It is well known that Christadelphian books cannot be bought in Christian bookshops or in mainstream bookshops. In the 1980s, a Christadelphian imprint, Aletheia Books, tried to break into this market in the UK, but success was limited to only one or two volumes. Compared to Christian publishing houses, of which there are many, Christadelphians have only one or two organizations that run as a business.
In the world, a tiny number of popular authors make a living from religious book writing. The writing of books on biblical topics offers less opportunity for money-making to an author. Generally, the authors of these books are making their living in academia or the church; their writing offers some royalties as a bonus to their salary. We might ask whether royalties or commission fees should be paid to Christadelphian writers who have their work accepted in the main magazines or who have works published by CMPA. The principle is that a labourer is worthy of his hire.
The Christadelphian community is a more or less completely lay community; it has no professional clergy. It supports missionary work through private and charitable donations; it supports many other good works through such means, for example Meal-a-Day and various care homes. The same endeavours can be seen in the churches. That area of human endeavour which we call writing receives virtually no support financially in the Christadelphian community unless it is writing directed towards preaching.
A “giving of your time freely to the Lord” is the model that dominates Christadelphian writing. The same is true of Christadelphian preaching, except here there may be living expenses for foreign missionaries, for travel, or sundry expenses incurred in campaigns, and so on. The difference between the lack of financial support for writing compared to preaching is plain to see, but does it matter? Are there costs involved in writing which should be borne by the community; has the community suffered from its lack of support for writing? What are the problem conditions that arise from the lack of support for writing in the community? We could list several:
1) Quality: there are different qualities in different types of writing. In Biblical Studies, the best quality writing is based on careful research and thinking. The benchmark in method would be the doctoral writing that comes off the conveyor belt of the church seminaries and universities. This kind of writing is wholly lacking in the community. Other types of writing are also rare or scarce; writing that is overtly theological or philosophical in relation to biblical matters.
2) False Doctrine: When ecclesial magazines and those who publish books in the community neglect advanced writing, whether in biblical studies or in doctrine, there is a danger of false doctrine and error. Unless there is a counter-balance to the advanced writing that takes place in the churches, people will only have the one source to consult for such writing. The truths and the mistakes in advanced biblical studies are subtle, and readers imbibe each in equal measure. There is therefore a need for such writing in the community to counter the subtle falsehoods that exist in church writing.
3) Problem Solving: Hoary old chestnuts bedevil the community; they have a life of their own and they live on in each new generation. However, there is a need for advanced writing on such problems. One way to measure the lack of such writing is to ask: to which Christadelphian writers do I look for a solution to this or that problem? Is s/he a person who wrote over a hundred years ago, over fifty years ago, or in the last twenty years in the pages of an ecclesial magazine? Another question to ask is this: do the solutions being offered to biblical and doctrinal problems seem stuck in a time warp? This is another way in which the lack of advanced writing is felt. Again, people can go to the advanced writing in the churches for solutions to hoary old chestnuts and be misled.
4) Doctrinal Development: the Bible is a deep book and the believer can plumb to ever increasing depths. Doctrine can be developed to deeper levels. This is a form of advanced writing that is neglected in the community. It is a kind of writing that is required if Christadelphians are to combat the sophisticated false doctrines that are abroad in Christendom. Two pieces of evidence that show that we have neglected advanced writing on doctrine are: i) the extent to which pioneer writings are used; and ii) the temerity with which doctrine is handled; safe formulations are used from the past stock of writing (e.g. in the area of the Atonement).
We could, perhaps, add to (1)-(4), but this is a short opinion piece. The types of writing that predominate in the community are “devotional”, “preaching”, “proverbial back page sentiment” and “introduction”. With these types of writing, there can be no complaint about quality; each has their own rationale and value. We can say, however, that the neglect of more advanced types of writing is a strategic mistake within the community. This applies not only to what we might call scholarly writing but also to deeper analysis of the biblical text without scholarly engagement. The evidence that this mistake has been made is simply what has been published by the mainstream ecclesial magazines since the late 1980s. The problem that is created is that there is virtually nothing to read from the community once the offered forms of writing have been read.
Time is a problem. If a person only has time to read one advanced book on a topic, by a Pentecostal or a Baptist, say, they will inevitably be in danger of a one sided view. If that view is then transcribed to an article in a Christadelphian magazine, then it is duplicated a hundredfold. What’s required is: more time for personal research and/or a stock of Christadelphian writings that have written up such research, thereby offering a guide through topics.
The neglect of advanced writing in ecclesial magazines is a strategic mistake. For the last twenty years, magazines and those who publish books have not been building the stock of such writing for people to draw upon. This is not to say that false doctrine has crept into the magazines and books, although there are some obvious examples of scholarly mistakes that have migrated from scholarship into magazine and book materials. Rather, the conflict between true and false teaching has another battleground: the Internet. As opinions, viewpoints, and questions are posted on forums, Facebook, and mailing lists, it is here that the lack of advanced written material is felt, and the scholarly writing of the churches is quoted instead.
There are several ways to tackle this problem. Existing magazines could broaden their editorial policy to include advanced writing. Christadelphian publishing organizations could include the concept of an “academic series” in their portfolios, so that advanced biblical writing could be published. Christadelphian charitable foundations could broaden their articles of association to include research grants for the purpose of advanced writing and advertise this on their websites. These ideas are not new, but they would be a challenge. Perhaps the new generation of writers and editors (when they come) can undo the mistake of their forbears in this matter.
Fellowship with the Maker and Brethren