From time to time we direct attention in these pages to trends, movements, or agitations in the religious world that merit our most careful scrutiny as students of Bible prophecy and heralds of the approaching crisis. Sometimes these trends are well developed and clearly defined, and so come definitely within the category of fulfilling prophecy. Others are still indeterminate as to their ultimate course and influence. But they constitute telltale "straws," showing the direction of affairs.
We are called upon to watch closely that shaping of events which may develop into the last chapter in the great controversy between light and darkness. We have been forewarned that the final scenes will be rapid ones, and that human affairs will close with a suddenness that will surprise even many who look for their Lord's return. We confess to a profound conviction of being nearer the great consummation than many are wont to believe. Not a few fail to realize how advanced is the course of events, because they look for prophecy to fulfill along certain preconceived lines. With minds open and alert, we will watch such proposals as the following:
Because of the inspired outline recorded for our guidance in Revelation 13:11-18, we should watch every proposal looking in the direction of Protestant unity for "moral pressure." The oppressive unity of Catholicism, operative under the Apocalyptic symbol of "the beast," as portrayed in Revelation 13:1-10, is a matter of Dark Age history. But that Protestant unity that constitutes an image-likeness of papal oppression, and which is to join with a revived Papacy in the Old World for the enforcement of the separating "mark of the beast," is a matter of deepest moment to all mankind. That is why we should follow the divine command to "watch."
Without impugning the motives of the author of this call, or making any declaration as to its probable outcome, we reproduce without further comment the essential paragraphs, that our workers, the majority of whom do not have access to the journal in which it appeared, may scan the proposal:
"I am persuaded that the next great step for Christians everywhere is to get together. A kind of fatalism has come over the world. We find ourselves drifting into war and yet feel helpless to avert it. We know that if we get into it again it will mean ruin, and yet we feel incapable of asserting a collective will to peace. . . .
"One of the reasons for this sense of helplessness is the fact that while there is a tremendous amount of scattered good will, it is not united. So there is no way of pointing all this good will toward collective action. And yet the Christians of the world hold the balance of power in their hands. They are the greatest single body on earth organized around one idea and with a loyalty to one Person. They could do anything if they knew how to come together. The next great step is a living unity in Christendom. .
"We want a unity which will bring everybody into it. Closing up the ranks between two or three bodies is good as far as it goes, and I am grateful beyond words for such attempts, but it hardly touches the real problem. We must have practically everybody in. How can it be done? . . .
"Christians are the most united body on earth —if they only knew it! When they drop down beneath the level of organization and church polity to the level of experience, there they are the most united body on earth. . . .
"God is not working particularly or exclusively in any one denomination. The saints are about equally distributed among all the denominations. . . .
"Three things—unity, equality, and diversity —will have to be kept in mind in any suggestions for unity.. . .
"I would therefore suggest the following as a possibility. That since we are one, let us act like it. Let us begin with this underlying fact and build upon it. Since we are one in inner life, we will be one in outer expression. We will therefore drop all the labels that divide us and become members of 'The Church of Christ in America.' Since we are all members of Christ, then we should all belong to 'The Church of Christ.' But since we have a local habitation, we should define it and thus belong to 'The Church of Christ in America.' We are thus unified both in life and in outer fact.
"But under this unity we will have an equality and a diversity. This would be provided for by having many branches, thus: The Presbyterian branch of the Church of Christ in America, the Episcopal branch, the Lutheran branch, the Friends branch, the Salvation Army branch, and so on clown the line. Each would be a branch, but only a branch. In giving up the name of 'church' attached to each denomination we would give up claims to superiority and look upon ourselves and all others as branches of the church. This would give us an equality. But it would also give us a diversity, for each branch would retain what it felt was essential to retain. . . .
"If any two or more branches came together, it would reduce by so much the number of branches in 'The Church of Christ in America' . . .
"These branches would be bound together in an outer unity which might be called 'The General Assembly.' This general assembly would be composed of delegates on a prorata basis of membership and would elect its own officers. Small denominations might be assured of representation by being given a minimum representation, say of two. This general assembly meeting every two or four years would deal with matters of general import to the church as a whole.
"Regional assemblies could be organized to deal with matters more local than could be handled by the general assembly.
"On our letterheads would be at the top: `The Church of Christ in America