The restoration movement in Britain has had its divisions as is true of churches of Christ in the U.S. In 1943, they divided over what was known there as the "Association Question," which is somewhat similar to the "institution" issue that divides churches here. It also included the pastor system (which they call the one man ministry) and instrumental music. Those congregations that accepted these practices were called the Association Churches and those that rejected them and pled for scriptural authority came to be known as Old Path Churches.

Although there are many similarities between Old Path churches in the U.K. and the churches represented by the OLD PATHS ADVOCATE, one issue historically seems to have drawn them together. That issue is what they call pacificism and we call conscientious objection to war. Brother Doug Phillips wrote in THE TRUTH about contacts with British brethren around the time of World War II. Christians there were suffering because of their opposition to the war; a number were in camps; and they were seeking moral support from brethren here. Brother Phillips conducted a correspondence with these brethren for a time but contact seems to have been lost after the end of the war. When Jerry Cutter and I were preparing to go to Malawi in 1964, I wrote to a preacher in London whose name I had acquired from a digressive church paper and asked about churches that worshiped as we do. He responded with a discouraging and largely false view of the beliefs and practices of British churches. But he did give me the name and address of brother R.B. Scott, who then worshiped with a church that had met in the same building in north-west London, named Hope Chapel, for 93 years. In route to Africa, Jerry and I attended a Wednesday evening service at Hope Chapel on March 25. I wrote in my diary at the time that the service was an "open discussion" with men and women taking part, very different than we would have done it. We accepted brother Scott's invitation to visit after-church and, in his home over hot chocolate and cake, had a good and forthright discussion. Brother Scott, now deceased, was a good man and a gentleman in every way.

Once in Malawi we found that several of the British churches were supporting the work through contributions of money, clothing, literature, and so forth. Although we were surprised to find this situation, it was quite natural. The gospel was first preached in Malawi by British missionaries decades before our arrival. One of the churches that supported the African work was Wallacestone in Scotland. I wrote to the secretary, brother John Baird, to thank them and in the process inquired about their worship. Brother Baird gave my letter for reply to an articulate young teacher in the church named James Grant. The correspondence and friendship that developed from Jim's response has lasted 27 years. In addition, it enlightened us to the fact that, contrary to what the digressive preacher had said, there were a number of churches in Britain that were rather close to us in faith and practice.

When Jerry's and my stay in Malawi ended, I returned home and moved to Nashville, Tennessee. The military draft was still in effect, and President Lyndon Johnson had recently escalated the Vietnam War through the Gulf of Tonkin incident (which history has proved was greatly exaggerated to justify the escalation). Christians were again worried about being forced into military service. One of my cousins who lived near Nashville published his name in the OPA as a conscientious objector. Brother John Breakall, who lives and worships near Wigan on the Western side of Britain, saw that issue of the paper and wrote my cousin praising his stand against war. I responded to brother Breakall's letter and found that some of the congregations around Wigan were also quite near to us (or we to them!) in worship. Again, our common opposition to war had drawn us together. Over the following year, I corresponded with several British brethren discussing a number of issues. One brother who was outstanding for his Christian character and Bible knowledge was David Dougal. Brother Dougal, who died in 1978, was a tall dignified Scotsman with a warm heart and an absolute commitment to truth. A scholar himself, David was impressed with Doug Phillips' small masterpiece on communion issues, The Voice of One Crying in the Wilderness, which I had posted to him. In these discussions, I believed that I had brought up most of the issues that might concern us, and I knew the ones we agreed upon and those we did not. I knew that many churches there held solidly to the use of one cup and one loaf in communion. I was aware that most Old Path churches did not have an American-type Sunday School in which the assembly of the church is divided for teaching. I knew that many did have a practice they called Sunday School that consisted of gathering children of nonmembers from the neighborhood and teaching them, usually on Sunday afternoon. Because the conduct of these gatherings varies from church to church (i.e. women teach in some and not in others) we would approve of some and not of others. One of the stickiest issues, from our point of view, was breaking the bread. Although that issue was hotly contested here in the 1930's and 40's, I do not believe the British brethren had ever had it raised as a matter of concern. David Dougal was quick to see its importance, however, and a church near Edinburgh which he often visited, soon stopped breaking the loaf before it was served.

Early in 19661 called Bill VanStavern of the Lebanon, Missouri congregation and told him what I knew about the churches in Britain. I asked if they would sponsor a visit to the U.K. to see if stronger ties of fellowship could be developed. Bill, always a supporter of good causes, was enthusiastic; and the church agreed. The trip took place that summer. I visited several churches, mostly Sunday evening and midweek services, and many brethren. My first stop was Wallacestone, home of James Grant and his father-in-law, David Dougal.

Within hours of my arrival in Scotland, I was introduced to an issue that was new to me and would have been at the time to most U.S. Christians, viz. closed communion. The British brethren are carefu1 to see that the bread and cup are not offered to unbaptized persons. The reaction of many Americans to this practice is astonishment and questions such as, "Do you mean they wrestle it out of people's hands?" To those who know British churches, the question is absurd and the answer is no. By and large the brethren there are more decorous in their worship than we are. What they do is make a point to meet new visitors before the service and respectfully explain the worship to them. They find that most people appreciate knowing what is expected and are not offended.

Although space prohibits a full discussion of the topic here, the British brethren base their belief on the nature of Christian fellowship and the fact that the right to sit at the Lord's table is the most fundamental extension of that fellowship. They have a point. That right is what is withdrawn when an erring brother is disfellowshipped. When first confronted by this issue, I responded with the argument that I have heard many times from persons with whom I have discussed the subject: "But the Bible says, 'Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat..."' The brethren take that argument away easily by pointing out that l Cor 11:28 was written to "the church of God" at Corinth (1:2) and not to unbelievers. Our differences on this point with U.K Christians are more in practice than in faith. We all believe that non-Christians should not partake lest they incur the "damnation" of I Cor 11:29. But we are not as active in seeing that they do not. In an extension of this issue, the British churches also see contribution as a form of fellowship. Thus, they do not willingly accept money from unbelievers.

Additional high points during that 1966 trip were visits with churches and brethren in the Wigan area. Leonard Morgan is a tireless worker for the Lord, one of the most dedicated I have met anywhere. In his 80's now, time has taken a toil on Leonard's physical health, but the Lord is still his life. I had long talks with John Breakall and Carlton Melling. Carlton (small of build, but a giant of a Christian man) edited the SCRIPTURE STANDARD for years before his death in 1984. John is an elder at Hindley (Wigan) church along with Leonard and brother Tom Kemp.

The timing of my first visit to the U.K was propitious. Just a few years earlier, an American preacher working in a suburb of Edinburgh had introduced the first set of individual communion cups into an Old Path church, and that over the protests of leading British brethren. This set off a storm of controversy reminiscent of the one here 40 years before. Advocates of individual cups told brethren that "one cuppers" were dying out in America. (How often have we heard that story?) It encouraged them to know that counterparts on this side of the Atlantic were alive and growing.

For the next several years I corresponded and studied with a number of British brethren and made a return visit in 1969, again with the help of the Lebanon church. James and Isa Grant came for the first of three visits among U.S. churches in 1973. I, and the Nashville congregation, arranged that visit because we believed they would be an encouragement to Christians here by James' good teaching, but also just because of their presence. And they have been. James has preached at churches in Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Missouri.

Joe Norton and Wayne McKamie spent several weeks in Britain in 1981. These knowledgeable and diplomatic preachers would be a help anywhere. They made many friends in the U.K, visiting churches and studying with brethren from the north of Scotland to the South of England. Several other preachers from our ranks have visited briefly in Britain, often in route to mission fields in Africa or other places. The brethren there have always been hospitable and Christian-like.

I feel profited by my association with our British brethren and trust they view it similarly. Since they tend to see fellowship in terms of reception at the Lord's table, I believe they consider themselves "in fellowship" with us. We are more apt to define fellowship in terms of agreement on "major" doctrinal issues. We agree with them on many issues that divide us from other groups of churches of Christ in the U.S. But we practice some things they do not agree with and vice versa. I know of four or five churches whose Lord's day worship most of us who have been there feel comfortable to share.

Because so many Christians hope to visit Britain, I feel impelled to offer some advice to those who may actually do it. We all want to conduct ourselves in ways that foster fellowship and good feelings. First, try not to be the typical "Ugly American" who jumps to conclusions, usually negative ones, even before he understands what is being done and why. The brethren there have shared numerous stories of having been insulted by well-meaning but naive and arrogant Americans, unfortunately, a few from among our brethren. One example they probably do not know about is a brother who visited and saw that the grape juice bottle looked differently and the liquid did not taste "right" (i.e. not like Welchs!). He came home saying that church used fermented wine. I know the church well and I knew he was dead wrong but misinformation had already been circulated. Second, do not go planning to be lodged and fed by the brethren. The British Christians are always hospitable and at times they have been burdened by American Christians who came for worship and stayed as house guests. I have a list of hotels near churches that I will supply to Christians planning business or vacation trips to the U.K Finally, keep in mind that Britain is not a mission point of U.S. churches. The restoration began in Europe, not here. Our fellowship and study can be mutually profitable if it is done in mutual respect.