In 1989, brother Ed Harrell, one of the editors of Christianity Magazine (a magazine no longer being published) wrote a short article in defense of the late brother Homer Hailey. In his article, brother Harrell commented: "brethren are guilty of attacking an 85-year-old warrior." Brother Harrell was referring to some who had publicly disagreed with brother Hailey's erroneous position on marriage, divorce, and remarriage. As a result of this one article, brother Harrell wrote a series of 16 articles on the Bounds of Christian Unity. I believe the series was reprinted in pamphlet form. In these articles, brother Harrell wrote about his understanding of Romans 14 and its teaching concerning fellowship among brethren. The article series was not about Romans 14, but he did include his opinion about the passage. As they say, "the rest is history."

In February of 2000, in Burnet, Texas, six brethren--Paul Earnhart, Bob Owens, Harry Pickup, Jr., Jessie Jenkins, Ron Halbrook, and Tom Roberts--engaged in a discussion. The Preceptor Company of Beaumont, Texas published a book, "Toward a Better Understanding," about the meeting. I've read this book, but I feel that it doesn't really deal with the grave problems currently existing among the brethren who are at odds over the meaning of Romans 14.

In February of 2001, during the Florida College Lectures, brother Donnie Rader spoke on Marriage, Divorce, and Remarriage. I was present and heard brother Rader's lecture on the assigned subject. Following Brother Rader's lecture, brother Bob Owens, a past president of FC, came to the podium. Brother Owens stated that he took no issue with the content of the MDR material presented by Brother Rader. Then he continued, basically calling brother Rader a liar because of a statement his lecture book manuscript contained about some of brother Owens' teaching concerning Romans 14. Brethren Ed Harrell and Ed Kimbrough had also written statements questioning the validity of statements made about their writings in the book.

Now you are up to date. I've chosen not to share many of the articles, lessons, and public and private discussions, as well as the firestorm that has surrounded Romans 14 during the past 12 years. Conservative brethren, once united and standing side-by-side in defense of God's word, are today divided. In 1997, I submitted for publication in Truth Magazine an article concerning my disappointment in some brethren on both sides of the issue. I felt then, and I still feel, that what needs to be discussed has not yet been discussed. While I agree with my brethren who teach the truth regarding Romans 14, I do not agree with the way we've handled our differences. How can brethren who love God, love truth, and claim to love one another, be so at odds? My good friend, for whom I have great respect, tells me I am just weary.

He continues to tell me that these things are just another cycle of apostasy that is raising its ugly head. While I understand this brother's point, this is not the main issue with me. While these discussions have been going on, something has been lost among the brethren. What is it? I'm afraid some, on both sides of the issue, are more interested in winning the battle, than arriving at the truth. They may win the battle but lose something much more important--the love that should exist among brethren. I feel this way because, during the past years, I've heard these brethren question one another's honesty and motives. Their attitudes have become bitter, and harmful statements about brethren's character have been circulated on the Internet. Sadly, we seem to have lost sight of the original reason for the discussion.

Let me begin this special series on Romans 14 with a personal observation--for what it may be worth. From the onset of this discussion, way back in 1989, with the opening article written to defend a close friend of brother Harrell--the late Homer Hailey, the center of the discussion has been wrong. I attended the Florida College open forum in 1991, the last year of open forums at FC. Brothers Mike Willis and Ed Harrell discussed their differences on this subject. When the floor opened for questions, an overwhelming number of questions had nothing to do with the issue; they were about brother Hailey! I sat for over an hour with my hand in the air, but was not given opportunity to speak. Given the opportunity, I would have asked: "Why are we discussing brother Hailey instead of focusing on the error he taught on this subject? The point is: both sides agreed that brother Hailey's teaching on marriage, divorce, and remarriage (MDR) was wrong. Brother Hamilton, that year's moderator, and brother Harrell told the assembly that they had talked with brother Hailey about not publishing his book on the subject, because they thought his position was in error and would bring him great harm. Their advice went unheeded, and the book, "The Divorced and Remarried Who Would Come to God," was published, and brother Hailey's erroneous teaching became part of the public domain.

Brother Weldon Warnock wrote an excellent booklet answering the errors contained in brother Hailey's book. This should have changed the discussion's climate, but it did not. Today, if it were not for the firestorm that surrounds brother Hailey's MDR teaching, Romans 14 would not be an issue. Defending brother Hailey--not Romans 14--is now the issue. Misapplication of Romans 14 has become the means by which many try to defend open fellowship with one whom, we all agree, taught error on the MDR subject. What if I had been the one who taught error on MDR? To ask the question is to answer it! Brethren placed a man above the truth--a fatal mistake that always leads to deeper controversy.

I don't believe that brother Hailey ever needed for any of his friends to defend him. He was capable of doing that for himself. Long before brother Hailey, Romans 14 did not defend open fellowship with sin; and it will not defend it after brother Hailey! The Romans 14 question is quite simple: what matters are being discussed in the text? Does it give permission for differences on matters of doctrines? Sadly, this discussion has been clouded by efforts to defend brother Hailey and attack those who his friends believed were attacking him. In this special issue, we will not deal with personalities; we will deal with the text and with what we learn from Romans 14. Please consider the following pages carefully.