As we notice some of the things going on among brethren today, we are both sickened and saddened by the progressive digression that is steadily rearing its ugly head above the horizon.

A movement is tinder way to unite Christian churches and churches of Christ. The movement boasts a far different approach, however, than similar movements of the past. After all, "If you can't lick 'em, join 'em!" Brethren used to plead for Christian churches to give up those unauthorized practices that divided us. Now, some brethren are beginning to adopt the practices of the Christian churches. Consequently, if unity could not be achieved on the Lord's grounds, some of our brethren will move to another ground.

I noted recently that the Christian Chronicle carried a story of a small New England Christian church, the entirety of which was supposed to have been converted to the truth, renouncing the errors of the digressive movement. Since not a great deal was revealed in the article, I can hardly help wondering whether the members of the Christian church repented of any error or if they just glanced over their shoulders and saw a "church of Christ" coming up fast on the wheels of digression. Had the church in that area become so liberal that there was no difference (except the instrument), or did the members of the Christian church actually change? I do not know? I am just wondering aloud.

It is a recognizable fact that the differences between the so-called "churches of Christ" (digressive) and the Disciples of Christian churches are becoming fewer. Our brethren are on the march and are rapidly closing the gap.

We are here reprinting a statement from a bulletin form used by a Church of Christ (Christian) in the Cincinnati, Ohio area:

This congregation cooperates in the mission of the Church to redeem the lost people of the world through the preaching of the gospel. It therefore gives money directly to the men and women who are preaching and teaching Christianity to the unevangelized areas of the world, whether they be in the United States or in sonic other country of the world. This congregation also supports with her prayers and monies benevolent institutions including homes for orphans and the aged and Christian Hospitals. Christian Colleges also receive financial support from this congregation.

The foregoing statement is particularly interesting to the writer in that there is nothing whatsoever in it which would be objectionable to many of our brethren who are non-instrumental. In fact, there is little difference reflected in the entirety of the bulletin between the two groups we mention.

We believe that about the only remaining differences between some non-instrumental groups and the conservative element of the Disciples or Christian church is the instrument itself! And we have cause to be alarmed about• the attitude toward the instrument manifested by some of our brethren. In fact, some churches are already placing the instrument in the meetinghouses for "weddings and funerals." Too, there are scores of brethren who feel no compunction whatsoever at accompanying spiritual songs with the mechanical music so long as they are not in the meetinghouse. And, a number of conservatives have moved instruments in and out of the meetinghouses for years (in a graphic display of inconsistency.)

In the past, a number of brethren have written and preached concerning the comparative differences between churches of Christ and Christian churches. It would be interesting to collect some of these old articles, tracts, and sermon outlines and superimpose the image of the present day practices of their authors upon their old workmanship. I suspect that the old charges against the Christian churches would now condemn the very authors of the material in a number of instances.

A number of churches in this area have conducted a Bible Forum for this year, the integral parts of which appear to be nothing short of a simple Missionary Society. Yet, the participants, in an area Fellowship Meeting just a few months ago, condemned the Missionary Society! A number of brethren have attempted justification of some present-day missionary societies" (such as Herald of Truth) on the ground that churches do not send representatives. But in an article titled BIBLE FORUM, which appeared in the December 1, 1963, issue of a Canton, Ohio, bulletin, it is said: "Each congregation participating has a representative on his committee." Now the committee involved was an advertising committee, but note that each church cooperating in the preparation for this Bible Forum had sent or provided a representative. It seems to me that this will incapacitate them from ever objecting to a missionary society because of the delegate system.

The apostle Paul said, "I have applied all this to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brethren, that you may learn by us to live according to scripture, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another." (I Cor. 4:6 RSV)

This passage shows me two things: (1) we ought to be content with things authorized by command, example, or precept. (2) When religious people are not content with only those things that are authorized by the scriptures, division is the result. May God help us to reach those who are honest and sincere among our brethren that they be not swept along with this current tide of digression.

Truth Magazine VIII: 12, pp. 3-4 September 1964