Any objection that is possible to make against meeting at the church-house at 10 a. in., and teaching the word to several classes for an hour can with the same words be used against any Christian, any day in the week, in any place whatsoever and teaching and studying together. The same reasoning that will exclude reading and teaching the Word in the church-house on Sunday morning, before the hour of worship, will exclude any Christian, any day and any place from placing the Word in the hands of two or more, reading and teaching it to them. If a Christian can place the Word in the hands of a plurality of persons, any day in the week, in any place, let them read it, then proceed to ask and answer questions, then one or more Christians may scripturally meet in the house of worship an hour before the hour for worship, centering around the Lord’s Supper, read and teach it.

1. No new organization is formed.

2. The church in its assembled capacity for worship is not divided.

3. There is no confusion when voices are properly modulated.

4. Only one speaks to one audience at one and the same time.

1. We must do what God has commanded. All admit we are commanded to teach.

2. We must not form human organizations to do his work. No organization is formed.

The use of lessons helps, as they are usually called, is entirely separate and apart from the question of classes. Of course, if one objects to classes, it would be useless to try to prove to that one the permissibility or efficiency of prepared lessons. This article does not deal with that question.

There is no specific command or example for standing up, singing an invitation, song, and exhorting sinners formally to come forward to confess Christ. But there is abundant authority for preaching, exhorting, singing, and prevailing upon sinners to accept Christ. But the exact procedure of doing so is left to those who engage therein. So of teaching the Word. Teaching the Word to different classes, any day, any place wherever and whenever we can get them together, is just exactly on the same basis as preaching, singing, and exhorting sinners to come forward to confess Christ.

Just here some one may remark what then about instrumental music in the worship, and missionary societies? Missionary societies are ecclesiastical organizations, separate and apart from the church, exacted over the church, till they have become so oppressive that the very men who once were their greatest advocates are now opposing them. Instrumental music in the worship is something entirely new in the worship. Neither bears the slightest resemblance to teaching the Word by reading, asking and answering questions.

Of all the prophecies that have been so literally fulfilled that a person can "see it with half an eye," the prophecy of the Apostle Peter is an outstanding example. He says—"But there were false prophets also among the people, even so there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies." (2 Pet.2:1).

If any innovators and perverters of the truth, who have been a curse to the church of Christ, have exceeded these "classes and literature" innovators in trying to cover up their tracks and seduce unsuspecting Christians by "privily" bringing in "the commandments and doctrines of men" (Col. 2:22). Who are they?

Well does the Leader know of the havoc in the churches that follows in the wake of the bringing in of these things, Are they blind to the "damnation" to come upon those "that are causing divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which you have learned"? (Rom. 16:15)

At the beginning of his article Otey says, "It has long seemed to me that if the question was considered with a sincere desire to the best interests of the cause, that unity of agreement would result."

And I say certainly it would. But do these innovators consider "the best interests of the cause" when they thrust these things upon the churches, knowing the wreck and ruin that has been the result of their introduction? No. Are these things any more essential to salvation than is the Missionary Society? If so, point it out. Don’t both have the same Scriptural foundation—none? They do. Don’t both produce the same result when foisted upon the churches—division? They do. Does not the same warning of ‘damnation" apply to those "causing" such "occasions"? It does. And if there is one place in hell hotter than another it will be, I think, for those who have come out on the plain Word of God to "Speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where the Bible is silent," and then turn around as "The dog turning to his own vomit again, and the sow that had washed to wallowing in the mire" (2 Pet. 2:22), and wallow again in the "precepts and doctrines of men" (Col. 2:22), and try to "smuggle" them into the churches to help the devil ruin "the best interests of the cause!" And if the devil had no such "false teachers" in "sheep’s clothing" (Mt. 7:15), the "flock" would not be scattered as it is. Now we have the "Christian Church" among its "sister denominations." But oh, how innocent was that Missionary lamb, and how "privily," secretly, smugglingly was it started. Why, "the aged Alexander Campbell was its first President." But how now? Even Otey, who combated the monster with the veritable giant, Briney, as its defender, says, "They have become so oppressive that the very men who once were their greatest advocates are now opposing them." Why did they ever advocate them? Had they no brains? Prophecy demanded a betrayer of Christ; but the Iscariot did not have to be "it" any more than I must be. Prophecy demands "false teachers, who will be smuggling in destructive sects," and those who let the devil work through them, as did Judas Iscariot, shall, as the ‘Bible teaches, receive the devil’s reward when Christ comes, and says, "Depart from me, ye accursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels." (Mt. 25:1-41)

And now we have "the Sunday School Church" with its acknowledged "Sunday School" and "Sunday School literature"; with its "Pastor," and with its "Class Rooms," like the "Christian Church" and its "sister denominations. "Yes, with about every humanism found in the "Christian Church" but "instrumental music." And oh, how innocent at first—truly lamb-like! "No harm in it," as we were "cunningly" told, we who had seen such lamb, and well knew it was just in "sheep’s clothing" to deceive the "flock," and if permitted to enter, would soon be "roaring as a lion," as the devil always does when he once gets "the upper hand." Often did he blurt at anyone who ventured to sound an alarm, "It’s not a Sunday School," — "We don’t have a Sunday School,"—"Just teaching the little ones," — "There’s no harm in it," —"You stay away; you don’t have to come." And so he (the devil and his co-workers) plead, and threatened, and lied, and planned "secretly" until camouflage no longer served his purpose, and then the "cloven foot" of a man, "sitting in the temple of God," gave out his "precepts and doctrines of men," as of God, and said, "If you don’t like the way we’re doing here, just get out; we can get along better without you."

And now division has fully come. You see a "Christian Church" on one corner, a "Sunday School Church" across the street, and a "church of Christ" not far away with a few in an old house or barn, in some brother’s home, or under a tree, their meeting-house stolen, not even the seats left to them unless they are "too old style" for the "Sunday ‘School Church." "Class Rooms" are added, a "Pastor" employed, and on they go, as did the now-called Christian Church—to hell with the devil and all the others that rebel against God.

Though but child at the time, I can see my dear old grandmother leaving the meeting-house with her Bible pressed tightly to her heart, knowing that thousands had died, that she might have the privilege of reading its sacred pages—leaving to return no more, since it was decided by "majority vote to put in the organ." True, they said it was but for the Sunday School, which had just recently been "put in for the young people." But when a preacher came who did not object, it was played for the church, and finally all the time there, for no one that opposed it was permitted to preach there.

1.No new organization is formed, he says. He must have taken a Rip Van Winkle sleep. They "whipped the devil around the stump," we know, for a long time, saying, "No Sunday School, just Bible Study—no Superintendent, no Secretary, no separate treasury, no confusion, etc. ad infinitum. But they soon went to "building class rooms to prevent so much confusion," and to advertising their "Sunday School literature." Now they have S. S. Superintendent, Secretary, S. S. treasury—in short an "organization" that is not the church. Otey admits the "thing" he stands for is not "The church in its assembled capacity for worship," for the "thing" he advocates is "divided." Seeing the "thing" is not "The church in its assembled capacity for worship," will Otey tell us why they may not have "instrumental music" in the "thing"? Do the "precepts and doctrines" that regulate the church apply to the "thing"? If so, why is the "thing" divided, while "The church in its assembled capacity for worship is not divided"? Is the "thing" the church in its unassembled capacity? Is it the church at all? If so, why is it not subject to Bible "precepts and doctrines" that do not permit the church to be divided?

3.There is no confusion when voices are properly modulated, you say. Then why the "Class Rooms"? If what you say is true, I have never been in one of the ‘‘things’’ when ‘‘voices are properly modulated," and I do not believe you have either.

4.Only one speaks to one audience at one and the same time." If this meets the Bible precept for "one by one," then why not divide the church as you do the "thing"? "The legs of the lame are unequal." And if the "wing" is not the church, why do you want it to conform to the Bible precepts for the church?

Yes, all admit we are commanded to teach, and must do what God has commanded. But we say that no man (and this includes Otey) can "Speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where the Bible is silent," and advocate such a "thing" as Otey here advocates. There is neither precept nor example for it in the Bible, and he evidently knows it or he would appeal to the Bible in defense of the "thing." He is now where Briney stood—off the Bible. The "thing" causes division, and I say, Away with it to the junk heap of all other humanisms.

He says, "Instrumental music is something entirely new." Let me say that I can find the place where instrumental music was put into the worship hundreds of years before the introduction of "Sunday Schools" (or so-called "Bible Study") as now prevail in so-called "Sunday School Churches." Both are innovations, and the man who advocates either is in duty bound to affirm his practice. Will Otey do this? Defend, if you can, what these so-called churches of Christ actually have.

But Otey finally "lets the cat out of the bag" when he steals Briney’s and every other innovator’s thunder in saying, "There is no specific command or example for standing up, singing an invitation song, and exhorting sinners formally to come forward to confess Christ."

Briney says, Therefore we are justified in having instrumental music in the worship, while Otey says, Therefore we can have the Sunday School. (I say Sunday School, for that is the "thing" they have, and now admit they have it.) And by this road they all go finally to Rome, for that is the very way Rome started out and kept going. And they are not done going. How did the. now-called "Christian Church" start and go? Not all done in one day, was it?

If we find practices that are causing division and "no command or example" for them, I say stop it, and be "endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace." (Eph. 4:4) And if Otey wants to "walk worthy" of his "vocation," he will drop the "thing" he advocates, for which he admits there is neither "precept nor example" in the Bible. No one will ever be condemned for not taking part in the "thing" he advocates; but all Christians that do not endeavor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace will be condemned.