R.P. Bell wrote to Stone-Campbell:
> We can all thank the Lord that
> the Baty person is now retired
> from the IRS and will not be
> tempted to impose his own
> opinion above the application
> of the law of the land.
> If you don't like the law, tell your
> congressional representatives
> about it.
Methinks R.P. Bell has not been paying attention or is deliberately
intending to mislead people about the historical development of the
issue involving the church, the private schools and how the federal
government recognized them.
The law is what it is, and, under the law, the private schools are not
"integral agencies" of the churches of Christ.
While that is a matter of fact, you are welcome to consider it my
opinion, if that suits your fancy. I am in good company (i.e., the
founders of the schools, the high level legal administrators, and the
What has happnened is that school administrators successfully
circumvented the law, via the efforts of Bush and Burleson, in order to
get an administrative ruling that is contrary to fact, law and theology
as popularly promoted amongst the churches of Christ.
That such happens is not peculiar to this situation, but it does happen
as has been documented on the Stone-Campbell forum and elsehwere this
issue has been extensively discussed.
I have, by the way, told my congressional representatives about the
issue. They made a big deal of how they were concerned about the IRS
when it was neat to express such concerns. They were not so concerened,
however, to openly and honestly take on this issue and risk upsetting
their private school constitutents; much less the political machine
behind the Bush and Burleson types.
So, it is just a matter of fact that the private school folks have
successfully enjoyed a little deal with the feds, contrary to fact and
Maybe when that story is told in the same sort of tedius detail that the
Bales/Atteberry story, and others, is told, the record will at least be
I find it quite interesting that much of that flap was going on all the
while the schoolmen were lobbying for "integral agency" status from the
feds. I think, had that been made public, it would have been a neat
twist to that controversy over "Christian education" and "obscurantism"
and such, or whatever that matter was.
P.S. I think it a rather serious charge for that Bell person, whatever
he is, to suggest that, when I was employed I sought to impose my
opinions above the law. Perhaps he needs to explain that comment or
apologize for it! Nah, folks like him don't do such things as
apologize, do they?