrous path. So I’ll be thinking out loud for a bit.

The Decline of Pacifism in Churches of Christ: Cordell Christian College

8 Replies

Yesterday we looked at government censure of the Gospel Advocate during World War I. This was a serious blow to pacifist thinking within churches of Christ. Another setback was the closing of Cordell Christian College in Oklahoma.

Cordell was headed by a man named J.N. Armstrong. Armstrong held to what Richard Hughes calls “an apocalyptic worldview.” This viewpoint was fairly common in our brotherhood in the late 19th century, putting a strong emphasis on the Kingdom of God vs. the kingdoms of this earth. Among other things, such a view typically leads to a refusal to participate in war.

This apocalyptic thinking became common among the faculty at Cordell Christian, a fact which did not please the pro-war community around them. In particular, the Selective Service board felt that Cordell was not giving sufficient encouragement to its students to enlist in the military. When faculty member S.A. Bell published an anti-war article in the Gospel Herald, that was perceived to be the final straw. The Selective Service board intervened, demanding the resignation of Armstrong, Bell and all faculty members who held to a pacifist viewpoint. Rather than accede to these demands, Cordell Christian College closed its doors.

How could I have forgotten about this incident? (BTW, Bobby V. reminded me in the comments yesterday that there was an entire chapter on this closure in his book Kingdom Come) How could we as a brotherhood have forgotten? I hear people talk about their fear that government might someday tell preachers what they can and can’t preach. We’ve already been there! And we as a brotherhood acquiesced, bowed our heads and quietly muttered, “Hail, Caesar!”

I know that it’s easy to judge what has happened in the past. You really have to have been there to have known what really happened. But I can’t help but see this as one of the low points for our brotherhood. Even if we don’t agree, we should be willing to stand and defend a brother’s right to preach what he sees in Scripture. I pray that history will not repeat itself on this matter.

“And now, Lord, look upon their threats and grant to your servants to continue to speak your word with all boldness” (Acts 4:29)

(Bobby V. was gracious enough to share with me the chapter that he contributed to a book that was published in memory of Mike Casey. Bobby’s article was titled “‘David Lipscomb of Texas’ Vs. David Lipscomb of Nashville: R. L. Whiteside’s Rejection of Lipscomb’s Pacifism”)

The Decline of Pacifism in Churches of Christ

26 Replies

OK, so I was wrong. Wrong with a capital R. I know that surprises no one, but it’s frustrating to me because I wasn’t wrong so much out of ignorance (like normal), but wrong out of forgetfulness.

I forgot about Cordell Christian College. And World War I. OK, maybe I didn’t forget about WWI, but when I said that the churches of Christ were predominantly pacifistic up until WWII, I was forgetting the first world war. (Which wasn’t really the first world war, but they’re not going to change the history books now)

On my shelves, I have the book Decades of Destiny: A History of Churches of Christ from 1900-2000. I’ve read the book and thoroughly enjoyed it. So how could I forget that Lynn McMillon’s chapter on 1910-1920 is titled “The End of Pacifism”?

So let’s back up a bit. During the Civil War, the Restoration Movement found itself divided, both geographically and philosophically. Generally speaking, the churches in the North supported the war, while those in the South discouraged their members from fighting. (I’m painting with broad strokes, I know) More than doctrine, this is what led to the split between the Disciples of Christ and the churches of Christ (a scenario which played out in many other religious groups).

Leaders like David Lipscomb took strong stands against Christians joining the military. When the Spanish-American War came, it wasn’t hard for Christians to see through the pretenses behind the war and refuse to get involved. But then came World War I.

By the time World War I arrived, churches of Christ no longer found themselves on the wrong side of the tracks. [You might read Mike Casey’s article “From religious outsiders to insiders: the rise and fall of pacifism in the Churches of Christ.” Not sure how long that link will be valid, but you can read the article there for now.] Now an accepted part of society, they felt a stake in the preservation of that society.

What’s more, the government saw to it to persecute Christians who dared use their influence to discourage others from participating in the war. Two large targets were attacked directly. One was the Gospel Advocate, a publication long known for its pacifist views. During the Spanish-American War, the magazine had republished a letter presented to the governor of Tennessee during the Civil War which declared that the churches of Christ “believe that all Military Service or connexion with Military Service is entirely incompatible with the Spirit and requirements of the Christian religion.” During World War I, Caesar, err, the government threatened to arrest J.C. McQuiddy under the Espionage Act if he didn’t stop publishing pieces promoting pacifism. In July 1917, the Advocate stopped publishing peace articles for the rest of the war. McQuiddy also helped the government persuade preacher Price Billingsley to stop denouncing pro-war Christians.

Tomorrow I’ll do my best to retell the story of Cordell Christian College. Those who know it better than I can be prepared to chime in. And you’re always more than welcome to offer comments and corrections on the story thus far.