A movement is on foot and has been for a number of years to group all non-Catholic bodies under one overhead leadership, on the assumption that Baptists and the other non-Catholic bodies are practically one. This is not so.

Baptists have been called narrow because they refuse to unionize. But it is not a question of being narrow, it is a question of what is Christianity? Summing it up you would say it is the individual being joined to Christ by faith. We believe: that each person is capable of dealing with God through Christ, and that this privilege is granted every creature who knows right from wrong. Further we believe as Baptists that every individual has an equal right in all matters of the church and that each church is a free autonomous body of its own, governed by the majority of its members and not obligated to the state except as pertains the individual himself in legal relation to the state. In other words, we hold that the church is a free church in a free state and that our first obligation is to Christ and since it is that we shall also express our duty to our state which God has set up for our legal rights.

With this as a foundation there is little need for me to state that Baptists cannot unionize with others for they cannot accept anything or harmonize with anything that affects the direct relation of the soul to Christ. This the ecclesiastical administrators do. Furthermore, we cannot accept the idea of saving grace coming through the ordinances of the church, such as, Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. This brings grace down into the same realm as matter and takes it out of the realm of mind and spirit. John 1:12,13 answers, "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

These views would destroy the relation of the individual soul to Christ by making Christianity depend on something outward or on some priestly order who by administering the ordinance holds in his hands the destiny of my soul, in that he could refuse to grant to me such ordinance.

We cannot unionize because we cannot accept infant baptism.

So you see that Baptists are separated from all other denominations by their New Testament principles. Understand that we do not believe that Protestants are lost, for many Protestant churches hold to repentance and faith as the only means into the kingdom of God, but, they will have to admit that their structure is built around certain principles and certain errors which we cannot accept.

Here is a startling statement: If you would take from the Protestant Pedo-Baptist bodies all in them that is Catholic, you would have nothing left but a Baptist church, and if you were to take from them all that is Baptist you would have nothing but a Catholic church remaining. Most Protestant churches believe one or more of the following: infant baptism, baptismal regeneration, good works, church membership, repentance and faith. The only thing there that we believe as they believe is repentance and faith for salvation. Take away those two things and you have a complete Roman Catholic church without the Priest. Take away all the other and leave repentance and faith and you have a Baptist church. So you see, we cannot change our position.

So you ask, "What is your relationship to other ecclesiastical bodies?" None.

We are not to be blamed for this separation. We have stood our ground since the church was built on the banks of the river Jordan. We have given our blood and even endured death because we stood for this principle. Instead of you Baptists hanging your head in shame for being a Baptist, and any who would, should leave the Baptists in a hurry, you should lovingly and boldly accept your ecclesiastical isolation and preach it to all the world and especially to the coming generations. We have a heritage to which we do not bow our heads in shame, but to which we lift our head in honor, having never had laid at our feet the charge of aggression or persecution of any other religious group in all the world, even while standing in our own blood, flowing there at the hands of some of those who would today tear down our principles.

Now let us look at this unionizing or ecumenical movement that is sweeping our country. It started back in 1919 under John R. Mott. He had influence and access to men with plenty of money. They operated through a number of inter-or outside denominational organizations such as the Y.M.C.A.; Continuation Committee of the Edinburgh Conference; Federal Council Foreign Mission Council; Inter Church World Movement and others. They planned their movement with great skill and ability. They began their work by assuming that all non-Catholic bodies are one, and their differences are not noticeable. Their object was to break down all denominational lines and build one organic religious body with an overhead management.

This is exactly the way the Roman hierarchy finally came into existence. You will not find a word about it in the Scriptures. Rome did not become a reality until human wisdom was enthroned in place of the wisdom of Christ. This is true of the Ecumenical Movement. I point you to the National Council which has so outgrown itself that now it reaches out into the World Council of Churches. I need say little about this except that most of it is aimed at Baptists to destroy their faith. This I shall show to you. If Baptists were to put the program of Dr. Mott and the World Council, we would die overnight.

How do they work? The leaders assume the overhead leadership of the historic religious bodies and advance with their program. They promote that which is uppermost in the minds of the people at the time and use programs that deeply affect their work at home and abroad. They do not wait for an invitation. They have no manners. I refer to the Council of Churches here.

It was this very kind of Ecumenical Movement that hampered mission work in China some years ago. Dr. Mott and his crowd heading the Continuation Committee of the Edinburg Conference, went to China, called conferences and put on a program utterly subversive to the principles of the people supporting the missions involved. There he sowed seeds of discord that threatened some of the Baptist mission work overseas.

They went further than that. In World War I, do you know what this unionizing group did? Mott went to Washington with a plan for war work. He kept his meeting secret. War came and what did we wake up to find? Three forms of religion has been established in the camps: Judaism, Catholicism and Y.M.C.Aism. The non-Catholics, that is the great groups of them were barred from the camps, though many soldiers came from their ranks. Those who did minister were compelled to merge into the Y.M.C.A. and work through them and wear their uniform and the "Y" was covenanted with the government not to encourage anything denominational.

Why do some of our Baptists join these movements? Out of ignorance, and because they are not Baptist. You can always find bad apples or lemons or potatoes in a whole mass. This is how they work. They call a conference and pay the expenses of the individual. They call the ones who will work with them. Then the papers carry a big article that such and such denominations were represented and thereby mislead the people. There are people named Baptist in the various State Councils, National Council, and World Council of Churches, but they did not take their churches called Baptists in with them. Let me give you a conversation I had one time after being turned down in Grundy, Virginia. An evangelist said, "Why not hold a Union meeting?" I asked him, "Do you?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Don’t you have any scruples?" He then said, "I am not limited in my financial drag. If I hold a union meeting all people will put in their money but if I limit myself to Baptists, I won’t make near as much."

I then said, "Do you believe in infant baptism, foot-washing, baptismal regeneration, salvation by works and falling from grace?" He said, "No." "But," I said, "these people you are inviting in do." "Well," he said, "I may get them to hear me in this way and get them to see the error of their ways." I said, "will you tell them that?" He said, "Don’t be a fool."

A druggest that won’t label the medicine he sells cannot stay in business and you would not trade with him. Yet you go right down, without knowing a thing about the person who holds a union meeting, and join in and don’t even bother to ask him for his label. Some of you say, "He sounds just like a Baptist." Yes sir, but sounding like one and being one are two different things.

The danger of unionism is what it leads to. It leads to hierarchy.

Look at your World Council of Churches. If ever anything is farce in the way it has been represented it is this group. Do you know their charter? Do you know what they believe? What you read in the papers sounds good, doesn’t it? What you know about them makes the whole thing stink, if you viii excuse such an expression.

Why do we need a World Council of Churches? Jesus never endorsed such a thing. He did the very opposite. WE HAD BETTER WATCH THE BAPTIST WORLD ALLIANCE TOO. All these alliances will lead us right to the place we know Jesus does not want us. Baptists cannot unionize with other Baptist churches and keep the New Testament church. We are local governing bodies of our own, carrying on the work as the Holy Spirit directs us, not as He directs some other Baptist church. They may be led to put on a training school at the same time we are led to put on a school of missions. It is all right when we plan far enough ahead to co-operate in the census, school of missions, etc. But let it be said, that even after saying we would co-operate if we feel led not to go into that and put on another program, that is our business and privilege.

Some Baptists have not learned yet that they are to run their own church according to the leadership of the Holy Spirit.

Let us go back to this World Council. We know what the National Council is. It has some communist composition. The local and State council of churches are kin to them and one of their bed fellows, if not its own child. All these union movements with the exception of the revival of the old Oxford Movement under another name, THE MORAL RE-ARMAMENT MOVEMENT, are sponsored mostly by the National Council. The National Council may soon take over the Oxford crowd.

They call this thing the World Council of Churches. What does this group stand for? Simply stated, here it is. "The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which accept our Lord Jesus Christ as God and Savior."

There is an affirmative statement but nothing in it definitive. This Council did not affirm its faith in the inspiration and final authority of the Scripture. Barth and Brunner were there. They did not affirm their faith in the virgin birth, for many of its number do not so believe. They did not affirm their faith in the heart of the Gospel, the atoning death of Christ, for many of the churches it represents do not believe in this. They did not affirm its faith in the return of Jesus. Many of its leaders have repudiated this. They did not affirm the resurrection. For some of its leaders no longer accept it. Summarizing I simply say it is a group of churches the PEOPLE WHO LOVE THE LORD JESUS CHRIST will not fellowship with—ever! (Case Against World Council of Churches"—Chester Tulga.) This crowd did not want another Pentecost. TIME Magazine summed up all this meeting in a true statement, "The men of Amsterdam did not expect and did not receive flames from heaven."

Now let me make myself even more clear by clearing the errors that exist about Church evangelism—that is that evangelism apart from the church is possible.

1. Christ was and is the one evangelist.

2. He now fulfills His great work of proclaiming the good tidings through His body which is the church.

3. Unattached and unauthorized evangelism is unscriptural. Christ committed the evangelizing of the world to His church.

4. Another error, supposing that a time can be set for it and people worked up to it.

5. Another great error and one which I wish to dwell on now is that to have church evangelism it is necessary for all the denominations of a given city to unite.

1. The basis of agreement in every union meeting implied or distinctly stated is the suppression of a part of the truth and that in the face of the direct command of Christ, "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all nations . . ."

2. The necessity of such organizations does not exist in order to secure the cooperation of those who really want to assist in winning the lost. No Christian who loves God and wants to win the lost is debarred from this. He can do personal work every day in the year.

3. By far the greatest amount of genuine cooperation is given in meetings not run on the union plan.

4. As a rule the church work is continuously kept going by those members who are most loyal to their church’s doctrines.

5. Union meetings have a necessary tendency to make people willing to surrender part of the teachings of the Word of God.

6. As a rule the churches and members who are the greatest believers in union meetings do very little to save the lost after the campaign is over.

7. A union meeting makes it next to impossible for a pastor to indoctrinate his church after the revival closes.

8. In union meeting sectarianism is described and the direct effect is to make it odious and defend firm convictions of church doctrine.

9. In doctrine and practice Baptists stand opposed to all others. In going into the union meeting they minimize and discount the fundamental doctrines and practices which in the estimation of thinking people form the reason for their existence.

10. In union meetings the real difference between truth and error is mystified.

11. The union meeting is a misnomer because a real union involves oneness of faith and practice and the Bible says, "two cannot walk together except they be agreed."

12. If churches can unite for four weeks in a union meeting, why, let us unite for all time to come.

But you ask, "How do you explain John 17:21? ‘That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me’" This should come from the heart of every Christian. A prayer for unity of God’s true people. What is the nature of this unity which Jesus had with His Father? NOT A PRAYER FOR ORGANIC unity, for organic unity can never be the close spiritual relationship like that existing between Father and Son. It is that deep unity of identity, will and purpose that existed between the Father and His Son, who was said to be, "the express image," of God. It was the unity of will which could say, "not my will but Thy will be done."

This is the basis of the unity for which Jesus prayed and by which He illustrates His will for His people.