Page 6357 – Christianity Today (2024)

David W. Baker

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

Some 40 million children, youth, and adults are receiving instruction in the Christian religion in Sunday Schools of America. What they are taught will largely determine what the Church of tomorrow will believe and be, and also the nature of its moral and social impact on American society.

What are these millions of pupils being taught? And who is determining the what?

TWO TYPES OF LESSONS

In general, we have two types of curriculum materials in the Sunday School: Uniform and Graded Lessons.

Uniform Lessons are designed to provide every age group with lessons based on the same passage of Scripture on any given Sunday. These lessons have been set up in six year cycles, and though designed to provide for “the fruitful study of the Bible as a whole,” have also been arranged to give “larger place to those portions of the Scriptures which afford greatest teaching and learning values.” In each year’s lessons opportunity is given for the “consideration of some aspect of the life or teaching of Jesus and some challenge to the Christian way of life.” It is amazing how little of the total content of the Bible is studied during the entire course of two or three cycles; also which doctrinal passages are dealt with, and which are omitted.

Graded Lessons are designed to provide Sunday School pupils with lesson materials more suited to their particular age group than Uniform Lessons.

There are differences between Graded Lessons.

One example of solid Bible study, provided in a Graded Lesson Series produced by the Methodist Church, may be found in Unit III of the Adult Bible Course for April–June, 1959, on “The Book of Romans.” The treatment of Romans is not altogether satisfactory. It leans heavily on liberal commentaries, and too easily espouses the views of critical scholarship. But it is a Bible-centered series of lessons.

An example of denominationally-produced Graded Lessons, prepared independently of the Graded Lessons Committee of the National Council of Churches, and having no Christian spiritual content whatsoever, is a book for three-year-olds titled “The Little Seeds that Grew.” It is one of the so-called Westminster First Books for Nursery and forms a part of the Presbyterians’ “Christian Faith and Life Curriculum.” Some of the other parts of this curriculum are among the finest Christian Education materials available anywhere. But this particular book, though widely used by other denominations, could be used equally well in any public school, or in any private nursery school enrolling Unitarians, Jews, and Moslems!

At present the Commission on General Christian Education of the National Council of Churches directs and controls the production of most curriculum materials now used in American Sunday Schools.

In 1955 the NCC issued “a guide for curriculum in Christian education” in which the following details as to the composition of the Uniform Lesson Committee and the Graded Lessons Committee appear: “The Committee on the Uniform Series is made up of persons appointed by their respective denominations which, although differing in certain elements of faith and polity, hold a common faith in Jesus Christ, the Son of God, as Lord and Saviour, whose saving gospel is to be taught to all mankind. There are approximately 70 members of the Committee, representing 30 denominations in the United States and Canada … the committee works under the direction of a chairman elected triennially by the Commission on General Christian Education of the National Council and an executive secretary who is the director of the Department of Curriculum Development of the Commission on General Christian Education.

“The Committee on the Graded Series is composed of approximately 100 persons appointed by the denominations intending to use outlines produced by the Committee. The number of representatives which a denomination may have is determined by the needs of the denomination and its willingness to send persons to the meetings of the committee to work on outlines. The number of denominations participating in the work of the committee varies from time to time, but usually is more than 20. The officers of the committee include a chairman … elected triennially by the Commission on General Christian Education and an executive secretary who is the director of the Department of Curricular Development of the Commission on General Christian Education of the National Council.”

THEOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES

Several documents are available which disclose the theological principles that NCC materials are currently supposed to embody. Among these is a staff article published in the International Journal of Religious Education in February 1955. The Journal is the official publication of the Division of Christian Education of the National Council of Churches. On the subject of ‘the Word of God” the above-mentioned article states:

“Where does the Christian go for authority? Does he simply consult his own experience to discover his relation with God and God’s activity in life? Does he accept the dogmatic interpretations of an infallible Pope? Or does he find authority in an infallible Scripture? In wrestling with this question, theologians have rediscovered the Protestant concept of the ‘Word of God.’ God’s Word is neither an infallible book or Pope, nor individual experience. It is God’s action in human life, revealed partially in all human experience and fully in Jesus Christ. The Bible has authority insofar as through it God’s living Word is spoken to men. The Church has authority only as it speaks God’s Word.… According to this view, the Bible is a book which historical criticism must analyze. It witnesses to the fact that ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.’ The Christian is not bound to particular words as God’s Word. The Bible is not simply history, but the record of God’s mighty action in history.… God speaks his living Word through the Bible and in the Church … the authority of the Bible and the Church rests in neither words nor creeds, but in their witness to the mighty act of God in Christ.” Other examples could be cited.

What is perhaps the most revealing, most frequently quoted and widely used statement of NCC’s theological principles and objectives appeared in The International Curriculum Guide, Book One issued by the International Council of Religious Education in 1932. These statements were based on the work and recommendations of Dr. Paul Vieth, and though adopted by the International Council of Religious Education, they have never been changed or repudiated by its successor, the Commission on General Christian Education:

1. Christian Religious Education seeks to foster in growing persons a consciousness of God as a reality in human experience, and a sense of personal relationship to him.

2. Christian Religious Education seeks to develop in growing persons such an understanding and appreciation of the personality, life, and teaching of Jesus as will lead to experience of Him as Saviour and Lord, loyalty to Him and to his cause, and manifest itself in daily life and conduct.

3. Christian Religious Education seeks to foster in growing persons a progressive and continuous development of Christ-like character.

4. Christian Religious Education seeks to develop in growing persons the ability and disposition to participate in and contribute constructively to the building of a social order throughout the world, embodying the ideal of the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man.

5. Christian Religious Education seeks to develop in growing persons the ability and disposition to participate in the organized society of Christians—the Church.

6. Christian Religious Education seeks to lead growing persons into a Christian interpretation of life and the universe; the ability to see God’s purpose and plan; a life philosophy built on this interpretation.

7. Christian Religious Education seeks to effect in growing persons the assimilation of the best religious experience of the race, pre-eminently that recorded in the Bible, as effective guidance to present experience.

SOCIAL OBJECTIVES

Though objective No. 4 clearly states that it is an avowed purpose of Christian Religious Education “to develop in growing persons the ability and disposition to participate in and contribute constructively to the building of a social order throughout the world, embodying the ideal of the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of Man,” and though intimations of this philosophy may clearly be seen in most of the materials which the NCC is presently sponsoring, the full implications of this objective are not always apparent. In the Church and Home Series of the Evangelical and Reformed Church, however, one may find excellent examples of the ends to which this objective leads. Among numerous examples are two courses of study designed for Junior and Senior High pupils for the months of April to June 1959, titled “Bridges to Brotherhood,” by Julia Wilke, and “Sore Spots in Society,” by Dorothy W. Kinney and Charles B. Kinney, Jr.

Two lessons in the series “Sore Spots in Society” are of special interest. They urge the winning of recruits for the extension of “economic democracy,” endorse the strike as a “necessary economic force,” and also commend the labor movement, especially the International Ladies Garment Workers Union. They present with full approval “A Personal Economic Platform for a Christian,” as set forth by the “United Christian Youth Movement,” and endorse certain social and economic pronouncements of the NCC in 1954.

CURRICULUM BUILDERS

The theological views of NCC leaders in the field of Christian education are a matter of serious concern. Who are the curriculum builders and lesson writers employed by the NCC or its affiliated denominations? What theological beliefs have they expressed? Not all of these persons are well known. Many have published very little besides Sunday School materials. One who has written a great deal, however, and is held in high esteem by her colleagues is Dr. Mary Alice Jones. Miss Jones is Director of the Department of Christian Education of Children, Methodist Board of Education. She has been a member of the Committee on Graded Curriculum, and was present at its 1958 meeting.

In 1953 Dr. Jones wrote a book published by the Abingdon Press bearing the title The Faith of Our Children. On page 15 of this book she states: “The Bible is the Word of God to those who through it hear God speak to them … what we are saying is that the text of the Bible as we hold it in our hands may be or may not be the Word of God to men.”

Of Jesus Christ she wrote on page 60: “Let us be careful not to set Jesus off from all other revelations of God, as though he were unrelated to them … he was one in whom sonship to God had been perfected.”

Of the death of Jesus she said on page 66: “With all its goodness and beauty, the life of Jesus ended in the most ignominious death that could be inflicted upon a man in his day. He was condemned to be executed, publicly, by crucifixion. How can we interpret this fact to boys and girls? Of course, we shall not tell the little children about the crucifixion of Jesus … but after they go to school we could not keep it from them if we would; so we must be prepared to interpret it to them. The basis of our interpretation must be the fact that people suffer for being good as well as for being bad.”

Of Jesus’ resurrection she wrote on page 70: “We shall be equally unwise, however, if the story of the resurrection is emphasized to the neglect of the simpler phases of the life of Jesus.… For a life such as his could not be ended when his body was broken by sinful men. His life has expressed abiding values, deathless love, and so we may teach our children that Jesus lives today, not because of some isolated, wonder-inspiring event, but because there was in his life that quality, that spirit, which is of the very essence of eternity.”

Men who assert their belief in the inspiration of the Bible, but who deny its inerrancy, its infallibility, the accuracy and authority of the written record, and who hesitate to say of any of the words of Scripture that “these are the words of God,” are among the writers who have commended themselves to the NCC, as presently constituted, in the production of its curriculum materials. Many of the leaders of the NCC are undoubtedly saddened and disturbed over this condition. No doubt there are writers and other persons engaged in the production of NCC materials who would prefer to take a more vigorous stand for traditional Christianity, and who themselves do so. But the materials produced indicate that at this moment their influence is not very great. At present time their views are definitely not the policy of the NCC as a whole.

The methods by which the National Council exercises control over the production of Sunday School curriculum materials are both direct and indirect.

VARIED NCC CONTROLS

By the very nature of its organization, its common philosophy and ideology, and by reason of the cooperation which its boards and committees of Christian education maintain one with another, the NCC often exerts a controlling influence over the educational materials of all the denominations affiliated with it. There are large areas of agreement between all the materials produced by all the churches in the NCC, and this similarity is in part a direct result of NCC influence.

The NCC wields direct influence on the production of curriculum materials through its official organ, the International Journal of Religious Education. This is the only magazine of its kind in the field, and it forcefully projects NCC thought and policy in Christian education.

The NCC also exerts direct influence on the production of curriculum materials of a large number of Protestant churches not in the NCC orbit through numerous conferences on Christian education which it sets up and directs, and to which representatives of these other (non-NCC) denominations are invited, and whose participation in them is encouraged.

A further direct influence on curriculum materials is well known but difficult to evaluate. We refer to the highly centralized and interlocking departments of Religion and Christian Education in America’s institutions of higher learning. Through systems of accreditation, the requirements and restrictions placed on the obtaining and recognition of advanced degrees, the whole field of Christian education at a professional level is becoming more and more like a guild or union. It is from informed and trained persons moving in this sphere that curriculum materials are obtained. And here are found the so-called “scholars” and “theologians” to whom the lesser writers refer as “authorities.” The organization of these persons within academic circles is still formative, and is sometimes more implied and invisible than evident and actual, though no less effective. Everything involved in religious education is coming more and more under NCC control.

UNIFORM LESSON MONOPOLY

The NCC exerts indirect controlling influence on the production of Sunday School materials through its unique position with reference to the Uniform Lessons.

Due to the long history of the Uniform Series, it is no doubt the most widely used system of lessons among Protestants. The use of the series is extended through license agreement beyond the member denominations of the Commission on General Christian Education of the National Council to other denominational and non-denominational publishing houses and to individual writers. At least 80 denominations make use of these lessons. Several commentaries on these lessons are published each year. The outlines are used in the preparation of church calendars, radio programs and syndicated newspaper columns. Under the direction of a committee of the National Council of Churches, syndicated treatments of the Uniform Lessons are provided for both weekly and daily papers. In cooperation with the World Council of Christian Education, the outlines are made available for curriculum work in more than 50 other countries (A Guide for Curriculum in Christian Education, published by the National Council of Churches in 1955).

It is widely assumed that no one can copyright the Bible or any part of it because it is part of our common heritage. This is true of the King James Version. Other versions, such as the RSV, can be and have been copyrighted. The NCC and the International Council of Religious Education preceding it have copyrighted versions of the Bible and also copyright the Outlines of the Uniform Lessons. Through this copyright the Council exerts tremendous influence and control.

There is no charge made to member denominations for the use of the Outlines. All denominations outside the Council (numbering some 23 million American Protestants), independent publishers, and other groups who wish to use the outlines for any purpose whatsoever must obtain permission to do so from the NCC, and pay a royalty for the privilege. Reasonable as the copyright-royalty agreement may be, it provides a means by which the NCC can influence Sunday Schools using the Uniform Lessons.

Many evangelicals and fundamentalists use the Outlines. Some of them serve on the NCC Uniform Lesson committee. These good people are of the opinion that since the basis for the Uniform Lessons is the Word of God, and since every verse in the Lessons is the Word of God, the Lord will bless its use; and whatever interpretation the liberal wing of the Committee on Uniform Lessons may place on the Scripture passages selected, the truth of God will still prevail, and will be blessed by him in those churches and schools expounding the Word faithfully.

This is not the whole picture, however. Believers in the plenary, verbal inspiration of the Bible have somewhat been “taken in” a snare by their modernist colleagues. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, Andrews Norton, a Harvard professor, pointed out that “if every word is equally inspired, isolated proof texts can be assembled to support almost any preconceived system of doctrine.” Modernists, neo-orthodox, and social gospel advocates have taken him at his word, and some believers in the verbal inspiration of the Bible have fallen into the trap. To illustrate what we mean, and to show the manner in which the NCC exerts this kind of influence over the Uniform Lessons by cleverly selecting the “proper” passages of Scripture, omitting others, and arranging them in such a fashion as to imply their own doctrines and policies, reference is made to the lesson prepared by the NCC’s Uniform Lesson Committee for May 3, 1959.

Special attention is called to the last verse of the lesson: “And David reigned over all Israel; and David executed judgment and justice unto all his people.” It has been introduced into the lesson entirely out of context. The purpose of citing this verse is suggested in the title: “Wise Management.”

An examination of a number of lesson commentaries revealed interesting facts. Some evangelical lesson writers exercised their liberty and omitted this verse altogether from their discussion of the lesson. Other writers dealt with the main passage of the Scripture and expounded it faithfully, but practically none of them took occasion to discuss the significance of David as a forerunner of the Messiah, a type of Christ, or the covenant God made with him concerning Christ, and the reasons for it. Social gospel, liberal lesson writers used the passage as it was intended to be used with the result that millions of Sunday School pupils were “properly indoctrinated.”

Ignoring all the prophetical, theological, and truly spiritual aspects of the life and reign of David, the persons engaged in the construction of this lesson outline, as agents for the NCC, slanted the Scriptures, merely by a skillful selection of Bible verses, so as to make them appear to show that the secret of David’s greatness and success was his “wise management” and especially his devotion to social justice. This example of mishandling Scripture could be multiplied.

SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM

What is the solution of the curriculum problem confronting the evangelical Protestant churches? This is a question which deserves careful consideration beyond the purview of this article. Despite the seriousness of the present situation, it is not without encouraging aspects. Discriminating Christian teachers and leaders in the local church schools can choose from a wide variety of Uniform and Graded lesson materials which are thoroughly trustworthy. There are satisfactory commentaries and quarterlies of all types and for all ages, with various methods of treatment, exhibiting different degrees of education, skill, editorial competence, and artistic attractiveness, and at a wide range of prices. One has but to recall the excellent Peloubet, Arnold, and Tarbell Commentaries and the publications of such well-known houses as Standard, Cook, Scripture Press, Gospel Light, and many others, to realize the rich possibilities.

But there should be no need for denominational disloyalty or rejection of all NCC materials in order to attain a very excellent group of lessons and lesson materials. We know of no set of materials which is entirely good. Even the worst are not entirely bad. What we should strive for is a dedicated, concerted effort to improve the materials now being offered. When the NCC and denominationally produced lesson aids are not satisfactory, they can be supplemented by sound materials. Untiring efforts should be made to encourage all who produce Sunday School lesson materials to develop a better product. No denominational board of Christian Education, or the Commission on General Christian Education of the NCC can withstand the concerted pressure of determined Sunday School teachers dedicated to this end.

SOME NEW DEVELOPMENTS

Some bold new developments in local church education give cause for optimism.

Protestant parish schools and parent-community Christian Day Schools are “mushrooming” in various parts of the country.

The Sunday Evening School is a significant development, especially among the Southern Baptists. It presents an opportunity for far more extensive and intensive Christian education than anything ever attempted in the old-line Sunday School. It invites the production of good lay religious textbooks which for the most part are now lacking for Protestant churches.

The National Sunday School Association, organized in 1946 as a protest against the curriculum policies of the International Council of Religious Education, now produces a series of outlines for Uniform Sunday School lessons entirely independent of the NCC. It seeks to “revitalize the American Sunday School” along strictly evangelical lines, and now serves more than 40 denominations and evangelical elements in many other Protestant bodies.

The church schools of America are entering upon a new era of improvement and progress. Buildings and equipment are more adequate. Teachers are better trained. Programs are more effective. Materials are closer to the needs of both the learner and the teacher.

We must firmly face the curriculum difficulties that beset us. Pastors, teachers, and others charged with the selection of lesson material hold the future of the Church in their hands. May they look beyond the imprimatur of denomination or publisher to be certain that faith in Christ is kept inviolate. This faith is the code of Christian teaching and it must be nurtured until it controls all of life.

Jacob J. Vellenga served on the National Board of Administration of the United Presbyterian Church from 1948–54. Since 1958 he has served the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A. as Associate Executive. He holds the A.B. degree from Monmouth College, the B.D. from Pittsburgh-Xenia Seminary, Th.D. from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and D.D. from Monmouth College, Illinois.

- More fromDavid W. Baker

Merrill C. Tenney

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

Across the bar of an American tavern leaned a young man still in his late teens. His hair flopped loosely over his ears in a disorderly tangled mop, and his rumpled sport shirt and soiled slacks hung carelessly on his frame as he toyed with a glass of beer and gazed vacantly into the mirror before him. One foot kept time with the monotonous rhythm of the juke box that was blaring out the latest popular hit. He was one of those whom Time magazine defined as “oddballs who celebrate booze, dope, sex, and despair, and who go by the name of ‘beatniks’.”

These self-conscious victims of fear and futility may be found anywhere among the younger set today. Two world wars, bringing destruction, taxation, and compulsory military service in their wake, have shattered the hopes of many for a peaceful and orderly life ending in some measure of personal success. As one young fellow put it, “Life is only a pile of rubbish. What have we to look forward to? Somebody is going to start a war, and we go into the army. Then an atomic bomb will drop, and it will be all over.” The inevitable result of such thinking is to while away the intervening hours as pleasantly as possible; to spend all your money now because it may be worthless tomorrow; to accept futility as your goal; and to stop the arduous process of thinking or believing because it will accomplish nothing anyway.

Such an attitude is spiritual suicide. To look upon life as utterly meaningless is equivalent to repudiating God and resigning oneself to an everlasting emptiness. Culture, morality, and faith alike perish in the blackness of this chaos.

Although the consciousness that the world is too much for us may be more acute today than ever before, it is by no means new. Jesus encountered this same attitude as he stood with his disciples in the upper room just before going to the cross. As he declared to them the inescapable outcome of the hatred of the chief priests and of their resolution to kill him, the disciples were plunged into an abyss of despair. They could not understand why their national leaders should be so blind to the obvious greatness of Jesus’ person. The essential injustice of condemning him to death as a blasphemer when his life had been devoted to teaching truth seemed a monstrous incongruity. The whole situation did not make sense, and they protested loudly. They felt beaten by the wall of irrational injustices that confronted them.

The fourteenth chapter of John records how Jesus dealt with these “beatniks” of his own time. Four types are presented in the four questions that were asked of him as he endeavored to unfold the program of God.

PETER, THE ACTIVIST

When Jesus announced that he was about to leave his disciples, Peter asked immediately, “Lord, whither goest thou?” (John 13:36). Upon Jesus’ reply that he could not follow at that moment, Peter pressed the question further: “Why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thy sake!” (13:36, 37). The idea that Jesus was going to some place without him was more than Peter could endure. Of all the disciples, he was most nearly like the Americans in temperament, for he had to be doing something in order to be happy. There was little time for contemplation in Peter’s life. “Act first—ask questions afterward” was his motto.

Such activism leads to frustration because it is often mistaken or pointless. Peter was not ready to follow Jesus, even though his intentions were good. Consequently Jesus said with penetrating insight, “Wilt thou lay down thy life for my sake? Verily, verily I say unto thee, The co*ck shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice” (John 13:38). He had to disabuse Peter of his self-confidence before he could impart to him a true faith.

Jesus’ words were a shock to the other disciples. If Peter failed, what would happen to them? A cold wave of discouragement swept over them all. Jesus, noting their pale faces and downcast eyes, spoke a word of cheer: “Let not your heart be troubled; keep on believing in God, keep on believing in me” (John 14:1; original translation). For the “beatniks” who feel that there is no certain destiny and that their activity is beating the air, Jesus had an answer. Confidence in God and in himself can give them courage.

THOMAS, THE PESSIMIST

Thomas, another of the disciples, was utterly skeptical about any certainty. “Lord,” he said respectfully but bluntly, “we know not whither thou goest, and how can we know the way?” (14:5). He felt that action was not only futile, but impossible. Like men trapped in a cave, the disciples could not escape, nor could they see if any avenues of escape might exist.

To this deep-seated hopelessness Jesus brought three answers. First he said, “I am the way” (14:6). Having experienced all the essential aspects of human life, he was familiar with its hunger, poverty, toil, and temptation. Knowing it completely, he was competent to guide men through it.

But what does life mean? Is there any final criterion by which its worth can be judged, or is it to be evaluated only in terms of the present advantages? To the “beatnik” of our generation, expediency and pleasure are the sole criteria; there is no everlasting truth, or if there is, it is undiscoverable. Jesus, however, said simply, “I am the truth.” No two men can or will agree on a definition of truth in all details, but as they engage in a personal relation with Him, they can develop convictions of what is right and wrong. His person becomes the standard for all living.

Thomas’ despairing words imply that he had lost incentive for living. If work is futile and if truth is unattainable, life is valueless. The logical conclusion would be to ring down the curtain on such an empty farce. Surely Jesus himself, who had seen his deepest teachings go unheeded, his greatest miracles overlooked, and his appeal to his nation rejected, would have lost his interest in life. On the contrary, he said, “I am the life.” He possessed both the incentive and the dynamic for the fullest activity, for in doing the will of God he found the answer to the “beatnik” philosophy.

PHILIP, THE MATERIALIST

It is not surprising that the “beat generation” should be materialistic. If the spiritual values of life have evaporated, the material values are all that remain. When Jesus spoke of the Father, Philip said with deep sincerity and with pathetic eagerness, “Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us” (John 14:8). He knew that Jesus was always conscious of the reality of God, but could he find it? God was to him a beautiful abstraction who could become real only when manifested to his senses.

For Philip Jesus had a ready reply. “Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father …” (John 14:9). By His person, in whom the Father dwelt and to whom the Father was intimately near, the reality of God was demonstrated. If Philip could accept Jesus’ truthfulness, he would have to believe that the Father was real to Jesus, and therefore potentially real for him also.

The words of Jesus (14:10) were audible and understandable. Philip could not deny their meaning and maintain any communication at all. If therefore he admitted that Jesus spoke the truth, he would have to concede the reality of the Father, though the Father was invisible and inaudible.

The works of Jesus were even stronger evidence (14:10, 11). Philip had seen Jesus turn water into wine, and, with the rest of the disciples, had “believed” (2:11). He had participated in feeding the crowd with bread and fish which Jesus had multiplied from a small boy’s lunch. He had seen the sick healed instantly of chronic disease, and had stood at the grave of Lazarus when Jesus called him back to life. If he wanted material evidence for the existence of God, the works of Jesus supplied it.

JUDAS, THE RELIGIONIST

As Jesus spoke of the revelation which he intended to give to the disciples Judas (not Iscariot) raised a question: “Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us and not unto the world?” (John 14:22). The idea of any special manifestation of God to the disciples, and not accessible to the multitude as a whole, seemed ridiculous to him, or at least dubious. Would not further revelation be impossible, and would he not be doomed to everlasting ignorance or uncertainty?

Jesus assured him that God’s love could leap any barrier, and could penetrate any resistance. “We”—the Father and He—“will come unto him and make our abode with him” (14:23). He promised that the Holy Spirit, who is not circ*mscribed by space and time, would come after his departure and would continue the work that he had begun. The “beat generation” cannot complain that God is inaccessible or silent. He communicates with men through the Spirit who is always in tune with the times and whose message is consequently always relevant.

For this bewildered and frustrated generation Jesus offers an adequate solution to the problems of life. He alone is competent to plumb the depths of the human spirit and comprehend its deep desires. In his imperative call is the challenge that can lift it out of blankness and despair.

To the activist, who wants to do something but does not know what direction to take, He says “Follow me.” Though his realism included the cross, he knew the way through humiliation and death to triumph.

To the pessimist, who had given up all expectation of happiness and even the very concept of attainment, Jesus said, “Trust me.” Nobody ever had a better right than he to be pessimistic, for he was confronted by a failure totally undeserved and humanly inexplicable. Nevertheless he trusted the Father completely, and in the hour when his life was crushed by his enemies he cried out, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit” (Luke 23:46). Truly, our Lord Jesus Christ demonstrated the power of complete faith in God.

To the materialist, he said, “Know me.” His personality gives the lie to the dogma that reality belongs only to the world of sense, and that present possession is final good. He had no important property of his own. When he wanted a coin for an illustration, he had to borrow it. When he needed a place in which to meet his disciples, he arranged for the use of an upper room in another man’s house. His clothing was parted by his captors at the cross, and he was buried in the tomb of Joseph of Arimathea. Better than any other he could have claimed to represent the “heat generation,” but he became for them the way back to God.

For the puzzled religionist, he provided the reality that all men seek. He offered no new and complex philosophy as a panacea for human bewilderment, but said, “If a man love me …” (14:23); and if men have become so sunk in their despair that they cannot love him, he says: “Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins” (1 John 4:10).

Jesus’ attitude toward the “beatniks” among the disciples sets a pattern for our attitude. Because he walked the way to the Cross, he looked upon them with sympathy and compassion. He did not excuse their failures, but he prayed that they might come to share his victory. They are extreme examples of men and women who have made a cult of frustration, and who need our help to hear His Word of final counsel: “Be of good cheer, I have overcome the world” (John 16:33).

Sacrament

The poor in spirit and the poor in gifts

The rich in gifts and the poor in charity

The faithful though weak, the faithless strong

The calléd many, and the chosen few

False saints and sainted sinners:

Up to the altar they come

To Thee, the Sacrificéd Lamb of God

Who taketh away the sin of the world,

And even theirs, their sin.

And even mine, O Lord, even my sin against Thee,

Life-giving Spirit.

Now enriched with thy peace

Let me, Thy faithless servant,

Disobedient disciple, wavering follower,

Depart from thy spread table

To return unto the world.

JOHN C. COOPER

- More fromMerrill C. Tenney

G. C. Berkouwer

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

A new wave of anti-Semitism has recently shocked a large part of the world. Especially in Western Europe, attempts were made first to minimize the outbursts by explaining them away as the grotesque gests of a few mentally perverted individuals. But the extent and ferocity of the anti-Semitic acts and the intense feelings they aroused soon demonstrated that a serious situation had been provoked.

Ever since the infamous pogroms of Nazi Germany the phenomenon of anti-Semitism has been a matter of profound concern. The shocking events of recent decades in Germany took hard hold on our memories. Books documenting the terrors of Nazi anti-Semitic policies still appear and continue to attract serious study. Reflecting on that dreadful history, one remembers what was done in the name of culture to fellow human beings. One remembers the easy shamelessness with which people could converse about the anti-Jewish program at the time it was being carried out. Hitler had said in his Mein Kampf that he could spot the Jews behind all the darkness in the world, and then he declared that he would rid Germany once and for all of its Jewish problem. But we also tried to get behind these concrete memories to analyze the deepest motives of Hitler’s anti-Semitism.

WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

Some writers saw a connection between anti-Semitism and natural man’s resistance to divine grace. Karl Barth declared that anti-Semitism was obviously the sin against the Holy Spirit, and argued that it was a revolt against the divine election of Israel. Since his exegesis of the biblical texts in question was somewhat dubious, Barth’s statement itself aroused considerable discussions. Others saw in anti-Semitism an expression of racial delusion and pretension implying a denial of the image of God in all men. Indeed, anti-Semitism does bring to mind James’ statement about the tongue by which man—the image of God—is cursed. And the hatred of the Jews which we have seen in the past decades has indeed been man’s curse on thousands of fellow men, women, and children. These people were put under a curse, accused of crimes they did not commit, and forsaken by the human race.

I recall seeing Jews driven out of my parish in Amsterdam and out of all parts of the country, packed together as animal herds, and carted off toward Germany to vanish forever from our sight. We saw suffering that we had not imagined before. I recall the words written by one person who had gone through the torture and survived: “I can no longer imagine it. If I could imagine it once more, I think I would die at that moment. I have seen the night of nights, the night of human damnation.” It is a terrible thing to fall into the hands of man! As I think about anti-Semitism, I am reminded of David’s words, spoken when darkness seemed to fall on his own life: “I am in a great strait: let us fall now into the hand of the Lord; for his mercies are great; and let me not fall into the hand of man” (2 Sam. 24:14).

OUR PROGRESSIVE RESPONSIBILITY

To those who have thought deeply about anti-Semitism, the recent outbreaks are no minor matter. We insist that the present anti-Semitic demonstrations are worse than what happened in Hitler’s day, not in effect, but in tendency and implication. As history develops, there is a progressive responsibility for us. He who now, after the facts of the past are known, thinks and acts in the inhumanity of anti-Semitic patterns, demonstrates the extremity of human blindness and is guilty of a sinful denial of the humanity created in the image of God.

NO ARISTOCRACY OF RACE

The Gospel of grace means that there can be no aristocracy of race or people. The Dutch poet implied an answer to this perverted pious anti-Semitism when he penned the lines:

It was not the Jews, Lord Jesus, who put you to the cross …

It was I, I my Lord, who nailed you there.

If anything is manifestly anti-Christian, it is anti-Semitism. Anti-Semitism is not a protest against an idea or an ideology; it is a sin against humanity, a crime that is especially tragic because it has no stopping point. Recall what is written in Revelation 18 concerning the judgment upon Babylon. The sellers weep over her “for no man buyeth their merchandise any more.” Everything is taken from her: gold, silver, precious stones, and fine linen, and finally … the souls of men. This is the awful thing about falling into the hands of men. If human beings have no worth, if children no more awaken pity, if man is without compassion, the final step is the opening of the gas chambers to receive their victims while the rest of the world goes unconcerned to the order of the day.

Happily, the order of God’s day is different. He thinks differently about his creatures, for he is merciful and compassionate. And through the witness of the church of Christ against the godlessness of anti-Semitism, the mercy of the Lord may yet be revealed.

- More fromG. C. Berkouwer

Philip Edgcumbe Hughes

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

This issue affords an occasion for taking stock, though in a cursory manner, of the religious and particularly evangelical thought of the decade we have left behind us. So far as theological fame (or notoriety) goes, it may be described as the decade of the Three B’s—Barth, Brunner, and Bultmann, whose names, have dominated the headlines.

Karl Barth continues to work at his monumental Church Dogmatics, and translators continue to slave away at putting it into other languages. However critical one may be of his theology, one cannot avoid a feeling of regret that a man so brilliantly endowed with gifts of prophetic utterance should have allowed himself to be metamorphosed into a monolithic dogmatician.

Emil Brunner, one of the most readable and stimulating of contemporary thinkers, has, during the more recent years, lapsed into silence; but the influence of his dialectical theology shows no abatement in the power of its impact.

Rudolf Bultmann, whose reaction against orthodox theology has been considerably more radical than that of either Barth or Brunner, has eschewed the way of dialectic and has endeavored to speak to the modern world in the language of a theology that has come to terms with existentialist philosophy and so-called “modern science.” In doing so, he has demanded the “demythologization” of the Christian message, which in effect has involved for him the rejection of the supernatural and of historical truth considered as objectively significant.

The 50’s, however, have also witnessed the beginnings of a revival in evangelical theology and exegesis, and the movement which is gathering momentum is not limited geographically to our Western world, but is also making itself felt in lands on the other side of the globe where Christianity is still comparatively recent in appearance. It has come to expression also in the founding, during the last decade, of the International Association for Reformed Faith and Action, amongst whose activities is the provision of theological literature, both classical and contemporary, for the benefit particularly of younger churches and fellowships of Christians struggling midst difficulties to establish the witness of the Gospel.

The upsurge of interest in the doctrine and significance of the Reformers, especially of Calvin and Luther, is also a source of encouragement. In France Jean Cadier and Pierre Marcel are supervising the preparation of a new edition in modernized French of Calvin’s Institutes (already published) and Commentaries. In Great Britain the Beveridge translation of the Institutes has been republished, and T. F. Torrance, T. H. L. Parker, Ronald Wallace, Basil Hall, and others have been producing useful studies on different aspects of the thought of Calvin. Luther publications have included estimable contributions from the pen of Gordon Rupp and a two-volume collection of the German leader’s Reformation Writings edited by Bertram Lee Wolff. In the States, where the 50’s have been marked by a veritable plethora of religious publications, the great project of producing a 55-volume edition of Luther’s works in English translation under the joint editorship of Jaroslav Pelikan and Helmut Lehmann is now under way.

The field of New Testament exegesis has been entered in an ambitious manner by the launching of a series of commentaries contributed by evangelical scholars from different countries under the general title of The New International Commentary on the New Testament, edited by Ned Stonehouse of Philadelphia. Smaller in size and scope is the series of Tyndale Commentaries now being edited by R. V. G. Tasker and published by the Tyndale Press of the English Inter-Varsity Fellowship, which over the past 10 years has built up a reputation for the distinction, in format as well as in content, of the books it is producing.

In the sphere of Old Testament studies there has been less to show, though mention must be made of the writings of Edward Young of Philadelphia, which have gained for him the respect of other scholars though they find themselves unsympathetic with his conservative views.

Where theological studies and Christian apologetics are concerned, great interest has been aroused and at times controversy by the writings of Cornelius Van Til, also of Philadelphia, a deep and dedicated thinker whose influence is apparent in other countries besides his own. G. C. Berkouwer of Amsterdam, indefatigable writer of dogmatic works, has established a reputation as one well fitted to speak intelligently to our contemporary situation. We still await, however, the appearance of a systematic theologian for our day.

No survey of the 50’s would be complete without including the name of Herman Dooyeweerd of Amsterdam, beyond dispute one of the most erudite and profound thinkers of this generation, whose massive three-volume work De Wijsbegeerte der Wetsidee (translated in the U.S.A. under the title A New Critique of Theoretical Knowledge) is, together with his numerous other writings, proving of capital significance (especially on the Continent) in the formation of a genuinely Christian philosophy consistently constructed on the foundation of the revealed biblical scheme of creation-fall-redemption. As yet, however, his work is virtually unknown in England.

Finally, what of the future? I do not hesitate to say that, despite the ominous clouds of ignorance, apathy, antipathy, and anti-Christianity, not to mention the fog of liberalism which darkens the prospect, the future is full of hope. This hope is embodied in the growing number of younger men of real ability and intelligence who are coming forward to make their mark, under God, in the sphere of Evangelical and Reformed scholarship. Andrew Bonar once said that “wherever godliness is healthy and progressive we almost invariably find learning in the Church of Christ attendant on it.” If this new decade is one in which godliness is combined with learning, then we have every reason to be hopeful.

- More fromPhilip Edgcumbe Hughes

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

A tense battleground between Christianity and a new religion called Africanism may be shaping up in Ghana led by a brilliant, brooding man whose power is well nigh absolute and whose intentions are far from clear.

Prime Minister Kwame Nkrumah, who calls himself a non-sectarian Christian but patronizes the fetish priests, has placed no roadblocks in the way of the Christian evangelist and pastor since he led Ghana to independence two years ago.

But, when Christian leaders protested against a sacrilegious slogan underneath Nkrumah’s statue in front of the parliament building, they were told in effect to mind the church’s business and let the politicians take care of public affairs.

“Seek ye first the political kingdom and all other things shall be added unto you” was the headline of an editorial which belittled Billy Graham’s African tour and called Nkrumaism “the highest form of Christianity.” Most other press comments were friendly and the reports, although politically conscious, accurate.

Nkrumah himself was very cordial when Graham closed his Accra visit with a 20-minute visit to the prime minister. Graham told the Ghanaian that every great nation has cherished religious liberty. Nkrumah replied that such freedom is one of his country’s goals.

A diplomat in Accra said the good outweighs the bad in Nkrumah’s program. That point of view undoubtedly underlies the American and British policy of pouring millions of dollars into Ghanaian investments and loans.

Others see handwriting on the wall. They remember what happened in other lands when government of men replaced the rule of law. They read the government newspapers with sorrow and alarm.

“The church may face a choice between Christ and the nation,” said one African who was in Germany during Hitler’s rule. “If I spoke out strongly, I would likely be deported in three days,” said an influential European. Many fear that the days of non-African missionaries in Ghana are numbered.

Billy Graham’s visit was perhaps most significant in that it called together for pre-crusade training many keen African minds. It provided a stimulus for recruiting and briefing a sizable group of able counselors in several centers. Some of these soul winners are students; others are lay preachers, several of whom got their first clear grasp of the Gospel in the counseling classes.

The crusade also challenged the upper class, educated Africans, a number of whom were among the 3,000 inquirers. A wealthy African woman who heard part of a sermon over Radio Ghana sent her servant for a decision card so she could register her commitment to Christ.

Unprecedented crowds, totaling 45,000 in three cities, served to encourage lonely pastors who serve remote stations with little chance to sense the fellowship of the Lord’s hosts. These men returned from pastors’ meetings and crusade gatherings with a renewed grip and a fresh hope in their coming Lord.

The Christian population is estimated at about one-fourth of Ghana’s six millions. Of these, Catholics number 400,000; Presbyterians, 250,000; Methodists, 175,000; Anglicans, 40,000; Apostolics (similar to Assemblies of God), 20,000; Salvation Army, 10,000, and Baptists, 3,000. Exotic sects are numerous.

There is some liberalism among educated ministers and university students, but churches are largely evangelical, if somewhat formalistic. Most English-language sermons are read. Denominational rivalry is so intense that counselors for the Graham meetings were trained by their respective churches.

The danger inherent in the adulation heaped on Nkrumah is potential. A battle already has been joined between fetish priests and discerning Christians. Sometimes entire communities are asked to take part in purchasing and pouring libations. Church councils have refused to take part in ceremonials where libations were poured. On the local level those who take a forthright stand often are left alone while temporizers are hounded. Something like the Japanese Shinto shrine controversy may be in the making.

Nkrumah may promote a recrudescence of pagan rites in his search for the roots of African culture. Or he may be hailed as a sort of deity by his inner circle. One of them has said he would choose Nkrumah instead of Christ if he could have only one. Others call him Africa’s “messiah” and speak of him as “son of man”. His picture sometimes bears a halo. Women visit his mother chanting “blessed art thou among women.” He has crushed most of his political opponents. If the church opposes him openly, will its leaders be next?

All of this pan-Africanism is competing with the church for the attention of the ablest young people. Materialism, power and total devotion to a temporal goal tend to obscure vital spiritual vision. Billy Graham’s message on the Lordship of Christ and his emphasis on the hard demands of the Gospel were never more relevant than at the beginning of what he has called Africa’s “year of decision.”

Evenings of Music

Vocalist George Beverly Shea and pianist Tedd Smith, members of the Billy Graham team who are remaining in the United States during the evangelist’s African crusade, will appear in a series of evening concerts across the nation in coming weeks. Here is their schedule:

Eyeing the Mark

More than a billion dollars will be spent on church construction in 1960, according to a Department of Commerce forecast. A year-end estimate by the Census Bureau said church construction in 1959 hit an all-time high of $935,000,000.

Korean Reunion

A general assembly to reunite rival factions of the Presbyterian Church in Korea was scheduled February 17.

The church has been split since last fall when its 44th general assembly broke up in disorder. A minority party set up an assembly of its own.

Planners of the reunion assembly called upon the Board of World Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. to dispatch a representative to conduct a pre-assembly spiritual conference. The board commissioned one of its members, Dr. L. Nelson Bell, Executive Editor of CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

Dr. Bell’s assignment took him to Korea for the second time in little more than two months. In December he spent 12 days in Korea to try to effect a reconciliation. He returned saying the chances appeared good that dissidents would reach agreement. At that time he was accompanied by Dr. S. Hugh Bradley, the board’s Far East Secretary. This time he was scheduled to travel alone. Dr. Bell is a veteran of 25 years’ missionary service in China.

The call for reunification came from a reconciliation committee composed of representatives of both sides of the dispute. Neutrals and Americans and Australian Presbyterian missionaries also were on the committee.

A group of extremists in the minority faction are still holding out. The International Council of Christian Churches set up an office in Seoul to support this group.

Hospitals for Asia

World Vision is currently engaged in seven hospital building projects in Asia: In Korea, a children’s convalescent home near Seoul, an addition to a children’s hospital in Taegu, a children’s clinic in Taejon; in Formosa, a hospital for tuberculars in Po-li, a hospital for crippled children in Pingtung; in Hong Kong, a nursery school and clinic; in India, an in-patient ward for a hospital in Kattanam, Kerala.

World Vision’s support, in most cases, includes purchase of land, architectural service and cost of building materials.

Evangelical Protest

Five hundred clergymen belonging to what is generally known as the evangelical wing of the Church of England signed a protest in London last month against a movement toward Roman Catholic practices.

The protest was sent to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York. It called for the use of vestments to cease and recommended that the Bible be again established in fact and theory as “the final and supreme authority in all matters of faith and doctrine.”

Swedish Precedent

Swedish Lutherans will ordain their first women ministers in the spring, according to Archbishop Gunnar Hultgren, primate of the state church.

Three women are ordination candidates, all educated at Uppsala University, principal Swedish theological faculty.

Ordination of women was made possible under a bill passed by the legislature and the state church assembly in 1958 despite much protest.

Scoring Films

Two local chapters of the National Religious Publicity council, one in Los Angeles and the other in Washington, D. C., adopted resolutions last month which score overemphasis on sex and violence in motion pictures.

The NRPC is an interdenominational organization made up largely of religious writers and publicists.

‘Bible Storyland’

Businessmen in Cucamonga, California, are investing $15,000,000 in a 220-acre “Bible Storyland” scheduled to open Easter Sunday, 1961. Projected as a tourist attraction to compete with Disneyland in nearby Anaheim, “Bible Storyland” will include replicas of the Garden of Eden, Noah’s Ark, Jonah’s whale—even the “Pearly Gates of Heaven.” Visitors will be able to “sail down the Nile,” ride biblical animals, browse in exotic shops, and watch chariot races in a simulated Circus Maximum.

Old Testament Theater

A new theater for presentation of biblical and other historical plays is planned for Jerusalem. The project is under the patronage of Mrs. Rahel Ben-Zvi, wife of Israel’s president.

Protestant Panorama

• Some 70 delegates representing congregations which have defected from the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod over its refusal to sever relations with the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod held a three-day meeting in Mankato, Minnesota, last month to plan a new church organization. The dissidents, who feel that the Wisconsin Synod erred in not breaking with the Missouri Synod, expect to consider a constitution for their group in August. They charge the Missouri Synod with “unscriptural conduct.”

• The Augustana Lutheran Church’s Superior Conference, comprising 15 congregations, became last month the first Lutheran synod ever to join the Wisconsin Council of Churches.

• Southern Baptists plan to organize their 43 churches in seven Northeastern states into an association.

• The world’s largest cast bell carillon, made at the Petit and Fritsen bell foundry in Holland, will be installed in the new Kirk-in-the-Hills Presbyterian Church of Bloomfield Hills, Michigan. The church is a $5 million reconstruction of Scotland’s Melrose Abbey, cradle of Presbyterianism.

• Methodists spent $986,278,000 on church construction in the last 10 years, according to Dr. B. P. Murphy, Methodist national missions official.

• A $5,500 disaster loan to Shiloh Baptist Church of Murphysboro, Illinois, which was damaged by a tornado, was announced by the Small Business Administration last month. A similar loan of $4,000 to the Holiness Church of Christ in Dale, South Carolina, which was damaged by a hurricane, also was disclosed.

• Evangelist Jimmie Johnson, vocalist Ed Lyman, and pianist-organist Merrill Dunlop will appear in three interdenominational evangelistic campaigns in New England this spring: April 3–17 in the Municipal Auditorium, Springfield, Massachusetts; April 24–May 8 in Foot Guard Hall, Hartford, Connecticut, closing out in Bushnell Auditorium; May 15–29 at Frye Hall, Portland, Maine.

• A 52-week television series is being filmed as a congregational project of the Highland Church of Christ in Abilene, Texas. The series, “Herald of Truth,” will be seen this year on 43 television stations across the United States. The same church has sponsored a “Herald of Truth” radio series for eight years.

• The interdenominational Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, California, is the beneficiary of the $1,500,000 estate of the late Alice M. Gayman. The school will receive the legacy after the death of several relatives who were bequeathed income from the estate.

• Church World Service, relief arm of the National Council of Churches, has established a goal of $11,418,000 for 1960.

• The Episcopal Church will introduce a new family magazine in April called The Episcopalian. It will replace Forth (current circulation: 51,000) as the monthly for more than 3,000,000 Episcopalians.

• Radio minister Dale Crowley of Washington, D. C., conducted his 13,000th broadcast this month.

• KADX, located in Naha, Okinawa, was dedicated February 7 as the twelfth station of the Far East Broadcasting Company’s Gospel radio network. The new station broadcasts in Japanese for the Ryukyuan population of Okinawa. The first FEBC station on Okinawa, KSAB, will now be programed in English for U. S. servicemen and their families stationed there. Still another transmitter is being erected, this one with a power of 100,000 watts to carry programs in Chinese.

• More than 6,000 Southern Baptist churches plan to conduct week-long schools of missions during 1960.

• A Hollywood producer says he is cancelling plans to shoot a new movie about campus life at Wake Forest College (“parts of the action are not in consonance with the school’s traditions”). Wake Forest, a Baptist school, does not permit dancing.

After 72 Years

Dr. Charles E. Fuller, 72, whose “Old Fashioned Revival Hour” is in its 36th year on the air, underwent a minor operation this month, the first he has ever had. He was expected to be hospitalized for about a week.

Six-Point Searchers

Evangelical editors and radio broadcasters absorbed some searching criticism out of their own ranks last month.

At Minneapolis—A. W. Tozer, editor of the Alliance Witness, among the 142 publications representing 29 denominations which go to make up the Evangelical Press Association, aired his dislikes in Christian journalism before the group’s 12th annual convention. He protested: (1) Preoccupation with externals which starve the hearts of readers; (2) the “revolt against the cult of ignorance and ugliness that ruled in fundamentalist circles” which has given rise to too much pseudo-intellectualism; (3) sensationalism (“gospel journalism gone sexy”); (4) excessive illustration (“no great Christian concept can be set forth pictorially”); (5) commercialism that promotes gimmicks ranging from “moonlight cruises for Christians” to tracts featuring “15 easy ways to win souls”; and (6) the how-to-do-it (“religious popular mechanics”).

At Washington, D. C.—Dr. Charles Hostetter, “Mennonite Hour” preacher called upon National Religious Broadcasters delegates to uphold their 17th annual convention theme (“Preserve Positive Preaching”) by (1) going back to the basic objectives and philosophy for being in the work, to give spiritual help rather than woo fan mail and contributions; (2) depending upon the power of prayer and God, rather than upon the arm of flesh; (3) taking care that material responsibilities do not crowd out desire for program quality; (4) avoiding excessive interest in gimmicks, mail counts, monies received, ratings, and reputation; (5) displaying transparent honesty (“we are constantly tempted to slant the facts and to distort the truth”); and (6) remembering that radio is “just one of the tools that the church should be using,” not necessarily the most important one.

Dr. Oswald C. J. Hoffman, speaker on the “Lutheran Hour,” most widely-heard broadcast of any kind in the world, told NRB delegates that paid-versus-free time was no longer their “big issue.” He said the chief concern was “much larger” now, that it involved freedom of religion on the air plus quality of programming.

Pointing the Way

Not since “The Ten Commandments” has a religious motion picture received as much attention as “Ben-Hur,” now appearing in theaters across the country.CHRISTIANITY TODAYasked one of its contributing editors, Dr. Harold J. Ockenga, pastor of Park Street Church in Boston, for a report. Here are Dr. Ockenga’s impressions:

Ben-Hur is more than a popular spectacle. It is the story of the spiritual experience of one man, Judah Ben-Hur, in his personal conquest of prejudice, hate, vengeance and racial pride.

The religious issues are handled with reverance, respect and restraint. No Jew or Christian could take offense at it. Moreover, though the story is tenderly romantic, it is totally without the usual Hollywood touch of sex. The biblical scenes are geographically and historically accurate, the photography is superb, the massive scenes such as the chariot race, the sea battle and the triumphal procession are interesting and authentic, and the pictures of Christ, whether teaching or suffering, are restrained and chaste. Commendable is the practice of only portraying a figure of Christ without showing his face.

If we are to have biblical stories and events presented to us on the screen, then Ben-Hur, which while not in itself a biblical story is closely attached to it, points the way to better presentation.

The Pendulum’s Swing

Dr. Melvin M. Forney, executive director of the Lord’s Day Alliance of the United States, told delegates to its 71st annual meeting last month that the “flagrant desecration” of Sunday by business enterprises “is fast coming to an end.”

“The pendulum has swung about as far as it can in the direction of the Commercialism of the Lord’s Day,” Forney said. “A majority of good citizens are beginning to realize the peril we face as a nation should we lose the Lord’s Day as a day of rest and worship.”

Olympic Church

A 150-seat chapel whose architectural lines reflect the sweeping grandeur of surrounding ridges and valleys stands ready to serve participants and spectators in this week’s Winter Olympics at Squaw Valley, California.

The United Church of Squaw Valley, built with $140,000 donated by national home missions boards of the Congregational Christian and Evangelical and Reformed Churches, will hold four Sunday services plus prayer meetings each evening. Snacks will be served in a fellowship room which adjoins the sanctuary.

In charge of services is the Rev. J. Hood Snavely of Woodside, California. He will be assisted by the Rev. Mitchell Whiterabbit, American Indian pastor from Wisconsin who is a skilled winter sports enthusiast.

The chapel, flanked by the 300-seat Queen of the Snows Roman Catholic Church on a nearby slope, is the only Protestant congregation in the valley. After the games, it will serve valley residents and the thousands who will visit the area when it is eventually turned into a year-round resort and recreational retreat as a state park.

Dibelius to Resign

Bishop Otto Dibelius, most noted of German clergy leaders, says he will resign all his church posts at the end of 1961.

Dibelius, 79, is head of the Evangelical (Lutheran) Church in Berlin-Brandenburg, chairman of the Council of the Evangelical Church in Germany, and a co-president of the World Council of Churches.

He made the announcement on the eve of a meeting of the Berlin-Brandenburg synod, which covers West Berlin and part of the Soviet Zone.

Delegates subsequently gave Dibelius a resounding vote of confidence. The vote came after a debate on a recent controversial booklet by the bishop in which he declares that neither the East German regime nor any other totalitarian government has a claim to the status of “supreme authority” in the biblical sense of the term. The “supreme authority” issue was known to have divided the synod into pro-Dibelius and anti-Dibelius groups. The bishop formally retracted one example used in the booklet, but reaffirmed the principles cited therein.

Dibelius has said that “when, under the Nazis, euthanasia, crimes and the killings of Jews became known, I realized that the conventional interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans (concerning the supreme authority of the state) could not be applied to a state which wants to decide itself what is good and bad.”

Dibelius has been under the attack of Communists repeatedly. One of the latest criticisms appeared in an East Berlin newspaper, which attributed anti-Semitic statements to the bishop. Dibelius admitted writing statements against German Jews in the late twenties and early thirties, then explained: “These utterances date from a time now 30 years past and can be explained as part of completely different conditions. Since then I have always, under jeopardy of my own freedom and life, emphatically stood up for Jewish fellow citizens.”

Exchange of Letters

Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras sent a letter to Pope John XXIII last month announcing that an all-Orthodox synod to be held later this year should determine whether the Eastern Orthodox communion takes part in the coming Ecumenical Council summoned by the pontiff.

The patriarch’s letter was in reply to one sent by the pope last Christmas. The pontiff appealed to Patriarch Athenagoras to contribute to Christian unity.

The Patriarch said the Orthodox synod would probably be held in September.

Japanese Tally

Latest statistics released in Tokyo last month show 678,258 Christians in Japan, a gain of approximately 35,000 over figures compiled in 1958.

According to the Japanese Christian Year Book for 1960, these include 376,267 Protestants, 266,608 Roman Catholics, and 35,293 Eastern Orthodox.

Candidate for Moderator

The Rev. Edler G. Hawkins, moderator of the New York City Presbytery, will be its candidate for moderator of the General Assembly of the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A.

If elected at the assembly’s 172nd meeting in Cleveland, May 18–25, Hawkins would become the first Negro ever to head a major, predominantly-white denomination in this country.

Since his graduation from Union Theological Seminary 21 years ago, Hawkins has served as pastor of St. Augustine Presbyterian Church in the Bronx, a congregation of mostly Negroes, but with some Puerto Ricans and whites.

Tale of a Fortune

The U. S. Internal Revenue Service this month filed a $5,990,648 income tax lien against the estate of Charles Manuel “Daddy” Grace, Negro cult leader who died January 12.

The action, according to a spokesman, involved one of the largest sums from a single estate in the history of the Internal Revenue Service.

The value of the Grace estate has been estimated as high as $25 million.

Worth Quoting

“While politicians dicker over the matter of a man’s religious denomination, let us not fail to inquire into his business associations. It would be the height of stupidity for Methodists, in the name of ecumenicity, to help elect a president whose source of wealth comes partly from whiskey. Or for churchmen to help elect to office men who would encourage the further growth of the menacing gambling racket.”—Dr. Caradine R. Hooton, in the general secretary’s report to the annual meeting last month of the Methodist Board of Temperance.

Shift of Emphasis

Despite several years’ discussion, including two national gatherings of the Committee on Religion and Public Education, the NCC Division of Christian Education has been unable as yet to formulate a guiding policy statement on religion in the public schools.

Due to lack of unanimity on key issues, the Commission on General Christian Education and the Executive Board of the Division of Christian Education, meeting February 18 in St. Louis (where the project launched in 1955), were expected to shift NCC emphasis—for the time being at least—from policy formulation to “approval” of the committee report as a “study document” to stimulate further discussion at the level of denominations, church councils, and local churches. (The word “approval” carries ambiguous overtones. The chairman and secretary of the Committee on Religion and Public Education [in its Progress Report No. 9] 1. asked the Executive Board of NCC’s Division of Christian Education for “approval for wide distribution and study” and 2. notified members of the Committee that the Commission and then the Executive Board were being requested “to approve the document and to authorize its distribution for study.”) Subject to future editorial revision in details, the present “study document” still retains difficulties to which CHRISTIANITY TODAY has already called attention.

The report insists that 1. Public schools should recognize the function of religion in American life (“most Americans approach the basic values of life,” the report notes, “in the light of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man”). 2. Public schools should maintain a climate friendly to religion. 3. Public schools should assure a person’s right to choose his own beliefs. But what of the role of Christianity in public education? The answer thus far—and it is not without its critics—is: “Christian citizens … should steer clear of any attempt to force their particular religious viewpoint upon the public schools; on the other hand, they should not be a party to a policy of silence which would permit an anti-religious point of view to characterize our schools.” This position—some observers protest—virtually reduces Protestantism to a “pro-religious, non-Christian” front in public education.

In lieu of an opening statement of theological affirmations, the study document begins with a comment on “theological differences” and then deviates to subjective religious “convictions” and “attitudes.” The report asserts that “a pluralistic society” precludes teaching “a sectarian faith” in public schools. But it seems indifferent to the fact that a religion-in-general credo is also, in its own way, partisan. The report champions the desirability of “spiritual values” achieved through “functional” rather than “sectarian” religion. The public school should emphasize that “religion is important” but leave “indoctrinating a belief in God” to home and church, c. F. H. H.

A Clergyman’s Ouster

The Rev. Harold J. Quigley, minister of the Central Presbyterian Church in Haverstraw, New York, was removed from his pastorate last month and stricken from the membership rolls of the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A.

He was deprived of his standing by a vote of 46 to 7 of the Hudson Presbytery. The action was taken after Quigley had appeared voluntarily before the presbytery to report that he had theological differences with his denomination. He has denied the deity of Jesus Christ and the divine authorship of the Bible.

Maine’s Refusal

In Maine, where public transportation of parochial students has been a perennial issue, the legislature defeated an enabling bill last month.

The state Senate voted down, 18 to 15, a bill which would have permitted public transportation of parochial school pupils on a local option basis. A similar measure in the House was rejected by a 76–69 vote.

The Maine Supreme Court has ruled that use of public funds for private and parochial school bus service is illegal under present laws.

The court has said, however, that it sees no constitutional barrier if the legislature should ever choose to pass an enabling act.

People: Words And Events

Deaths: Dr. Frederick W. Burnham, 88, noted Disciples’ pastor and administrator, past president of the United Christian Missionary Society and International Convention of Disciples of Christ, in Richmond, Virginia … Dr. John Henry Strong, 92, son of the influential Northern Baptist theologian, Augustus Hopkins Strong, in Santa Barbara, California … Dr. Walter S. Davidson, 75, dean emeritus of Auburn Theological Seminary, in East Hampton, New York … Dr. John F. B. Carruthers, retired Navy and Air Force chaplain, organizer and past president of the United Nations Chaplains League, in Pasadena, California … Dr. Clarence W. Hatch, 57, executive secretary of the executive council of the Church of God, in Anderson, Indiana … Dr. J. E. Lambdin, 70, retired secretary of the Training Union department of the Baptist Sunday School Board, in Nashville, Tennessee … Dr. J. Andrew Hall, 92, for 35 years a medical and evangelistic missionary to the Philippines.

Retirement: As vice president of Trinity Seminary and Bible College, Dr. T. Berner Madsen.

Appointments: As pastor of Bellevue Baptist Church in Memphis, Tennessee, Dr. Ramsey Pollard, president of the Southern Baptist Convention … as associate executive secretary of the Division of Home Missions of the National Council of Churches, Dr. H. Conrad Hoyer (to take the new post, he resigned as executive secretary of the Division of American Missions of the National Lutheran Council) … as chaplain-general of Protestant chaplain services in Canada’s armed forces, Air Commodore the Rev. Dr. Frank W. MacLean … as president of Southwestern Bible Institute, Dr. Klaude Kendrick (succeeding the Rev. M. E. Collins, who is retiring from administrative responsibilities to accept an instructional post with the school) … as managing editor of The Christian Century, Dr. Kyle E. Haselden.

Elections: As president of the Evangelical Press Association, Joseph Bayly, editor of His … as Protestant co-chairman of the National Conference of Christians and Jews, Carrol M. Shanks, president of the Prudentail Insurance Company of America … as bishop of the Anglican Diocese of Saskatchewan, Canon William H. H. Crump … as president of the New York Bible Society, John J. Dahne … as president of the Interdenominational Religious Work Foundation, the Rev. Robert R. Sala … as chairman of the Ministers Life and Casualty Union, Dr. Armin G. Weng, president of Chicago Lutheran Theological Seminary.

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

President Eisenhower’s decision to visit South America this month is an indication of the increasingly important role that continent is assuming in world affairs.

Attention currently focused on South America, however, is not entirely of a political and diplomatic character. Religious leaders likewise are eyeing South America’s 131,000,000 with unprecedented interest. Reason for the added religious recognition: Roman Catholicism is losing its hold. The Catholic hierarchy is openly alarmed.

Romanist concern is for the entire area south of the border. Last fall, bishops representative of all the Western Hemisphere assembled in Washington for their first such joint session. Uppermost on the agenda was how to stem the Protestant tide in Latin America.

Blared the cover of the January 9 issue of The Ave Maria, Catholic home weekly: “Is THE CHURCH LOSING LATIN AMERICA? By 1990 … Half the World’s Catholics may be Lost to the Faith!”

Inside, a six-page spread featured an interview with the Rev. Roger E. Vekemans, Belgian Jesuit who is director of the school of sociology of the Catholic Pontifical University of Chile.

“Since coming to Chile,” said the introduction, “Father Vekemans has become convinced that the Church in Latin America can be saved only if the Catholic countries in the world mobilize in a gigantic missionary effort to rescue it.”

Vekemans concedes the percentage of Roman Catholics in Latin America is “falling rapidly” and conversely, “it seems that it can be proved” that “the non-Catholic population is growing faster.”

Is Protestant growth showing a corresponding increase?

“Phenomenally,” says Dr. John A. Mackay, Presbyterian elder statesman and an expert on religious trends in Latin America, where he spent 16 years as a missionary educator.

“There are now more native-born Protestant pastors in Brazil than native-born Roman Catholic priests,” he observed.

Mackay asserts, moreover, that many people in the United States are realizing that American influence has slipped, and that the 20 republics of Latin America are no longer to be taken for granted.

The World Presbyterian Alliance became the first global confessional body to meet on Latin American soil when it held its 18th General Council in Sao Paulo last summer.

This month the World Council of Churches held its first major meeting in Latin America (the semi-annual Executive Committee meeting in Buenos Aires, February 8–12). Host was Methodist Bishop Santa Uberto Barbieri of Buenos Aires, a member of the six-man World Council presidium.

In June, Rio de Janeiro will be the site of the Baptist World Congress.

Mackay points to the increasing respect Protestantism has gained with Latin American governments. During the World Presbyterian Alliance meeting, President Kubitschek of Brazil paid an official visit and thus became the first South American chief executive to attend a public Protestant service.

Mackay credits Catholic leaders with becoming more realistic about the number of their true followers in Latin America. A competent Romanist survey, he says, has disclosed that only 10 per cent of the population of Chile shows a “real interest” in the Catholic church while Protestants can now claim 11 per cent, largely as a result of Pentecostal missionary work.

Roman Catholic alarm over the Protestant tide south of the border can be expected to result in a crash program of missionary endeavor. Already, priests are said to be pouring in (their own current estimate of Catholic missionaries in Latin America: 2,600).

Observes Mackay: “Roman Catholics in America and in France have become very critical of Hispanic Catholicism. They have at last awakened to the fact that it is not a worthy expression of Christianity or of Catholicism. Their concern has led them to pour in missionaries.”

To coordinate a Protestant counteroffensive, Mackay advocates the assembling of a congress representative of all Protestant missionary work in Latin America, both denominational and independent. He says such a meeting could promote study and understanding of trends and problems. It is tentatively set for Peru in 1961.

The history of Protestantism in Latin America is punctuated with violence (recent examples: persecution by Roman Catholics in Colombia, the slayings of the five missionary men by the Auca Indians in Ecuador). Vice President Nixon, in his trip to South America last year, learned first-hand how severe Latin hostility can be.

Some observers feel that the current Protestant surge springs from the perseverance of missionaries who have labored steadily despite intense adversity.

Many sense that Protestantism is on the threshold of a new era in Latin America which, given an atmosphere of liberty and objectivity, will see remarkable strides in the spread of the Gospel. They stress, however, that the gains will depend largely upon how alert Protestants will be to their new opportunities.

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

A Spring Forecast

A casual survey of publishers’ “Spring Lists” indicates that 1960 will be another year in which religious books will maintain top priority in number of new titles on the American reading market. As the sage of Ecclesiastes said, long ago, “Of the making of books there is no end.”

A dip into the tides projected for the first six months whets the appetite of the bibliophile. Some of the forthcoming books are noted in the following sampler list. While including only a mere fraction of the planned output and without attempt to pre-evaluate, the list bristles with the prospect of stimulating reading. In due time CHRISTIANITY TODAY’S 100 capable reviewers will report on these volumes furnishing skilled guidance in their specialized fields.

Since the LENTEN season is just around the corner these titles bid for immediate attention: Herschel Hobbs’ Messages on the Resurrection, Ralph Turnbull’s The Pathway to the Cross, G. Hall Todd’s Culture and the Cross—all three from Baker. Crowell offers The Dark Road to Triumph by Clayton E. Williams. Abingdon Press announces Lynn Radcliffe’s With Christ in the Upper Room; Eerdmans, A Working Faith by Joost de Blank; Seabury, Peter Day’s Saints on Main Street; Revell, And Still He Speaks, by Edward L. R. Elson; Concordia, The Crowds Around Calvary, by William F. Beck and Paul G. Hansen.

A classification by fields of interest may serve as a forecast framework:

In the field of SYSTEMATIC AND BIBLICAL THEOLOGY Eerdmans promises Divine Election by G. C. Berkouwer, Old Testament View of Revelation by J. G. S. S. Thomson and From Eden to Eternity by Howard Hanke, a treatise on the unity of the Bible. Abingdon offers John Wesley’s Theology Today, by Colin Williams and Providence of God by Georgia Harkness; Oxford, The Thought of Reinhold Niebuhr by Gordon Harland; Knox, The Humanity of God, by Karl Barth; Broadman, Faith to Grow On by Joseph Green. Westminster, The Theology of Dietrich Bonhoeffer by John Godsey. Evangelicals will enthusiastically welcome a volume which is long overdue, the Dictionary of Theology edited by Everett Harrison, Geoffrey Bromiley and Carl F. H. Henry (Baker).

Books on APOLOGETICS AND PHILOSOPHY include John H. Gerstner’s Reasons for Faith (Harper); W. E. Sangster’s Questions People Ask about Religion (Abingdon); Albert Schweitzer’s The Light Within Us (Philosophical Library); Murdo Macdonald’s The Need to Believe (Scribners). Merrill C. Tenney edits The Word for this Century (Oxford) in which Wheaton College scholars speak of evangelical certainties in an age of conflict. John H. Gerstner has another book coming from Harpers, Theology of the Major Sects. Then there is The Religion of Israel, by Yehezkel Kaufmann (University of Chicago) considered a blow to the Wellhausen theory.

The long-awaited definitive volume on Seventh-day Adventism by Walter R. Martin will be released by Zondervan on March 15.

CHURCH HISTORY AND BIOGRAPHY is rich with promise. Kenneth Scott Latourette will be adding another volume to Christianity in a Revolutionary Age (Harper). Abingdon offers The History of Christianity in the Middle Ages, by William Cannon. Standard has a new comprehensive history of the Christian Churches and Churches of Christ by James DeForest Murch; Bethany, The Restoration Principle by Alfred DeGroot. American Christianity by Smith, Handy and Loetscher will be published by Scribner. Life stories of Martin Buber: Jewish Existentialist by Malcom Diamond (Oxford); Heinrich Schutz by Hans J. Moser (Concordia); George Matheson, the Blind Seer by John Crew Tyler (Philosophical Library); Abraham Kuyper by Frank Vandenburg and Makers of Puritan History by Marcus Loane (Eerdmans) are “in the works.” Eerdmans also offers in this field the Story of the Scottish Reformation by A. M. Renwick, and Zondervan, They Found the Secret by V. Raymond Edman.

In the area of NEW TESTAMENT Broadman promises a verse by verse treatment of Ephesians under the title Pattern for Christian Living by Ray Summers; Eerdmans lists Robert Mounce on The New Testament Herald. Two titles in OLD TESTAMENT from the presses of Harper are: The Old Testament Speaks by Samuel Schultz and another especially addressed to laymen, M. A. Beek’s A Journey Through the Old Testament.

In GENERAL BIBLE STUDY evangelicals will welcome Holman’s three-volume work The Biblical Expositor, edited by Carl F. H. Henry and Wilde’s Treasury of Books for Bible Study by Wilbur Smith. Only a few of many other volumes can be listed: God and Ourselves, Norman Cox (Broadman); The Church in the Thought of Jesus, Joseph Clower (Knox); The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians, R. P. Martin, and Commentary on Romans, John Murray (Eerdmans).

Turning to PASTORAL PROBLEMS the air is filled with promise: Abingdon promises Andrew Blackwood’s The Growing Minister; Knox, Luthi and Thurneyson’s Preaching, Confession and the Lord’s Supper; Concordia, a symposium on The Pastor at Work; Macmillan, D. R. Holt’s Church Finance; Bethany, Charles Kemp’s The Pastor and Community Resources; Zondervan, Mark Lee’s The Minister and His Ministry; Revell, Arnold Prater’s Seven Keys to a More Fruitful Ministry and Clyde Narramore’s Psychology of Counselling; Westminster, James D. Smart’s The Rebirth of Ministry.

In this connection we might mention some books in the growingly popular area of PSYCHIATRY AND CHRISTIAN LIVING. Richard K. Young has done a book, Spiritual Therapy, for Harper. Abingdon has a trio: Beggars in Velvet, by Carlyle Marney; When Trouble Comes, by James E. Sellers, and Point of Glad Return by Lance Webb.

And then there is SERMONIC literature: Broadman will issue Southwestern Sermons, edited by H. C. Brown, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, containing 32 sermons by current and emeritus professors. Macmillan—Religion that is Eternal by G. Ray Jordan. Abingdon—Sermon Outlines from Sermon Masters, by Ian McPherson and Sermons on the Prodigal Son by Thomas Whiting. Harper—Great Sermons of George Morrison, compiled by George Docherty of Washington’s New York Avenue Presbyterian Church, and in the field of hermeneutics, God’s Word in English by Richard Young. Revell—a new volume of sermons by Robert G. Lee, and in the sphere of homiletics, Dynamic Preaching by James W. Clarke. Westminster—Steps to Salvation by John H. Gerstner—the evangelistic message of Jonathan Edwards.

In LITURGY AND WORSHIP: Massey Hamilton Shepherd’s Liturgical Renewal (Oxford); Laliberte and West’s de luxe volume History of the Cross (Macmillan); Fred Cealy’s Let Us Break Bread Together (Abingdon); Geoffrey Bromiley’s Christian Ministry (Eerdmans); Massey Shepherd’s The Paschal Liturgy and James Sydnor’s The Hymn and Congregational Singing (Knox).

ETHICAL AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS: God and Man in Washington by that doughty freedom fighter Paul Blanshard (Beacon); What Shall We Say About Alcohol? by Carradine Hooton (Abingdon); Population Explosion and the Christian Response by Richard fa*gley (Oxford); Social Problems in Our Time by K. Weinberg (Prentice-Hall).

CHRISTIAN EDUCATION in the local church has its share of new books such as The Pastor in Christian Education by Peter Person (Baker); Religious Education, edited by Marvin J. Taylor (Abingdon); What’s Lutheran In Education? by Allan Hart Jahsmann (Concordia); Train up a Child by William Barclay (Westminster), and the related Church and Secular Education by Lewis Bliss Whittemore (Seabury). There are new books of Sunday School methods and aids galore.

Of ECUMENICAL interest there is Stephen Neill’s Brothers of the Faith (Abingdon) and Matthew Spinka’s The Quest of Church Unity (Macmillan).

A number of substantial projects are under way in the field of evangelical literature, some as yet to be announced. A better balance still needs to be achieved between liberal and evangelical in the many works flowing from the presses of religious publishing houses. Many titles in this forecast will prove less than evangelical, and sometimes error will be clad in literary artistry more attractive than the truth. But the power of the evangelical pen is increasing in the theological crisis of our time. As always in the spring, hope lights the horizon.

JAMES DEFOREST MURCH

An Ecumenical Model?

Religion and Culture, Essays in Honor of Paul Tillich, edited by Walter Leibretch (Harper, 1959, 400 pp., $7.50), is reviewed by William W. Paul, Professor of Philosophy, Shelton College, and currently Visiting Professor of Philosophy, Wheaton College.

The motivation behind much contemporary theology is apologetic: it begins with man and an assessment of his spiritual need, and with this is correlated a religious message that the “modern mind” is supposed to accept as meaningful. No one has pursued this goal with greater zeal and breadth of vision than has Paul Tillich, and for this he deserves the honor which the 25 notable contributors to this volume bring him.

Since discussion of the diverse material contained in Religion and Culture is quite impossible, we shall confine ourselves to those ideas which point up Tillich’s own philosophical theology.

Editor Walter Leibrecht, director of the Evanston Institute for Ecumenical Studies, gives a useful summary of Tillich’s synthesis of Greek wisdom with Christian faith in an opening chapter, “The Life and Mind of Paul Tillich.” Leibrecht has high praise for his former colleague at Harvard: “with candor he has approached every facet of our tangled lives and has been a true guide to the perplexed in our century” (p. 4); he has thus become “the theologian for Everyman in the predicament of his existence” (p. 10), and he has laid the ground work for “a truly ecumenical theology” by establishing bridges between Catholic sacramentalism and Protestant prophetism, and between the spiritual worlds of the Continent, America and the Orient (pp. 17, ix).

Informed readers of Tillich will admit that he provides no simple, easy road for the spiritually perplexed. There are times when his way of stating his vision of God as “ultimate reality” becomes itself very perplexing. This is due in part to Tillich’s desire to combine so many diverse insights from philosophy, psychology, and theology. Leibrecht’s review of some of this background material will be helpful. He explains that Tillich is an ontologist inquiring into the meaning of Being, an existentialist exploring man’s anxiety about the meaningfulness of his own existence, an idealist who sees man’s spiritual problem as calling for a return of the soul from estrangement to its true essence, and a romanticist who uses his creative spirit to reinterpret the symbols of traditional religion in an effort to make their truth meaningful to the perplexed.

As important as philosophical theology is in Tillich’s system, it is not necessarily responsible for his more popular influence. In Germany, his theory of the interrelation of religion and culture drew attention. The contributions in social theory to Religion and Culture by Karl Jaspers, Karl Heim, Reinhold Niebuhr, John Bennett, and Charles Malik reflect this same interest. Before leaving Germany in 1933 Tillich had worked out his ideas for a “religious socialism” which included a “Protestant protest” against the withdrawal of the church from socio-economic concerns and an attempt to put some religious depth into the socialist movement. He had been predicting the coming of a kairos—a “right time” for the manifestation of something divine (a “theonomy”) in cultural affairs, but the “demonic” in the form of Hitler’s national socialism appeared instead. After coming to Union Seminary in New York, Tillich worked closely with Niebuhr on matters of social policy and, as Niebuhr explains, they came to realize early in World War II that radical socialism was not going to remove sin from the world.

Leibrecht indicates that Tillich increased his influence in the United States by applying insights from Jung’s depth psychology as well as from existential analysis to illuminate man’s estrangement from a meaningful life and from his ideal “essential” self. Erich Fromm provides the reader with a clear evaluation of the possibilities and limitations of the psychoanalytic side of Tillich’s program for the healing of the soul. There can be no doubt that Tillich combines psychology and ontology into a striking apologetic for reaching the unchurched and the perplexed of our day with his religious message.

The less inclined one is to follow the Reformers in their conviction of the full authority of the written Word, the more challenging Tillich’s reinterpretation of the biblical symbols may appear to be. He looks upon traditional Lutheranism as “crystallized,” and speaks of doctrines like the Virgin Birth as “beyond salvation”; but Leibrecht insists that Tillich has “never sought to eliminate any of the classic Christian doctrines” and hence should not be called “liberal” (p. 19). Tillich, however, readily admits that he is a neo-liberal. Instead of eliminating biblical symbols like the old liberals and like Rudolf Bultmann with his method of demythologizing the Scriptures, Tillich finds it more pragmatic to put new meaning into old symbols, new wine into old skins. Conservatives may join an outsider like Walter Kaufmann (Critique of Religion and Philosophy) in questioning the honesty and justification for such a procedure, but there can be no doubt that Tillich is quite open about the whole business. Furthermore he and numerous followers see it as the only way of making the Bible meaningful today, the only way of exalting the “core” of the Christian message which is what Tillich calls “the Jesus which is the Christ.”

Although it is true, as Liebrecht indicates, that religious myths and symbols are viewed by Bultmann simply as expressions of man’s existential attitudes, while Tillich takes them as pointing to the Ultimate, still in practice the views of the two men converge. Bultmann’s contribution to this Harper volume, for example, presents the purpose of preaching as laying bare the depths of human existence and proclaiming “Jesus Christ as Lord.” But both men would hold that when one makes a decision for Christ, doctrinal and historical questions about Christ are quite irrelevant. In volume two of Systematic Theology Tillich makes it clear that his “Christ of faith” can be experienced by those who have doubts about Jesus of Nazareth and about the Christ of the Gospels. It is enough for Tillich that Christ should “become historical” for the faithful as he becomes the meaning-giving-Center for their lives and history.

Those who are sympathetic to such an approach would do well to read the chapter by Japanese Philosopher Takeuchi in which Tillich’s insights are set forth within a Buddhist framework and then ask themselves “Why ‘the Christ of faith’ rather than the Buddha?” The excellent studies dealing with the Christian’s approach to the historical by Gustave Weigel and Georges Florovsky show how vital it is to a genuinely Christian faith that the Lordship of Christ be correlated with the historical God-man (cf. the present writer’s discussion in the Journal of Philosophy, Oct. 8, 1959). The big risk for Tillich as for Bultmann is that the historical is on the verge of being dissolved by the existential.

Tillich states the meaning of salvation in ontological terms when he speaks of the Christ of faith as the bearer of the grace of New Being, “the redeeming creative power in reality” (p. 21). In psychological terms this means that the New Being is the power of healing reconciling what each man is existentially (symbolized for Tillich in the myth of the Fall, i.e., the daily experience of “falling” away from what one should be) with what God creatively intends each man to be. In quasi-historical language the editor tells us,

This concept of New Being means that, for Tillich, history is in its essence the history of salvation (Heilsgeschichte): the continuous transforming action of the New Being. The New Being is not, as in Barthian theology, the Logos, limited to one particular, unique Christ-event; but, as the power of being, is the essence of all history (p. 21).

If such a generalization is helpful in working out a psychology of healing or a philosophy of history, it nonetheless obscures the uniqueness of the Christ of history. One does not have to be a Barthian to see that danger in Tillich’s theology. (It is unfortunate, however, that Karl Barth has written on Mozart rather than meeting Tillich’s criticism for this volume.) Existentialist theology allows each man to evaluate Christ subjectively and for Tillich this means understanding that “Jesus became the Christ by sacrificing that which was Jesus in Him to that which was the Christ.” Leibrecht, on the other hand, apparently prefers to appeal to the declarations of the Church to overcome the difficulties arising from a weaker view of the Scriptures than that maintained by the Reformers.

It is true that Tillich has increasingly emphasized that the healing of man’s soul requires that the sinner be accepted within God’s redeeming love, but even here it is a continuous process of crisis and reconciliation that is behind his thinking. On Tillich’s view, Leibrecht recognizes, within the Trinity tragedy is conquered by love but is never really overcome (pp. 16, 25). The sinner is never really sure of the victory Paul experienced when he was made a “new creature in Christ Jesus,” in and through the finished work of the God-Man.

We return now to Tillich’s basic apologetic objective since he has come to America. Tillich has been exercised to find some middle ground between philosophical naturalism and the purely transcendent kind of “supranaturalism” which he ascribes to Barth. He does not find the solution in the kind of “Christian pantheism” which Charles Hartshorne again pushes in this volume. Nor would he stop with Nels Ferré’s supernaturalism in the chapter “Christian Presuppositions for a Creative Culture” since Tillich sees the Transcendent as immanent everywhere in cultural life and not alone in Christ. Actually Tillich calls himself an “ecstatic naturalist” and, as Leibrecht says, condemns supernaturalism for “objectifying God” (p. 5), making God just one more being alongside other beings. What the editor fails to point out is that when the Reformers, for example, spoke of God as a Person they surely were not reducing him to the level of man-made deities. Like Isaiah of old they were drawn to the person of the Mighty God and Everlasting Father. Like Paul they experienced the saving work of the Person of the Son of God and the security of his sanctifying Spirit.

This is the truly ecumenical message which has stood the test of time. In the work under review, Wilhelm Pauck claims that American Protestantism has been too preoccupied with evangelism, archaic orthodoxy, and denominationalism to develop an ecumenical theology. It is surely true that Protestantism has too frequently departed from its main task of declaring the whole council of God in a needy world. But it is that Faith which must be proclaimed and must be made relevant to every dimension of reality and cultural life. Cannot the simple language of Scripture be made meaningful to young and old today with greater ease and quickening power than “Being-itself” or the “Unconditioned?” If nothing else, the writings of Tillich should make Christians realize how challenging is the task of taking the incorruptible seed, the Word of God, to the intellectuals of our day.

WILLIAM W. PAUL

SCIENTIFIC BUT BIASED

The History of Religions, Essays in Methodology, by eight authors, edited by Eliade and Kitagawa (University of Chicago Press, 1959, 164 pp., $5), is reviewed by Gordon H. Clark, Professor of Philosophy, Butler University.

Should the History of Religions be included in the university curriculum as a department independent of philosophy, sociology, psychology, and related subjects? To evaluate religions is certainly philosophy, not history. Further, evaluation and philosophy are not sufficiently objective and scientific, while the History of Religions ought to be. On the other hand, some say that it is too objective because it looks on religion from the outside and therefore cannot understand its own material. All these objections the authors face, and they conclude that universities should have such an independent department.

In describing the particular details of the several world religions, the History of Religions does not give up the search for types of universals; but these are not to be located in a few clear moral principles nor in national common denominators. The subject should not endorse any one religion nor offer a universal synthetic religion. Neither should it examine a foreign religion as a commander of an invading army investigates enemy territory. The History of Religions is to be a science, a single science, and not a collective title for the History of Islam, the History of Hinduism, and so on. It is neither normative, nor solely descriptive, but lies somewhere in between. Just where the author unfortunately does not say.

This book suffers from a defect common to many books on religion. It does not state what religion is. The authors show a sympathetic attitude toward religions, especially non-Christian religions; but there is difficulty in identifying religion. This difficulty appears clearly in Smith’s chapter on Comparative Religion. The gentleman is arguing that the representatives of various religions should gather in a friendly way to exchange ideas and understand each other. They should approach each other in humility and love. But there is one phenomenon (shall we call it a religion?) to which this lovely principle does not apply. That is fascism. The difference between fascism and religion is so axiomatic that the author cannot foresee any practical problem here. But only a few pages later he includes communism as a religion along with Christianity and Hinduism. By what principle is fascism ruled out, evil as it was, and communism lovingly and humbly accepted, infinitely more evil as it is?

These UNESCO writers are not so unbiased as it might appear at the beginning. The book ends with a plea for a universal religion based on the History of Religions, which has scientifically shown that the gloomy theories of Christianity do not correspond to the truth (p. 136).

GORDON H. CLARK

Free Discussion Tabu?

God and Man in Washington, by Paul Blanshard (Beacon, 1960, 251 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Joseph M. Dawson, former Executive Director of the Joint Committee on Public Affairs for Baptists of the United States.

It is not surprising that Paul Blanshard, called the dean of American controversy, should be appalled at the silence which now cloaks vital issues in Washington and the nation, that is, vital issues in our society connected with Church and State relations. This, he says, grows out of the fact that politicians and the press regard religion as too delicate a matter to touch. Their respect for tolerance is exaggerated since their conception of “tolerance is absence of criticism of any standard religion.” Yet free discussion is the essential of democracy without which our present successful Church-State relationship cannot survive.

Blanshard agrees with Cardinal Manning that religion is eternally relevant to politics and politics is eternally relevant to religion. To whatever degree the author argues in his book, he is fair, factual, and objective, and properly documentative. He proceeds to picture clearly the attitudes of the justices of the Supreme Court, members of Congress, and occupants of the White House toward the vital issues currently at stake.

Throughout this candid book the reader sees the prevalence of full religious liberty in the United States. But he sees also that the distinctive American principle of separation of Church and State, as defined by the Federal Constitution and interpreted by the Supreme Court, does not prevail and is in eminent danger. He contends that Washington is You; and unless you are alert and active, we shall lose our priceless heritage through erosion of the principle if not by bold destruction.

In answer to the hot question “Can a Roman Catholic be elected president?” Blanshard replies that one can; but more likely this will happen if the parties decide that the country must recognize a Catholic political party. Then the nominee would be for the vice presidency. He has only kind words for Senator John Kennedy, but points out the unescapable necessity of facing up to the Roman church’s position on six crucial questions which the church cannot maintain in a pluralistic society.

One of the most helpful features in this provocative book is the author’s demolition of six popular clichés which bar free discussion of the vital issues confronting us. If such a book cannot induce candor and courage in citizens, one does not know what can.

JOSEPH M. DAWSON

Universalism Of Future Life

The Preacher’s Calling to be Servant, by D. T. Niles (Harper, 1959, 144 pp., $2.50), is reviewed by G. Aiken Taylor, Editor of The Presbyterian Journal.

In this sequel of The Preacher’s Task and the Stone of Stumbling, the new Secretary of the East Asia Christian Conference treats of the ministry rather than the message of the preacher. According to the author, the Church is not an extension of the Incarnation itself but rather of the ministry of Him who became incarnate in order to serve. Our calling is to be servants.

“The calling of a preacher is not simply a call to preach, with his task to be understood in terms of preaching as such. Rather the calling of a preacher is like every Christian calling a call to share in the continuing ministry of the risen and ascended Lord.… When we surrendered ourselves to Him we surrendered ourselves to become His servants. And it is right that it should be so. For He himself is Servant, so that we as servants of the Servant can have no other career.”

Dr. Niles is one of the most effective writers in the religious field today. The only discordant note is in his introduction of universalism which, interestingly enough, does not affect his evangelistic zeal. His is a universalism of the future life, not of this present one. For him Christ is the only answer to the abundant life here and now, and men must be won to him if they are to participate in it. However, those that miss him in this life, though they miss much now, will meet him in eternity, for, as the author wrote to this reviewer, the Scripture says, “I will seek my sheep until I find it.”

G. AIKEN TAYLOR

The Body Politic

Science, Medicine and Morals, by Charles E. Raven (Harper, 1959, 189 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Orville S. Walters, Psychiatrist, Urbana, Illinois.

The diseases of the body politic should be the next field of conquest for the medical profession. What medicine has done in the field of individual psychology should be extended into the area of corporate psychology. This is the thesis of Canon Raven’s Markle Lectures given at the College of Medicine of the University of Cincinnati in 1958.

Subtitled “A Survey and a Suggestion,” the lectures first range through a broad historical summary of scientific thought and give special notice to the contribution of medical men. Then there is a consideration of the contribution that medical science can make in helping modern man adjust to the new look upon the universe.

The medical profession must turn from the individual and his disease to a broader concern with health and the environment. The doctor cannot be content with adjusting his patient to social norms. He cannot be content with healing the individual and neglecting to treat society. The concept of medicine must be enlarged to include the epidemic madnesses and the misapplication of our corporate capacities. The doctor’s skills of diagnosis and treatment should be joined to sociology as they have to psychology.

The book’s sweeping chronology offers an imposing demonstration of the author’s erudition. This, together with his discursive style, makes for slow movement in a century-hopping panorama.

While all will agree that society desperately needs treatment for its ills, the proposition that medicine as a scientific discipline can swing the balance is as dubious as the author’s faith that “the process of evolution does tend towards the emergence of more and more freely responsible creatures.”

ORVILLE S. WALTERS

Final And Dynamic

Ideas of Revelation, An Historical Study A.D. 1700 to A.D. 1860, by H. D. McDonald (Macmillan, 1959, 300 pp., $6.75), is reviewed by William Childs Robinson, Professor of Historical Theology, Columbia Theological Seminary.

This is a carefully documented and thought out presentation of the problem of revelation. It begins with the fundamental contrast between the view of the deists that God is an inference from a rational consideration of the external world, and the assurance of an inner light for the enthusiasts who know God by heart intuition. The true Christian position is that one begins neither with the world without nor with the world within, but with the Word. “In Christ God did not simply countersign the best intuitions of the heart or the highest products of reason.” The order of clauses in the great Trinitarian Benediction is significant: the grace of the Lord Jesus stands first, followed by the love of God and closing with the communion of the Holy Spirit.

The extreme emphasis on the external world made of natural religion a vast tome and of supernatural revelation a small pamphlet republishing the law of nature with a few added duties. In our day, the German Christians stressed theism, yet repudiated Christ and the Church. On the opposite side the Ranters became antinomian, while the Quakers more circ*mspectly held to the light within. Much rational orthodoxy followed the former. The advocates of the Spirit within the heart were supported more recently by the stress on divine immanence and are represented by Schleiermacher, Coleridge, Maurice, and the neo-orthodox. In some cases, studies in psychic processes have led students to become more ministers of religion than ministers of Jesus Christ.

This exhaustive historical study is properly balanced by a thoughtful and worthwhile conclusion. However, the stresses have varied; there has been a recognition that God has made a self-disclosure to men which is adequate and available. The relations of the objective and the subjective aspects of revelation may not be reduced to a neat formula. But something of a synthesis may be attempted. This may be suggested by representative men such as Charles Simeon, the evangelical who stressed Revelation in the Word through the Spirit, and John Wesley, the Methodist leader (and friend of Simeon) who taught Revelation by the Spirit and through the Word. Even though the full truth must be stated in antinomies, neither element is to be rejected. Revelation is both in Scripture and in Spirit, both final and dynamic, propositional and personal, communication and communion, mediated by the Word and made immediate in experience by the Spirit, both in words and in the Word, and is the Christ of the New Testament who lived, taught, died and rose, and the exalted present Christ who encounters men today. There is both the stability of the scriptural revelation and the activity of the Holy Spirit in giving this revelation efficacy for our salvation now. God is Spirit and we must worship him in the Holy Spirit and in Christ the Truth. The careful student will find no better study than this work of Professor McDonald to guide him into such a genuine expression of Christian faith.

WILLIAM CHILDS ROBINSON

Brilliant Encounter

Protestant Thought: from Rousseau to Ritschl, by Karl Barth, translated by Brian Cozens (Harper, 1959, 435 pp., $7), is reviewed by Robert D. Knudsen, Instructor in Philosophy at Westminster Theological Seminary.

In sparkling prose Karl Barth guides us through the enchanted world of the liberal theologians with whom he himself has spent the greater part of his life disagreeing. The English edition is composed of the translation of 11 major chapters of Barth’s justly famous German work: Protestant Theology in the Nineteenth Century. These well-translated chapters offer the intelligent reader a brilliant and fascinating survey of liberal Protestant thought from the viewpoint of the dialectical theology in an important historical period.

Barth strikes the keynote in the opening chapter, as he traces the development in the eighteenth century of the idea of absolute man, which later is to dominate liberal theology. The orthodox reader will be able to agree at least formally with this characterization; nevertheless, he must feel uneasy when he reflects that, because of his belief that God has revealed himself directly in history, he will be placed by Barth on the side of autonomous man, along with the liberal who holds that God’s revelation can be identified with the advance of human culture. It is well known that Barth denies that God reveals himself directly in history and that the Bible is the Word of God. The reviewer once asked Barth to defend a theological position in the light of two Bible texts, whereupon Barth immediately spoke of him as a “Fundamentalist,” the greatest reproach that can be lodged against one in the majority of theological schools today. Though Barth would uphold his own view of the Word against the orthodox view and also against the liberal thinkers whom he treats in this book, he seeks to treat the liberals fairly. He accords to each one a place in the church of Christ and feels himself obliged as a theologian to be stimulated by his thinking. A similar magnanimity is not necessarily foreign to orthodoxy. Though his attitude would have differed in important points from that of Barth, the Reformed theologian Charles Hodge said of his personal friend and theological opponent, Friedrich Schleiermacher, “Tholuck said that Schleiermacher, when sitting in the evening with his family, would often say, ‘Hush, children; let us sing a hymn of praise to Christ.’ Can we doubt that he is singing those praises now? To whomsoever Christ is God, St. John assures us, Christ is a Saviour” (Systematic Theology, II, p. 440).

Barth’s volume is a brilliant encounter with the liberal theology; nevertheless it may be pointed out that Cornelius Van Til in his New Modernism, Richard R. Niebuhr in his Resurrection and Historical Reason, and now, in echo, Willis B. Glover in his article, “The Irrelevance of Theology” (Christian Century, Dec. 30, 1959), have suggested that the structure of Barth’s theology may after all not he so far removed from the liberal “consciousness theology” that he has so vigorously repudiated.

ROBERT D. KNUDSEN

BOOK BRIEFS

African Nationalism, by Ndabaningi Sithole (Oxford University Press, 1959, 174 pp., $3.25)—A moderate view of rising nationalism in the Dark Continent by a native Christian educational leader.

Collectivism in the Churches, by Edgar C. Bundy (Church League of America, 1958, 354 pp., $2)—Paper back edition of a documented account of the political activities of the National Council of Churches.

I Have Called You Friends, by Dr. Francis C. Anscomhe (Christopher, 1959, 407 pp., $5)—The well-documented story of Quakerism in North Carolina.

The Pastor’s Public Relations, by Eugene Dinsmore Dolloff (Judson Press, 1959, 188 pp., $3)—ABC’s of public relations for busy ministers.

Meet the Twelve, by John H. Baumgaertner (Augsburg, 1960, 122 pp., $2.50)—Character sketches of the twelve disciples.

Seven Times He Spoke, by Olfert Ricard (Augsburg, 1960, 82 pp., $1.75)—Sermons on the seven words of the Cross by a leading pastor in Denmark.

Devotional Introduction to Job, by Andrew W. Blackwood, Jr. (Baker Book House, 1959, 166 pp., $2.95)—A commentary with distinctive devotional and homiletical values.

Sermons on the Prodigal Son, by Thomas A. Whiting (Abingdon, 1959, 111 pp., $2)—Rich in theological and psychological truths.

Baptist Confessions of Faith, by W. L. Lumpkin (Judson Press, 1959, 430 pp., $6)—Compilation of great Baptist documents with interpretations in the light of historical settings.

The Crowds Around Calvary, by William F. Beck and Paul G. Hansen (Concordia, 1960, 120 pp., $1.50 paper)—Scripture readings and sermons for the Lenten season.

Christendom, by Einar Molland (Philosophical Library, 1959, 418 pp., $10)—A Norwegian scholar looks at the churches of Christendom.

Missionary Life and Work, by Harold R. Cook (Moody, 1959, 382 pp., $5)—Advice to missionaries and candidates for the mission field by a leading evangelical authority in that field.

God’s Healing Power, by Rev. Edgar L. Sanford (Prentice Hall, 1959, 224 pp., $4.95)—Spiritual therapy for the sick and unfortunate with a wealth of examples of healing.

Major Religions of the World, by Marcus Bach (Abingdon, 1959, 128 pp., $1)—A popular liberal study in comparative religions.

Into the Light of Christianity, by William J. Schnell (Baker Book House, 1959, 211 pp., $2.95)—Gripping testimony of a convert from Jehovah’s Witnesses with refutations of the basic doctrines of this sect. A companion book to the author’s Thirty Years a Watchtower Slave.

Caspar Schwenckfeld on the Person and Work of Christ, by Paul L. Maier (Christian Book Center, Kalamazoo, Mich., 1959, 115 pp., $1.75)—A study of the theological core of Schwenckfeldism.

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

BEDTIME STORY

The last bedtime story I read to my youngest daughter has been keeping me awake. There are no giants, witches, or dragons in it. Nancy and I are both old-fashioned, and neither loses sleep over fee, fie, fo, fum.

This story is most contemporary. It is about a dog named Crispin’s Crispian, who belonged to himself, and therefore kept house with bachelor methodicalness. After a few curious adventures, he met a boy who also belonged to himself. On the dog’s invitation, the boy came to share his house.

Share is not exactly the word, since each of these rugged individuals emphatically preserved his own independent way of life. On opposite pages each chewed up his own dinner and swallowed it into his stomach. Then, also on opposite pages, each went to bed and dreamed his own dreams.

The disturbing thing is that I don’t know what to make of this philosophical novel for the kindergarten. It is just as evident that I should understand it. There could hardly be more clues. The dog, for example, takes himself for a walk. He can go wherever he wants, but he doesn’t know where he wants to go.

This would seem to be the dilemma of the freedom of modern man. The emancipated individualist, without restriction, is also without goals or norms. The man who belongs to nobody has nowhere to go.

Crispian’s solution, in advice that he gives himself, is just to walk; sooner or later he will set somewhere. I take it that he is no existentialist. The advice smacks more of Dewey than Sartre. Or perhaps it is just the spirit of the frontier.

From this point on I become more confused. The walk takes Crispian to a dog country and a cat and rabbit country with implications that are either political or Freudian, and then the dog-meets-boy theme develops.

There is an outright declaration that the dog is a conservative, who likes everything in place, whether saucers or stars. Yet I am not reassured. The domiciled coexistence of this dog without a master and boy without a father seems to be a dreadful parable of society without God, where there can be fraternization but not fellowship, cooperation but not love.

I do wish the author were at least less profound, for the sake of the parents, who also need their sleep. How about a little lost puppy who comes home to his master? At bedtime.

EUTYCHUS

CHURCH TAX

I have enjoyed the discussion of “Taxation and the Churches” in the article by Eugene Carson Blake (Aug. 3 issue) and in the recent editorial (Jan. 4 issue).… This is not an issue of Federal power, because it is the state and local governments which levy property taxes for services rendered to churches as well as individuals and other institutions.

FOSTER SHANNON

East Side Presbyterian Church

Omaha, Nebraska

To allow the State to tax the churches would be a most dangerous precedent and would be a violation of the Church-State principle. It would be just as wrong for the State to impose taxes upon churches as it would for the churches to exact funds from the State in return for the services which the churches provide for the State. In teaching the young, in promoting morality and civil obedience and tranquility, in providing youth recreational facilities, in charitable enterprises, in free counseling to distraught people, in the promotion of emotional health through spiritual development, and in countless other ways, not the least being seeking the divine benediction upon our nation and its rulers in prayer and worship, the Church serves the State without reimbursem*nt. To allow the State the power of taxation over the Church would be equally wrong as to allow the Church authorities dominion over the civil government. There is little question that the power to tax is the power to destroy, for if a church were not willing or unable to pay its tax, the government would have no alternative but to take court action and ultimately confiscate the Church property.

However, there is a just complaint that churches have abused the tax exemption by going into competition with commercial enterprise in everything from bake sales to bingo games to massive rental of large and expensive property holdings. In doing this I believe the church has ceased to be the church and should be subject to the same sales taxes, or corporation profits taxes as any other commercial concern.

MAURICE M. BENITEZ

St. James Episcopal Church

Lake City, Fla.

I should like to call your attention … to a further item concerning the report on Florida Presbyterian College.… When it was pointed out to the president and trustees of this institution that the acceptance of a site from the city of St. Petersburg might well be in violation of the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution and the Florida Constitution as well, they took action in the matter. Appraisers determined that $500,000 was a fair price for the land. College officials promptly agreed to pay this amount to the city and have already paid the first installment.

C. STANLEY LOWELL

Washington, D. C.

CAST CORRECTION

Your news report (Jan. 4 issue) on our latest production identified one of the cast incorrectly. Dick Jones, not Dick Clark, is the male lead in the film, now titled “Shadow of the Boomerang” and scheduled for fall release.

BRUNSON MOTLEY

World Wide Pictures

Hollywood, Calif.

TROUBLES IN THE KINGDOM

I wish to comment on Dr. George E. Ladd’s review (Oct. 12 issue) of my book The Greatness of the Kingdom. Since there has been so much disagreement about the subject of the Kingdom, I suppose that anyone venturing to write a book in this field should expect to meet some dissent, and also be willing to accept fair criticism with some measure of good humor. However, the review of a book should be a review; not merely a polemic, as several competent judges have already characterized Ladd’s discussion. At very least, the reviewer should seek to find and state fairly the author’s purpose and plan; give some serious attention to his definitions, not passing judgments on the basis of meanings which he rejects; and, above all, avoid carelessness in handling the facts. In these obligations, I feel, the review by Ladd gravely fails; but especially in the last mentioned. Out of the many, I cite but three examples.

First, my book does not teach that God has “two programs—a theocratic program for Israel and a redemptive program for Church”; which, Ladd declares, is “the pattern of McClain’s theology.” On the contrary (in a passage quoted by Ladd himself in another connection!) I have clearly stated that, with reference to our Lord’s redemptive work as a personal Saviour of men, “there is no difference between Jew and Gentile … and there are no national priorities” (my p. 424). Also, I have said that the New Testament Church is “the one body of Christ in which there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile” (my pp. 428–9). Elsewhere, over and over, I have asserted a divine redemptive program for Israel (my pp. 197–8, 218–220, 352); and also a theocratic program for the Church (my pp. 329, 469–472).

Second, Ladd declares without any qualification that “the pattern of McClain’s theology” is that “the Mediatorial Kingdom of Christ is a blessing for Israel, not for the Church.” This makes no sense at all when compared with my statement “that the Church of the present age is enjoying many of the spiritual blessings which in the Old Testament were predicted in connection with the Messianic Kingdom (my p. 440). Curiously, in connection with another point, Ladd later refers to this very passage; but shrugs it off as a failure of “logic” on my part. Still, I did write the passage; to say nothing of other passages similar in nature (my pp. 329–330, 429, 433, 436, 439, 464, 469–472). An author can hardly agree amiably to the re-writing of his material in order to validate the criticism of a reviewer.

Third, in his review Ladd refers to a matter which he correctly calls “serious.” It concerns the relation of the death of Christ to the Kingdom. In the following words he misrepresents my position: “Christ did not speak of his death until his offer of the Kingdom to Israel had been firmly rejected.… McClain places great stress on the fact that Jesus at first proclaimed the gospel of the Kingdom with no word about his death and resurrection.” And he cites my page 332 to document his charge. (I italicize certain of Ladd’s words to show the unqualified nature of his assertion.) Now as a matter of fact neither on my page 332 nor anywhere else in the book have I written anything like Ladd has alleged. Not only so, but on the two preceding pages (330–331) I have specifically cited certain recorded references to his death and resurrection made by our Lord during His earliest ministry—in John 2:18–22; 3:14–16; Mark 2:19–20, and in the accounts of his baptism—all prior to the rejection of the King and his Kingdom as described in Matthew 11 and 12. Yet Ladd represents me as having written that there was “no word” from Christ about His death in this area of time. Surely there is a difference between some word and no word.

Furthermore, using the above misrepresentation as his solitary premise, Ladd moves with no hesitation to his ill-conceived conclusion in these words: “The conclusion is unavoidable: in McClain’s system, the Cross is relevant to the Church but not to the Kingdom.” This in spite of my affirmation at the opening of the book: “We are not forgetting the person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ. For He is the King eternal, and there could be no final Kingdom apart from Him and His work as the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (my p. 5). And again on my page 426: “For the preaching [about the Kingdom] in Acts proceeded on the basis of the death and resurrection of Messiah which had now become historic facts, thus providing the soteriological foundation without which there could have been no enduring Messianic Kingdom established on earth.” For other passages, the reader may consult pages 167–168, 352–353, 399–401, 403–406.

ALVA J. MCCLAIN

Winona Lake, Ind.

Edmund Opitz should have written two pieces for publication in CHRISTIANITY TODAY: 1. a review of my Basic Christian Ethics (“The Elastic Yardstick,” Jan. 4 issue), and, 2. an article on “Some Contextualists, Pragmatists and Relativists I Have Known.” Opitz did not confine himself to my writing or to a criticism of tendencies demonstrated to come from my writing, but followed instead the method of making objection by mere association. Statements or tendencies he sees in some other books must have been uppermost in his mind. I regard contextualism and relativism as wrong, and tyranny and Big Brotherism as evil; and cannot rejoice in being placed in such company without proof. The review not only did not succeed, it did not even attempt to show valid socio-political objections that could be made against my book, but against “neighbor love” ethics somewhere else. I would not call this responsible reviewing.

I have composed a longer analysis of that review and rejoinder to the issues it raises, which for reasons of space CHRISTIANITY TODAY finds it impossible to publish. Any reader may receive a copy by sending me a stamped self-addressed envelope. This is the only way open to me to correct fully a grave misinterpretation, now widely circulated, in a review that only seems to engage in genuine controversy.

PAUL RAMSEY

Chairman

Dept. of Religion

Princeton University

Princeton, N. J.

The position of traditional ethics is, as I understand it, that there is an independent, non-human order of reality; the objective ground for the ends we deem valuable, the ultimate sanction for the moral life. God is, and His will is binding on all men. There is that in man which responds to God, which seeks to know and do His will. There is also that in man which seeks to deny any will above his own.

The self-regarding element in man will tend to domesticate great spiritual insights within set rules and codes. We need as a corrective, therefore, criticism of “code morality,” “rule morality,” “coalition ethics,” and “legalism.” But several schools of thought would jettison codes, rules and laws, holding that these do not guide but fetter the moral life. Mr. Ramsey, as I read him, belongs to one of these. Chapter II of his book, for instance, is entitled “Christian Liberty and Ethic without Rules.” Section III of the same chapter is headed “What the Christian Does without a Code: St. Paul’s Answer.” The author admits that this position is beset with pitfalls. “The Ethics of Paul,” he writes, “indeed Christian ethics generally, seems always in peril of opening the floodgates of anarchy and license in the name of freedom from law.” The author feels he has avoided the pitfalls; the reviewer thinks otherwise. The reviewer erred in assuming that the author would place himself in the company which the reviewer supposed would be congenial to him.

EDMUND A. OPITZ

Irvington, N. Y.

‘GREAT MINISTRY’

May God’s richest blessings be upon the great ministry of your magazine and may it continue to bring to the Christian public those matters of highest concern in this twentieth century.

JARED F. GERIG

President

Fort Wayne Bible College

Fort Wayne, Ind.

Ideas

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

All reports evaluate the year just ended as one of tremendous activity in the publishing world. Both secular and religious fields reflected a great output of titles and banner sales of books.

Among evangelical Protestants, the Christian Booksellers Association convention in Grand Rapids saw record attendance and interest, and publishers talked of larger editions and a new high for in-print totals.

Religious books shared in trends common to the secular publishing world, such as television-inspired interest in books by celebrities, continuing attention to news headline-related subjects, and large numbers of titles devoted to the self-help and how-to, and the personal improvement formulas. The religious field also registered a gain in heavier or more serious titles, commentaries, new versions of Scripture, and scholarly symposia, while fiction and juvenile reading continued to reflect long-standing weaknesses.

The list of theological works was a strong one, perhaps the strongest in recent years in volumes of distinctly evangelical character. Sherwood Wirt’s Crusade at the Golden Gate and Russell Hitt’s Jungle Pilot sold more than 25,000 copies. The symposium on Revelation and the Bible already is in 30,000 homes despite efforts of some liberals to demean it, and a British edition has appeared. Also encouraging is the fact that evangelical works are appearing under “new” imprints such as Oxford, Harpers, Westminster.

There was a day when it would have been extremely difficult to list 25 creditable evangelical books published within a year’s time, but when CHRISTIANITY TODAY named its “Choice Evangelical Books of 1959” (p. 17), a wealth of worthy titles was available. Books of sermons and several theological works of real stature were perforce omitted. This evidence of evangelical advance in the world of books is heartening.

While prosperity seemed to be smiling on publishers, booksellers, and certain evangelical writers, a rash of self-criticism evidenced itself in writers’ conferences and evangelical journals. Editorials appeared commenting on the decline of good reading and the cultured unrelatedness of evangelicals. Panel discussions on the cultural lag in Christian publishing gave evidence of increasing awareness of deficiencies. An editorial by Dr. A. W. Tozer in Alliance Witness was reprinted by several magazines, and others picked up the same theme. Deploring the poor reading habits of most evangelical Christians in this country and the output of mediocre stuff by many evangelical writers, Tozer—in a rather harsh judgment—held it “hardly too much to say that illiterate religious literature has now become the earmark of evangelicalism.”

Whether this wave of critical awareness inaugurates an improvement toward a higher quality of writing, or merely a preoccupation with the problem, remains to be seen. Awareness of deficiencies is essential but in itself offers no real solution. The problem remains, into 1960 and beyond, unless skilled writing becomes a serious concern and a genuine goal. Too long have evangelical Christian circles evaded a striving for perfection in literary expression as well as for excellence in content. This lack has not gone unobserved even among secular writers. Sydney Harris in his “Strictly Personal” syndicated column recently observed (Pittsburgh Post Gazette, Nov. 23): “It is the religious manuscripts, especially, that are the most painful to look at.… The amateurs feel strongly about the subject, and they assume that strong feelings make strong writing, but such is not always the case.… Most of these aspiring authors are trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly … and untalented. Their fine characters and good intentions gleam from every page; and so does their lack of writing ability.…” Perhaps nowhere more than in this world of literary expression have evangelicals shown greater allegiance to the prevailing American cult of mediocrity.

True, some improvement may be noted in religious non-fiction in the last several years. But alongside the encouraging signs, a dearth of good copy remains in many areas. Good religious fiction, in the main, is noteworthy for its absence, and while more material of a wholesome variety has appeared for teen-agers, good books for the eight-to-twelve-year-old bracket appear to be a casualty of TV thrillers. Even here, as in all classifications, religious publishing could stand a good spurt of competition in keen writing, the sort of spur that would send quality soaring, through the publishers’ opportunity to be discerningly selective in the choice of manuscripts for publication.

One point that often rises to the surface in discussions with religious publishers and booksellers is the seeming unwillingness of the Christian reading public to pay sufficient prices for quality books. The religious book market—particularly that portion of it called evangelical or conservative—has a reputation for being a “cheap” market. Books in similar categories, especially juveniles and devotionals, generally sell for double or more in the secular world. If this is so, this price barrier in itself is a severe stricture on the production and publication of quality material. Such cultural barriers can be overcome only by a long process of education, a training from childhood up in the real values of good books and good reading. At the same time, on the higher levels of secondary school and college, we shall need to encourage serious dedication to Christian writing as an art, both as avocation and career. For until the literary pursuit gains the status of an art that deserves and demands the highest training, application, skill, dedication, and discipline, we shall not encourage great writing, and the output of the presses will not achieve better quality—even though they may attain increases in circulation as in the year just past.

In certain areas, especially in respect to theological subjects, there has been an improvement, reflected in the annual summaries elsewhere in this issue. This is all to the good. But the evangelical picture retains a need, within the near future, for something akin to the university presses for the issuance of scholarly works in limited editions for libraries and serious students. The output of a Christian university press need not necessarily be limited to theological and critical works. Establishment and endowment of such a publishing venture might do more than any other single development to inspire and raise the level of quality writing in the evangelical camp. It would raise goals and standards for others, and set an example for private and other institutional publishers. It could mark the beginning of a new era in evangelical publishing in this country and in the whole Christian world.

In broader perspective: Not in three decades have there been more alluring opportunities for the expression of religious and moral convictions. In this climate capable and discriminating evangelical thinkers and writers should respond with growing enthusiasm. Great days are ahead for religion in the world of books.

WILL DAILY NEWSPAPERS YIELD TO ROMAN PROPAGANDA DRIVE?

A cleverly-written article in the Catholic Home Messenger gives advice on “How to Write a Letter to a Newspaper Editor.” It suggests among other things that appeals should be made to the editor’s vanity, and adds that the writer should not necessarily identify himself as a clergyman or as a Roman Catholic. The author explains that the object in view is not to make the daily newspapers of our country Roman Catholic. “We are only concerned,” he writes, “that the changes (which the letters seek to bring about) conform to Catholic principles.”

Letter writing is a free exercise of the citizenry of our land, and within legal limits is above criticism. One wonders, however, if newspaper editors are aware of the intensive campaigns being undertaken in our time by groups within the Roman church seeking national conformity to the teachings of the hierarchy.

“Maybe Catholics fail to realize what one suggestion can do,” says the author, Russell L. Faist. “Letters from readers have done marvelous things to newspapers. They have stopped serials in the middle of publication; they have caused editors to refuse half pages of advertising; they have teased editors into taking a second look at national and international figures.”

If, as he urges, letters to editors deal with questions of “fairness, unselfishness and suitability,” little fault can be found. Actual conditions, however, are quite otherwise. Pressure on newspaper editors from Roman Catholic sources is lopsidedly religious in nature. “Is the news unfavorable to Romanism? Does the Church appear to be something less than the ‘one true Church’? Is its personnel seen as anything but noble and heroic? Are its activities described in any terms other than altruistic, even when (as in Colombia) rival houses of worship are burned and innocent people are killed? Do people ever walk out of its ranks? Can I afford to print the truth?” These are the questions that Romanism subtly wants the editors to consider along with such matters as “fairness, unselfishness and suitability.” These are the issues that affect subscriptions and advertising revenue.

Certainly there is a place for letters to the editor, and we can join with our Roman Catholic friends in protesting the immorality that is constantly trying to invade our family newspapers. We need further to bear our witness to the truth as it is in Jesus Christ by speaking up in defense of the Christian faith. But the whole trend of our time—to turn the house of God into a lobby group or letter writing organization for political and social action, and to retool the Church of Jesus Christ so that its main thrust is as a power bloc instead of a beacon and herald—is a travesty of the Gospel. Churches have a right to urge their constituents to exercise responsible citizenship. But what standard will the Church use in evaluating the issues of the day? If the Christian conscience of the laity is stirred to trust social reform alone, and not spiritual regeneration as the primary Christian dynamism for the renewal of society, why bother with the adjective “Christian”?

We need to pray earnestly for the newspaper editors of our nation. We need to beseech our Heavenly Father that they be converted to genuine faith in him, and that they be filled by his Spirit with such godly confidence that they cannot be swayed from truth and freedom of the press by any pressure group, whether religious or nonreligious.

BARTH AMONG THE MIND-CHANGERS: SOME UNRESOLVED ISSUES

From time to time Karl Barth has penned brief reviews of his own theological position and perspective, the last in this series in a recent issue of The Christian Century. Naturally, too much importance is not to be attached to a report which Barth himself regards as little more than a trifle. Nor shall we find much light on the basic issues that concerned him 30 years ago and therefore on the underlying principles of the Church Dogmatics. On the other hand, the actual impressions and intentions of Barth as stated by Barth have a particular value, especially since he stands among the “mind-changers” as a champion of special divine revelation.

A great part of this latest review is taken up with Barth’s well-known if not so easily understood attitude to the East-West political cleavage and conflict. It might be thought that this outlook discloses a basic strain of Swiss neutralism possible only in a country artificially isolated from the strains and stresses of other powers. Yet the Swiss generally do not follow this line of approach, and it may be that, in spite of his attempts at understanding, Barth is guilty of a certain naiveté in relation to the policies and dominating principles of the Kremlin. On the other hand, Christians in the Western world should be impelled from time to time to search their own consciences, not so much in regard to the basic rightness of their cause, but certainly in relation to the way in which they represent it, and more particularly in relation to the over-easy identification of everything in the Western world itself with Christian truth and practice. An element of prophetic challenge may be found here, one which gains no little point from the threatening signs that German nationalism needs little encouragement to rear its ugly head for the third time this unhappy century.

Our main interest lies in the remarks concerning the Dogmatics as Barth’s major theological enterprise. He confirms the fact that in its later stages the Dogmatics has become in large measure a refutation of Bultmannism, in which Barth himself finds a new version of the older liberalism fostered by Schleiermacher, and more specifically an example of the evils of enslaving theology to a dominant existentialist interpretation. The basic problem for evangelicals is whether Barth himself does or does not break free in effect from the neo-liberalism which he finds in Bultmann. Not a few evangelical writers feel that, while he may not subjectivize the Gospel as Bultmann finally does, he sets it in a sphere of transcendence which breaks its contact with true history and thus deprives it of genuine objectivity. If this is true, the Dogmatics is vitiated from the outset and must finally be adjudged a liberal work in spite of its express intention and the apparently good points or passages to be found in it. On the other hand, some contend that there is an intrinsic improbability in this reading in view of Barth’s explicit aim and the fact that Barth himself dismisses as misconceived caricatures the various representations of this kind, usually drawn for the most part from his earlier writings.

Unfortunately his latest self review gives little help in deciding this issue. At most, we are given one or two very indirect indications that may help us to view the matter as Barth himself sees it. First, he reiterates strongly his own desire that theology should be emancipated from all philosophical domination, whether existentialist or historico-critical, or for that matter Kantian. Hence there can be no doubt as to his own intention. Second, he does not find much serious understanding of his work in the Protestant world, whether orthodox, neo-orthodox, or liberal. Indeed, apart from isolated studies such as that of Berkouwer, he sees the greatest critical and even positive interest and appreciation among Roman Catholic dogmaticians, who apparently take him at his face value and are not on the lookout for mysterious transmutations. Finally, he is amused that in so many books about his theology he comes across hypotheses from which he learns more about himself than “he ever dared dream.”

This does not amount to very much in fact. It is all allusive and indirect. It contains no explanation of issues that arouse apprehension. It does not point us to the basis of Barth’s objectivity, nor clarify his interpretation of history, nor establish his interrelating of the objective authority of Scripture with its not so clearly objective inspiration as he seems to understand it. It does not remove the possibility that Barth may be mistaken as to his own presumed fulfillment of what is no doubt his sincere aim. The most that can be said is that Barth seems to have a picture of himself and his theology rather different from that of many of the orthodox expositors even of his Dogmatics. Elementary fairness demands that this be given serious consideration as the basis of understanding, although an author is not always the best judge of his own work. It may prove that there are serious defects as well as good qualities in the picture, as Roman Catholics from their own angle do not hesitate to maintain. It is important, however, that the evangelical as well as the Roman response to Barth should be concerned with these genuine rather than perhaps illusory defects and qualities. For in this way, as Berkouwer’s approach to Barth suggests, the path is opened to fruitful interchange which may lead, not merely to clearing up misunderstandings, but to putting right the defects and harnessing significant emphases to the service of biblical truth and evangelical witness.

View Issue
Subscribe
Give a Gift
Archives

FAITH AND THE WORD OF GOD

We do not believe there has ever been a time when Christians needed more help than now. There is a raging tide against faith in a completely trustworthy and authoritative Bible, and this is having a devastating effect.

The consequences are not primarily in the areas of culture or ethics, or even sociology and politics. The devastation has to do with spiritual power—that ability to confront sinners with their need of a Saviour and to lead them to repentance and conversion. It has to do with the spiritual power necessary to lead men to the Word of God for strength and wisdom for daily living. The concern is over preaching and teaching which brings a Scripture-based confidence for today and an assured hope for the life beyond the grave.

Right now we are reaping the harvest of attacks on the integrity of the Scriptures which began in Germany a century ago. In institution after institution, the chair of Bible is now occupied by men who have capitulated either to the older, higher critical viewpoint of the Scriptures, or to the more recent deviation from faith in the complete trustworthiness of the Bible, known as Neo-orthodoxy. There are, of course, notable exceptions, and for these we are deeply thankful.

Those who hold the higher critical or neo-orthodox viewpoints of Scripture deny the accuracy and validity of the Bible on a rational basis. But in the more popular concept we find something very different: Man has superimposed upon the authority of the Word of God the authority of the human interpreter, so that revelation as a fait accompli becomes revelation only when acknowledged to be such by the human interpreter of the Word. We of course recognize that divine revelation becomes operative in the life of the individual only as he hears and acts on that revelation.

The point is that this act of obedience on the part of man does not validate revelation, for God’s revelation is valid regardless of what man may do with it. To equate obedience to God’s revealed truth with that truth itself is to becloud the issue.

The words of Paul as found in Romans 3:3, 4, are pertinent: “For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.”

Old-line higher criticism, said by some to be discredited today, is far more alive than many think. The old rationalism has been largely supplanted by neo-orthodoxy, it is true. But this welcome shift to the theological right is far from adequate, for its destructive effect is a demonstrable fact. Wherever human speculation is permitted to take the place of divine revelation, the way is open for interpretations contrary to that revelation.

An overwhelming majority of seminary students are now being subjected to this new philosophy of inspiration. The bold affirmation, “Thus saith the Lord,” has been muted. The voice of authority has been supplanted by the expression of opinions. We have lost the power of God’s Word for us in the din of human speculation. Power from entirely too many pulpits rises no higher than the leading intellects of the day.

This is an appeal, therefore, to young ministers. The question to them is, do you have the power of God’s Holy Spirit resting on you when you go into the pulpit? Are you seeing souls saved and lives transformed through your ministry? If you are, thank God and go forward.

If not, the writer would suggest a soul-searching inquest into the death of spiritual power. The point at which you no longer believed in the complete integrity and authority of the Word of God may have been your departure. Or it may have been at some time in life when you did not surrender motives, habits, and other activities to the searching and cleansing of the Holy Spirit.

There is on every hand today a raging tide, a drift against which Christians must stand. The faithfulness of God, the reliability and comfort of the Holy Bible, the consistent testimony of Spirit-directed lives are all a part of effective witnessing for our Saviour. Against these bulwarks of the faith, Satan is waging an unending warfare with active and effective devices.

History indicates that the spiritual witness of the Church has always been as strong as the faith that held the integrity and authority of the Holy Scriptures and lives that were consistent with that faith.

Christians should regard as suspect every attempt to undermine faith in the Bible. They should ask those who have substituted human speculation for divine revelation, or who speak knowingly of the more recent findings of modern scholarship, whether by their standards we have a Book which contains the Word of God, or whether in the Holy Scriptures we have in fact the Written Word of God?

There is a tremendous difference in the two approaches.

With one we have an anchor and a chain which can withstand every tide of unbelief. The other is sustained only by links of human opinion, reasoning and speculation—and they cannot hold.

We live in a day of scientific experimentation and achievement, a day when theories are being tested and facts determined. In the realm of biblical criticism we would suggest an experiment, if the one making this experiment is willing to follow through, regardless of the cost.

Let every minister search his own heart in the presence of God and offer a complete surrender of his God-given faculties to the Holy Spirit.

Then, in all sincerity, let him ask God for a clear understanding of the Scriptures, an understanding that will deliver him from philosophical presuppositions and prejudices. At the same time, may he ask for the faith of a little child and for the power in personal living and public witness that alone comes through the complete and constant indwelling of the Holy Spirit.

It is our conviction that when the matter of biblical inspiration and interpretation is met in the light of understanding that comes from the Holy Spirit, difficulties disappear like mist before the rising sun, and we come to marvel at our own blindness and unbelief.

We believe that when this kind of examination takes place in an individual, the study of God’s Word becomes a joy instead of a chore; and any Christian, whether minister or not, will find so much to think about, teach, and preach that he will not have opportunities adequate enough to make these new-found truths known to others.

The Bible is an inexhaustible mine of wisdom, joy, and divine truth. Its gold is waiting for the humbled mind, the willing heart, and the surrendered will.

L. NELSON BELL