AND this indicates the difference in other points. In the Christian order, Christian work is done by individual Christians; each one of whom is led to the work and fitted for it by the Holy Spirit. in the federation system the work is done by those who are called and sent and managed and controlled by a sheer officialdom, through executive boards, the members of the officialdom connected with “missionary” work solely because they occupy an official position, and they hold official position more because of manipulation of ecclesiastical politic and machinery than from any missionary spirit or zeal.MEDM June 12, 1907, page 187.1

In the discussion of this Report in the Baptist Ministers’ Conference, it was well said that “Not every ‘merger’ is beneficial to its promoters or its stockholders. The forced organic union of our three societies into one mammoth organization would, in our view, be immediately disastrous. The interests they represent are too vast, too diversified, too complex to allow it.’MEDM June 12, 1907, page 187.2

In this connection also, in the discussion, the question was asked, “How are we going to bring this [already existing missionary] Northern Baptist Convention, unless its members wish to come?” Upon Christian ground and with respect to the individuality and conscience of Christians, that would be a very proper inquiry. But in the presence of “federation” and “confederation” the question is merely academic rather than practical. For as to the point itself the “leadership” of the “strong federation” can very easily make that matter all plain; this leadership can simply issue its commands to the Society that it “come under” the administration of the “strong confederation.” And if the Society choose not to do this, then the leadership of the “strong confederation,” conscious of its power, can totally ignore the Society and “organize” a new Society adapted to the confederation; and then, by all the power and influence of the “strong confederation” systematically undermine the original society, destroy its credit and its work, and crush it out of all efficiency, if not actually out of existence.MEDM June 12, 1907, page 187.3

Further, upon the supposition that the society should decide to accept the merger with the “strong confederation,” in the discussion it was remarked: “If they vote to take that action, no bare majority vote will be effective—a merger on the basis of a bare majority vote would be a fatal blow to our whole foreign missionary work.”MEDM June 12, 1907, page 187.4

Upon Christian principles such alternative as that might be counted worthy of consideration; but as against the successful administration of a “strong confederation,” any such result would be held as of very minor importance. For, with the policy of a “strong confederation” firmly fixed, the success of that policy would take precedence of all other questions or considerations of every kind; and the leadership of that “strong confederation” would push recklessly forward, making it more and more manifest that whosoever would not come under must get out, and that, whether a society or an individual person, whosoever would not conform to the policy of the administration of the “strong confederation” and thus be recognized as of the confederation, would be counted as no longer of the Baptist denomination and not entitled even to the name of Baptist.MEDM June 12, 1907, page 187.5

Of course this procedure would roughly sweep aside considerations of Christian unity; and would supplant it with a machine unity, a confederation unity, a unity of human domination. Also, of course, such procedure would cause division and a breach in the Baptist ranks; because in the nature of the case all who would be Christians in loyalty to Christ in his place as head of the church, would refuse to come under such domination.MEDM June 12, 1907, page 187.6

But, it may be said, such a thing as that would not be Christian. True enough; but it would be “a strong confederation.” The wrecking of any efficient missionary society and the ruthless spreading of confusion and suspicion amongst the Baptist churches throughout the world would be a very small matter as compared to the triumph of the “strong confederation.” The “wreckage strewn along the way” would be considered by the “leadership” of the “strong confederation” as only the greater evidence of the essential value and efficiency of the “strong confederation.” And this is all sufficient to demonstrate just what lies in scripture and on the face of the thing itself, that federation and confederation is simply anti-Christian.MEDM June 12, 1907, page 187.7

(To be continued.)

May 29, 1907

June 19, 1907