·
It is a Work of the Church!
1.
“That
the care of orphan children is a responsibility of the church is not denied,
except by a few brethren north of the Mason-Dixon line. They affirm that the care of orphan children
is an individual matter. Most of my
brethren admit, however, that it is a work of the church[1].”
2.
“If
it is a work of the church we wonder why the church cannot do this work without
forming an organization to take over the work for the elders[2].”
3.
“The
elders of the church may hire someone to do a job for the church that is not a
member of the church. They may let a
contract to some builder to erect a building and this contractor may use dozens
of men who are not even members of the church[3].”
4.
“What
we need today is to encourage congregations all over the brotherhood to take
children who are dependent and neglected in their community and provide for
them a home. We need hundreds of homes[4]…”
5.
James
1:27 is generally used to “authorize” the taking care of orphans as being a
work of the church.[5]
·
The Emotional and “Patriotic”
Argument
1.
“Surely
it is not hardness of heart or pure indifference that causes the Lord’s people
to neglect their obligation to suffering humanity – specially the cries of
little children![6]”
2.
“As
the bus brought them [the orphans] in to church services each night, the
children would appear clean and fresh, with their hair combed neatly and they
would then sit quietly and attentively to the services. Their good behavior would put to shame that
of the vast majority of our own children – mine and yours. These children are being taken from ruined homes
and reclaimed, transformed into the image of God, to become men and women who
will be a credit to the church and to the nation.[7]”
3.
“Brethren,
in the name of him who took little children in his arms and blessed them, let
us do what we can today to build these children of unfortunate homes into the
right kind of men and women; for tomorrow they will fill the ranks of the
church, or the ranks of its enemies, depending on what we do for them today.[8]”
4.
“Do
not procrastinate till the prisoner is gone [reference to 1 Kings 20:39-40] –
act today![9]”
5.
“For
the past week I have been in Wichita, Kansas, with an opportunity to observe
first hand a work that has thrilled my soul: the work being done by the
churches in and about Wichita in the Maude Carpenter Children’s Home.[10]”
·
The In Loco Parentis Argument
1.
Definition
– in place or role of a parent (dictionary.com)
2.
“In
debates on the Orphan Home issue brother Guy N. Woods has argued that the
Orphan Home is merely “the home restored” to the children who have lost their
natural homes, and that the board of directors stand “en loco parentis” (in
place of the parents), or “equivalent” to the parents.[11]”
3.
“The
argument basically went like this: You have an original home, and they say that
the church can help that original home.
Then the original home is destroyed.
Parents were killed in a car wreck.
Then you’ve got these little children.
And they say that the orphan’s home is a restored home. And the argument is: if the church can help
the original home, why can’t the church, out of its treasury, help the restored
home?[12]”
4.
“So
that the institutional board becomes the in
loco parentis. The institutional
board becomes the parents, as it were, of this restored home.[13]”
·
Institutional Organization is a Tool
1.
“In
the June issue of Gospel Defender Malcolm Hill has an article entitled “Caring
for the Needy as Simple as Noah Building the Ark.” The author labors to show that since God did
not specify the tools Noah was to use to build the ark, leaving these things to
Noah’s choice and wisdom, likewise, God has commanded us to care for the needy
and has not specified the “tools” (place, care etc.) we are to use to carry out
this command. Therefore, according to
the author, we are at liberty to set up any kind of human arrangement or
institution in order to carry out God’s command to care for those in need.[14]”
2.
“[Allen
again quoting Hill] God’s command to Noah to build the ark would of
necessity demand that he have some kind of tools with which to work. We are not able to determine exactly what
kind he used, but he evidently used some.
Who would be so foolish as to ask, ‘Where did he get his authority for
using these tools?’ Included in the command was the authority to use the tools
necessary to accomplish the command, God has commanded his people to care for
the needy.”
3.
“This
command of necessity demands that tools are necessary. The needy must have a home. Needy children must have someone to watch
over them, etc. Now, would anyone be so
foolish as to ask where we get the authority for doing such? The very fact that
God demanded that His people care for the needy would of itself include the
tools with which they are to perform the work.”
[1]
G.K. Wallace, “Orphan Homes,” The Gospel
Guardian, 1, no. 28 (November 1949): 1, 3b.
[2]
Ibid.
[3]
Ibid.
[4]
Ibid.
[5]
Jerry Ray, “Comments on ‘Who is Fatherless?’” The Gospel Guardian, 12, no. 8 (June 1960): 2, 14a.
[6]
Homer Hailey, “Dependent Children,” The
Gospel Guardian (Reprint), 1, no. 29 (November 1949): 5.
[7]
Ibid.
[8]
Ibid.
[9]
Ibid.
[10]
Ibid.
[11]
Billy W. Moore, “En Loco Parentis,” Truth
Magazine, 8 (1964): 1a.
[12]
Bill Hall, Restudying Issues of the ‘50s
& ‘60s: A Historical Perspective, 9.
[13]
Ibid.
[14]
Lindsay Allen Sr., “Has God Specified the Tools?” The Gospel Guardian, 12, no. 12 (July 1960), 5.
No comments:
Post a Comment