The Christian Chronicle (Part 3)
Last week's article about the way news and events are reported in The Christian Chronicle first appeared in The Richwood Reaper (of Richwood, Texas) on December 3, 2023. That same publication also printed an article the following week (December 10), noting two responses to the "merger" that had been described. (The initial story of said merger ran in the October issue of the CC; these two responses followed in November.)
One reader, named Stephen, wrote a letter of commendation for the way in which The Christian Chronicle conducts itself. We will comment on some of those points after listing them. Stephen wrote:
I, for one and for many others, am happy to receive The Christian Chronicle. I think their news reporting is top tier. Churches of Christ have always been a broad, diverse group of believers, with varying beliefs on different matters.
What the CC frequently reports are departures from the faith—as in the case of this merger. Sound brethren might report the same news—but not without a value judgment that what was being practiced violates the principles of the New Testament. The CC is kind of like the weatherman, who says, "It's going to rain, but we need some to combat dry conditions," or, "It will be sunny today. Go outside and enjoy yourselves." It wouldn't do him any good to take sides. Whatever happens is beyond his control.
The CC is the same way. "Oh, look, here's a group that is growing; that's newsworthy. Never mind that they are compromising truth in order to gain numbers. That will not be our concern." It's like reporting that Jesse James is adept at robbing banks, but, hey, let's not discuss the morality of the matter. We just report. The CC does not want to make value judgments, and that is referred to as top tier reporting?
Have churches of Christ always been broad and diverse in their beliefs? Sure, but Paul said they needed to agree with him, since what he wrote were the commandments of the Lord (1 Cor. 14:37). Peter wrote to some brethren who were so diverse they were practicing immorality (2 Peter 2). John said to "try the spirits" (1 John 4:1); some were too diverse for the Lord.
There have been times when brethren held diverse views, but when they studied the Word of God more thoroughly, they came together and achieved unity for a long period of time. During the past fifty years, however, some have taken great delight in reversing the trend. Many of those in denominations do not believe what Paul said when he wrote that "all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among" us, but instead we ought to be "perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10). Why does Stephen feel comfortable violating these words?
Stephen goes on to write:
Global Broadcasting Network [sic], Polishing the Pulpit, or preaching schools do not speak for the entire brotherhood. That is the "No True Scotsman" fallacy. Seriously, the level of combativeness and vitriol… and then we wonder why Churches of Christ are closing their doors.
First of all, GBN stands for Gospel Broadcasting Network. Has anyone ever claimed that they or Polishing the Pulpit speak for the entire brotherhood? Is there some evidence that either has such a goal? When they designed their charters, was point number one: "It is our desire and expressed interest to speak for the entire brotherhood"? Schools of preaching were not designed that way, either. The goal was to train men to preach.
The "No True Scotsman" Fallacy
Many have likely not hear of this fallacy. The Internet explains what it is.
No true Scotsman fallacy example. Person 1: No Scotsman puts sugar in his porridge! Person 2: But my friend Duncan likes sugar with his porridge. Person 1: Yes, but no true Scotsman puts sugar in his porridge. The word "Scotsman" can be replaced with any other type of group affiliation.
Presumably, the idea would be that no true Christian could believe or practice a particular thing. Of course, sometimes that would be true—if it is a matter of what the Scriptures teach. But if it were merely a matter of opinion, it would be false. However, few, if any, in the Lord's church argue this way. Rather, we say, "What do the Scriptures teach on this issue?"
Stephen laments the level of combativeness and vitriol. Are we combative? We hope so, the armor we wear and the sword in our hands are not there just to look good at Parades. Paul wrote:
For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ (2 Cor. 10:3-5).
Wasn't Paul combative? Wasn't Jesus combative? However, vitriol should not be found among our weapons. Our war is for the prevalence of truth; vitriol is a deterrent to that end—not a help. Stephen has a valid point here; hopefully, soldiers of Christ do not stand guilty of such tactics.
The Other Response
Having considered the response that praised the CC for their news coverage, we now come to the opposing view. We wonder how many of the CC's readers are still conservative, but at least there is one. Jeff Blanton wrote the following assessment:
It is shameful and disgraceful how The Christian Chronicle (which may be considered a chronicle but is nowhere near Christian) has consistently upheld apostasy and false teaching in its articles and reports for several years now.
It is not acceptable to fellowship denominationalism (reference to the article in question). That is not Christian unity. Instrumental music in worship is not an option. The scriptures say to sing. Praise teams, female ministers, the ecumenical movement and the such like will be condemned by the one true church, not given cursory approval through neutral articles. The 'We Report, You Decide' mentality is simply a refusal to stand up for truth.
Those brethren who have pledged to stand for the truth are going to give this assessment a hearty, "Amen!" For several decades now, the Christian Chronicle has been praising (either directly or indirectly) innovations that some have begun to practice. Or they have reported favorably on outright departures from the faith, such as female leadership in place of 1 Timothy 2:11-14.
If someone could get a reply, it would be interesting to see how the editorial staff would reply to the following True – False questions.
T – F. In baptism, sins are washed away.
T – F. People can be saved without being baptized.
T – F. Jesus built one—and only one—church.
T – F. Any religious denomination can be the church of Christ.
T – F. Instrumental music was not used by Jesus, the apostles, or any of the congregations in the New Testament; it therefore lacks authority (Col. 3:17).
T – F. Instrumental music is just an expedient.
T – F. No authority exists for the Christian to drink alcoholic beverages (Pr. 23:31).
T – F. Social drinking is a legitimate way for Christians to make contacts.
It is doubtful that anyone from the Chronicle's staff would reply, but the reader can imagine what the answers would be from the way the "news" is reported. One can scarcely approve of mergers with denominations and believe in the one church.
More on Their Attitude
Randy Robinson wrote further on this issue on December 10, 2024.
The Chronicle's position appears to be that they are simply and objectively reporting on a body of facts like any other newspaper would do. However, the Chronicle is not simply "any other newspaper."
In the upper right-hand corner of page one (above their website address) is this description: "An international newspaper for churches of Christ."
And let us not overlook the message in the upper left-hand corner of the same page: "Real news that honors God." You are not going to see those messages on The Washington Post or The New York Times or even The Oklahoman, the largest newspaper in the state of Oklahoma and the local secular paper for the Oklahoma City area.
The Jerusalem Gazette
Had there been a newspaper in the first century, what might it have reported? Actually, we do not need to wonder; it's called the Book of Acts. A newspaper probably would have begun well with descriptions of what occurred on the Day of Pentecost, excerpts of Peter's sermon, and interviews with several who had been baptized. Of course, to be fair, we would need to hear from Jewish families who felt betrayed by this new religion—who were upset to lose family members to this new Jesus "cult."
Later, the Gazette might suggest ways to present the gospel without so much controversy. Paul appeared to be such a polarizing figure; maybe he would have done better to share wine and the gospel at the same time. One can only imagine the lament over the destruction of the books of magical arts, amounting to 50,000 pieces of silver. How is the church ever going to relate to society when we always seem to be hostile toward various segments of it?
And what about those disciples that Paul insisted on baptizing again in Ephesus (Acts 19)? They had already been baptized once; what is this Paul, a fanatic? What makes him think that people need to know everything there is to know about baptism before they can be saved?
The other slogan of the CC is "Real news that honors God." Really? Does it honor God when they report about women in leadership roles contrary to the teaching of 1 Timothy 2:11-14? Or when they report Christians hosting an event for homosexuals? Or when they describe mergers with denominational groups? If they opposed such activities, then they might honor God, but why report such departures of the faith, period? It may be news—but not God-honoring news. May more brethren oppose The Christian Chronicle's slant on the news.