Cover Story
John H. Gerstner
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
What are the status and prospects of Calvinism in the United States 400 years after the definitive edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion? They are not good. In fact, they are very bad.
In this brief survey we will mention several factors which cast a gloom over the present and future, and, then, other aspects which give rise to hope. The times today are not so bad as the era before the Reformation. If the darkest hour is just before the dawn, perhaps we are near the sunrise.
The Ecumenical Trend
First, the ecumenical movement, in its present trend, is inimical to Calvinism. We say, “in its present trend,” for we do not think that the ecumenical movement, as such, or in its basic theory, is inimical to Calvinism. As a means by which all Christian churches, Calvinist and non-Calvinist, may give expression to their common unity in Christ and realize the maximum of cooperation without compromise, the ecumenical movement was born from the loins of Calvinism. The Evangelical Alliance of 1846 was probably the forerunner of the ecumenical movement and was essentially a Reformed activity.
Calvinism believes in the catholic church and rejoices in its fellowship. It holds to its own principles without compromise, but does not unchurch other Christians dubious about the value of Calvinism.
The ecumenical movement at present moves toward homogenous doctrinal thinking. Doctrinally speaking, it is based on an affirmation of the deity and saviourhood of Jesus Christ. To that much, Calvinist, along with non-Calvinist, Christians gladly subscribe. On that basis most Calvinist churches of the world have become a vital part of the ecumenical movement. The present ecumenical trend, however, is not satisfied with such a general agreement. There is a driving desire to forge an ecumenical theology. Each participant confessional group is vying with another to make its contribution to this ultimate eclectic product.
It may seem surprising to mention this trend as inimical to Calvinism. What is wrong with having Calvinism make its contribution? Is that not a favorable opportunity? Why can Calvinists not attempt to persuade other brethren, and make progress within the framework of this interchange of discussion? The answer to that question is, because the discussion is not an honest one. I realize the imperative need, in the interests of Christian charity, of explaining this charge. The fact is that most theologians who purport to represent the Reformed theology in the current ecumenical discussion are not, I feel, willing to let Calvinism speak its mind unless that speech contributes to doctrinal unity. It must be the contribution of the Reformed theology to ecumenical theology. These theologians seem unwilling to mention Reformed theology when it is hostile to ecumenical theology. They are not looking for such; they are not finding such. They are straining every intellectual nerve—and they are men of ability in many cases—to find the contributions. Their great eagerness, on the one hand, and their lack of candor, on the other, enable them to latch onto certain terms distinctly associated with the Reformed tradition, and to present the terms in a way which makes Reformed theology appear to be virtually identical with ecumenical theology, and that the ecumenical theology is Calvinism, pure and simple, but expressed in other terms.
Diluting The Contribution
For example, not long ago we heard an outstanding exponent of ecumenism who also has some reputation as a Reformed theologian. He spoke in a Reformed institution on the subject, “The contribution of the Reformed theology to ecumenical thought.” This address was typical. He cited several doctrines. I will mention only two to give a sample. One Reformed doctrine, which was to contribute to ecumenical thought, is the sovereignty of God. Beyond doubt, Reformed theology teaches the sovereignty of God, and is known among the communions of Christendom for so doing. But it teaches this doctrine in a very specific form which includes predestination. This theologian stated the sovereignty doctrine in such a way that its peculiar and distinctive flavor was drained and there remained only the most general sense of sovereignty to which no Arminian would take exception. As a matter of fact, anyone who says “I believe in God the Father Almighty” would have wondered why the speaker thought that this kind of sovereignty was a special contribution of the Reformed churches. The whole church has always believed that God was sovereign in some sense.
Again, he mentioned the radical nature of sin. When his animated discussion was finished, one realized that the speaker believed sin exists and that he is “agin” it. But more than that could not be said. No mention was made of imputation, total depravity, or inability. What must the non-Reformed listeners in the audience have been thinking? They must have wondered if this learned man was unaware that other people, besides Presbyterians, believe in the reality of sin and are “agin” it too. What was the specific contribution of the Reformed churches?
Now this intellectual spirit, which is widespread, is most unfavorable for Calvinism. How can there be any honest study of the subject if the spirit of the age demands that theologians come out of their ivory towers with some more arguments for some particular movement? Calvinism is based on absolute intellectual honesty and integrity, and the ecumenical movement in its present trend can only be advanced by deliberate unwillingness to examine truth with detachment and scientific objectivity. This “loaded” thinking is a serpent which will strangle any renascent Calvinism in its cradle.
The Rise Of Neo-Calvinism
The second factor which augurs ill for the fortunes of Calvinism is neo-Calvinism. If the most conspicuous ecclesiastical movement of our century is the ecumenical, the most conspicuous theological movement is neo-orthodoxy. Inasmuch as this has been reputedly neo-Calvinistic rather than neo-Lutheran or neo-Anglican or neo-Arminian, it might seem to be congenial to the fortunes of Calvinism. In some ways it is, but fundamentally this seems not to be so.
From the inception of this neo-Calvinism it was evident to most that it was formally different from the Reformation theology. It was, by nature, hostile to propositional revelation and creedal codifications of revelation content. That such an approach may have been congenial to modern thinkers but not to Luther and Calvin seemed clear, in spite of strenuous efforts to modernize the Reformers. If the Genevan would have stood still long enough to listen to the labored expositions of Urgeschichte, non-historical history, and timeless time, he would have had no truck with it once he grasped it. In the more recent developments of neo-Calvinism its divergence from the Institutes is becoming ever more explicit. What correspondence can there be between a theology which refuses to identify the Bible with the Word of God, is modalistic rather than truly trinitarian, denies infant baptism and forensic justification, repudiates the covenants of redemption and of works while reinterpreting the covenant of grace, is basically antinomian in theory, teaches universal election, inclines to universal salvation and makes the judgment of God into ameliorative rather than vindictive justice—what has such a theology to do with the theology of John Calvin?
Modern Indeterminism
A third adverse factor is modern indeterminism which tends to prejudice superficial thinkers against Calvinism. Actually there is nothing in the theories of Heisenberg and Planck and others which is either “here or there” as far as Calvinism is concerned. They simply imply that some things are not predictable because their laws of behavior are not determinable. This notion, however, leads some thinkers to suppose that some events are actually undetermined. The theories are not prepared to cover that much territory. But they would have to cover that much territory to prove that the Calvinistic theory of fore-ordination is false. Modern indeterminacy reaches only so far as the experiments of men reach; not so far, necessarily, as the laws of God reach. Nevertheless, the very word “indeterminancy” makes some persons wrongly suppose that things in themselves are undetermined and not merely that they are unpredictable so far as we know them. Such presumed ultimate indeterminacy is inimical to the interests of Calvinism and favors the “contingency” theory so essential to Arminianism.
Favorable Aspects
Still, all of these adverse trends of our time have aspects which promote the cause of Calvinism. First, the ecumenical movement is favorable to the interests of Calvinism in some ways. Inasmuch as it expresses the unity of the Church which survives the diverse organization of the churches, it has common cause with Calvinism. Again, the ecumenical interchange promotes a discussion of theology and in this atmosphere Calvinism thrives. Whether such discussion works for the accelerating or retarding of the ecumenical movement, discussion is a consequence of that movement and the movement cannot escape it. Especially is it true that the continental confessional groups are challenging Americans to rethink their theology. All of this involves a reconsideration of Calvinism and its claims. And it necessarily involves the question: is it true that much of the discussion concerning the Reformed contribution to the ecumenical movement is not candid? Honesty has a way of breaking through in such discussions. Their purpose may be to show what contributions Calvinism may have to make, and to repress what deterrents it offers; but the very search for contributions leads to a study of Calvinism which may find more things there than were bargained for. Calvinistic theology may be distorted, suppressed and misrepresented, but where theology is even discussed there is the possibility that it may yet be taken seriously.
Likewise, neo-orthodoxy, or neo-Calvinism, makes an oblique contribution to the fortunes of Calvinism. When a certain Calvinistic professor was inaugurated, he said that a famous neo-orthodox theologian had occasioned a revival of interest in John Calvin at his Reformed seminary. Now, it should not have been necessary for a Calvinistic institution to have its interest in Calvin awakened by a non-Calvinist! But that is what happened, and in more places than one. Perhaps we can say that the greatest modern stimulus to the study of Calvin does not come from traditional Calvinists, but from neo-Calvinists. While these men have led some traditional Calvinists astray, they have led far more non-Calvinists under Calvinistic influence. This augurs well for the future of Calvinism. One may study Calvin without understanding him, to be sure; but no one can understand him without studying him.
Likewise the cultural interest in determinism, in its various forms, holds some promise for Calvinism. The form of determinism may not be that of John Calvin, to be sure, but it makes its adherents willing to listen to him. This same determinism among the historians has led many a modern to think that Calvin was not so much a fool as some historians had formerly thought. This congeniality toward causations greater than man himself, at least, leads a person to rethink the Reformed position. Studying Calvinism under the aegis of a modern scientific, psychological, or historical determinism by no means guarantees that the study will be unbiased or successful, but on the other hand, no possible influence from Calvin can register on modern cultural life unless he is seriously considered. This call for a revisit to John Calvin is the chief by-product value in contemporary deterministic thinking.
Calvinists are incurable optimists. They are not Calvinists because they are optimists, but optimists because they are Calvinists. Calvinism teaches that every picayune event which occurs in the least important circumstance of the most trifling occasion to the most insignificant creature is the perfect outworking of the infinitely wise and good will of an eternal sovereign God. A person who believes that is, by definition, an optimist. So we say that a Calvinist is optimistic even about the pessimistic outlook for Calvinism at the present moment. The shape of things to come is not congenial to the fortunes of Calvinism in the main, but, precisely because these forebodings are part of the eternal wisdom of God, the Calvinist rejoices in them, while he repents of any guilt which he may share in the blame for them. Meanwhile, he goes on confidently assured that this is the best possible universe and all things work together for good to them that love God and are called according to his purpose (as the greatest Calvinist of all once wrote).
END
John H. Gerstner is Professor of Church History and Government in Pittsburgh-Xenia Theological Seminary. He holds the Ph. D. from Harvard University. He is editor of Jonathan Edwards’ Works, Sermons on Romans (with introduction and notes) to be published this year by Yale University Press.
My Father’s Benediction
(Numbers 6:24–26)
Now he is gone, but he has left these words Of benediction, inkwritten upon the flyleaf Of the Book, which was his gift. I read The Word he loved, gracious as dew of Hermon Or the oil that covered Aaron: “The Lord Bless thee and keep thee … make his face To shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee:The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee And give thee peace.” Almost unseeing I trace The signature; then wordlessly his life Shines as from an illuminated page:Strangely he speaks who has no need of utterance,Who, having blessed, is bathed eternally In fuller light than shines upon the land.
-RACHEL CROWN
- More fromJohn H. Gerstner
Cover Story
Frederick S. Leahy
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
The year 1959 marks the 450th anniversary of the birth of John Calvin and the 400th anniversary of the third and final edition of his Institutes. In a day when the “social gospel” has been placarded before the world, it is perhaps pertinent to stress that there is but one Gospel and this Gospel has its social implications. Fallen man is essentially a sinner, and any “social gospel” which does not deal in a radical manner with his sin is no gospel at all—it is “good advice” rather than “good news.” On the other hand, if the Gospel is preached without any reference to its clear social implications, then it is not being proclaimed in all its fullness. Man is a social being, and the Gospel, which is addressed to the totality of his being, has its social dimension.
Misappropriating Calvin
Frequently we witness complete misunderstandings of the Reformed faith in relation to the social needs of man. Trevor Huddleston, in his disturbing and challenging book, Naught for Your Comfort, writes:
The truth is that the Calvinistic doctrines upon which the faith of the Afrikaner is nourished contain within themselves—like all heresies and deviations from Catholic truth—exaggerations so distorting and so powerful that it is very hard indeed to recognise the Christian faith they are supposed to enshrine. Here, in this fantastic notion of the immutability of race, is present in a different form the predestination idea: the concept of an elect people of God, characteristic above all else of John Calvin.
Huddleston goes on to argue that this idea has been transplanted from its European context, and subconsciously “narrowed still further to meet South African preconceptions and prejudices.” “Calvinism,” he says, “with its great insistence on ‘election,’ is the ideally suitable religious doctrine for white South Africa” (pp. 63 f). Here is a serious accusation which cannot be lightly dismissed. The present writer does not agree that the doctrine of election is the ideological root of the unchristian treatment of blacks anywhere: whites who hold Arminian doctrines would be prone to racial prejudice, too. And if Calvinistic whites have tried to justify their anti-black policy by hiding behind election, that is neither the fault nor the consequence of the doctrine. In Britain we sometimes hear the criticism that extreme individualism, with the tenet that “a man’s home in his castle,” is really a fruit of Calvinism, which is thus virtually represented as being anti-social—to that we shall return.
John Calvin was too big a man for any ism: he knew that Truth could not be dissected, or contained by any man-made filing system. When we turn to the man himself, what do we find? We discover a remarkable social consciousness which can be easily detected in at least three spheres.
Social Consciousness In Theology
In the last chapter of the Institutes, Calvin considers the question of civil government and maintains that “the spiritual kingdom of Christ and civil government are things very widely separated.” This does not mean that “the whole scheme of civil government is matter of pollution, with which Christian men have nothing to do,” and we must remember that the State has the same Lord as the Church. The Christ who is Head of the Church is Lord of this world. This point in Calvin’s theology has been well stressed by Dr. Wilhelm Niesel (The Theology of Calvin, pp. 229 f). Calvin saw all things under Christ for the well-being of the Church. His view of the State, as a divine institution, was the highest possible and he quotes such passages as “By me kings reign, and princes decree justice” (Prov. 8:15). Magistrates, in Calvin’s view, “have a commission from God” and “are invested with divine authority” (Institutes, IV, 20, 4). Here Calvin’s argument, as always, is well buttressed with Scripture.
The implications of this doctrine for today are as vital as they are relevant. First, the Communist doctrine of the State is immoral in that (a) it makes the State exist for its own sake and (b) it has no conception of serving in any way whatever the well-being of Christ’s Church. Second, the same ideology is anti-social because it makes the State absolutely sovereign. Calvin really taught what Abraham Kuyper termed “sphere sovereignty”—i.e., family, Church and State are sovereign in their own sphere and while bound to respect and help each other must not encroach on each other’s sanctity—but all are equally subject to the sovereignty of Christ. Thus the sovereignty of Christ is the only safeguard against tyranny, and Calvin declares: “The Lord, therefore, is the King of kings. When he opens his sacred mouth, he alone is to be heard, instead of all and above all. We are subject to the men who rule over us, but subject only in the Lord. If they command anything against Him let us not pay the least regard to it …” (Institutes, IV, 20, 32). The Gospel in the hands of Calvin was, among other things, social dynamite.
Heinrich Quistorp has drawn attention to the social implications of Calvin’s eschatology (Calvin’s Doctrine of Last Things, pp. 162 f.). He shows clearly that Calvin viewed earthly government as only a temporary arrangement. The consummation of the reign of Christ will mean the end of all other rule and authority, including rule which at present is based on divine authority. Thus Calvin’s social application of the Gospel could never be called a “social gospel.” Its ultimate orientation was indisputably eschatological.
Preaching And The Social Thrust
Calvin’s preaching was expositional, and it impinged upon the lives of the people; in a word, it was relevant, and consequently effective. “Calvin’s preaching,” writes Leroy Nixon, “was a big factor in changing the character of the city of Geneva from a city of doubtful moral standing to one of the cleanest, most moral and most intellectual cities of Europe” (John Calvin—Expository Preacher, p. 66).
It is sometimes said that Calvin is responsible for much of today’s “isolationism” in society—men living selfishly in their own homes, neglecting their fellow-men. Well, listen to this:
He has joined us together and united us in order that we may have a community; for men ought not to entirely separate themselves. It is true that our Lord has appointed the policy that each one shall have his house, that he shall have his household, his wife, his children, each one will be in his place; yet no one ought to except himself from the common life by saying, “I shall live to myself alone.” This would be to live worse than as a brute beast (Sermon on Job 19:17–25).
In the same sermon Calvin says: “God has joined them all together (as we have said) and they ought not to separate themselves from each other.…”
If we turn to Calvin’s commentaries on the Hebrew prophets, we again see his insight into the historical setting of their ministry, and his own social consciousness is thus revealed. Joel is a good example of this, so is Isaiah. In Isaiah, chapter one, we read of a people who were orthodox and most religious, but because of their social sins their very prayers wearied God. Calvin comes to this passage with piercing insight and lays bare the burden of Isaiah.
Social Impact Of His Life
Calvin’s own life was a witness to the sincerity of his social concern. He himself was a poor man. In the Rue des Chanoines the great preacher of God’s Word lived in the utmost simplicity. T. H. L. Parker well says that Calvin “lived without financial worry, but he did not get rich at Geneva’s expense” (Portrait of Calvin, p. 69). His fearless devotion in visiting the diseased when the plague struck Geneva in 1542, and despite the Council’s prohibition, again reveals the love and unselfishness of the man. He did not belong to the Dives class of men.
Whatever men may say of Calvin’s attempted theocracy, it cannot seriously be denied that ere he died Geneva was, to quote James Orr, “the astonishment of Christendom for civil order, administration of justice, pure morals, liberal learning, generous hospitality and the flourishing state of its arts and industries” (The Reformers, p. 260). Calvin aimed at making Geneva a city of God, and of that city John Knox declared: “In other places I confess Christ to be truly preached; but manners and religion to be so sincerely reformed I have not yet seen in any other place beside” (McCrie, Life of Knox). In Geneva, Calvin had to grapple with sexual immorality which was rampant and open, widespread drunkenness and gambling. Calvin has been wrongly blamed for harsh measures: the truth is that he found a fairly severe form of legislation in existence—and little wonder—and he brought to bear upon it his own high ideals and convictions regarding a godly and sober life for the individual and nation. Those who pour calumny on Calvin, or “frame” his faults, do not always admit that this man made Geneva a model township with clean streets, proper drainage, health regulations, hospitals and schools. Distressed to see little children falling out of windows, he had the herald proclaim that houses should have rails and shutters. Industries such as silk, velvet and wool owed their foundation in Geneva to him.
Moral Influence Survives
We might, in conclusion, note that Calvinism in history, active in the Huguenots, Puritans, Covenanters and others, has maintained its moral influence. N. S. McFetridge’s Calvinism in History (Presbyterian Board of Publication, Philadelphia, 1882) is still an invaluable aid to this side of our subject; it needs to be read again today.
The principles manifest in Calvin’s Geneva would take definite issue with unworthy facets of modern capitalism and labor, and with Apartheid, and the unbiblical otherworldliness of “fundamentalism.” Whatever mistakes Calvin may have made, he seriously endeavored to apply biblical principles to contemporary society, and he achieved, under God, remarkable success. Are we as frank and courageous to acknowledge the social implications of the Gospel and to grapple with current evils? We need not turn to the “social gospel”—indeed we dare not—but we must return to the full Gospel that was preached and applied by Calvin. And as, in imagination, we hear the bells of St. Pierre peal over the waters of Lake Léman, while the herald recites the official proclamation of the reign of God in the city of Geneva to the great multitude standing in Molard Square, do the portentous words not find at least a prayer in the hearts of evangelical Christians in our modern times?:
In the name of Almighty God. That whereas the preservation of the Holy Gospel of Our Lord Jesus Christ in all its purity is the highest of human actions, we, the Syndics and the Councils, greater and lesser, of the city of Geneva ordain as follows: There shall be established in our city a government in accord with the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.
END
Frederick S. Leahy is an alumnus of Free Church College, Edinburgh, and minister of the Reformed Presbyterian Church of Ireland—a church which inherits the ideals of the Scottish Covenanters and insists on the Crown Rights of Christ in civil as well as ecclesiastical causes. For several years he was editor of The Protestant. His present charge is in Belfast.
- More fromFrederick S. Leahy
Cover Story
F. R. Webber
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
Most of us are confronted by two kinds of years. The business year, extending from January 1 to December 31, has certain holidays, such as New Year’s Day, Memorial Day, Independence Day, and Labor Day. Then there is the traditional Christian Year which begins four Sundays before Christmas. It has holidays of its own: Christmas Day, Epiphany, Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, Easter Day, Ascension Day, Pentecost, and Trinity Sunday. Where the civil year has its spring, summer, autumn and winter seasons, the Christian Year has its Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lenten, Easter, and Trinity seasons.
Some 34,500,000 people in America observe the complete Christian Year. This Christian Year is almost as old as Christianity itself. Episcopalians, Lutherans and Roman Catholics have governed their church services and their preaching by it for centuries. It is said that these denominations hold so firmly to the Christian Year that during the late war, when a troop ship was torpedoed, a chaplain, remembering that it was January 6, opened his pocket Bible and turned quickly to Isaiah 60:1–6, and to Matthew 2:1–12, and read the appointed lessons for the Epiphany festival as the ship went to the bottom.
Due to the influence of Puritanism, the traditional Christian Year ceased to be observed by many of the major denominations. About the year 1840, the Rev. H. C. Schwan created a city-wide sensation in Cleveland by conducting a Christmas Day service, complete with a Christmas tree and candles. A decade later the people of Butler county, Pennsylvania, were horrified when a Protestant congregation celebrated Easter Day with special music and an appropriate sermon. In each case much was said about “immigrants who insisted upon introducing strange European customs into America.”
Today Episcopalians, Lutherans, and Roman Catholics observe the full Christian Year as they have been doing for centuries. Many other denominations have restored a partial Christian Year. It follows the traditional pattern from Advent to Pentecost. From then on a season known as Kingdomtide is observed instead of the traditional Trinity season.
The purpose of the Christian Year is to keep Christian worship and preaching strictly Christ-centered. Each Sunday and weekday festival has its appointed Scripture lessons. These are called the “standard periscopes,” and they do not vary from year to year. Romans 13:11–14 and St. Matthew 21:1–9 will be read on the first Sunday in Advent in 1958, just as they were on the same day in 1858, 1758, and for centuries on back. The same is true of every Sunday in the year. From Advent to Ascension Day our Saviour’s earthly life is presented in chronological order, and during the second half of the year, his Parables, Miracles, and Teachings are the appointed themes.
The fixed Scripture lessons are always a selection from one of the four Gospels, together with a lesson from one of the Epistles, and occasionally (as on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday), a portion of one of the Prophecies. Not only that, but each Sunday has a definite theme for the day. This theme is announced at the start of the service by the Introit. This is composed of two or more Scripture verses, and it is read by the clergyman or sung by the choir.
The Epistle for the day is read, and the choir arises and sings the Gradual. This is in anthem form, and in the words of Scripture, and the theme for the day is announced once more by means of it. Books of Graduals, with their proper music, still exist.
After the Gospel for the day is read, a Collect follows. This is a short prayer reiterating the theme of the day. Then three or four hymns appropriate to the day’s theme are sung by choir and congregation.
With the theme for the day reiterated again and again by means of the Introit, Epistle, Gradual, Gospel, Collect, and in the sermon and the hymns, there is a unity of structure that fixes the central thought of the day firmly in the minds of the congregation. It is almost impossible to hear anything but Christ-centered preaching in churches where the Christian Year is followed.
Advent, with its four Sundays, prepares the worshiper for Christmas. It begins with the theme “Behold, thy King cometh.” On the following Sunday the theme is “Behold, He shall come again.” On the third Sunday the theme is John the Baptist’s question, “Art Thou He that should come?” On the fourth Sunday it is “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.”
Christmas Eve, Christmas Day, and the Sunday after Christmas are centered upon the Nativity. On this first of the major festivals the church is decorated with Christmas greens, and there is a tree. The choir is at its best, and the old, familiar Christmas hymns echo throughout the church. The story of the watching shepherds is told, and the service reaches a great climax with the words of the angels, “Glory to God in the Highest, and on earth peace, good will toward men.”
Epiphany (from epiphania), means “to make manifest.” The Festival of the Epiphany falls on January 6. Scripture lessons, prayers, hymns, and sermon are centered upon the visit of the wise men from the East, and the congregation is assured that the Christ Child came not only for the Jews, but for the Gentile nations as well. There are from one to six Sundays after Epiphany, and on each of these some “manifestation” or epiphany of the Saviour is the theme. His wisdom was manifested to the doctors in the temple, his glory at Cana of Galilee, his grace to the Capernaum centurion, his omnipotence was shown in stilling the storm on Galilee, and his heavenly splendor was seen on the Mount of Transfiguration. The Epiphany season is, by tradition, a missionary season, and the people are reminded again of the Christian’s obligation to make known the saving grace of Jesus Christ to all nations.
There is a Pre-Lenten cycle of three Sundays, called Septuagesima, Sexagesima and Quinquagesima, and on these the nature of our Lord’s kingdom and his ministry is presented.
Lent begins with Ash Wednesday, which is 46 days before Easter. There is a noonday service in city churches and at least an evening service in village churches and in the country.
During the Lenten season it is customary, where the Christian Year is followed, to meet for worship not only on Sunday, but on Wednesday evening as well. At the mid-week service the Passion history is read and expounded. This is nothing more nor less than a harmony of the four Gospels beginning with Gethsemane and ending with Calvary. This Passion history is printed in full in the altar book and in many hymnals. It is divided into seven or eight parts. It requires about 15 minutes to read one part. Lenten hymns of great solemnity are sung, and there is a sermon on one of the parts of the Passion history. Our Lord’s steps are followed to Gethsemane, then to the halls of Annas, Caiaphas, Herod and Pilate, and from thence to Calvary. Churches are, as a rule, filled to capacity at these mid-week services, and on Maundy Thursday and Good Friday. The very nature of the theme tells us why. Every service is Christ-centered and Redemption-centered throughout.
On Palm Sunday, of course, the theme is the Triumphal Entry. Somber Lenten hymns and organ music give way for an hour to the joyous hosannas of the multitude. Palms are distributed at the close of the service by churches of all denominations, where such an innovation would have proved scandalous to our fathers.
On Maundy Thursday attention is called to the institution of the Lord’s Supper, and the service usually closes with a celebration of Holy Communion.
On Good Friday the one solemn theme is our Lord’s death upon the cross. On that day churches are traditionally stripped of all color, bells are not rung, and the playing of the organ is reduced to an absolute minimum. Many churches, during the last few years, have had their Tre-Ore service from noon until 3 p.m. Our Lord became our Substitute in respect to the demands of the Law, keeping it perfectly for us. In like manner did he become our Substitute in respect to the penalty of the Law, which demands death as the wages of sin. This is given utmost stress on Good Friday.
Easter Day is celebrated in every land, and its theme, is, of course, the risen triumphant Saviour. It is the second of the great festivals. There are six Sundays after Easter, then Ascension Day, then the festival of Pentecost, when the theme is the descent of the Holy Ghost. Among Protestants, Trinity Sunday comes on the following Sunday, and the subject is the visit of Nicodemus, with special attention to St. John 3:16–17.
It is well to observe the 22 to 27 Sundays after Trinity in the manner of the traditional Christian Year, thus keeping the life and teachings of the Lord Jesus in the foreground, 52 Sundays a year.
The Christian Year has its disadvantages. Old Testament texts do not lend themselves to it, although it is easy enough to use Old Testament men and incidents as illustrations. Popular modern Sundays often conflict with some important church festival, but not many clergymen would ignore Pentecost in favor of Fire Prevention Sunday or Father’s Day.
The Christian Year has its advantages. Clergymen, organist and choir know just what the theme will be on any Sunday of the year. There is no such thing as wondering what to preach about. Then the reiteration of a single theme throughout the service on a given Sunday gives it structural form, and has a decided pedagogical effect upon the people. They simply cannot miss the theme for the day. More important still is the fact that the centuries-old traditional series of Gospels and Epistles results in Christ-centered preaching throughout the year, especially when the entire traditional series is used. Those who will give the Christian Year a fair trial will wonder why they ever became slaves to a series of unrelated free texts.
END
F. R. Webber served the Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) for 30 years as Secretary of the Architectural Committee. He has written A History of Preaching in Britain and America.
- More fromF. R. Webber
Cover Story
Carlos Greenleaf Fuller
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
One Sunday morning during years of graduate study I went with friends to hear a preacher of international reputation. Each week people of all ages overflowed the large sanctuary to hear this pulpit master.
He spoke with disarming directness that was most appealing. Each well-modulated and carefully-chosen word held the vast audience in rapt attention. It would have been hard to have excelled his power of enunciation and words of articulate beauty.
The organization and illustration of his ideas made an intense impact upon all of us. With complete mastery of thought and bearing, he massed his ideas to move with accumulating power to a dramatic end. As a young student I knew that in the realm of communication, I was sitting at the feet of an artist. I felt great respect and admiration for the unparalleled skill with which he presented truth. Obviously his artistry had been perfected through hours of faithful preparation.
I came away from that memorable service saying, “What a man!”
That Sunday night, we went to hear another preacher of international reputation. He spoke with deliberate simplicity. He had pruned away eccentricity. He was earnest, honest, sincere, and full of conviction.
I can still see the simple but dynamically effective gesture with which he drove home a classic quotation from Shakespeare that made his point about Scripture truth unforgettable. At no place was there a false note. In construction and presentation it was flawless. What he said so simply and directly created an atmosphere of reverence. Our eager minds were fed with beauty and truth. The power of his utterance is seen in the fact that after several decades I recall it so vividly.
I came away from that unforgettable service saying, “What a message!”
After 30 years in the pastorate I recall those two men as I find myself asking again, “How does one preach with power?” I ask it because a plenitude of outstanding preachers in every denomination across the nation and the world has made so slight an impression today upon the steady trend of division among nations.
If thousands of pulpits, large and small, were week by week preaching with biblical power, would the condition of our world be as serious as it now is?
Millions of people sit in church pews each Sunday and listen to varying degrees of competent preaching. But if such preaching had been with Old Testament prophetic power, would not those millions have been shaken to the very core of their being? If such preaching had been in the New Testament power that Peter and Paul preached, would not millions of people have been prostrated with penitence in the churches? Would they not leave the sanctuaries like conquering spiritual giants? Would not true revival be a continuing experience week by week in every church, where young and old sought and found transforming redemption?
Why is it that with new churches being erected on every hand and an unprecedented church membership and attendance, there is an equally steady decline of good relations among nations? Would not great spiritual power generated each Sunday in our churches be reflected in new and sincere forms of conciliation among leaders and nations?
The Pulpit Last Sunday
As one who must acknowledge personal responsibility for his share in this state of affairs, I am forced to search my own heart in the face of the swift tide of world events. What power has emerged from my preaching?
Of the hundreds I received into church membership, a painfully small percentage have manifested in daily life the revolutionary influence of the redemptive grace of Jesus Christ.
I could defend myself by listing systematic hours of study I did each week. I could explain the care with which I persisted in organizing and writing out my sermons in detail. I could name the time I spent in going over sermons before delivering them in the pulpit, in order to present my thoughts with reasonable effectiveness. I could tell of hours of earnest prayer and devotional study of the Bible that was a background for sermon preparation.
But the fact remains that despite normal sincerity of effort and modest care in preparation, the numbers of individuals deeply shaken by my messages are not hard to enumerate. I never had anything happen as a result of my preaching comparable to the New Testament records of the early disciples. If what happened when Peter and Paul preached was a reproducible experience under any similar preaching, then to a measurable degree I should have been preaching with the same kind of power. But I know that I was not preaching with the power that the redemption of Jesus Christ demands. Why wasn’t I?
Preaching For Converts
As I try to assess the reason for my failure to preach with power, I recall the preaching under which I was led to make my public confession of Jesus Christ. As a 15-year-old high school junior I had gone with boyhood friends to church and Sunday School. Often it was a social activity, and my response was indifferent.
Then two village churches brought an evangelist and his singing helper to our community for a five weeks series of special meetings. The large invitation sign outside the church where the meetings were to begin attracted only a passing glance from me. But because in that small town there was limited excitement, and because some of my friends were curious enough to attend, I went along.
The speaker was a humble man but deeply dedicated. And even as a skeptical lad, I could detect no hypocrisy in his manner or speech. He spoke with love and tenderness of the Saviour who obviously was the center of his affection and the power of his joyful life. As I write at this late date I can still feel the wholesomeness that radiated from his physical appearance, his calm presence, and his spoken words. His heart seemed so thoroughly clean, and it was something far deeper than the self-righteous “cleanliness” of a fastidious man. I did not understand then the commanding power of a Holy Spirit-filled life. But I could not deny its compelling attraction.
What he said troubled me. I concealed my sudden inner turmoil from friends and family, yet I continued to attend the meetings. The searching effect of his simple but powerful talks inwardly split me in two. I was getting a look at myself, such as I had never had, and what I saw inside was deeply disgraceful. I was not the self-sufficient, care-free fellow I thought I was. Vanity, pride, and conceit showed up in the mirror which that man held up to my life. I was in misery.
One Sunday afternoon I lingered at the church after the congregation had departed. My pastor was alert to my condition. He put his arm around me as we talked together in a church pew. Then before I knew it, we were on our knees together in that pew. My tortured spirit gave way before the Lord of Love. Penitent tears were followed by a flood of joy and peace which I could not then understand or explain, but which has never been swept from my life by succeeding years of crisis and decision.
I came away from church that day saying, “What a Master! What a God! What a Saviour!”
I had heard preaching with power!
Death And Resurrection
With deep contrition I confess how slow I have been through the years to grasp the secret of such power.
In daily life that modest preacher whom God used to open my eyes and heart to redemptive grace lived where Peter and Paul lived, which Paul explains in such detail in the New Testament. He lived daily in an abiding death and resurrection union with Christ.
This twofold message of the Cross that the old nature of man must abide in the death union with Christ at the Cross in order that he may abide in the resurrection power was natural to preach because he lived it.
Another apostolic element in that preacher’s life was that he expounded Spirit-wielded Scripture. Though he had had training and learning, he made no effort to preach in the wisdom of man. The Bible was God’s revelation, and since his own life was based on that unshakable conviction, he spoke in the pulpit with great humility and holy boldness. His “thus saith the Lord” carried spiritual power.
One other element in that man’s presentation was redemptive-based prayer. He knew that power in prayer was not based on human need but upon the redemption of Jesus Christ. So when he prayed, the Holy Spirit winged his words into my heart and gave me the greatest blessing that a young man can know.
But, above all, in true apostolic succession, he made clear the meaning of the vicarious atonement of Jesus Christ. He proclaimed the truth of Scripture that Christ died for my sins, that Christ was my substitute upon the Cross, that his death was a substitutionary sacrifice, bearing the penalty of my personal sin. My acceptance, in penitence and faith, of this unmerited gift of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God, was my regeneration. And then, joyfully, he proclaimed the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ as the unshakable rock of my Christian faith.
If all of my preaching had been on those central apostolic truths of Christian grace, I know that today there would be more spiritual power to resist the tide of division and confusion in our distracted world. If such Bible-based preaching had been done in all our churches during the past decades, I have a strong conviction that much of the present division between nations would have been healed. I wonder what would happen now if all our churches returned to apostolic preaching?
END
Carlos Greenleaf Fuller holds the A.B. degree from Colgate University, the B.D. from Union Theological Seminary (New York City), and M.A. from Teachers College, Columbia University. At 62 years of age, he is presently a retired Presbyterian minister and a frequent writer on religious themes.
- More fromCarlos Greenleaf Fuller
John H. Gerstner
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
The question with which we concern ourselves in this article is why some men are ever learning and never knowing (2 Tim. 3:7). We think the reason is that truth brings pain to the corrupt heart of fallen man. The entrance of divine light on the darkness of the fallen soul is like the application of iodine to an open sore. People have an aversion to pain. If truth brings pain, people will have an aversion to truth.
So it is that some are ever learning and never knowing. They have experience after experience with truth but never grow in knowledge, because they are always fleeing rather than coming to it. The more they learn, consequently, the less of the truth they know. Thus as the sensitive eye shuts itself ever tighter to the light as more light falls upon it, so the blind eye of the soul closes more and more as divine truth comes to it. It seems paradoxical that more light should bring more darkness and more truth more ignorance, but it is not so when we consider that the eye of the soul reacts adversely to the entrance of light. The more light enters, the more negatively the soul will react.
But there seems to be a problem. Is it not a fact that some unsound persons actually do know a great deal about Christianity, however much an exception to the rule they may be? It is a fact indeed. But how is it then, if they themselves never come to a knowledge of the truth, they do learn some of it? The explanation, it seems to me, is that such people wrest the Scriptures so as to be able to rest in them. And this wresting is done several ways, three of which are fashionable in our day. I will briefly mention them.
The first way in which Scripture can be wrested is by simple misinterpretation. For convenience, let us call this the man-on-the-street’s way of avoiding the truth. Consider what multitudes of people have in mind when the word “Christianity” is mentioned. It is a religion which teaches a very vague, bland sort of supreme being who does nothing but smile through all eternity and looks with great pleasure on all men. He never becomes angry for more than a moment, because his mercy reminds him that it is not dignified for him to lose his temper. This glorious being regards all men as his children, even those who seem wicked but are actually only misguided. Sin is a nasty word and is not associated with this religion.
Jesus, according to this view, was a wonderful man who loved everyone, was full of sweetness and light, and always entertained the loveliest views of man and the future. This Jesus died because certain men did not quite understand what he was up to. Jesus died forgiving everybody and showing us all how we ought to be devoted to this grand philosophy of faith in man and God.
Now when someone comes to the door to ask a person what his religion is, and that person says he is a Christian, it is altogether possible that this is what he has in mind. A person, even a very scholarly person, could read the Bible and all his life be learning this type of religion more and more. He would be ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.
The second kind of wresting of Scripture is a more subtle thing. We may call this the liberals’ way of avoiding the truth. That is to say, they make the Bible’s supernatural content to appear unhistorical, non-factual. Heaven is not a place, miracles never happened, and Adam and Eve never lived in a garden or any place else for that matter. Now who is afraid of a myth? If Scriptural light hurts the eyes of the wicked, it cannot hurt once it is shown to be merely mythological. If some readers, when myth is mentioned, think of Bultmann and Neo-orthodoxy, let me say that I think Bultmann’s “demythologizing” is the point at which Neo-orthodoxy is tending to revert to Liberalism.
Let me illustrate this liberal theory in action by an analogy. Jonathan Edwards is more often compared to the Italian poet Dante than to any other single person, even though Edwards never wrote a stick of verse. The thing that we are interested to notice is that when Edwards’ Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God reminds people of Dante’s Inferno, they claim that they enjoy Dante but cannot enjoy Edwards. In many cases they admire Dante and reprobate Edwards. Now why? The answer, I think, is exceedingly simple. Critics think, at least, that Dante did not represent or intend to represent truth, but myth. After all, the great poem bears many of the marks of the facetious: does the author not populate hell with personal enemies? Do we not recognize particular Florentines at various cantos in Inferno? Surely Dante did not picture an actual hell when he made such representations. And being relieved at this point, we can rather enjoy the spectacle since we don’t have to take it factually. Edwards on the contrary is a preacher of the Word; his message is an exposition of Scripture. There are no personal grievances in any part of the sermon. In broad, general, solemn terms he represents the fate of all men who persist in wickedness. One cannot enjoy his account of hell, at least not if he catches the sincere mood of the preacher. One knows that with Edwards this is no myth being expounded. His description of hell is no more terrible than Dante’s, but with the latter there is a more symbolic tone, is less factual and more palatable.
One last way of learning and never coming to the knowledge of the truth or wresting the Scriptures so that they do not hurt is by making the content of the Word, not the interpretation merely, fluid rather than fixed. If we need not fear a myth, neither need we fear something which cannot be defined. If truth is never stationary, if it is relative and not the same yesterday, today, and forever, then while it may be unpleasant at the moment we can easily take the sting out of it by the assurance that this truth is here today and gone tomorrow. Better than that we can say it is here this minute and gone the next. Better even than that we can say it is not here even this instant, for as soon as we say it is here, we fix it and this is not possible, and so as soon as we say it is here, it is no longer here (if it ever was here). Of all the ways of avoiding the knowledge of truth, this is the most up-to-date; and if one wants to be in the metaphysical swim of things he need only dive into the ever-flowing river of changing truth.
So it is a very sorry possibility for men to be ever learning and never coming to the knowledge of the truth. And since this disposition is not utterly destroyed at conversion, it behooves everyone constantly to be on the alert lest with all his getting he should fail to get wisdom. Archbishop Temple stated “The purpose of an open mind is to close it on something.” And that something, I add, should be the knowledge of the truth.
- More fromJohn H. Gerstner
L. B. Smedes
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
Baptism And Lord’S Supper
Sacramental Teaching and Practice in the Reformation Churches, by G. W. Bromiley (Eerdmans, 1957, 111 pp., $1.50), is reviewed by L. B. Smedes, Professor of Bible at Calvin College.
The title of G. W. Bromiley’s contribution to Eerdman’s Pathway Series would lead the reader to expect an historical study of sacramental theology in the Reformed churches. This is not his intention, however, as he makes clear in his foreword. He tells us that he has attempted more of a biblical than an historical statement. But as one reads, he discovers a marked ambivalence in regard to both the biblical and historical approach. And as a result, the reader is sometimes hard put to know whether a given view is being put forward as representative of historical Reformation thinking or whether it is the author’s independent exegesis. This is doubtless a weakness in the book’s plan. The work would have been even more valuable than it is had the author stuck more relentlessly to his biblical study and used the exegesis of reformation scholars to buttress his own conclusions. This is only to say that Dr. Bromiley’s method makes it difficult to know how to assess his otherwise creative and instructive discussion of the two sacraments.
The book does very little theologizing on the nature of sacraments in general. Yet it is one of the best English studies of the sacraments to come out of evangelical circles in recent years. There is Dr. Oscar Cullman’s monograph on baptism in the New Testament—on which Dr. Bromiley appears to lean in places—but that is not really an English work. Another Anglican theologian, Dr. E. L. Mascall, wrote a book on the sacraments a few years back called Corpus Christi which had its own merits. But Mascall’s penchant is for the newer Roman Catholic sacramentalism, while Bromiley thinks steadily along Reformation lines. Surely Bromiley’s book is much sturdier stuff than the posthumous study of Sacramental Theology by the late Don Baillie.
The most challenging feature in this book is Bromiley’s discussion of baptism. The author draws a strict antithesis between the subjective and objective references in baptism. He chooses for a consistently objective point of view. Both Roman Catholic and anabaptist theology understand the reference of baptism as subjective. The Roman Catholic sees baptism as effecting a work done in the baptized person by the Holy Spirit. The anabaptist sees baptism as a testimony to a work done in the baptized person at least in part by the baptized person. Bromiley would have the reference of baptism to be wholly apart from anything that happens in the baptized person. Baptism refers only to the work of Jesus Christ on the Cross.
The Cross, says Bromiley apparently following the exegesis of Oscar Cullmann, was our Lord’s baptism for us all. Our baptism attests to His baptism for us. Our baptism refers, then, not to what God does in us, but to what He did for us. The baptized person is not buried and raised with Christ when he is baptized. He was buried and raised with Christ in His baptism—the Cross and Resurrection. Our baptism attests the objective fact of Christ’s death for us. It signifies the objective fact that we were representatively in Christ back there outside the gate of Jerusalem. It does not attest to a subjective or mystical experience of our own.
In this sense baptism is an effective sign. It really works. It really does something rather than merely signifying something. But this means that our Lord’s baptism—the Cross—really works, really does something. Our baptism only summons us to respond in obedience to His baptism. “The real work of baptism is not a subjective work in us; it is the objective work accomplished in Christ for us” (p. 47).
This consistently objective approach shifts the focus on an old problem concerning baptism, especially infant baptism. Dr. Bromiley discusses the Roman Catholic way of dealing with post-baptismal sin—penitence. But the Reformed view has a problem of its own. If baptism is a seal on the child that he belongs to God, what about those who later lapse into permanent disbelief? Was the seal not a real seal, or was it broken? Was the child in the covenant when baptized or was he not really in the covenant? Bromiley’s approach opens another possibility. The baptism of Christ—his death—for our sins cannot be annuled. There is nothing in the subjective status of the baptized person that has been effected by the sacrament, so there is nothing here that can be a problem. “The only problem of the post-baptismal sinner is that it is a denial of the true reality of the believer, a refusal to be what he is in Christ, or to act as such” (p. 50). A person’s baptism summons him to be what he is. If he refuses, he is acting as though he were not in Christ. But he cannot change what he actually is, a person objectively buried and raised with Christ.
What was said in the first paragraph about the ambivalence of the book’s method comes out here. Are we now to ask whether this objectivism is the teaching of the reformation churches? If so, we should have to be somewhat dubious. Surely Calvin did not avoid the Scylla of subjectivity by accepting the Charybdis of consistent objectivity. Calvin did indeed insist time and again that baptism is never to be isolated from the cross of Christ, that it has its meaning and effectiveness only in correlation to it. In this, Bromiley is on the side of the angels. But Calvin also clearly teaches that our baptism refers to the work of God in us, the washing of our souls. Christ was buried and raised for us—call this his baptism, if you will. But our washing or regeneration did not take place at Calvary. It does not take place in isolation from Calvary, but it does occur in us after Calvary. And our baptism refers to the remission of our sins and the washing of our souls. (See the Institutes IV/15/1 ff.) One is also inclined to ask whether Bromiley’s objectivism does not tend to remove the terrible urgency that lies in the possibility of a baptized person’s falling into real apostasy.
On the Lord’s Supper, Dr. Bromiley lucidly maintains the real presence of Christ in the sacrament. He yields nothing to the Roman Church in regard to the real presence, but rightly insists that, though very real, the presence is spiritual and that, though spiritual, the presence is very real. He underscores the truth that a presence in itself is profitless; it is only because it is the presence of the crucified Lord that the presence is spiritually of value. His exposition of the Roman Catholic view of the substantial presence is a gem of lucidity and a good example of theological fair-play. The chapter on the Eucharistic Sacrifice is not as successful.
One of the exciting parts of the book is the argument that the sacraments have compelling significance for the unity of the Church. In the stubborn refusal to go along with church unity schemes at the sacrifice of doctrinal principle, evangelical churches have sometimes ignored the appeal to church unity that is made in the very act of breaking the bread. Every time that we take the broken bread to our lips we confess that we are one body for we all eat of the one loaf. But we rise from the Lord’s table to insist that we are after all not one body. Or, we revert to the notion that while doing what the Lord commanded we are one body spiritually, but that we rise to accept the fact that we are not one body ecclesiastically. Bromiley’s strong words concerning the Supper’s inherent protest against denominationalism bear quoting:
That the loaf and cup must be one, that the new and true reality of Christians is life in the one body of Christ, demands that the old, sinful, defeated, and outdated reality of schism should be averted or healed as far as possible. The churches are to become and be what they are in Christ. The Lord’s Supper with its one loaf and one cup is a condemnation of their present structure with its many loaves and many cups, and a call to the reformation under the Word of God, … which will not mean the end of the congregations and therefore of diversity and richness, but will certainly involve the end of the kind of division against which we are warned already by Paul’s answer to incipient denominationalism in Corinth (p. 65).
To Dr. Bromiley, the sacrament of the one loaf and cup is our Lord’s own prohibition of needless denominationalism.
To this reviewer, an otherwise excellent book was impoverished by the total absence of notes and references, other than references to Bible passages. It would have aided the reader considerably had he been able to refer to Reformation theologians on points claimed by the author to be reformation thought. One is curious, for instance, to know whether Dr. Bromiley has discovered something in regard to baptism that has been otherwise missed, for instance, in Calvin. Again, there are occasions where the author evidently makes use of the work of contemporary scholars. It would have been helpful to the reader had Dr. Bromiley indicated where this was so. The use of notes and references does more than prove accuracy and acknowledge indebtedness. It helps promote a community of scholarship. It underscores the fact that no one stands alone in biblical study. Christian scholarship lives by fellowship and conversation. The judicious use of notes stimulates the conversation and enables the reader to follow it.
L. B. SMEDES
Diagnoses Without Cure
The Restoration of Meaning to Contemporary Life, by Paul Elmen (Doubleday, New York, 194 pp., $3.95), and The Man in the Mirror, by Alexander Miller (Doubleday, New York, 186 pp., $3.95), are reviewed by G. Aiken Taylor, Minister of First Presbyterian Church, Alexandria, La.
Every once in a while a book comes along which is notable, not so much for its theme or its thesis, as for the pure reading pleasure it affords. Of such is the first of these volumes. Here is the theme of Trueblood’s Predicament of Modern Man done in the modern, sophisticated manner. The author writes of the Exurbanite, dedicated to the metaphysics of Esquire magazine, who drives through the hills of Connecticut in his Volkswagon, to a home over the mantel of which hangs Vico’s sullen announcement: “We can know nothing that we have not made.” He wonders, through these delightful pages, if men are not hagridden, appalled by something they have not made.
The author paints delicate and effective word pictures to describe how life can be utterly boring when it is without meaning. He then recalls the frightful history of man’s inhumanity to point out how empty lives breed the horrors of hell. Finally, he offers his view of the manner in which meaning can be given to life only in God. The style is unusually readable:
“(The Byronic hero) comes from nowhere and is going nowhere; he is on the Grand Tour and has lost his itinerary. While he is in this town, in order not to die of inanition, he diverts himself with a seduction, particularly enjoying himself if the woman is married and a home is destroyed before he leaves. He kills time and does not even know how much else has died.”
Unfortunately, the author’s spiritual perception is not as acute as his philosophical. For him, the answer to man’s emptiness is “the Glory,” or the addition of the actual presence of God to life. But what is this “Glory?”
“The glory of all created things is in their possibility of becoming what they really are, that is to say, what God intended them to be.” This is the true glory of man. “The function of families, schools, governments and churches is to help him to discover his authentic individuality—and hence his glory.”
This was the glory Saul saw. In his vision on the Damascus road, Saul recognized his true identity—that he was not Saul but Paul. Thus he captured for himself the glory that Jesus had.
Is Jesus’ death important to the restoration of the meaning of life? Apparently not. The author doesn’t say so, but reading between the lines one concludes that the death of Jesus, as the death of a Stephen or a Polycarp, was actually irrelevent to the manner in which He possessed or manifested his glory, although it certainly underscored it, as did their martyrdoms.
What of the book? Its chapters on the glory reflect, in sophisticated speech, the effect of Pentecost and the beauty of the indwelling Spirit, but the author knows nothing of the personal theology of the Cross or of Pentecost. So his book, in the end, springs mightily towards the Son and falls flat on its face.
These two books are reviewed together because they belong to the same “Christian Faith Series” edited by Reinhold Niebuhr. It is not without significance that they brightly reflect the Niebuhrian ability to diagnose the ills of mankind without knowing exactly what to do about them. Such is the fault of the next work, to which is added a style which makes for hard reading.
The Man in the Mirror is about the restoration of self-hood. Essentially the pattern delineated is one of self-realization. Says the author:
“The self’s concern to understand itself is legitimate and inevitable. But to pursue it solely by introspection is self-defeating. Some discoveries are to be made that way … but the seductiveness of the introspective approach to the problems of the self derives in part from the fact that it feeds the self’s preoccupation with the self, and in part from the fact that it lends itself to endless self-deception.”
The author is perfectly willing to seek the solution of acute personality problems either through religion or without it. He tells the story of a profoundly disturbed, married member of his (Presbyterian!) church whose problem he reduced to a case history and sent to one psychotherapist who was a Christian and another who was an atheist. The solutions, when they came back, were identical and precisely what the man needed. The author tells this story to illustrate his contention that religion is not always necessary to successful personality adjustment. Knowing yourself, however, is.
To be sure one will get to know himself best if he has a good mirror in which to examine himself. Thus Christ is brought into the human situation, as a mirror in which man can best see what life ought to be. Christ is the true man, the “proper” Man. We are our true selves in the measure in which we are rightly related to him. The Christian proclamation of Jesus Christ is the proclamation of a true understanding of human nature and of our nature.
G. AIKEN TAYLOR
Popular Atlas
Atlas of the Bible, by L. H. Grollenberg (Thomas Nelson, New York, 1956, 166 pp., $15), is reviewed by Anton T. Pearson, Professor of O.T. Language and Literature at Bethel Theological Seminary.
Nelson’s Comprehensive Atlas of the Bible, by L. H. Grollenberg of the Dominican Order of Preachers, appearing originally in Dutch and French editions, has been translated into English by Joyce Reed of the University of Manchester, and edited by H. H. Rowley, distinguished Old Testament scholar and professor of Hebrew Language and Literature at Manchester. There is a brief foreword by W. F. Albright and H. H. Rowley.
Grollenberg, a lecturer at the Albertinum Theological Seminary at Nijmegen in Holland, has been a member of the French School of Biblical and Archeological Studies in Jerusalem, and for four seasons did excavation work at Tell el Farah, or Sharuhen, a Hyksos center to the south of Gaza.
This atlas contains 60,000 words of text, 408 photographs, many of them breath-taking, plus 35 eight color maps, 11 of which are full page (13¾ × 10¼ inches), 11 are half page, and 13 are smaller or inset maps. The maps have explanatory data superimposed in red. The 26-page index listing every town, village, mountain, valley, region, country, and people occurring in the Bible is invaluable. Modern Arabic names and alternate locations of sites are included in the index rather than on the maps. The spelling of the biblical names is that of the R.S.V. with cross references to the King James, Douay, and Knox versions.
After an introductory chapter, the author traces the chronological history of Israel from the patriarchs to the first century A.D. He holds that the Semites spread out from the Syrian Steppes rather than Noldeke’s Arabian Desert origin for them (maps 1, 5). “The stories of the patriarchs must be based on historical memories” (p. 35), and archeology demands revision of the old notions of the evolution of Israel’s law, history, and religion (p. 52). With Albright and G. E. Wright, he identifies Jebel Musa of the Sinai Peninsula as Mount Sinai, and dates the conquest of Canaan about the middle of the thirteenth century B.C.
He dates Ezra’s journey to Jerusalem in 458, after Nehemiah’s returns in 445 and 433, contrary to the view of most recent critics who follow Van Hoonacker and locate Ezra after Nehemiah, in the reign of Artaxerxes III, 398 B.C. (pp. 96, 100). He equates Daniel’s fourth empire with the Macedonian (pp. 102 f).
The rolling stone before a tomb, Luke’s accuracy, the pool with five porches not of pentagonal shape (pp. 132, 136) are among the many fascinating topics.
One senses neither a Roman Catholic nor a liberal bias in the volume. The book closes on a warm Christological, soteriological note (p. 139).
Written in non-technical language, this atlas will delight both pastors and laymen.
ANTON T. PEARSON
Essence Of Religion
The Primacy of Worship, by Von Ogden Vogt (Starr King, 175 pp., $5), is reviewed by Richard Allen Bodey, Minister of the Third Presbyterian Church of North Tonawanda, N. Y.
Von Ogden Vogt is a Congregational clergyman turned Unitarian, and now minister emeritus of the First Unitarian Society of Chicago. Through previous publications he has achieved recognition as an authority on the subject of worship and kindred themes.
The present volume grew out of the author’s concern over what he believes to be a widening and disastrous breach between the classical and scientific mind on the one hand, and Medieval and Reformation dogmatism on the other. The title pinpoints the thesis of the book, namely, that worship is the essence and center of valid religion. Vogt deplores all religion which revolves around doctrinal or moral creeds. He has an especial distaste for dogma which, he unconvincingly argues, “fosters obscurantism, encourages duplicity, confounds education, promotes aggression, disbars seekers, threatens social order, and stifles growth.” From his viewpoint, the only absolutes are the spirit (love) of truth, the spirit of goodness, and the spirit of beauty. Incomplete and distorted when isolated from one another, these are brought into their appropriate and harmonious relationship by the agency of worship; hence, the thesis.
Curiously enough, Vogt pretends to be a Christian, and includes a chapter here entitled “The True Christianity.” As should be expected, he conveniently clings to the antiquated distinction between the religion of Jesus and the religion about Jesus. He casts aspersion on New Testament texts which are incompatible with his theories, and blurs the obvious meaning of others by wresting them from their contexts. He defines true Christianity as the imitation of Jesus—not of his beliefs or his way of life, which he considers impossible—but of his character and calling, his sonship to God and saviourhood to men! He rejects the Messiahship of Jesus; compares his death to that of Socrates, Servetus, and Nathan Hale; restricts his resurrection to the spiritual sphere; equates human forgiveness with divine forgiveness; repudiates the concept of revelation; and capitulates to an anemic pantheism.
Abounding in fallacies, perhaps the most conspicuous one is this: the author fails to take note of the pivotal role of the intellect in both God and man. The result is his rejection of the fact of divine revelation of ultimate truth to man in comprehensible terms, and also his disdain for doctrine. His one grand achievement in these pages is simply that he forcefully demonstrates the sheer absurdity and irrationality of his own philosophical and religious tenets.
RICHARD ALLEN BODEY
Informative Work
Theology of the Old Testament, by Edmond Jacob (Harpers, 1958, 368 pp., $5), is reviewed by David W. Kerr, Professor of Old Testament at Gordon Divinity School.
The continued popularity of biblical theology in the Old Testament field is evident from the fact that this is the fifth title in that general area to come into the reviewer’s hands this year. Jacob is professor of Old Testament in the University of Strasbourg and this work is an English translation of his Théologie de l’Ancien Testament published in 1955.
Perhaps the most helpful feature of the book is its vast acquaintance with material published in Europe which has been unavailable to American seminarians and ministers, who seem to avoid foreign language studies. Those who would like to be brought up to date on recent scholarly thought in Old Testament theology can hardly do better than to read this book.
That is not to say that the evangelical reader will find his task thoroughly enjoyable. He will, probably, find it quite disagreeable at a number of points. The general view of the author is that of the comparative religions school with its several weaknesses. For instance, the meanings of words or terms in non-biblical sources may be used to interpret the Bible, to the neglect of statements in the Bible itself. Tsedek was a deity worshiped in Jerusalem served by the priesthood of Tsadok (or Zadok). The source for this conclusion is the El Amarna letters. According to the biblical account, Zadok was a priest of the Lord who officiated first at Gibeon, not at Jerusalem. Here is illustrated another weakness of some modern approaches to biblical theology, which is that they make the Bible say quite the opposite of what it does, as a matter of fact, say.
Jacob accepts the old Wellhausen view that the Law, in its literary form as a whole and in its origin in part, is later than the prophetic writings and is therefore not a unifying principle in the Old Testament. This means that the Mosaic covenant, which is used so often as a point of reference by the writers of the historical books as well as by the prophets, is relegated by him to the place of minor importance in the faith of the people. One must not be unkind in his judgment, of course, for it is not always easy to distinguish between what Israel’s faith was and what it should have been. It is clear, nevertheless, that for the writers of the Bible the Mosaic law and covenant precede the ministry and writings of the prophets and were considered normative for people and prophet alike.
The position is adopted in the book that El and Shaddai along with other titles for the Deity were originally different gods whose functions were later fused in the person and work of Yahweh.
While the author maintains that the Bible is revelational, one is left with a strong uneasiness that it is not in the least authoritative, since the purpose of biblical theology, it is said (p. 20), is to describe what the authors thought concerning divine things. One is reminded of the statement of a well-known liberal of this century who, in denying one of the Pauline teachings, said that his own thoughts of God had as much authority as the apostle’s.
It is hoped, however, that such criticism of Jacob’s position will not obscure the many excellencies of his work. The reader will gain some fine insights into the meanings of some biblical terms, especially where Jacob has used the Bible itself, in the absence of secular sources, as a key. There is a helpful discussion (p. 155) on the problem of corporate personality and the individual. There is a very suggestive presentation of the meaning of chesed, which is translated as “stedfast love” in the R.S.V. An interesting, if not at all conclusive, argument about the image of God is found on p. 168 ff. It is indeed satisfying to find a discussion of such classical passages as Genesis 49; 2 Samuel 7 and even Daniel 7 under category of the Messianic kingdom.
DAVID W. KERR
Madison Avenue Methods
Crisis in Communication, by Malcolm Boyd (Society for the Propagation of Christian Knowledge, London, 128 pp., 10/6), is reviewed by S. W. Murray of Belfast, Ireland.
The attitude of the Christian Church to the advent of mass media continues to provoke discussion and enquiry. Here we have an examination of mass media from one who worked in commercial radio before he was ordained to the Christian ministry.
The far-reaching activities of the Institute for Motivational Research in New York and the commercial advertizer have done much to shape the demand of the consumer in the modern world, and it might be questioned whether the presentation of the Christian Gospel would be appropriate to like methods. Indeed Dr. Dichter, president of the Institute, has pointed out that the departure of the public from its “puritan complex” had helped the power of three major sales appeals: desire for comfort, for luxury, and for prestige.
When the attack upon the human mind and emotions by all that Madison Avenue can devise comes to be regarded as exploitation, Boyd pertinently raises the question: “When does evangelism become exploitation. When is the church free to ‘exploit’ for Jesus Christ and the kingdom of God.” Dr. Billy Graham has answered: “Why should not the church employ some of these methods, that are used by big business or labor unions to promote their products or causes, in order to win men for Christ?”
Comparison is made between various methods of using the radio in communicating the Gospel. The primary objective of religious broadcasting in the words of the Director of religious broadcasting of the B.B.C. “is to communicate the Christian Gospel to listeners with whom the churches have few other effective means of contact.”
Boyd considers there have been few honestly effective church, radio, or TV presentations bearing in mind Gospel content and techniques. He instances the success of Bishop Fulton Sheen on TV as that of a “dynamic, intelligent personality, ideally suited to the video medium.” He concludes that the church must make full and wise use of the mass media of communication which are such a feature of the present generation.
S. W. MURRAY
Reference Handbook
An Introduction to Christian Education, by Peter P. Person (Baker Book House, 1958, 215 pp., $3.75), is reviewed by Tunis Romein, Professor of Philosophy at Erskine College, Due West, South Carolina.
Professor Person, teacher of psychology and Christian education at North Park College in Chicago, has written this book for college, Bible Institute, or seminary introductory courses in Christian education. The church school teacher should find it a useful book.
The text is partly a summary of the author’s lecture notes developed over a number of years in teaching Christian education courses. He has arranged a study outline at the beginning of each chapter as well as a concluding set of review questions at the end of each chapter. The content includes a wealth of information about Christian movements and agencies which makes the text not only appropriate for classroom use but also as a reference handbook for the student after he gets into the field. Some of the general topics discussed are: the Christian church, philosophies of Christian education, the Sunday church school, the vacation church school, the weekly church school, Christian youth camps, and so on.
Commendable is the author’s precaution to make clear the point of view from which the book is written, namely a conservative and evangelical standpoint, although he tries at the same time to avoid “being antagonistic toward more liberal educational philosophies and pedagogical patterns.” He also makes an effort to be “denominationally … neutral without denying the place and purpose of denominations.” These aims are evident throughout, but the result is sometimes a juxtaposition of secular psychological principles, progressive educational outlooks, and conservative Christian faith in a way which does not seem to indicate some of the tensions which exist between Christian faith and secular outlooks. Possibly a fuller acknowledgment of these stresses would also constitute valuable and stimulating aspects of an introduction to Christian education.
The author’s tolerant spirit and tendency toward eclecticism also manifests itself in his enthusiasm for recording lists of aims and objectives drawn from many sources, not the least of which must have been progressive educational texts. Most Christian education majors are probably not so fortunate as to escape some of the routine education courses in which aims and objectives are laboriously outlined for almost everything. And now yet another exposure to the same intellectual fare could conceivably dampen the enthusiasm of the Christian education initiate, especially if he is a superior student.
TUNIS ROMEIN
Religious Classics
In recent years publishers have been making available religious classics of which only few copies have previously existed. Many of these were written by Scotch and English Puritans of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. Although these works provide difficult reading (because they employ a scholastic style) the effort provides rich rewards. The classics abound with gold nuggets that will not only enrich the preaching of the minister but deepen his devotional life. The following are among the most recent reprints:
THE EPISTLE OF JUDE, by Thomas Manton (Banner of Truth Trust, London, 376 pp., $4.25). The late Bishop J. C. Ryle writes of Manton: “As a writer his chief excellence consists in the ease, perspicuousness and clearness of his style.… He is never trifling, never shallow, never wearisome, and never dull.” Manton’s work on Jude has never been surpassed for homiletical help.
AN EXPOSITION OF JOHN SEVENTEEN, by Thomas Manton (Sovereign Grace Book Club, Evansville, Indiana, 451 pp., $5.95). He who would know the mind and heart of the Lord as expressed in his high priestly prayer would do well to study this work of Manton. With love and deep reverence the author opens up the glorious and blessed truths of this intercessory passage.
HUMAN NATURE IN ITS FOURFOLD STATE, by Thomas Boston (Sovereign Grace Book Club, Evansville, Indiana, 360 pp., $4.95). The book treats of the four states of man: innocence, depravity, grace, and glory. This volume is heavy reading for those without theological background.
THE ATTRIBUTES OF GOD, by Stephen Charnock (Sovereign Grace Book Club, Evansville, Indiana, 802 pp., $8.95). Here is theology that gives people a deeper, richer knowledge of the living God. Those who would go beyond the superficial religious knowledge that characterizes the present century would do well to meditate on the attributes of God through the medium of this volume.
THE BOOK OF ZECHARIAH, AN EXPOSITION, by Thomas V. Moore (The Banner of Truth Trust, London, 251 pp., $3.25). Dr. Moore was Moderator of the General Assembly of the Southern Presbyterian Church in 1867. He brings great exegetical skill to this portion of God’s Word. Scholarship and devotion are blended together, and extravagant literalism is avoided.
THE SONG OF SOLOMON, by George Burrowes (The Banner of Truth Trust, London, 453 pp., $4.25). Dr. D. M. Lloyd-Jones of England writes: “It has everything that should characterize a good commentary—learning and scholarship, accuracy and carefulness, but, above all, and more important than all else, true spiritual insight and understanding. It provides a key to the understanding of the whole and of every verse, which the humblest Christian can easily follow.” A BODY OF DIVINITY, by Thomas Watson (The Banner of Truth Trust, London, 221 pp., $3.25). C. H. Spurgeon writes: “Thomas Watson’s ‘Body of Practical Divinity’ is one of the most precious of the peerless works of the Puritans. Watson was one of the most concise, racy, illustrative, and suggestive of those eminent divines who made the Puritan age the Augustan period of evangelical literature. There is a happy union of sound doctrine and experience.
- More fromL. B. Smedes
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
Latin America
1958 was communism’s year in Latin America. Facts apparent at year’s end: Stepped up activity of Soviet agents in Hispanic countries, and alarming indifference of public sentiment. In 1958 the Communist party (1) was legalized in Chile, (2) joined a coalition to elect a conservative president in Costa Rica; (3) helped oust a dictator in Venezuela; and (4) threw Argentina into a state of ferment.
Mexico is Latin America headquarters of Soviet infiltration. All Red satellite countries maintain large embassies in Mexico. The Russian embassy alone boasts a staff of over 900 trained operators. No one can guess how many agents are scattered throughout the continent. But their espionage and indoctrination are backed by a tidal wave of literature and propaganda.
Communists now publish 135 periodicals in Spanish and Portuguese (28 of these were launched in the last 12 months). Radio Moscow is on the air in Spanish 100 hours a week. Even Radio Peking devotes 14 hours weekly to Spanish propaganda.
More than 1700 Latin American travelers went behind the Iron Curtain in 1958—one-third of them to receive Soviet indoctrination.
In many Latin American countries, indoctrination schools for agents, sympathizers and children are conducted openly. Communist literature is distributed by mail. The hammer and sickle is a familiar sign on political posters and handbills.
An increasing tempo of Communist activities has been noted even since August, when Nikita Khrushchev and Mao Tse-Tung reportedly agreed to devote more attention to Latin America.
Target countries at present appear to be Venezuela and Argentina. In October, the Russian government granted Argentina a $100 million loan. And while most party expenses are borne locally, Vision magazine calculates that about $30 million (largely outside money) was spent in Argentina for propaganda last year. Argentine Communists are currently conducting a drive to boost total party membership from 80,000 to 100,000.
The arrest of Manuel Fortuny in Brazil highlighted the acute situation in Venezuela at election time. Fortuny, the exiled chief of the Communist party in Guatemala, has been traveling back and forth to Russia under assumed names.
He seems to be emerging as bossman of Latin American infiltration. On his last trip he had entered Argentina to cross into Brazil and Venezuela when caught by Rio de Janeiro police.
The purpose of his intended visit to Venezuela could be easily guessed. The Communist party, after joining hands with Catholics to depose dictator Perez Jimenez, became the strongest political factor in the pre-election confusion, leading and dominating the liberal groups. Venezuela has 30,000 registered Communists whose influence on the labor unions and universities was dramatically evident on the occasion of Vice President Richard M. Nixon’s visit to Caracas.
Although Venezuela and Argentina are in most conspicuous ferment, the shadow of the hammer and sickle can be discerned in every Latin American country—in the copper mines of destitute Chile, the tin mines of inflation-racked Bolivia, universities of Lima, Quito and Bogota.
But most alarming of all is the apparent popular indifference to the Red infiltration. Official recognition and a shrug of the shoulder is the typical reaction. Costa Rica’s Communist boss, Manuel Mora, exiled for his share in the frauds and bloodshed of 1948, is back in the country practicing law. At a recent political rally, he spoke immediately after the president from the steps of the Presidential Palace. Few people seem concerned about the Communist menace. To this day, most Argentines think the Guatemalan revolution was simply a U. S. propaganda stunt. And when a missionary, returning to Argentina, commented on the apparent increase of communism there, a leading evangelical layman “poo-pooed” his fears as Yankee witch-hunting.
It is not strange that dictatorships and revolution should breed in Latin America, a continent for centuries under the feudal thumb of Rome. As the sleeping giant wakes, he stretches and bursts the ancient bonds.
And the naturalism of Marx, tangible, here-and-now, seems to offer what modern man needs. He wants potatoes, not platitudes. The earthy religion of the Reds cannot be fought, therefore, with the empty trappings and dead traditions of Romanism. Only an evangelical, supernatural faith can save Latin America—a faith which is not afraid of its social conscience, nor of sacrificial discipline, but which is essentially a regenerating miracle—in short, a New Testament faith.
Back For A Rest
Mrs. Elisabeth Elliot and Miss Rachel Saint returned to civilization this month after almost eight weeks of living with the Auca Indians of Ecuador.
It was reported that the two women missionaries came back for a rest, and not because of any unexpected difficulties.
Thus was completed a significant contact with the tribe that killed Mrs. Elliot’s husband, Miss Saint’s brother, and three other young missionaries in 1956. They were accompanied back by Quechua Indians.
Mrs. Elliot, who was accompanied by her four-year-old daughter, Valerie, planned an early return to the tribe.
Contient Of Africa
Nigeria’S Open Door
The Premier of Northern Nigeria, a Muslim, told a special session of the Sudan Interior Mission this month that self-government will bring no change in the government’s friendly attitude toward Christian missions.
“The differences in our religions need be no bar to our continuing to work together for the good of our people,” said Alhaji Ahmadu, Sardauna of Sokoto.
Nigeria is to become completely independent from Britain by October, 1960.
The Sardauna spoke by his own request to council members and African representatives of SIM. Church leaders who have been watching Islam’s attitude toward Christian missions considered the Premier’s move a highly significant gesture showing the government’s desire to win the confidence of Christian minorities. The Sardauna holds the second highest rank among Muslims in Northern Nigeria, which is the only area in the world besides Saudi Arabia where there is strict adherence to Islamic law.
“Earlier this year,” the Premier said, “we sent delegations consisting of both Muslims and Christians to Libya, Pakistan and the Sudan—all newly independent and predominantly Muslim—in order to study how their governments manage the difficult business of looking after people of different races and creeds.”
The Premier’s good will and tolerance may, in turn, influence the policies of other Muslim countries watching how Africa’s most populous nation solves her religious problems.
The Sardauna stated that the educational progress of the region was in part due to the “devoted work” of the missionaries and that the government would continue to welcome foreign workers.
“The Christian holds a special place in the regard of Muslims throughout the world,” he said. “If I add that in the past there have been occasions when we have sometimes felt that our regards were not reciprocated, then I do so in the hope that you may all understand that it is my fervent prayer that these differences can and will be overcome.”
“The most earnest hope of my government,” he added, “is that contained in the beautiful thought and language of the Christmas message—that there shall be peace on earth and good will to all men.”
The regional government of Northern Nigeria has stated that “all persons are absolutely at liberty to practice their beliefs according to their conscience. The government does not intend to place any curb on the religious activities of missionaries or on their right to receive converts amongst other religions.”
To the Sudan Interior Mission, largest interdenominational mission in Africa, the Premier’s talk was a significant landmark. It was an encouraging contrast to reports of closing doors elsewhere.
W. H. F.
No Enmity
Sudan Interior Mission’s 61 workers in the Sudan weathered last month’s army coup with no adverse effects.
General Ibraham Abboud, commander-in-chief of the Sudanese army, said the new regime bore “enmity to no one” and wanted to “transform corruption into integrity.”
SIM observed its 65th anniversary in West Africa December 4. Work began in 1893 in what was then termed western Sudan—now Northern Nigeria and surrounding territories just south of the Sahara. Entering the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan (now the Sudan proper) in 1938 when missionaries were forced out of Ethiopia by the Italian invasion, SIM went on to establish 11 stations there.
“We expect continued freedom to preach the gospel in these areas,” said Dr. A. D. Helser, general director of SIM. “Abboud has assured all foreign communities of the safety of their persons, property, and funds. This is a day when Christians must move quickly to fulfill the Great Commission.”
W. H. F.
Continent Of Australia
Together Again?
The Rt. Rev. Hugh Rowland Gough, Suffragan Bishop of Barking (near London, England) was elected Archbishop of Sydney, Australia, last month by the Sydney Anglican Synod.
Gough took a leading part in arranging Billy Graham’s London evangelistic meetings. His election in Sydney may foreshadow another cooperative effort with Graham, for the evangelist begins his Australian crusade early in 1959.
Gough would assume the post made vacant by the October death of Dr. Howard W. K. Mowll, who had been appointed chairman of the executive committee for the forthcoming Graham crusade. The Chief Justice of Victoria, Lieutenant General Sir Edmund Herring, was named to succeed Mowll as committee chairman.
Mowll had held the bishopric of the traditionally evangelical see of Sydney since 1933. He became Primate of Australia nine years ago. He was born at Dover, England, educated at King’s School, Canterbury, King’s College and Ridley Hall, Cambridge. After ordination in the Church of England, he served in England for a time before being appointed a tutor in Wycliff College in Toronto, Canada. He became professor in 1916 and dean in 1919. He was sent to Western China as an assistant bishop in 1922, and four years later was made bishop.
Said CHRISTIANITY TODAY Correspondent Leon Morris: “While he was always courteous and fair to those of other points of view he made no secret of his evangelical views. He was always ready to set forth the preaching of the Gospel. His evangelical faith and his personal qualities endeared him to many. Small wonder that the verdict of many Sydney-siders is, ‘We shall never again look on his like!’”
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
Theological Education
The American Association of Theological Schools virtually put the Southern Baptist seminary at Louisville on a year’s probation this month and asked President Duke McCall to relinquish personal leadership ties with the accrediting agency.
The action grew out of the seminary’s dismissal last June of 13 professors, one of whom was subsequently reinstated.
Charging that McCall and the seminary’s trustees “are ultimately responsible for the conditions that have made possible the development of what they themselves have called an intolerable situation,” the AATS Commission on Accrediting (1) threatened removal of accreditation next December pending “a full inquiry as to whether they have taken adequate steps to repair the damage” and (2) recommended to the AATS executive committee (which promptly carried out the proposal) that McCall be asked to submit his resignation from the vice presidency of the AATS and from membership in the Commission on Accrediting.
A special committee headed by Dr. Luther A. Weigle, dean emeritus of Yale Divinity School, had investigated the dismissals. “Efforts were directed,” an AATS statement said, “to making a report on the character of the administrative procedures leading up to this particular incident.” Accrediting standards of the AATS specify that “regard will be had for … the character of (a theological school’s) administration.”
Last month the investigating committee spent three days gathering information in Louisville. It interviewed McCall and members of the present faculty, as well as trustees, three of whom reportedly are unsympathetic toward the dismissal action, and 10 of the dismissed professors. McCall welcomed the committee personally. Minutes of the trustees’ meetings were examined.
During the week end of December 6–7 the committee presented a report on its findings, which concerned “the character of the administration or administrative process and not the character of particular persons involved actively or passively in that process.” Excerpts from the report:
“The resignations of the thirteen professors were not tendered or asked for except orally in two instances … On June 12th when they were dismissed as a body, two of their number were overseas, and a third was out of the state … Between the time of the presidential recommendation of dismissal and final action, no opportunity of a full hearing, as promised, was given to these absent professors. The hearing given to the other ten professors was … too hastily conceived and executed to conform to reasonable standards of dignity and due process of law … The action of June 12 was in part intended as a device to secure the discharge of two members of the faculty and the re-instatement of as many as possible of the remaining eleven.”
While Louisville tensions appeared to be administrative more than theological, the seminary has experienced growing theological distresses. Southern Baptist institutions generally have sought “denominational purity” by guarding teaching posts rigidly for graduates of their own schools. But even these graduates have come under alien theological influences in graduate studies elsewhere. While Louisville has held the line theologically against the liberal theology (despite more concessive views toward evolution and higher critical theories of the Bible than many Southern schools), some alumni have criticized it for tolerating neo-orthodox inroads. Some censure has also followed the widening range of views represented in seminary lectureships. This year’s centennial lectureship series includes Dr. John Wick Bowman, Dr. Daniel Day Williams, and Dr. Emlyn Davies.
Protestant Idols?
The retiring president of the Canadian Council of Churches left office charging that his country’s churches had created “denominational gods” and some had made idols of the Bible and the church.
Dr. Emlyn Davies, Baptist pastor from Toronto, said each church had its “party slogan.” He cited as examples “the infallibility of the pope,” “historic episcopate,” “believers’ baptism by immersion,” “the priesthood of all believers,” and “the Bible says.”
He called church divisions “a scandal and a disgrace to the cause of Christ.”
Davies was scheduled to give a series of lectures this month at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, in that school’s centennial lectureship program.
Ministerial Trainees
Total enrollment of students in member institutions of the American Association of Theological Schools came close to setting a record this fall.
The 127 member schools of the AATS reported a combined enrollment of 20,853 for the 1958–59 academic year.
A record of 20,910 was set in 1956–57 when the AATS had 124 member schools.
Views In The News
After Cleveland
Secretary of State John Foster Dulles was asked for comment on last month’s Fifth World Order Conference of the National Council of Churches, which came out for recognition of Communist China.
“Well,” said Dulles, “I attach great weight to judgments taken by church people which relate primarily to the realm of moral principles and the like.
When it comes down to practical details such as whom you recognize and whom you don’t, then I think the judgment does not carry the same weight.”
“As far as I know,” he added, “I don’t think that this matter was adequately presented at the meeting. Also, it seems unlikely indeed that a policy which reflects both the Republican and Democratic national platforms which were adopted two years ago would be unanimously rejected by a group if it represented fairly a cross section of the religious people of the country.”
Then, in an address in San Francisco this month, Dulles reaffirmed U. S. policy toward mainland China, noting:
“Developments make it ever more clear that if we were to grant political recognition to the Chinese Communist regime, it would be a well-nigh mortal blow to the survival of the non-Communist governments in the Far East.”
Alongside the remarks of Dulles, protests piled up to make the action of the conference held in Cleveland appear as one of the most unpopular ever made in the name of the NCC. (See editorial on Page 23—ED.) Among other comments:
—The statement on Red China is noted “with grave concern” by the Executive Committee of the National Association of Evangelicals. “We are convinced,” said NAE President Herbert S. Mekeel, “such a statement does not represent the true sentiment of masses of members of American churches … We are baffled to observe left-wing cliches, and the typical Communistic ‘soft approach’ urging pressure on our government, falsely in the name of Christian fellowship.” Mekeel called “sheer nonsense” a conference statement which said Americans “hesitate to admit any imperfections in our society.” He added that it is folly to talk of “restorations of relationships” between our churches of the East and West so long as Iron and Bamboo Curtains exist. “To waiver in our stand now,” Mekeel said, “is to bring hopeless despair to millions over the world.”
—“I believe that this action misrepresents my Protestant faith,” said Dr. Daniel A. Poling, editor of the Christian Herald. “With every influence that I have, I repudiate it.”
—Dr. Norman Vincent Peale said he was “completely opposed to recognition of Communist China and to the admission of that ruthlessly totalitarian government to the councils of nations.”
—Dr. Frederick Brown Harris, U. S. Senate chaplain, labelled the study conference a “Trojan Horse … the symbol of conquest from within by smuggled foes.” He said that “Red China, still unrepentant, is under condemnation for aggression by the very organization that is urged to accept it.”
NCC officials, for the most part, hailed the work of the Cleveland conference. Other Protestant leaders, however, refused to comment one way or another. Among these was Dr. C. Emanuel Carlson, executive director of the Baptist Joint Committee on Public Affairs, who said he felt it was “outside my province” to issue judgment on the pronouncements.
Officially Unofficial
The General Board of the National Council of Churches, in a resolution passed at its fall meeting in Chicago, said the Fifth World Order Study Conference was within its rights in recommending steps toward U. S. recognition of Red China.
The board insisted that the conference action was not an official pronouncement of the NCC. But it endorsed the conference as having “performed a valuable function.”
Greek Orthodox bishops on the board voted against the resolution. The Romanian Orthodox bishop abstained.
The Rector And The Tavern Keepers
An Episcopal rector startled wets and drys alike last month with a 3½-minute talk before a tavern keepers’ convention in Atlantic City.
“Quit being ashamed and embarrassed by your business,” the Rev. John F. Mangrum told 1,000 representatives of the National Licensed Beverage Association. “Don’t hide behind the scorn of the professional drys. You have let them shrink you into a gigantic inferiority complex again and again.”
Mangrum urged the tavern keepers to join churches, “to be good citizens and to be good Christians.” He added: “If one denomination does not need you, except when it wants back-door contributions extracted through implied blackmail about community fusses in local option elections, you will find that the traditional Christian groups want you and need you.”
Many a newspaper editor, sensing an incongruity, picked up the remarks, even though Mangrum had given the same speech to a state-wide convention of liquor dealers in Florida last June. Some of the press accounts became distorted. “One paper even had me urging everyone to go out and get loaded,” the rector said later.
Mangrum, who says he does not drink, apologetically concedes that “I probably offended some.” He says his motive, however, was to witness to the liquor industry for the Christian cause. He favors “decent standards” in the control of alcoholic beverages, but opposes harsh criticism of liquor dealers. “Apparently people are going to drink,” he observes in advocating more kindly relations between wets and drys.
“Those fellows really listened to me,” Mangrum maintains. “The words they heard will have a greater influence than all the horrible pamphlets.”
Mangrum, 36, knows something of the evils of alcohol from five years in a parish on Detroit’s Skid Row. He is now rector of rapidly-growing St. Edward’s Episcopal Church in Mount Dora, Florida. He was introduced to the liquor groups by one of their officials who was turned away from three churches before St. Edward’s welcomed him. Mangrum’s witness thus far has fallen short of a clear call for regeneration.
Protestant Panorama
• American missionaries overseas now number 25,058, an increase of nearly 150 per cent since 1936, according to a study by a National Council of Churches’ agency. The study, compiled by Dr. Frank Price and Clare E. Orr of the Missionary Research Library, was presented to the ninth annual assembly of the NCC’s Division of Foreign Missions held in Pittsburgh this month. Japan is said to have the most North American Protestant missionary societies with 97. India has 95 and Formosa 52. The study added that the largest American Protestant missionary force is in Southeast Asia.
• Some 90 members of the Gospel Chapel Congregation in Milwaukee, when they learned that the Rev. Bennie Morris had accepted a new pastorate in Phoenix, Arizona, sold homes, gave up jobs, and went with him.
• The Methodist Church says it has 817 openings for missionaries in home and overseas fields … One hundred and ten missionaries were commissioned for service overseas under the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. by its Commission on Ecumenical Mission and Relations.
• Twentieth Century-Fox plans to film “The Greatest Story Ever Told,” beginning in 1960. The forthcoming picture, it is said, will be the first attempt to tell the story of Christ in a major movie since “King of Kings,” produced by Cecil B. DeMille in 1927.
• The Sunday School Times marks its 100th anniversary with the January 3 number … The Ecumenical Press Service observed its 25th year last month.
• The Internal Revenue Service says missionaries and other U. S. citizens abroad must file an income tax return for 1958 even though their earnings are exempt. IRS Publication 54 gives details.
• A heavy snowstorm failed to dampen spirits at ground breaking ceremonies November 28 for the new Methodist Theological School to be located three miles south of Delaware, Ohio.
• Nearly all of the 30,000 Indians and 16,000 Eskimos in Alaska have been converted to some form of Christianity, according to a Roman Catholic missionary. The Rev. Pasquale Spoletini says about one-third of the converts are Catholics.
• Grace Church (Episcopal) in New York celebrates its 150th anniversary this month … The First Mission Covenant Church of Chicago commemorates its 90th anniversary December 26–28.
• International Students, Inc. says more than 100,000 foreign nationals are now residing temporarily in the United States … Moody Bible Institute began the operation of a new FM radio station in Cleveland.
• A Japanese pastor, having completed a six-month study tour of parish and youth work in America, wants to know whether American pastors are too busy to study and “Why are there not more young people attending Lutheran services?’” Said the Rev. Hidetake Yano, whose trip was financed by the Lutheran World Federation, “I do not believe that America is a Christian nation, but at least all Americans have Christianity in their background.”
• World Vision President Dr. Bob Pierce was honored at a reception by 150 officials of the Korean government, which gave him a vote of appreciation for humanitarian statesmanship as “the father of Korean orphans” and for tireless efforts in achieving “better understanding” between the United States and Korea.
• A postage stamp issued in Greenland honors the Christian missionary from whom the country’s entire modern history is dated. Bishop Hans Egede of Norway led the settlement of Greenland starting in 1721.
• Hilfswerk, welfare arm of the Evangelical Church in Germany, is receiving up to 100 letters a day from German Lutherans in Siberia acknowledging shipments of Bibles and religious literature, an official of the agency said in Stuttgart.
• The Methodist Board of Temperance is distributing a booklet containing official statements of 18 major Protestant denominations which have condemned alcoholism and urged curbs on alcoholic beverage advertising.
• To accommodate expected increased attendance, the 18th General Council of the World Presbyterian Alliance, July 26-August 6, will be held in Sao Paulo instead of the Campinas Seminary in Brazil.
Baptist Trends
A Southern Baptist observer notes several trends which he says are apparent in a survey of Baptist state conventions held this fall. Theo Sommerkamp, Baptist Press staff writer, listed the trends as follows:
—Continued confidence in the leadership of Brooks Hays, president of the Southern Baptist Convention, despite defeat in his bid for a ninth term in the U. S. Congress.
[One pointed exception was a message from the Baptist Laymen of Mississippi, who urged the immediate resignation of Hays to “help to restore the solidarity to Southern Baptists who are firm believers in Southern traditions.”—ED.]
—A desire on the part of messengers to be about their business, evidenced by the fact that church fires or bomb threats failed to delay and interrupt conventions in two states.
—The fact that Baptists are aware of Christian responsibility in public affairs and said so plainly in several states.
—The growing stature of the layman in Baptist denominational life.
—A concern for important internal issues in Baptist circles.
Before this fall, there were 25 Baptist state conventions (or general associations as they are called in a few states). But Indiana Baptists organized themselves into an independent convention to increase it to 26.
Social Drinking
Baptist Editor C. R. Daley took a dim view of the approval of social drinking voted by the Protestant Episcopal Church’s convention in Miami Beach this fall. Daley said in the Western Recorder that a recent event in Knoxville, Tennessee, which he describes as follows, “should be placed side-by-side with this announcement of the Episcopalians”:
“A young graduate student was shot to death by his neighbor upon trying to enter the neighbor’s home in the middle of the night.… The neighbor who had killed his friend was horrified. The young man’s father and mother were deeply shocked. He was their only child. He was not reared to drink and he did not frequent taverns or cocktail rooms. The girl whom he was to marry after graduation was deeply grieved.
“Oh yes, one other person was distressed. This was the preacher with whom the young man had dinner on the very evening before he was killed. This clergyman had no prejudice against drinking and reported he and the young man had a shaker of cocktails before dinner and a brandy afterward. He was sure that they did not drink enough to affect the mental processes but just the same the student was dead. All he did was to take a few drinks on a social occasion—drinks offered him by a minister of Jesus Christ.”
Criticism From Within
German church leader Martin Niemoeller says modern ecumenism lacks grass-roots support. He calls Protestant unity on a theological basis “impossible.”
Though he says he delights in the “ecumenical fellowship,” Niemoeller adds that the ecumenical movement, “still in the talking stage,” is “not the answer” for a Germany absorbed in East-West tension and controversy.
The famed president of the Evangelical Church in Hesse and Nassau, active in the World Council of Churches, expressed views in an interview with a Seventh-day Adventist theologian, Dr. Daniel Walther, who met with Niemoeller at Darmstadt during a visit to Germany last summer. Walther, professor of church history at Potomac University, disclosed results of the interview upon return to the United States this fall.
Niemoeller criticized modern ecumenism as top-heavy—conducted on the “academic” and “upper-crust” level of theologians without grass-roots support.
He nevertheless maintained that there are “cardinal principles on which all are one.” “Faith and obedience are identical in all communions,” he said. “All accept and worship Christ Jesus as Saviour.”
On the other hand, he warned that denominations cannot be dissolved without weakening Protestantism.
Great Britain
Rejection From Glasgow
The influential Glasgow Presbytery of the Church of Scotland rejected last month a General Assembly report recommending mutual recognition of bishops by Presbyterian churches and of presbyteries by Anglican churches.
The report, under referral to presbyteries, was criticized largely on the basis of fears that only episcopally ordained ministers could be regarded by Anglican churches as truly valid.
A special subcommittee of the Glasgow Presbytery said the door should be kept open for future conversations between the two churches, but on a new basis that left room for “full and mutual recognition of the ministeries of the conferring churches.”
Continent Of Europe
Greek Orthodox Synod
The Orthodox Church of Greece held its 13th assembly in Athens last month. The following comprehensive report on the month-long conference was prepared by Dr. G. A. Hadjiantoniou, minister of the Second Greek Evangelical Church of Athens and correspondent forCHRISTIANITY TODAY.
Sixty of the sixty-two bishops of the church took part in the synod, which is to meet triennially. During the last 21 years, however, the synod found it possible to meet only three times. Thus the agenda of the synod groaned under the burden of accumulated problems. The orthodox religious press noticed with regret that the various committees which worked beforehand on various subjects did not do a thorough job. Consequently, discussion was not as satisfactory as it might have been.
Among the most pressing problems were education and remuneration of the lower clergy. The bishops expressed satisfaction for a series of measures recently taken which put the problem of the education of the clergy on a realistic basis. It should be noted that the educational level of the vast majority of the priests serving in villages and in some of the smaller towns is deplorably low. For many years the church tried unsuccessfully to solve the problem. From now on, candidates for ordination must have graduated from high school and taken a two-year course in ecclesiastical training. Moreover, an ecclesiastical school was founded in Thessalonica where students will receive, in addition to theological education, teacher training. All the students of that school will be given state scholarships for the whole of their three-year course and on graduation will be immediately appointed in the dual capacity of priest and teacher in villages, receiving the salaries of both offices.
The government, on the other hand, promised church authorities assistance in the problem of clergy remuneration. One of the principal sources of the income of the church budget now is the “parish contribution.” The amount of the contribution of every Greek Orthodox individual living within the geographical limits of each parish is fixed in a more or less arbitrary way by parish authorities and it is collected as are ordinary taxes. In case one refuses to pay his “contribution” he may be imprisoned. Needless to say, this method of collecting gifts for the work of the church is highly detrimental to the prestige of the church and it has cooled the hearts of many. The convocation decided that this system should be abandoned and that another way of meeting material needs of the church be sought.
It is noteworthy that the Minister of Cults suggested the need for changing the system of the election of the bishops, so that this may be done on a broader and more democratic basis, with a clear hint that laymen should also take part in the election of these higher servants of the church. There is no doubt that much good will come to the spiritual life of the church out of the adoption of the suggestion of the minister. There is much doubt, however, as to the willingness of the bishops to adopt these suggestions. It is, on the other hand, a matter of regret that no suggestion whatever was made from any quarter about the desirability of having the present system of the celibacy of the higher clergy, with all its palpably evil influences on the spiritual and moral life of the whole church, abolished. It is the view of many responsible Greek Orthodox religious leaders that unless this unscriptural system is done away with, no real reform can be effected to the body of the church.
The synod devoted much of its time and deliberations to discussion of the followers of the Julian Calendar and their schismatic “bishops.” The synod decided to offer to the followers of this movement the possibility of having their rites kept within the church building and through the services of the priests of the official church. If this offer is accepted, many churches will enjoy from now on the doubtful luxury of celebrating Christmas and the other feasts of the Christian year twice annually; once for the “new style” and once again, thirteen days later, for the “old style.”
Another matter which gave cause to much heated debate was the position of the Orthodox Church of Greece within the World Council of Churches. It must be borne in mind that the teaching of the Greek Orthodox church according to which she is the only true church, the “una sancta,” makes it really impossible for her to take part in a council together with other “churches” without intolerable compromise in basic principles. Yet it is a member of the council. Many feel that the Roman Catholic church with its rigid attitude towards the ecumenical movement is much more consistent with its own teaching and its rival claim on being the only church. Many of the bishops—indeed one should say, the majority—as well as other religious leaders do not feel very happy about this state of things, have repeatedly pointed out the discrepancy and have recommended the breaking of all official relations with the WCC. A compromise solution was agreed upon, to the effect that only laymen—no bishops or other clergymen—should be permitted to take part in ecumenical conferences. It is worth noticing, however, that this decision was based not on the real cause of trouble but on the assumption that most of the Protestant churches which take part in the ecumenical movement reject the doctrine of the holy trinity.
The synod examined also the measures which the church should take in the matter of Roman Catholic and Protestant “propaganda.” It speaks highly for the Greek Evangelical Church that, while it was decided to seek the support of the state authorities in order to suppress the propaganda of the Roman Catholic church (especially in the activities of its “Uniate” branch) and the Jehovah’s Witnesses, it was agreed these activities can best be fought by spiritual weapons, such as the pulpit and religious literature.
Finally, the synod agreed to broaden the grounds on which divorce is given, by recognizing as a reason for divorce the separation of marriage partners for ten years or longer.
The synod put an end to its work by expressing the wish that in the future it should be convened at least once a year.
Rome And License
The Italian Constitution Court says no license is needed to build, own or operate a non-Catholic church.
The ruling was made on an appeal from pastor Francesco G. Rauti, whose church police had closed down.
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
CHRISTIANITY TODAY
NEWS
Special Report
Off-color “greetings” are being sold in record quantities. Producers of so-called “sophisticated humor” see the chance to cash in on popular demand during the holiday season. Result: A tide of iniquity is flooding this year’s Christmas card trade.
Ribald jokes with illustrations of drunkenness and sexual indecency are taking the place of traditional messages of good will. This is the sad reflection on the present state of American morality.
The bare-bosomed blonde in a sock crowds out the Christ of the manger. A degenerate verse crowds out the message of the Bethlehem angels. Satan takes the center of the stage even at Christmas, as if to publish the fact that in 1958 Christ is crucified almost before a carnal society acknowledges that he was born.
Postal officials in Washington expressed concern about the number of obscene and indecent Christmas cards being sent through the U. S. mails. They said, however, that the majority of such cards are sent through first class mail which the post office is powerless to open for inspection. Publishers and vendors of the cards have been avoiding prosecution by moving the cards to dealers by means other than the mails, postal officials added.
The cards were described as “extolling drunkenness and sexual license” as a means of celebrating the Christmas holiday and “otherwise mocking the observance.”
The Post Office Department acknowledged that it has received protests from religious groups against the indecent cards, but said it is primarily a matter for local law enforcement at the places of sale of such “greeting” cards.
Said one postal inspector, “Anyone receiving a card which he considers objectionable or in bad taste can help stop future mailings by protesting to the sender and questioning his spirit in purchasing and mailing such cards.”
Some of the worst cards are sent anonymously, in which case it is almost impossible for the post office to take any legal action.
When the legal road is clear, however, the post office quickly moves in. This month Postmaster General Arthur E. Summerfield announced that the publisher of Manhunt has been convicted by the U. S. District Court in Concord, New Hampshire, of depositing in the mails copies of the periodical containing obscene, lewd, lascivious, and indecent matter.
The prosecution was initiated by postal inspectors on the basis of illustrations in the April, 1957, issue of the magazine which described itself as the “world’s most popular crime fiction magazine.” After receiving complaints from citizens, the inspectors determined that 190,797 copies of the magazine had been mailed from the Concord post office.
The Flying Eagle Publication, Inc. of New York City, owners of the magazine, was fined $3,000, and Michael St. John, president, was fined $1,000, given a suspended six-month prison sentence and placed under probation for two years, Summerfield said.
Card producers and vendors seem to be bending over backwards to give risque merchandise the Christmas pitch. The double-entendre is exploited in terms associated, though often remotely, with Christmas.
At least one shop in Washington was displaying cards especially “dressed-up” for a Yuletide appeal. The reference to Christmas was far-fetched. The obscene connotation was plain. Christmas seals were affixed, presumably to clear up any doubt the prospective purchaser might have as to whether the “greeting” was definitely seasonal.
The same shop placed in its front window reprints of an old stand-by in the indelicate greeting card trade: A suggestive illustration with the squib, “I don’t know how to wrap it.”
The display of offensive Christmas “greetings” in Washington represents a daring imposition, for last year a shop in the nation’s capital was closed by authorities because it sold cards which officials described as “satire on the holy holiday.”
Large demands for distasteful so-called greetings apparently have grown out of the crude studio card craze, which had its origin in New York City’s Greenwich Village after World War II.
Studio cards themselves, which are also referred to as “jazz” or “contemporary,” seldom are obscene but often are objectionable. The first big-seller reportedly was a card with the message, “People are no damned good.”
Some 200 or more firms now are said to be producing studio cards. Even the most respected greeting card companies are cashing in on current demand by turning out ribaldry.
The studio motif with its simple sketches and insulting messages is also being used to profitable advantage in the sale of novelties. Awkward-looking line drawings and degenerate squibs appear increasingly on note pads, ash trays, drinking glasses, plaques, napkins, and even dishes.
Newsstands once were largely respectable business establishments. Now some have been reduced to hotbeds for lotteries and filthy reading matter, the latter having been described by the Dallas Morning News last month as a “$500-million-a-year racket.” Many a quaint gift shop seems to be headed in the same direction.
“We do not ask that non-Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ,” said Dr. Edward L. R. Elson, minister of National Presbyterian Church in Washington. “But if other than Christians can share in the commemoration, we should expect them to join us in exaltation rather than pollution of something sacred by secular and vulgar distortions.”
The Churchmen’s Commission for Decent Publications noted a year ago “the deterioration of Christmas into an occasion for the exchange of obscene and suggestive holiday greeting cards.”
At a meeting of the commission’s executive committee, a resolution was passed urging distributors and dealers “to manifest their concern for community decency by refusing to handle merchandise of a bawdy and sexy nature.”
The resolution encouraged local church and civic agencies “to protect the Christmas season as an occasion of spiritual force rather than of commercial exploitation of prurient interests.”
The post office was commended for its vigil over obscenity law violations.
The Dirtiest Ripple
Steps to strengthen the fight against “commercialized smut” were discussed at the first national conference on obscenity, held in Cleveland and sponsored by the Citizens for Decent Literature.
Dr. Pitirim Sorokin, Harvard University sociologist, said obscenity has been an accompanying factor in all the great crises of history. The rise of pornography today, he said is merely “the dirtiest ripple of a more powerful tidal wave” that threatens our civilization.
In various forms and degrees, Dr. Sorokin noted, obsession with sex has become so characteristic of movies, television, books, magazines and social and cultural institutions that “we now face the prospect of the collapse of the great cultural mansion of Western civilization.”
Eutychus
- View Issue
- Subscribe
- Give a Gift
- Archives
NEW YEAR BELLS
Dr. Samuel Jones of Second Church is eagerly anticipating the first stroke of the New Year. Over the traditional din of horns, whistles, shots and sirens will float the inaugural notes of the new Van Dyke Memorial Carillon in the church tower. The system is completely electronic, which in a way is a pity, but then bell ringing is an extinct art in exurbia. Jones himself has a romantic attachment to bells. He has replaced the manse doorbell with imported chimes so that each visitor is greeted with the conclusion of the 1812 Overture.
I imagine his dedicatory address on New Year’s Eve will ring the changes on bells. No doubt he will recite Poe’s poem in passing, allude to the bell ringing theme of his favorite mystery story (The Nine Tailors, by Dorothy Sayers), and recrack the Liberty Bell with resounding oratorical strokes. I just hope he doesn’t lapse into Tennyson’s “Ring out, wild bells” in conclusion.
We will all share his thrill when the midnight noise-making is overwhelmed by the majesty of the carillon. Bells are the voice of a former age, when the church spire marked the village, and there was solemn harmony even in the signal of alarm. This is the time of the siren, the shrieking howl of a maddened mechanical beast. Sirens on New Year’s Eve chill us with prospect of atomic war, but bells speak of peace.
Yet even before the bells were the trumpets. The trump of God heralded the Lord’s presence on Sinai, and the priests were to blow the trumpet of jubilee after the atonement in the fiftieth year. Our Lord declared the realization of the gospel jubilee in his own presence at the synagogue of Nazareth. The church needs trumpets and bells in the pulpit: the warning blast of impending judgment, when the trump of God shall sound; the joyful sound of eternal salvation in Christ’s finished work. The trumpet of the gospel herald has the urgency of an air-raid siren and the harmony of choirs of angels, for it calls not just to a new year but to the new heaven and earth. The jubilee liberty proclaimed in the text on the Liberty Bell is the liberty of sons of God.
THIRD YEAR THRESHOLD
To subscribe, two years ago, on your invitation to become a charter subscriber, was a work of faith. The idea of the projected publication sounded good, but how well would it work out? I felt that nothing much beyond the subscription price would be lost in accepting your invitation. When that initial subscription period was over, and time came to renew, it was no longer so questionable a venture. But after two years, CHRISTIANITY TODAY has become a necessity in my study. The wealth of material presented, the outlook, the reasoned approach to news events—all of these combine to make your periodical one of the best, if not the best, in the whole field of religious journalism. I am proud and happy that it was my privilege to be a charter subscriber, and determined that my subscription shall never lapse.
First Reformed Church
Randolph, Wisc.
This reader is pleased with the course that has been followed.
Evangelical Lutheran Theological Sem. Columbus, Ohio
I am an old man.… I read nothing but detective stories—except Theology Today (of which I am on the editorial board) and CHRISTIANITY TODAY.…
Princeton, N. J.
I’ve fought it long enough. I tried to be strong and resolute and say, “I don’t need another magazine!” But the trouble is: while there may be several magazines I get and don’t really read, I actually read CHRISTIANITY TODAY!”
Church of the Holy Spirit
Schenevus, N. Y.
That such a large percent of Christian leaders are reading with approval your magazine … augurs ill for the future of our religion. God’s purposes shall be carried out certainly. But whether in the end through the present kind of a church—which places more emphasis on theology than right living, on believing than doing, on faith than good works, and regarding communism as an enemy …, this may be very doubtful.
Lansing, Mich.
I am sending in my renewal to the finest Christian magazine in the United States. Its articles are intelligent, informative and truly biblical. I do not want to miss any number.
Newhall, Calif.
I have been tremendously pleased with CHRISTIANITY TODAY. I have longed, in England, for a paper of that type which combined scholarship with spirituality and loyalty to the Scriptures. I feel you just “hit it,” and am glad to note that you have many links across the ocean.
The Worldwide Evangelization Crusade
Fort Washington, Pa.
Please be advised that many thousands of lives are being transformed today without any “Gospel” preaching at all through groups like Alcoholics Anonymous. Simple belief in some kind of Higher Power able to rescue men is found sufficient. Moreover, such an approach is winning multitudes of thinking people who are only repelled by teaching they regard as an insult to intelligence.
Los Angeles, Calif.
May I say that CHRISTIANITY TODAY is the one periodical on my desk which seems to satisfy a need in my spiritual development. Avoiding the pitfalls of condemnatory extremist points of view the general tenor appears to “perfect, stablish, strengthen, settle” those who cherish the evangelical, biblical Christian faith. It is my hope that this influence will extend its helpful potential from the pulpit to the pew.
First Methodist Church
Onway Springs, Kan.
I’d be cheating my head and my heart should I fail to renew.… Thank God for CHRISTIANITY TODAY and “the resurgence of interest in evangelical Christianity.”
Wakefield, Va.
Disgusted with its whole point of view.
St. Andrew’s Episcopal Church
Burns, Ore.
It is superb!
St. Paul’s Episcopal
Medina, O.
If this is Christianity today, the apostasy of the church has reached its zenith. I refuse to believe it.…
Festus, Mo.
Often ministers are made to feel that they are antiquated and out-of-date if they hold to the foundational truths of historical Christianity. The liberalistic periodicals seek to give that impression. CHRISTIANITY TODAY makes plain that all educated, informed, scholarly men are not on the side of liberalism (infidelity). I feel that those who value the great truths of revealed religion ought to back this magazine.
Buffalo Avenue Baptist Church
Tampa, Fla.
In a day of spiritual confusion and infidelity it is a much needed trumpet with a certain sound.
Brooklyn, N. Y.
I appreciate the fact very much that at last a conservative, interdenominational religious periodical of good caliber has made its appearance that can be … appreciated by any religious man, no matter … what church denomination.… Today … it is … so imperative to stick to the … Word of God as we have it in the Bible. In civil affairs let men parade their knowledge and skill, but in holy things let them observe silence before the majesty of God. “I hate vain thoughts,” or as Luther gives this passage, “Ich hasse die Flattergesiter,” says the Psalmist (119:113).
Bonduel, Wisc.
It has been a great resource in providing answers to my college-age daughters, who have often felt that conservative Christians were too prone to award the blue ribbon to pious mediocrity. Your magazine, more than any other I know of, challenges its readers to be alert, intelligent, informed, dedicated and active in every area of life.
Minneapolis, Minn.
You are perfectly within your right to strive to restore some evangelical zeal into our somnolent, too intellectualized Protestant churches and to call us back to the Bible. But there is more than one definition of “evangelical” and of “biblical theology.” You seem to admit of but one—yours.
First Congregational Church
Chesterfield, Mass.
In a time when good Christian periodicals are scarce—acutely so in Australia, it is good to meet such a one as this.… While you set forth a strong, unequivocal evangelical front, you maintain a truly catholic spirit.
Strathmore Methodist Church
Essendon, Victoria, Australia
I find your paper interesting, impressive, and very instructive.
The Rectory
Newton Kyme, Yorkshire, England
With your emphasis on “old fashioned religion” and emotional experiences that accompany it, you are doing your best to make this dogmatic.… Then people … quarrel about the dogmas.… I’ve seen it … repeatedly, not only among Christians, but among socialists.
Utica, N. Y.
May I say that your magazine is wonderfully stimulating, challenging and inspirational for any Christian or non-Christian.
Student Dept., S. C. Baptist Conv.
Columbia, S. C.
While I find your periodical stimulating, I am also irritated often by the critical tone of many articles.… I have little sympathy for theological warfare, regardless of who are the contestants. I have found some Fundamentalists who were more modern than any Modernist and I have found some Modernists who were more fundamental than any Fundamentalist. What a man claims to believe is not as important as what he is.
The United Church of Canada
Port Stanley, Ont.
I continue to be impressed by the variety of articles, their high quality, and the irenic but forceful attitude expressed.
Nebreska Baptist State Convention
Omaha, Neb.
I read your magazine with great interest, and from time to time with not a little protest. This is all to the good, however; therefore I continue my subscription. For, as of this moment, I have not felt that I could equate all of my opinions with truth, nor have I come to that place in life where I can claim perfection in the purity of my motives.
First Methodist Church
Chowchilla, Calif.
Enclosed find payment for a two year subscription.… I do so as an unrepentant liberal because I need the constant reminder that those who differ from me basically can still be men of integrity and intelligence. I have found your articles to be consistently of a high level of scholarship. I should violate my own principles if I fail to recognize good wherever it is to be found.
Chicago, Ill.
Although I find myself sometimes in disagreement with your writings I am never in disagreement with the Christian spirit behind them. Let me say “thank you” both for stimulating my thinking and for reminding me that the liberals are not the only ones who admit that they have made mistakes in the past. Keep up the very fine work you are now doing.
Nettleton Methodist
Nettleton, Miss.
I received … a sample copy.… I do not take a publication which is distinctively conservative.… The articles on racial conflicts were better than those in many liberal publications which I have read and I think you are to be congratulated upon them.
The Methodist Ch., Beech Grove Charge
New Bern, N. C.
I cannot say I am in complete sympathy with “fundamentalism” as even so well described in your paper. Reinhold Niebuhr led me to know sin in my life more deep-rooted than I believed. But at that point, I began understanding Billy Graham! Mr. Niebuhr then went on to prove what he meant by sin in his book by the way he acted in the Christian Century. At that point Christian Century lost a liberal potential subscriber and CHRISTIANITY TODAY gains one.
Kewanna, Ind.
I am a modernist and a liberal … but I like to know what the other fellow thinks.
Winsted, Conn.
I think it is the greatest Christian periodical on the market.… I only wish it had more of a Wesleyan orientation.
President
Olivet Nazarene Col.
Kankakee, Ill.
Be assured that many of us consider CHRISTIANITY TODAY the most helpful magazine we receive.
Nazarene Theological Seminary
Kansas City, Mo.
CHRISTIANITY TODAY is one of the prime instruments used by God to lead me to take my theological training in an evangelical school.
Pasadena, Calif.
I think that you are combining sound scholarship with a conservative Christian point of view. It seems to me that this is something which is sorely needed by the Christian church today.
American Scientific Affiliation President
Mankato, Minn.
In my opinion, CHRISTIANITY TODAY is one of the brightest spots on the evangelical horizon. Your conservative approach, free from any “party line” is most helpful.
Moody Bible Institute
Chicago, Ill.
I always like to read “A Layman and his Faith” by L. Nelson Bell.… Because of a lack of higher education sometimes some articles are a little over my head but it is all so true to the Bible.
Bellefontaine, O.
Your magazine has been a tremendous spiritual blessing to me. It has a balance of material even including a touch of humor in “Preacher in the Red.”
First Baptist Ch.
Springfield, Ky.
I enjoy your stimulating articles and particularly “Eutychus and his kin.”
Chattanooga, Tenn.
I appreciate especially your scholarly and soundly evangelical approach as well as your policy of publishing letters from readers who are in complete disagreement with the evangelical viewpoint.
La Paz, Bolivia
Let us thank God for a national journal that sets forth and stands for the great historic doctrines of Christianity. May CHRISTIANITY TODAY never change its position nor compromise the teaching of the Bible.
The Mountain Christian Church
Bel Air, Md.
On the whole I find the articles profitable.… Why keep the layman tied to only what he hears from his pastor if he is intelligent enough to know the truth in reading?
Timmins, Ont.
Your paper suits me to a T—especially as it stands for the Truth, backs Billy Graham, gives interesting church news and has a number of features that makes it the most interesting religious paper that I have ever read. And I have read plenty, I assure you the last 80 years.
Presbyterian Sunday School Missions
Phoenix, Ariz.
During my long life of nearly 84 years I have read many religious journals. I consider CHRISTIANITY TODAY superior to all.
Campbellsville, Ky.
It is reassuring to read week after week articles of such importance as appear in CHRISTIANITY TODAY.… Many deal … with the implications of the faith for social concern.… The impression that they create is that God is the Lord of all life and not just a tiny fraction of it.
Calvary Baptist
Lowell, Mass.
Five religious journals come to my desk. CHRISTIANITY TODAY is the only one which we read from cover to cover. Its editorials and articles are courageous and timely. The editors avoid the ultras of conservatism and liberalism. Safe in theology, sane on social problems, it supplies a long-felt need in the field of religious journalism. Largely leaving local, temporary news to the daily papers, stories and pictures to the secular magazines, it provides a substantial and balanced mental and spiritual menu for normal Christian growth.… We hope it may soon be found on the desk of every Christian minister and leading layman in our country.
Townville, Pa.
LIMITS OF SCIENCE
(The following comment was submitted by request after a private discussion with the research physicist Dr. T. N. Panay on the subject of science and evolution.—ED.)
In the investigation of the ultimate structure of nature, theories are, as everywhere in science, a powerful and indispensable instrument. In the course of research we may occasionally develop a theory which seems very convincing, like Planck’s quantum theory (of quite mathematical character, however). But, generally, these theories are fictitious images—requiring only our knowledge of them, not our faith in them. They are very useful, nonetheless. They allow us to obtain new results and thereby improve those theories or replace them with better ones, still fictitious.
It seems that man, in his present phase, will never be able, by observation and theory, to unveil the true structure of nature. Consequently, it can be implied that the only way to know the truth about nature would be direct revelation by a being who possesses that true knowledge, if such a being were willing to give it to us and could do so, and provided we were able, in our present condition, to comprehend and assimilate such knowledge. Otherwise, advanced scientific considerations show that we cannot detect the intrinsic reality of nature, that is that we are under the limitations expressed in Ecclesiastes 3:10, 11, and that we are unlikely to achieve more than Aristotle sees possible in Metaphysics, Book alpha (II), 993a30–993b5.
If this is the situation with phenomena now at our disposal for observation and experimentation, the situation cannot very probably be better with the investigation of events of past history, which it is impossible to observe. Therefore, it seems that the right attitude toward the theory of evolution would be that its content should be learnt well and understood, and used to obtain results, if possible, but not believed to be necessarily true, and that the scientist should always be ready to substitute a new and better theory for the former. This should be the correct attitude merely on a scientific approach, even if the biblical account were not known.
On the other hand, the right scientific attitude toward the Scripture by one not believing in its authority should be that the probability that the statements of the Scripture be true cannot be considered to be zero; and that these statements should always be kept in mind lest a possible help thereby in some stage of scientific development be missed.
And one who believes in scriptural authority should be careful not to construe the text, under pretext of interpretation, as having a meaning not derived from the text with certainty; an interpretation should not be presented as the exclusively possible one, when it is only probable, and other probable interpretations have been or can be advanced as well.
Washington, D. C.
- More fromEutychus