Most of our readers will remember the struggle led by Brother Foy E. Wallace (Jr.) and the Bible Banner during the late forties to keep the colleges out of the treasuries of the churches. This writer had a small part in that battle.

The years have passed, almost twenty of them, and once again it appears a battle is developing along the same line. In the intervening years, a large segment of those who led in the fight against the support of colleges by the churches have had to oppose other encroachments of institutionalism and centralization. These brethren have, by a large portion of the brethren, been stigmatized as "antis" and quarantined. Liberal brethren evidently believe that they have effectively isolated the principal opposition to church support of colleges, hence may proceed unmolested with their ambition to get the colleges in the budgets of the churches.

Six years ago, Dr. J. D. Thomas, of Abilene Christian College, wrote a book on hermeneutics (Biblical interpretation) called "We Be Brethren." This book has been heralded far and wide as an answer to all of our problems. In it, Dr. Thomas illustrated by means of a wavy line how that just about anything the brethren are doing or want to do might be justified as scriptural. Everything under the wavy line according to Thomas in "We Be Brethren" is an "optional expedient" and scriptural. His book is reported to have been used as a text in classes at A. C. C. It has been read and approved by the leading professors of the college, and has been repudiated or opposed by none of them, nor by anyone else known to us connected with the college. Under the wavy line, Dr. Thomas placed church support of the colleges along with institutional orphan homes, the sponsoring church, church recreational activities etc. The Thomas book set the stage for a revival of the old issue.

A few years have passed and brethren generally have become increasingly liberal. One unscriptural promotion after another has been accepted with little or no opposition. Schools east of the Mississippi, with the exception of Florida College and perhaps another or two, have become militantly vocal relative to church support of the schools and have begun to accept and solicit such contributions. David Lipscomb College of Nashville, Tennessee has led the way in this movement.

In the latter part of 1963, Brother Batsell Baxter, head of the Bible Department of D.L. C. and preacher for the Hillsboro Church in Nashville, preached three sermons on current issues in which he came out in defense of practically all the brethren are doing these days. Among those things strongly advocated as scriptural was church support of the colleges. The material in these sermons has been published in a tract that is being widely circulated. Many brethren regard this as the opening shot in an all-out struggle to get the colleges in the budgets of churches once for all. Dr. Baxter's influence is tremendous by virtue of his position as speaker on the Herald of Truth radio and television series. Quite evidently, those who favor colleges in the budgets of churches feel the time is right to capitalize on this influence in view of the liberal state of mind of the "brotherhood."

Strangely, Reuel Lemmons and the Firm Foundation have come out strongly in opposition to Baxter's sermons and tract. Lemmons has written two editorials in the Firm Foundation reviewing Dr. Baxter's position. This seems exceedingly odd to us. Lemmons is a member of the Board of Directors of Abilene Christian College, yet has made no fight whatever against Dr. Thomas or the book, "We Be Brethren." Why should he seek to crucify Baxter as the leader of a movement toward apostasy and let Thomas go unscathed? You be the judge.

We are anxiously watching to see how far Lemmons and other liberal brethren are willing to go in this matter. Lemmons has launched out before and backed up faster than a crawfish when the Gospel Advocate applied the pressure to him. We want to see just how far he is prepared to pursue this matter and how many of his constituency will follow him. We do not believe there is a tithe of the official family of A. C. C. conscientiously opposed to church support of the schools. They are acutely sensitive to the "brotherhood conscience" in the matter and always have been, but they are not actually opposed to the practice. Also, Lemmons in his editorials has indicted all orphan homes under institutional boards. The Gospel Advocate contends that they are scriptural on no other basis. Is it not strange that brethren have these institutions but cannot agree on how they are to be defended by Scripture? They are determined to have them but do not know why they are right! Let us see if Lemmons will oppose Boles Home, Myrtle Foster Home, Childhaven, Tennessee Orphan Home, Potter Home and the others that are operated under institutional boards and not elderships. He believes them to be unscriptural but has continued to support and defend them. How far will he go in this fight?

Truth Magazine VIII: 9, pp. 15-16 June 1964