Page 6370 – Christianity Today (2024)

The small group of religious teachers who prepare pastors for some 60 million Protestant church members in the United States—and similar institutions for millions elsewhere—hold in their hands the spiritual future of the world, humanly speaking.

The total impact of these faculty members upon the crucial years of pastoral preparation determines in turn the pastor’s impact upon the Church. In a predominantly Protestant United States, whose present world leadership is the prevailing hope of mankind’s peace and freedom, the cause and effect relationship of faculty determinants, pastoral thought and conduct, faith and preaching, dedication and church instruction is demonstrably clear. Over these faculty heads hangs the sword of Damocles.

If any group of Christians ever needed to live in individual and collective conformity to Jesus Christ, these faculty leaders do. Their private lives and public instruction, individually and collectively, mark for life the pastors they teach, as clearly and irrevocably as a hot iron bums a permanent brand into the flank of a steer. Thereby they shape world Protestant thought and conduct and are, momentarily at least, the key to world destiny. Many years ago, while in training for the pastorate, I recall hearing a wise and deeply-loved faculty leader say, “If a student does not come to us with a personal, living Christian experience, we cannot give it to him.” Today, I am still troubled by that statement. There is something unhealthy about receiving into training a student for the pastorate who lacks the foundation upon which every premise of his future life rests: a personal experience of the saviourhood of Jesus Christ. My question therefore remains: If a theological seminary or a training center for pastors cannot lead an aspirant to the ministry, who has never had a personal encounter with Jesus Christ, into such a living relationship, how can it prepare pastors to lead others into a living fellowship with Jesus?

Consider the plight of a student who becomes a pastor, and whose primary function is now to preside at the birth of souls into the kingdom of God, and to nurture spiritual infants to maturity. How is he to proceed? From what spiritual plane is he expected to lead others—and to what plane?

The burden of responsibility in this matter cannot be shucked off by the Christian teachers who prepare pastors for our pulpits and churches. They are undoubtedly the ones who are shaping world Protestant thought, and they are the ones who must in turn reexamine the methods of pastoral instruction used by our Lord. The blueprint he left in his relationship with the apostles consisted of a trinity of disciplines: private prayer, public worship, and small group fellowship.

Curiously, modern Protestant church life would indicate that the major emphasis in pastoral training centers has been chiefly upon one of these three: public worship. Christian teachers assume the adequacy of the personal devotional life of their students, and the spiritual power of the small group fellowship has been lost by default. When the theological seminaries and Bible colleges recover some of the New Testament disciplines in their fullness, we can expect a corresponding increase in the power of the trained pastorate. The Church, as the Body of Christ, will then become irresistible.

The new decade upon which we are entered could be a decade of world-wide redemptive grace, flowing out of training centers for pastors from the faculty fountainhead. Therefore the thesis is that there should be a radical re-examination of the method and substance of pastoral instruction, until it is solidly based upon the pattern Jesus Christ provided for his twelve disciples. It has been available for nearly two thousand years. We need simply to dust it off and begin to build again on the only foundation that God promises to undergird. Either we accept without reservation the authenticity of the New Testament blueprint, or we discard New Testament revelation in behalf of a naked, bold, self-sufficient human reason. A religious house divided against itself cannot permanently stand. Either an aggressive rationalism will destroy revelation, or reason must become the humble and obedient servant of biblical revelation.

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

Suicide is taking place across America at the rate of 60 deaths per day, with a toll of more than 20,000 last year alone. Attempted suicide, according to current estimates, is occurring every four minutes and possibly oftener. Another classification known as “hidden suicides” may reach the startling estimate of 100,000 this year. Obviously suicide is a mental health problem of the first magnitude, yet no concerted effort to reduce the mounting rate has ever been undertaken by any reputable agency.

The happiness and well being of the individual is evidently not determined by the superficial appearances of his life, but rather, as Beulah Bosselman has suggested, “by the struggles that go on deep within his mind, hidden from the world, hidden often from himself.” Hence, victims represent all social strata, and the I.Q. ranges from the lowest to the highest. Suicide occurs frequently among those who have everything to live with, but apparently little to live for. Even church affiliation seems to be no real deterrent.

CAUSES AND TECHNIQUES

Causes of self-destruction are usually bracketed as unhappy love affairs, emotional maladjustment, chronic illness, and economic problems. Norman L. Farberow, Ph.D., of the Los Angeles Suicide Prevention Center, says that “psychologists have long since learned to look beyond the superficial overt reasons given in newspapers.” The causes they finally select, he suggests, “will depend upon the theories entertained, ranging from intensive psychiatric theories (e.g., psychoanalytic) to sociological (e.g., Durkheim).”

The techniques of self-destruction are as labyrinthine as the human mind, yet they can be grouped into standard methods: firearms, poison (barbiturates), gas, drowning, hanging, and jumping. The ratio of attempts to successful suicides in Los Angeles County, Dr. Farberow reports, is eight to one. The reason for the high ratio is sardonically expressed in a well-known verse of Dorothy Parker:

Razors pain you;

Rivers are damp;

Acids stain you;

And drugs cause cramp.

Guns aren’t lawful;

Nooses give;

Gas smells awful;

You might as well live.

(from The Portable Dorothy Parker, reprinted by permission of The Viking Press, Inc.)

Although the Bible covers thousands of years of history and records the lives and deaths of hundreds of descendants of Abraham, it tells of only five suicides. King Saul, after vainly trying to get his armor bearer to dispatch him in the midst of defeat, fell on his own sword. The armor bearer, sensing the tragedy of the occasion, destroyed himself in like manner. Ahithophel, whose speech had once had the authority of the divine oracle, turned against King David and when faced with a lost cause, hanged himself. Zimri, the fifth king of Israel, usurped the throne of Elah and reigned seven days. Fleeing into the palace from Omri, he set the building afire and perished in the ruins. Judas Iscariot, following the betrayal of Christ and his rejection by those who had bribed him, hanged himself.

Two others who might be included in the list are Samson and Abimelech. Samson dislodged the pillars of the Philistine palace at the climax of an adventurous, foolhardy, and sensual life, and destroyed himself and 3,000 Philistines. Abimelech, mortally wounded by a woman’s blow, ordered his armor bearer to draw his sword and finish him off, “that men say not of me. A woman slew him” (Judges 9:54).

Vernon Grounds writes in Baker’s Dictionary of Theology that “widely varying and sharply conflicting attitudes” have been entertained towards suicide in different times and cultures. The Stoics (Zeno, Cleanthes, Epictetus, Seneca) embraced it. Socrates and Cicero disapproved of it. While the Bible does not expressly prohibit it, prohibitory implications have been drawn from Romans 14:7–9; 1 Corinthians 6:19 and Ephesians 5:29. Both Judaism and Christianity have strongly opposed the practice; so likewise have other faiths, including Buddhism, Hinduism, Mohammedanism, and even the Dyak headhunters.

Many “hidden suicides” are never listed as such, although the motive can be clearly, if indirectly, traced. Psychologists speak of an “unconscious death wish” which, they say, accounts for many deaths, notably in wartime. According to Dr. Bosselman, self-destruction does not necessarily express itself in suicide. “Chronic physical illness and disability, neurosis in its manifold forms, drug and alcohol addictions, ‘martyrdom,’ life patterns of repetitious failure, accident proneness, are all to variable degrees motivated by the tendency of the human being to turn his aggressive drives upon himself, to act in more or less overt ways as his own executioner” (Self-Destruction, Chas. C. Thomas Publishers, Springfield, Ill.).

Those who wish to die but are unable to take the step themselves, trip and fall in front of trains, starve themselves, or like King Saul and Brutus, ask someone else to slay them. Dr. Karl A. Menninger in Man Against Himself points out that the components of suicide are (1) murder of self, (2) murder by self and (3) the wish to die. One could speculate that perhaps the reason for the popularity of death-defying acts of the Houdini type is that so many project their self-destructive views into the act. Even accident proneness can be a form of partial suicide.

Doctors Shneidman and Farberow of the Los Angeles General Hospital believe that only a small portion of the annual suicide toll is actually psychotic. They state further that depressed persons represent only 30 per cent of the self-destructions. A study of the family histories of a completed-suicide group showed that 33 per cent of the families had members who had been in mental hospitals at some time, compared with the average of about six per cent. Another study of potential suicides who had been adjudged by professional opinion to be on the way to recovery showed that 69 per cent of the discharged “well” or “recovering” people successfully destroyed themselves within one year.

The recent evidence of suicidal intent in airplane disasters heightens the seriousness of suicide as a social problem. Danger signals that pastors could well consider are, as Dr. Farberow suggests, the overt communication of intention; depression accompanied by restlessness or agitation; insomnia; marked changes in the habits of living; severe emotional trauma; feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, and uselessness.

From the scriptural viewpoint suicide is seen as unwillingness to trust God to care for us and our needs. Jesus during his temptation was taken to the pinnacle of the temple and challenged by Satan to cast himself down and permit the angels to bear him up. His answer was, “Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.” Paul brought out the fact that deliberately to choose death is to ignore life and its opportunities to help our fellow man: “For me to live is Christ … to die is gain … nevertheless to abide in the flesh is more needful for you” (Phil. 1:21, 24). (Augustine also condemned suicide under any circumstances because it precluded the possibility of repentence and therefore became murder, violating the sixth commandment.)

The Bible is clear in its teaching of the sacredness of life and the meaning of stewardship. According to the commandment we have no right to take life, even our own, for to do so is to usurp the place of God. Suicide betrays an impatience with God and man, and hastens men unprepared into the Divine presence.

Perhaps our churches are to blame for the sense of futility that seems to possess some of our communicants. If our preaching is truly spiritual it will lift men to the maturity and strength of godly faith. However, if our preaching is on such a level that it causes men to regress to immature supports, we leave them in the posture of frustration, a sort of adolescence in which they waver between adulthood and infancy. The churches’ ministry needs to be positive and uplifting in establishing a mature faith, overcoming the futile and hopeless outlook of the potential suicide.

As pastors and religious leaders we face a responsibility to our people. Our ministry must direct men to the real source of hope, Jesus Christ. When men tell us, “I might as well be dead,” a way must be found to help them to talk out their problems, and then to look to God in prayer for the power that will make them “free indeed.” We can show them the social implications of every man’s life—and death. Each of us must be a guardian of those who are losing their grip on reality, whose hope and courage are being shattered in the experiences of life. Our own bright, hopeful faith will inspire others, as we point to him who as the fountain of our faith is also the foundation of our reason: Jesus Christ, who said, “I am the way, the truth and the life.”

Creator of All Things

Now earth grows cramped, and restless man

Would venture high and far,

Would brave illimitable space

And board the nearest star.

Yet what though star and moon be gained

And distant planets trod,

Still would he merely glimpse a fringe

Of the magnitude of God.

LESLIE SAVAGE CLARK

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

The 400th anniversary of the Scottish Confession was celebrated in May at a commemoration held in Edinburgh. While attending the event, I recalled Barth’s 1938 Gifford Lectures on the Scottish Confession. The lectures were certain from beforehand to create a stir in the theological world. For Lord Gifford had endowed the Gifford series with the stipulation that the lectures be on the subject of natural theology and that they should serve the advancement of natural theology. Thus, when Barth was invited to give the lectures in 1938, he stood before a rather unique situation. He was already famous for his zealous opposition to all natural theology, for he had often declared that no theology apart from special, supernatural revelation was possible. The teaching of the Vatican Council, in which natural theology had been defined as Roman Catholic teaching, was in Barth’s view the great error which Reformed theology could only oppose. Barth wrote to the officials of the University of Aberdeen, where the lectures are held, and said that though he was against natural theology, he was willing to speak of another theology. Perhaps, he suggested, he would arouse such opposition to his own views that he would win supporters for natural theology by reaction and thus serve the purpose of the lectureship, though not in a way intended by the founder.

Since Barth’s Gifford Lectures, the question of natural theology has been the constant center of theological attention. Roman as well as Protestant writers have been busy with the subject. The new tendency in Roman theology has brought natural theology in general, and the proofs for the existence of God in particular, into intense discussion. The suggestion has been made in Roman circles that theology must be approached more Christocentrically; the Vatican statements need not be rejected, it is said, but the same matter should be approached with a different slant on the relationship between nature and grace. Thus, it is not only Protestants who have been raising questions about natural theology.

Proofs for the existence of God, apart from the Revelation of God in Christ, have unquestionably less authority now than at any time since Thomas Aquinas. One cannot challenge modern man effectually with a reasoned proof that the world has an “origin,” a first cause. Even should one feel that the argument itself has some inner cogency, he would not be a step closer toward faith than he would have been had he not heard the argument. In our day, the abstract character of the God proven to exist by natural theology is not convincing. Such a God does not sound like the God of Jesus Christ. When Roman Catholic theologians put forward proofs they insist that they are not pleading for an irrationalism that has no respect for human reason. Theirs is not, they say, a plea for truth from feeling or intuition. Outside of Roman Catholicism, the attack on natural theology stems more from the biblical-theological conclusion that the objective proofs are not really serviceable because they never come to men who are neutral to revelation. Natural man is always in reaction to the revelation that comes to him from nature in the world about him.

In Romans 1, Paul says that God has revealed himself, but that man has resisted his revelation, has held the truth down in unrighteousness. Man is not a neutral observer of God’s revelation. He is active with his entire life in reaction against it. Paul’s statement points out to us that there is no neutral position, and that this explains why there is so little convincing power in the neutral proofs for God’s existence. It is also the lack of power in the proofs which many modern Roman Catholic theologians have noticed.

From the very limited influence that the proofs have had on human thought, we see what a hopeless ambition it is to distinguish between a natural and a supernatural theology, and how it is futile to try to bring men to a real though limited knowledge of God outside of Jesus Christ. Natural theology has never been convincing to atheists for the simple reason that its arguments fail to reach the person at the point where his inclinations really lie. No person, as we have said, is ever a neutral observer of nature but is already in reaction to the revelation of God around him. Natural theology fails to reckon with the fact that man’s response to revelation is defined, not simply by objective thoughts but by the heart from which come the issues of life.

The Church of Christ must not attempt to make God appealing to natural reason. Nor should she preach that there is every “reason” to believe in God. There are many people who believe that there is a first cause, that there is something that got everything in creation going, something to which they are even willing to give the name “God.” But this kind of “faith” is that of a stranger to the actual revelation of God which is in Jesus Christ.

The Church must witness in the world to the only real God, the One revealed in Jesus Christ. She must witness, not with proofs, but with word and act. We need always to be aware that coming to living faith is not a matter of reasoned argument but of conversion, of a change of heart. In the secularization of life in our times, we can expect nothing of the power of reason but everything of the power of the Word and of the Spirit.

Natural theology has nothing to say about guilt and atonement, grace and judgment, or about God’s future. It is a secularized theology that will only lead men away from the Gospel. A person who believes in a first cause may well think that he believes in and is confident of his religion, but actually he has missed the real message if this is all he believes. The effect of natural theology has always been soporific rather than awakening. The prophets of the Old and New Testament came with a message to awaken, to disturb, and to call men to conversion.

Science, Reason And Conversion

The Psychology of Christian Conversion, by Robert O. Ferm (Revell, 1959, 231 pp., $4), is reviewed by Wallace L. Emerson, Professor of Psychology, Bible Institute of Los Angeles.

It is remarkable that one of the best, indeed one of the few recent psychologies of Christian experience should have been written not by a specialist in the field but by a professor of history. Even more unusual is the fact that his psychological insights avoid the pitfalls common to a man presumably more familiar with another field. Psychology in general and psychology in particular have largely been neglected by evangelicals, with the result that in America today there are few evangelicals who are psychologists. And when a book appears from the pen of one who has experienced evangelical conversion, who possesses familiarity with the field of religious psychology from William James to Gordon Allport, and who in addition possesses real psychological discernment, there should be much cause for rejoicing among those who are convinced that the Christian Church should not abandon an important field of human thought.

Dr. Ferm’s Psychology of Christian Conversion is apparently not intended to be definitive if indeed any work on the psychology of religion could be definitive; but in the compass of 231 pages, he manages to set forth clearly, simply, and without excessive technical verbiage, many basic problems, and to give answers that command respect and acceptance in areas where data and interpretation frequently lead to confusion. Readers will discover no reckless dogmatism; there are no asperities for those who disagree; there is a courteous consideration of points of view antagonistic to the evangelical thesis. If the book has a fault it is that of understatement and a failure to capitalize on all the logical conclusions implied in the evidence. Dr. Ferm seems to realize quite fully the difficulties involved in carrying on a contest when the field has already been chosen by opponents; but he does not on that account take evasive action or fight a defensive battle.

The book opens with a roll call of the outstanding psychologists who have written in the field of religion. Following this is a discussion of man’s capacity for religious experience of the crisis type. The reader is at first inclined to feel that Dr. Ferm is unaware of the scope of the problem when only the crisis types are presented. However, he defines crisis as a point of commitment to an ideal or to a person with or without intense emotional experience, that is, it involves a point of decision. He makes it clear that in childhood such emotional accompaniments are not at all likely because the point of decision is not so complete a reversal of the whole pattern of life.

Dr. Ferm does not fall into the error of assessing a religion in terms of its emotional content, nor does he confuse pagan or Christian mysticism with evangelical conversion. His whole discussion of spurious conversion is very clear. The fact that all men have the same psychological components will inevitably result in psychological similarities in all types of religious experience. But he points out that Christianity is unique with respect to (1) its content (differing from mysticism which has no content) (2) the extreme consciousness of sin which it promotes and for which it provides (relief not found in non-Christian religions) and (3) the moral regeneration that follows it. He quotes Underwood with reference to the latter: “There is no moral malady that conversion has not been able to cure”; and again: “of the many Hindu conversions he did not find one instance of moral metamorphosis.” As to the problem of sin, he quotes Pratt as follows: “in the biographies of Ramakrishna, for example, and in the autobiography of Tagore are to be found vivid accounts of the religious storm and stress of adolescence full of dissatisfactions, longings, and other experiences common to the adolescent of Protestant Christendom; but in spite of the sensitive conscience of these truly saintly men there is no evidence of sin.” Dr. Ferm goes on to say that “the non-Christian religions offer no adequate definition for sin and no cure, because they have no Holy Spirit who convicts of sin and applies the Word for healing; likewise in nominally Christian religions, which lack the essentials of true gospel, the sense of sin is dull.” A retreat from the concept of sin is a retreat from the most obvious reality.

The selection of cases which he gives of evangelical conversion are the classical examples (Luther, Wesley, and Finney), and rightly so, because they are biographies and autobiographical case histories that has frequently been misinterpreted.

In a chapter on theological and philosophical thought regarding the crisis, he gives a brief but clear evaluation of crisis conversion and subjectivism à la Kierkegaard, Barth, and Brunner. And while he does not labor the point, he does make it very clear that Christian conversion is imbedded in the historical medium without which it cannot be shared, explained, or retained.

One could wish that Dr. Ferm had amplified his evaluation of the modern psychiatric trends and perhaps spent more time throwing light upon the new religion of psychiatry which expresses the doctrine that criminals are merely sick minds and guilt is merely oversensitiveness to social convention and so forth. Nonetheless, this book is wholeheartedly recommended to pastors, evangelists, youth workers, and to every Christian who has to give a reason for the faith that is in him, who needs to discern the true from the false in a world where there are as many sick souls as sick minds.

WALLACE L. EMERSON

Ecumenical Proposal

The Quest for Church Unity, by Matthew Spinka (Macmillan, 1960, 85 pp., $2.50), is reviewed by Edward J. Caldwell, Pastor, First Presbyterian Church of North Hollywood, California.

Here is a timely book that is profitable reading for all who take the Church seriously and are concerned with the scandal of her divisions. The book is characterized by practical realism and integrity in a field where many have sacrificed realism for an ideal unattainable in the foreseeable future. As the title implies the book is concerned with the exciting quest for unity in the church of Christ. One of its great values is the tracing of the history of the quest primarily in the first half of the twentieth century (but including also the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral of 1886–8) yet without the detail of some of the larger volumes such as Bishop Stephen C. Neill’s standard work A History of the Ecumenical Movement, with which, along with other elaborate works, the author shows familiarity. His historical summary is admirable for setting the stage. He shows clearly that the World Council of Churches knows itself to be a council rather than a superchurch or a step toward that end. But the council idea, he recognizes, is a disappointment to a second party within the ecumenical movement that looks toward the “Great Church” or Una Sancta most seriously. The latter party he calls the “ecumenicists” in contrast with the “Federalists.”

The author then shows what considerable problems must be confronted and overcome by the maximal ecumenical party, both in the area of theological synthesis and in church polity. He shows that the unifying of the Church would sacrifice too much, either of the Reformation freedoms (if the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches were to be included) or in the search for a least common denominator in pan-Protestantism.

He makes his proposal for a “realistic” approach in the last chapter. Here he discusses certain plans for union that have already been tried, namely, the Greenwich Plan and the Union of the Church of South India. He gives reasons for feeling that neither will serve as an ultimate model. Then he describes his own proposal so that his book will not only “be a critique of extant proposals … but will offer constructive suggestions as well.”

He proposes areas of essential theological agreement for experiencing oneness, which would avoid bibliolatry on the one hand and a disregard of scriptural authority on the other. The divine-human person of Christ and the essentials of Christian faith are proposed. He insists that the Church must have freedom, but a “freedom limited by love.” He finds a present unity in the “invisible” as distinct from the “visible” Church. He may be criticized as not having an original idea or conclusion here, yet he sets forth the belief with new forcefulness. Also he avoids an escapist mentality by showing a close relationship between them which he summarizes as follows: “… of the relation of the invisible and visible Church, we now conclude that any absolute separation between them is not possible, and hence that when we ascribe unity in Christ to the Church invisible, this unity is shared by the Church visible to the degree to which that body is dominated by the mind of Christ. It is in this sense that the federalists and ecumenicists alike are right in striving for the outward unity of the Church … this latter kind of unity must necessarily be relative, because the mind of Christ is not fully dominant in the Church visible” (p. 81). The author feels that the World Council of Churches is worthy so long as it strives to federate the existing Christian communions. He sympathizes with the federalists rather than the ecumenicists whom he would define as looking and striving toward the future great structure of a United Church. Some ecumenicists will resent his defining the term in this way. The present reviewer feels indebted to the book for its clarification of issues and its realistic proposal toward fulfillment of our Lord’s prayer “that they might all be one” (John 17:21).

EDWARD J. CALDWELL

Catechisms And Theology

The School of Faith, by Thomas F. Torrance (Harper, 1959, 298 pp., $6), is reviewed by Gordon H. Clark, Professor of Philosophy, Butler University.

Catechetical instruction, so despised by modern educators, finds here a staunch defender. For one thing, education always requires the impartation of information. “Unless the mind is given material to think about, it can only turn in upon itself, and this is the mark of mental disease” (p. 27). This is all the more true of Christian education because Christianity is an historical religion. Catechisms supply the necessary information.

Doctrinal as well as historical information must be given to the pupil. The common objection to catechetical instruction, namely, that the material is beyond the experience of a child, Professor Torrance turns into an advantage by saying that catechism gives more than a child can grasp and so stretches his powers. Then, too, in any subject one must learn to ask the right questions. Catechisms teach us what questions to ask. We might not have thought of them had we been left to ourselves. Thus “the Catechisms set forth Christian doctrine at its closest to the mission, life, and growth of the Church” (p. 11).

Professor Torrance has therefore reproduced the texts of 10 catechisms, including Calvin’s Geneva Catechism, the Heidelberg Catechism, Craig’s two catechisms, the Latin Catechism, and the Westminster catechisms. He obviously prefers the earlier catechisms. The later ones are too scholastic and rationalistic.

Toward the end of the Introduction, the author sketches a view of Christ’s ontological union with all men. It is incorrect to think that Christ’s relation to mankind was merely a generic relation in that he too was man. Therefore all men are involved in Christ’s death, not only on judicial grounds but also by the constitution of His person as Mediator. The author claims to find these ideas in the earlier catechisms. God is the source of all being, he says; and therefore if Christ had not come, man would have disappeared into nothing. Christ’s work explains why men still exist (p. 113).

Professor Torrance rejects the universalism to which this type of argument leads. Earlier he had said that correct sequences of thought must never be allowed to cramp the expression of truth (p. 62). So here the author, with a complete reliance on free will, asserts that man can reject God’s grace. But how this is possible, he cannot understand: it is a bottomless mystery, words and thoughts fail him (pp. 113–116).

Would not this illogical outcome suggest that one should re-examine the premises on which it is based, return to the Westminster catechisms and to the Reformers, and unite federalism and the Covenant with the irresistible grace of God?

GORDON H. CLARK

Fresh Look At Wesley

John Wesley’s Theology Today, by Colin W. Williams (Abingdon, 1960, 252 pp., $4.50), is reviewed by C. Philip Hinerman, Pastor of Park Avenue Methodist Church. Minneapolis, Minnesota.

A modern Wesley scholar has declared that John Wesley was an obsessive compulsive neurotic, with his whole life based on a rigid self-discipline and self-control. It was true both before his conversion, while still a student at Oxford, and after his transforming Aldersgate experience. Until the time of his death after his 88th year, Wesley was still the driving, disciplined, dedicated individual.

How then could such a man as Wesley declare that salvation was by grace, and that justification came through faith alone? This proved to be one of the big issues of theological debate in Wesley’s life, and Colin Williams, young native of Australia, now Professor of Systematic Theology at Queens College, Melbourne, seeks in his first book to delineate the various phases of emphasis that Wesley made at this very point.

Franz Hildebrandt reminds us that “Methodism by its very name is open to the suspicion that it gives to means or works an undue importance and an unorthodox content, and therefore must rank with the many other forms of ‘enthusiasm’ which were so frequently rejected by Martin Luther.”

Hildebrandt goes on to quote Wesley’s own admission that there was a time when “I of means have made my boast, of means an idol made.”

But Williams is quick to remind us that if Wesley ever made an idol out of works or means, it was long before his conversion. Even prior to his salvation experience, John Wesley as a priest in the Church of England, was increasingly persuaded that Martin Luther’s doctrine of justification by faith alone was the only valid Gospel for a believing Christian.

Dr. Williams makes mention in almost every chapter of the ecumenical spirit that characterized the life and thinking of Methodism’s founder. He obviously had no intentions of breaking with the Church of England in forming his Methodist classes and societies. Always his intention was to keep these groups within the organized body of Christ, as he knew it in that day, that is, in the Church of England. However, Wesley with his strong debt to Luther and to Calvin (“coming within a hair’s breadth of Calvinism” as Wesley once said of himself) nonetheless constantly felt that within his own thinking there was a “bridge” relationship between Calvinism on the one hand and classic Roman theology on the other.

His nearness to Roman Catholicism is evidenced in the fact that Wesley held a doctrine of “double justification.” This is evidenced in his sermon titled “On The Wedding Garment,” in which Wesley speaks of sanctification being a condition of the final (not the present) justification. Yet Williams continues, “He is careful to avoid turning this holiness into a moral achievement requiring purgatory for the completion of the process by which final justification is merited. Holiness comes not by achievement but through the door of faith in accordance with our readiness to receive the promises. This holiness can be given at any time after justification, but in most it is given at the moment before death.”

Dr. Williams forcefully points out in his book that when faced with the Calvinistic dilemma of a doctrine of double predestination, Wesley did not hesitate to reject this as a possible alternative. As is well known, Wesley also fought Fletcher’s battle vigorously on the front against any type of antinomianism in the Christian life.

Today in modern Methodist circles there is a great resurgence of interest in things Wesleyan. Across America so-called Wesley Societies are springing up in Methodist conferences for a fresh look at the theology of their founder. As Wesley himself possessed the spirit of ecumenicity, so the entire holy catholic church may well be grateful for the many books of this nature that are appearing on this little man from Epworth, and for the revival of interest in the theology that “helped to save England from terrible revolution.”

C. PHILIP HINERMAN

A Great Unitarian

The Mind and Faith of A. Powell Davies, edited by William O. Douglas (Doubleday, 1959, 334 pp., $4.50), is reviewed by Lloyd F. Dean, Minister of the East Glenville Church, Scotia, New York.

Dr. Davies was probably the most gifted and distinguished Unitarian minister of the last two decades. His publishers describe him as an unrepentant liberal. That he was, but without rancor. He began his religious pilgrimage as a Methodist minister, but almost from the beginning he was dissatisfied with the demands of orthodoxy or even conventional liberalism. In the latter instance the unusual clarity of his mind is manifest. He was unable to rest in the confusion of a liberalism in orthodox dress. Following the basic logic of what is rational in liberalism, he could not stop short of an honest and forthright Unitarianism.

Davies avoided the pitfalls of a superficial liberalism on the one hand and a doctrinaire orthodoxy on the other, and yet managed to enunciate a position on the most difficult personal and social issues that would do the most earnest Bible believer great credit.

In a sermon on “The Right to Privacy” (and this book is in great part a collection of his sermons and addresses), he strikes certain notes that are pre-eminently biblical, but quite uncharacteristic of much that passes for biblical religion today. He points out that to approve in general a system of governmental investigation exhaustive enough to make public the greater part of an individual’s private life is to go far beyond that which bears on an individual’s reliability to the United States. Davies asks how many of us are eager to have our minds read or are not just a bit apprehensive when we learn we have talked in our sleep. Too many of us have forgotten that some things are between a man and his God alone and that liberty and privacy of conscience are a sacred Christian and American right. The Christian who rejoices not in evil will never use the invasion of privacy as “the occasion of demeaning and humiliating those who want to live down their mistakes.” Or as he says a little later, “the right of privacy is a right to seek one’s own redemption.” Have not certain of our evangelists forgotten this when they de facto mediate between the soul and its God until no decision can be made unless it is at once shared with the preacher? Davies puts it beautifully when he says, “It is always tyranny … which is afraid of people’s privacy. What are they thinking—these people who may not be saying what they think?… and it is only a step … to seeking ways of controlling what people think, through the media of communication, through mind-deadening repetition, through constant streams of falsehood, through censorship—and, at the extreme, through brainwashing!” Can we as conservative Christians plead complete guiltlessness in this?

Every minister should read this book for the sake of his own soul and those in his congregation. However, one must also be wary. For all the good it contains, Davies’ basic orientation is to non-Christian theism. What is wrong with this? Basically, that after treating almost every other subject in the most rational realistic way, when he comes to belief in God, he makes a leap of faith.

Let us give thanks that one can make an objective appeal to the historically validated revelation of the Scriptures. Without imposing a humanistic fantasy upon them, they stand as the Word of God. All else is superstition.

LLOYD F. DEAN

Women Of The Church

Great Women of the Christian Faith, by Edith Deen (Harper, 1959, 428 pp., $4.95), is reviewed by Norma R. Ellis, wife and mother in a Presbyterian Manse.

Such was the success that greeted her book, All the Women of the Bible, that Edith Deen, prominent newspaperwoman and lecturer, was asked by Harper and Brothers to write a companion volume on women important in the history of the church. With the same intensity of enthusiasm and thoroughness of research which she demonstrated in her other book, she attacked the task of writing this one. The result is a valuable book of reference and inspiration.

Mrs. Deen presents her subjects sympathetically and objectively. There is no Judgment passed upon the lives, beliefs, or actions of these women. There is no questioning of them either, in the light of Scripture—whether they be Mrs. Joseph Smith, Mary Baker Eddy, or Bernadette of Lourdes! Are women like these, one cannot but ask, “great women of the Christian faith” along with Ann Judson and the mother of Augustine?

Reading this book is something like taking an illuminating course in Church History, taught not by a discriminating conservative theologian, it is true, but by a most enthusiastic laywoman.

NORMA R. ELLIS

A Liberal Evangelical

The Greatest Sermons of George H. Morrison, selected and introduced by George H. Docherty (Harper, 1959, 252 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Andrew W. Blackwood, Professor of Homiletics, Emeritus, Princeton Seminary.

Here are 40 of the best (not “greatest”) published sermons from a popular liberal evangelical of yesterday in Glasgow. They are wisely selected and introduced by the able successor of Peter Marshall of the New York Avenue Presbyterian Church in Washington, D. C. The freshness and variety of Dr. Morrison’s topics are seen in titles such as, “The Message of the Rainbow,” “The Return of the Angels,” and “The Perils of the Middle-Aged.” Any reader will see how unfamiliar Bible truths can be presented clearly and kindly, simply and suggestively, with constant appeal to “eye-gate.” Morrison seems not to have published many of his morning sermons, which may have been more after the manner of “teaching-preaching.”

ANDREW W. BLACKWOOD

Exhaustive Research

The Truth About Seventh-Day Adventism, by Walter R. Martin (Zondervan, 1960, 248 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Frank A. Lawrence, Pastor of Graystone United Presbyterian Church, Indiana, Pennsylvania.

Evangelical Christians are no longer members of the “false church” or “tyrants”; those who observe the first day are not now “marked by the beast” and “guilty of the unpardonable sin,” says Walter R. Martin, Baptist minister, contributing editor of Eternity magazine, and current authority on modern cults. The author of this volume has also written Jehovah of the Watchtower, The Christian Science Myth, The Maze of Mormonism, Unity, Spiritualism, and other books and pamphlets in this field.

Martin, joined by Donald Grey Barn-house who writes the preface to the volume, interviewed present leaders of Seventh-day Adventism and closely scrutinized the official volumes now being written and distributed to Adventists. As a result he maintains that Adventist doctrine has changed and that the time has come to consider them true members of the Body of Christ.

That this is true may be gathered by contrasting the derogatory earlier statements of Elder James White, Ellen G. White, Father Bates, and Evangelist D. E. Venden with the new Seventh-day Adventist volume, Questions on Doctrine. “We believe the majority of God’s children are still scattered throughout the world, and of course the majority of those in Christian churches still conscientiously observe Sunday. We ourselves cannot do so, for we believe that God is calling for reformation in this matter. But we respect and love those of our fellow Christians who do not interpret God’s Word as we do. Finally, we would repudiate any implication that we alone are beloved of God. We recognize that a host of true followers of Christ are scattered all through the various churches of Christendom, including the Roman Catholic communion.” Martin reports that this attitude also claims much space in leading Adventist periodicals such as The Ministry and Signs of the Times.

Martin has not attempted to whitewash the differences or difficulties between Adventists and evangelicals. “They must realize their position fosters schism in the Body of Christ. Dogmatic adherence to speculative interpretation has constituted a massive barrier to understanding and fellowship. As long as Adventists maintain inflexibility where the ‘remnant church’ and other ‘special truths’ are concerned, they must expect Christians of other denominations will be cautious in according fellowship on an unlimited, unrestricted basis.”

He does maintain, on the basis of exhaustive research, that they have abandoned the concepts of the sinful nature of Christ, the “Mark of the Beast” for Sunday keepers, the infallibility of Ellen G. White, the vicarious nature of the scapegoat transaction, the law as necessary to salvation, and Satan carrying away the guilt of our sins.

In his effort to be sympathetic to the Adventists, Martin does make one misjudgment. He says that early Adventists were scorned by the evangelicals for two reasons: (1) because they were premillenarian, and (2) because of the “great disappointment”—the failure of Jesus to return to earth in 1844. The second point is true, and he follows Van Baalen and others in pointing out the falseness of the ascension robe stories and other slanderous myths. But the first is questionable. Evangelicals veered from the Adventists because Ellen G. White attacked them as false churches, false shepherds, and followers of the Pope in Sunday observance. Premillenarians have always been within the fold of the Church (e.g., Tertullian, Bengel, Alford, Bonar, Moorehead, Kellogg and so forth); but even J. N. Darby, who broke the generally accepted pattern of historic premillenarianism, never introduced “visions,” “revelations” and “halos of light” around Revelation chapter 20.

Not only is this book the result of exhaustive research in its study of the Adventist movement, but it also offers a full bibliography to the student who wishes to delve further into the subject.

Martin, aware that his volume will cause consternation and bitterness, nevertheless offers the right hand of fellowship on his studied conviction that evangelicals and Adventists are one in accepting the basic doctrines of the Trinity, salvation through the grace of God and the blood of Christ, the absolute deity of Jesus Christ, and the inspiration of the Scriptures. This is a book which will be “kicked around” in evangelical and Adventist circles until the Southern Baptists appoint an envoy to the Vatican.

FRANK A. LAWRENCE

Gnostic Writings

The Secret Sayings of Jesus, by Robert M. Grant and David Noel Freedman (Doubleday, 1960, 206 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Julius Robert Mantey, Professor of New Testament, Northern Baptist Theological Seminary.

In this volume we have an excellent scholarly presentation of the papyri discoveries of Gnostic writings which came to a climax in the unearthing of a Gnostic library consisting of 13 volumes in the Coptic language, found in Egypt in 1945, most of which are still unpublished.

So-called sayings of Jesus, which have been found from time to time among papyri in the sands of Egypt, are discussed and extensive quotations are given from the noncanonical “gospels” of Peter, of Hebrews, and of The Egyptians. But most of the book deals with The Gospel of Thomas, “written in Coptic during the fourth century of our era” (p. 18).

The following are a few pertinent quotations: “The canonical gospels are more original” (p. 46). “What we find in this Gnostic system is a complete spiritualization of the Christian Gospel” (p. 89). “Enough evidence has been given to show that as a whole The Gospel of Thomas must be considered a Gnostic gospel” (p. 89).

Robert M. Grant is Professor of New Testament at the University of Chicago, and David Noel Freedman is Professor of Old Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary.

JULIUS ROBERT MANTEY

Light On The Obsolete

The Bible Word Book, by Ronald Bridges and Luther A. Weigle (Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1960, 422 pp., $5), is reviewed by Everett F. Harrison, Professor of New Testament, Fuller Theological Seminary.

It is safe to say that most readers of the English Bible have paid little attention to the history of the words which their version contains. They usually ask only to be able to make out the meaning with tolerable certainty. This volume shows how difficult it is to understand the idiom of the King James Bible without a knowledge of the English of the period out of which it sprang.

A double purpose underlies this book. One is to show what meaning the King James translators had in mind when they used words that are now obsolete or archaic. For the realization of this task, heavy reliance is put upon the help of the great Oxford English Dictionary. Shakespeare’s works are also cited with frequency as providing parallels to our common version. A case in point is Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 4:4, “I know nothing by myself.” To the modern reader this sounds as though the apostle is disclaiming any self-acquired knowledge. This seems strange, and it does not fit the context. However, when it is discovered that Shakespeare used “by” in the sense of “against,” it becomes clear that the King James translators did the same. As an interesting sidelight, the authors note an occasional instance in which modern English dictionaries, in accepting the guidance of the King James as to the meaning of words and reading present-day nuances into terms that have changed their force, have actually given meanings to words which the original text of Scripture will not support (p. 15).

The present volume performs a helpful service in pointing out from time to time the influence of earlier English versions, especially that of Tyndale, upon the King James.

A second announced purpose of this work is to indicate what terms modern versions have used to render the obsolete or archaic words found in the King James, and what terms have shifted their meanings. Out of a total of 827 words and phrases treated in alphabetical order, a large majority lend themselves to both approaches—the disclosure of obsolescence and the statement of the modern substitute.

No one who is studying the Bible as literature can afford to ignore this volume.

EVERETT F. HARRISON

Crusade In New Zealand

Let the People Rejoice, by Warner Hutchinson and Cliff Wilson (Crusader Bookroom Society, Ltd., Wellington, 1959, 151 pp., 10s. 6d.), is reviewed by Robert O. Ferm Visiting Professor and Lecturer at Houghton College.

In addition to an ever-growing library of books about Billy Graham, there are volumes intended to provide a record of particular crusades. A most informative and interestingly written addition to this library is the documentary volume by co-authors Hutchinson and Wilson, titled Let the People Rejoice. The co-authors have amassed a surprising bulk of statistical information and present the week-long crusade in New Zealand as a typical Billy Graham crusade.

One might expect to find a documentary volume on such a topic as evangelism overweighted with little more than a numerical measurement. Happily, the writers have relegated much of the statistical information and name lists to a valuable appendix. By this device, the writers have retained for the body of the volume a warm and inspiring account of how a Billy Graham crusade happens—from start to finish.

Pastors who seriously give themselves to the work of evangelism will be greatly aided in the summary on counselor training in the appendix.

For the mind that responds with accurate and factual reporting, this volume will prove to be most rewarding. For the soul that desires refreshing, the detailed accounts of particular instances of conversion will abundantly satisfy.

ROBERT O. FERM

Mental Health

Religion, Science and Mental Health, by the Academy of Religion and Mental Health (New York University Press, 1959, 107 pp., $3); The Psychology of Jesus and Mental Health, by Raymond L. Cramer (Cowman Publications, 1959, 262 pp., $3.95); and Man’s Right to be Human, by George Christian Anderson (William Morrow & Co., 1959, 191 pp., $3.50), are reviewed by Dr. Lars I. Granberg, Professor of Pastoral Counseling and Psychology, Fuller Theological Seminary.

Since the days of Freud’s pronouncements on religion, the debate between religion and science has focused a good deal upon the challenges leveled at Christianity by the psychological disciplines. In recent years the tone of the discussion has moderated. Vigorous efforts toward rapprochement have arisen. Among the most influential of these is the Academy of Religion and Mental Health, an association of clergymen, psychiatrists, and psychologists. Its purpose is to develop a climate in which fruitful conversation can be held between psychologists, psychiatrists, and “specialists in religion.”

The first book is a product of the Academy’s efforts. Its subtitle is “Proceedings of the First Academy Symposium on Inter-discipline Responsibility for Mental Health—A Religious and Scientific Concern.” Section I discusses the contributions of the behavioral sciences, emphasizing psychology, sociology, and cultural anthropology; Section II emphasizes the contribution of psychiatry; and Section III the joint role of religion, the behavioral sciences, and medicine. The participants are men who have distinguished themselves in their special fields.

The views expressed provide the reader with a cross section of the current discussion. As such, this small book is useful as an introduction to the thinking going on today. It is well written and employs a minimum of technical jargon. Pastors who have had little opportunity to familiarize themselves with the issues will find the book helpful in this respect. Those for whom this is familiar ground will find no lack of intellectual fodder. A guide for further reading would have added greatly to the book’s usefulness.

The author of The Psychology of Jesus and Mental Health serves as the Fresno County (California) School System’s Counselor in Mental Hygiene. The book is an attempt to derive mental health principles from those sayings of our Lord known as “the beatitudes.”

The book considers common mental health problems including fear, hostility, obsessive-compulsiveness, and hysteria. The value of mercy, forgiveness, and love in the achievement of personal maturity are set forth. These topics are treated by (l) a paraphrase of the beatitude, (2) an examination of the mental health principles implied in the author’s paraphrase, and (3) an examination of the contribution of the Christian faith toward the achievement of maturity.

The mental health principles discussed are sound. The author has handled them simply and clearly. The counsel he derives from biblical teaching is generally commendable. To my mind, however, the book shares the weakness of many psychology and religion books: it moves from mental health principles to Christian resources too quickly and too simply. The actual intermediate steps bridging these are left obscure, and biblical scholars are likely to be mystified about the connection between the beatitudes as actually expressed in the New Testament, and as paraphrased by the author.

Ministers who are theologically conservative may find the book useful to pass along to parishioners who suffer from chronic emotional upset. A word of caution, however, on the self-rating chart the author included in the appendix. Emotionally troubled persons tend to come to such charts with their perspective distorted by their inner tensions and find such guides more troubling than helpful.

Man’s Plight to be Human is a kind of statement of faith by the Episcopal clergyman who is presently serving as director of the Academy of Religion and Mental Health. His thesis is that “man has a right to be human, to live with himself and with others free from emotional instability and fear” (p. 10). The book seems to represent a report on the author’s spiritual pilgrimage. From his present vantage point he discusses such things as false concepts of God, unhealthy religion, facing death, and immortality. As a personal viewpoint, vigorously presented, it could well be read in conjunction with the Cramer book as a kind of counter-irritant. Theologically conservative ministers mature enough to profit from “seeing ourselves as others see us” will find in this book a challenge to examine their convictions more deeply. However, some psychological evidence advanced seems to have been too uncritically examined.

LARS I. GRANBERG

Light For The Laity

God Is Inescapable, by David Wesley Soper (Westminster, 1959, 128 pp., $2.95); You Shall be My People: The Books of Covenant and Law, by Edwin M. Good (1959, 96 pp., $1.50); and In His Service: The Servant Lord and His Servant People, by Lewis S. Mudge (1959, 176 pp., $3), are reviewed by Andrew K. Rule, Professor of Church History and Apologetics, Louisville Presbyterian Seminary.

These three books are intended to inform lay members of the Protestant Church of the more active role being recognized for them, and to inspire them to be the more fruitful. Earlier the Westminster Press published a series on theology for the same purpose. Dr. Good’s book is one of a projected series to deal with the Bible, and he himself is general editor of the series. Although such efforts are to be commended, they can be harmful or at least of doubtful value if not characterized by adequate scholarship, fidelity to the faith, and a simple dignity of style.

Dr. Soper seeks to instruct the layman about God our Father, God the Son, and God in and among us. He therefore has something worth saying, but he is not orthodox by any stretch of the imagination. All too often, he uses methods which, while they may appeal to some, certainly offends others. His style is flippant, and he often calls on a riotous imagination in the absence of facts. Noteworthy in this instance is his treatment of Abraham (p. 16).

Dr. Good’s book is successful in expressing the deep religious significance of Old Testament law. He shows that that law was not simply queer social legislation, produced in an unscientific age, to which no attention need now he paid. However, he does write from a point of view that is more humanistic than the Bible. We read constantly of Israel discovering, Israel remembering, rather than of God revealing. If, as he writes, “the Pentateuch is the confession of a people’s faith,” then was that people Israel or was it rather certain chosen ones from among the people of Israel? The whole book expresses an historical reconstruction which the author admits to rest on supposition and hypothesis (p. 23). These incidentally are not the only ones current among scholars and seem indeed to be out of date. Among scholars endless debate of such matters and accompanying search for evidence might seem to be in order, but whether they should take up space in a popular book is another question.

Lewis Mudge’s book may be commended without qualifications. He takes the theme of the servant Lord and works it out with enlightenment and conviction. From the standpoint of service, he discusses the Lord and his people, theology, the Christian, the Church, and the State. The author’s purpose in further discussing the theme of the recent convocation in Brazil is to persuade Christians that their role is to serve the spiritual and other welfare of all mankind.

ANDREW K. RULE

Meditations On Luke

Peace, Poise, Power, by Edythe J. Johnson (Augustana Press, 1959, 424 pp., $3.50), is reviewed by Eric Edwin Paulson, Minister of Lutheran Free Church.

Although announced as “Meditations for Women Based on the Gospel of Luke,” entire families would find profit and blessing in the daily use of this volume. The author has served with her husband as a missionary in Africa and in several American pastorates, and the writings are clearly the fruit of a life dedicated to study, prayer, meditation, and service in the kingdom of God. As the tide implies, true peace, poise, and power can be acquired by study of the Word and daily fellowship with the living Christ. Unique in that it attempts to cover every verse of Luke’s Gospel, the volume’s primary purpose is inspirational rather than expository. Yet it might appropriately find a place in many pastors’ studies since it furnishes fresh insights and suggestions for sermons.

Ever since the days of the Apostle Paul, who wrote appreciatively of godly women who labored with him in the Gospel, devout and gifted women like Priscilla have expounded the way of God more perfectly sometimes to an eloquent but insufficiently instructed Apollos. Every sincere preacher thanks God for help from such consecrated women, although it has often been unsolicited and not adequately recognized by the church at large.

The present meditations vary somewhat in quality, but the style is always clear and the ideas freshly expressed. Especially to be commended is the author’s constant effort to point out the practical meaning of Christ’s teaching. A brief prayer at the close of each meditation enhances the value of the book.

ERIC EDWIN PAULSON

Book Briefs

The Voice of Authority, by George W. Marston (Presbyterian and Reformed, 1960, 110 pp., $2)—Dealing with the living question of ultimate authority the author finds it in the God revealed in nature and the Holy Scriptures. He sees the will of God mediated by Christ and revealed in Scripture under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Multipurpose Tools for Bible Study, by Frederick W. Danker (Concordia, 1960, 289 pp., $3.75)—Introduces theological students, pastors and lay leaders to the principal aids for competent and rewarding Bible study.

The Lutheran Church Among Norwegian Americans, by E. Clifford Nelson and Eugene L. Fevold (Augsburg, 1960, 2 vols., 736 pp., $12.50)—A carefully documented comprehensive history of the Evangelical Lutheran Church. Attractively packaged. A scholarly contribution to the record of Lutheran growth and development in America.

Life in the Son, by Robert Shank (Westcott, 1960, 380 pp., $4.95)—A critical and scholarly examination of the popular doctrine of “eternal (unconditional) security.”

The Human Problems of the Minister, by Daniel D. Walker (Harper, 1960, 203 pp., $3.95)—Helpful to the minister as a human being. An aid in recognizing and overcoming perplexing personal problems.

With My Own Eyes, by Bo Giertz (Macmillan, 1960, 237 pp., $4.50)—The Bishop of Gothenburg recreates in a most convincing novel the story of the four Gospels.

Elementary Patrology, by Aloys Dirksen, C.PP.S (B. Herder Book Co., 1959, 314 pp., $4)—An introduction to the literary beauty and theological wealth of the writings of the early Church Fathers.

The Gospel We Preach, by 68 Lutheran pastors (Augustana, 1960, 374 pp., $3.75)—Sermons with ecumenical outreach appropriate to the church year, based on the ancient series of Gospel lessons.

Mover of Men and Mountains (Prentice-Hall, 1960, 282 pp., $3.95)—The autobiography of R. G. Le Tourneau, one of America’s most remarkable inventors and industrialists, who built his career around a unique partnership with God.

What God Hath Wrought, edited by Gilbert L. Guffin (Judson, 1960, 179 pp., $3.50)—Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary’s 35 years of history as seen by seven men closely associated in the institution’s growth and achievements.

The Story of Southern Presbyterians, by T. Watson Street (John Knox Press, 1960, 134 pp., $1.50)—A brief definitive history officially authorized by the Centennial Committee of the Presbyterian Church U. S. and issued in commemoration of its one hundredth anniversary.

In ecclesiastical circles, the late spring is synonymous with church conventions—in North America and abroad. Here are reports from this year’s meetings (others will follow in subsequent issues ofCHRISTIANITY TODAY):

At Rock Island, Illinois—Delegates to the centennial (101st) synod of the 600,000-member Augustana Lutheran Church voted approval of a merger with three other Lutheran bodies. They asked the Joint Commission on Lutheran Unity, meanwhile, to consider changes in the consolidated constitution which would (1) record belief in the Bible as “the Word of God,” and (2) provide wider synod representation on the new church’s executive council.

A tentative plan calls for a constituting convention in June, 1962, to bring together the Augustana group with the United Lutheran Church in America, the Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church (Suomi Synod), and the American Evangelical Lutheran Church. The merged group is to be known as the Lutheran Church in America. Its three million members will make it the largest Lutheran denomination in North America.

The Augustana church is the first of the four merging bodies to give the unity plan a vote of approval. After consideration by the separate church conferences, the merger plan must then be ratified by a two-thirds vote of next year’s synod.

Delegates also adopted a resolution declaring that “ideological beliefs and affiliations or the lack of them are, among other criteria, valid grounds for judging the fitness of candidates for public office.”

“It is a misuse of the concept of tolerance to exclude such criteria from consideration,” the resolution said. “The Church reminds its members of their individual responsibilities as voting citizens and urges a conscientious and prayerful study of these factors before voting for any candidate for public office.”

The resolution was approved after delegates heard a report by the denomination’s commission on social action which raised serious questions relative to the fitness of a Roman Catholic to hold the office of U. S. President.

Unlike the Protestant, “who appropriates pronouncements of his church … in the light of his own conscience,” the Roman Catholic “can assert no broad right of conscientious testing except under the threat of very grave sin in the eyes of his church,” the commission’s report declared.

A candidate’s claim that he will defend the Constitution, the report added, is “hardly an answer” to the question of a Catholic’s fitness for the President’s office, since the Constitution is “subject to change as well as interpretation.”

Another resolution adopted by the delegates stoutly defended the National Council of Churches against charges of Communist infiltration. Still another called for special, thorough instruction of all converts from the Mormon faith.

Warning of the danger of the secularization of the church college, a Lutheran editor told the synod that many American colleges established by Christian communities have lost their original character and can “in no sense be recognized as different from state-supported schools.”

“The fate of these institutions,” said Dr. E. E. Ryden, editor of the Lutheran Companion and chairman of the board of directors of Augustana College, “brings home to us a lesson that we do well to heed with all soberness of spirit as we celebrate our centennial as a church and college.” He added:

“A primary requisite is to make sure that the church never loses ownership and control of its institutions of higher learning. This matter assumes all the more importance in the light of the impending merger with other Lutheran bodies where the relationship between the church and its various institutions has not been as clearly defined as in the Augustana Lutheran Church.”

The seven-day centennial meeting ended with the ordination of 42 young men. Officiating at the ordination service was Dr. Malvin H. Lundeen, Augustana president, assisted by a noted synod guest, Archbishop Gunnar Hultgren of Uppsala, Sweden.

In recognition of the centennial observance this year, the annual synod was designated a “general” convention, which permits each congregation to send its pastor and a lay delegate. As a result, more than 2,000 delegates were on hand as compared with the 600 usually present at an annual synod.

The Augustana church was organized June 5, 1860, at Jefferson Prairie, near Clinton, Wisconsin, as the “Scandinavian Evangelical Lutheran Augustana Synod in North America.”

A prelude to the convention was a memorial service in a secluded cemetery at Jefferson Prairie, where church officials assembled to pay tribute to the founders. A massive granite monument marks the site of the first chapel.

At Buck Hill Falls, Pennsylvania—The 154th annual General Synod of the Reformed Church in America turned down an invitation to merge with the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. The Presbyterian body’s 1959 General Assembly had extended a merger overture to other denominations of the Reformed tradition.

Also rejected was a proposal by the church’s Christian Action Commission to endorse a ban on “all nuclear tests for military purposes by international agreement, together with all chemical, biological and radiological weapons of mass destruction.” Opponents maintained that the proposal would put the synod in the position of “advising the military what weapons to use.” Instead, a resolution was adopted which expressed “approval of all the efforts” of President Eisenhower in “search for adequate controls and the ultimate abandonment of such weapons of mass destruction.”

The synod tabled a recommendation from its overtures committee to “record its disagreement and disassociate” itself from the 1958 World Order Study Conference which proposed U. S. and U. N. recognition of Communist China.

A resolution calling upon classes (local governing bodies) to open their churches’ “worship and fellowship” to all “irrespective of race” followed unanimous endorsement of a letter written by Dr. Howard G. Hageman, retiring president, to the Dutch Reformed Churches in South Africa. Hageman asked for a declaration “that in Jesus Christ there is neither Afrikaner, Colored or Bantu.”

“We cannot justify this situation in our country,” he said, “nor, we believe, would you seek to justify it in yours.”

Dr. Henry Bast, former Reformed Church vice president and speaker on the denomination’s weekly “Temple Time” radio broadcast since 1952, was elected to succeed Hageman as president. Bast is a professor at Western Theological Seminary in Holland, Michigan.

Delegates representative of the 223,000-member communion approved a theological commission report affirming the historicity of the book of Genesis.

But “we must be clear as to the nature of this history,” the report said. “The faith of the Bible is inseparably tied to historical events. We protest against all attempts to divorce faith from history, and to reduce the word which God would speak to us to abstract information about his nature and/or universal principles of moral behavior.”

The synod also proposed a study on the feasibility of adopting for the Lord’s Prayer the uniform sentence, “Forgive us our sins as we forgive those who sin against us.” The World and National Councils of Churches were asked to consider the change to replace the present use in that sentence of the word “debts” by some groups, and “trespasses” by others.

Another development was the creation of a permanent “committee on the professorate” in lieu of a special standing committee to deal with ministerial candidates. The new committee was given responsibility to conduct studies concerning establishment of “minimum standards” of academic requirement and institutional accreditation for candidates from other than Reformed Church colleges and seminaries. It was also asked to define “proper credentials” for a minister ordained by another ecclesiastical body or religious group” for his reception into the Reformed Church ministry.

The committee was requested, moreover, to consider establishment of a “possible order of lay workers or lay ordination for specific purposes” as a means of helping to meet the “immediate shortage” of personnel in the “expanding program of the church.”

In the president’s annual report, Hageman called upon congregations to place a new emphasis on Christian witness and evangelism in their local communities.

“Too many of our congregations in metropolitan areas,” he said, “are steadily losing ground because they do not know how to minister to changing populations.”

He also challenged his constituents to “delineate much more carefully our ideas, our concepts, our doctrines, our point of view about the church.”

In suggesting a celebration in 1963 of the 400th anniversary of the writing of the Heidelberg Catechism, Hageman proposed particularly an international theological congress.

The catechism, a significant confessional statement, was written in Heidelberg, Germany, in 1563.

Hageman also recommended a meeting of all Reformed Church in America theological professors at the 1961 General Synod.

At Fargo, North Dakota—The 64th annual conference of the Lutheran Free Church heard a call from its president, Dr. John M. Stensvaag, to return to Sunday evening services.

“It is not comfortable to see our Lutheran churches dark and empty while others are open on Sunday evening,” he said. “Lively singing, strong expository preaching, rich in food for the believer and with a clear evangelistic tone, can make these services contribute greatly to the life of the church.”

Stensvaag also urged greater emphasis on adult education and wider participation by children in week-day released time classes.

Participating in the conference were 315 voting lay delegates, 155 pastors and 90 advisory delegates, plus visitors.

At Boston—Seven thousand delegates were on hand for the annual meeting of The Mother Church, The First Church of Christ Scientist. Arthur W. Eckman, a Cambridge, Massachusetts, lawyer who has been general counsel of the legal department of The Mother Church since 1944, was named president.

At Guelph, Ontario—Chief development of the 86th General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Canada was establishment of an administrative council charged with ensuring that the work of the church is carried on efficiently and effectively.

Dr. Leslie King, retired physician, was named chairman of the council, which must coordinate the efforts of all church agencies and recommend policy (including budgetary aspects). To avoid “an entrenched bureaucracy,” executive secretaries will serve as non-voting members. Voting members will be appointed by the assembly and will be limited to six consecutive years in office.

Korean Violence

Club-swinging demonstrators broke into a compound where missionaries of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. were holding their annual mission meeting last month. Several American missionaries suffered minor injuries.

Police arrested IB demonstrators, said to be students representing a small, extremist anti-ecumenical element in Korean Presbyterianism. They waved a banner saying, “Unalterably Oppose WCC Ecumenicity,” and sang “Onward Christian Soldiers” as they invaded the compound and tried to break into houses where the missionaries had barricaded themselves.

The violence followed the mission’s reaffirmation of allegiance to the reunited General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Korea.

Inflammatory agitation by the International Council of Christian Churches is blamed in part for continuing incidents involving the extremists.

Korean missionaries are urging U. S. Christians to “pray for us and for the terrific spiritual low that has settled down on a good segment of the Korean church.”

The assembly accepted an invitation from the Anglican Church of Canada to enter into “conversations” regarding common theological, administrative, and parochial concerns.

A proposed revision of the Book of Common Order was sent to presbyteries for study following a debate centered on alleged “high church” tendencies in the book and criticism of the lack of prayers which reflect contemporary concerns and which are expressed in modern language.

The assembly also (1) gave Montreal’s Presbyterian College permission to sell its property to McGill University and to relocate near the campus; (2) elected the Rev. Robert Lennox, principal of the college, as moderator; (3) approved a “programme of advance, emphasizing evangelism” with a view to doubling the present communicant membership of 198,000 by 1975, when the church will mark its 100th anniversary; (4) commended the Canadian government for admitting 200 European refugee families, each having one tubercular member, noting that tuberculosis hospitals in Canada have many empty beds while people in other lands are unable to be treated; and (5) referred back to the presbyteries a proposal to ordain women (the assembly refused to hear from Shirley McLeod, 19-year-old coed who aspires to be the church’s first woman minister).

At Hamilton, Ontario—The Baptist Convention of Ontario and Quebec voted to explore the possibility of some control over its 450 traditionally-autonomous churches. An investigating committee was named after the Rev. Harold Stibbards said that conditions in congregations sometimes become “so bad” that the reputation of the Baptist communion is endangered. Stibbards argued that churches in the same association should be given authority to move in and say: “Either you fellows act like Christians or we’ll be forced to take over your affairs.”

The Rev. A. S. McGrath, general secretary-treasurer of the Lord’s Day Alliance of Canada, told the Baptist assembly that some change in the Lord’s Day Act “is inevitable.” McGrath’s remarks were widely interpreted as indicative of a somewhat easing attitude toward Sunday offenders.

At Belfast—The General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland voted against the use of “financial pressure” to influence a merger proposal between the United Church of North India and the Indian Presbytery of Gujarat. The Irish church, which sends about $280,000 annually to India, decided by a vote of 386–106 to continue support regardless of the outcome of the merger plan.

At Edinburgh—Delegates to the 400th annual General Assembly of the Church of Scotland approved, by a vote of 165 to 164, the principle that women should be eligible for the office of elder. The 1,000 clergy and lay delegates also: (1) decided to resume unity talks with the Church of England (previous negotiations broke down with the assembly’s rejection last year of the “bishops-in-presbytery” concept); (2) sanctioned family planning but condemned use of contraceptives from motives of indulgence or luxury; and (3) rejected a committee report, by a vote of 220 to 208, which said in effect that after the duty of worship there should be a place for physical recreation and that a negative attitude to the problems of the present generation should be avoided.

In a message to the assembly, Queen Elizabeth II stated her intention of attending the Scottish church’s special 400th anniversary celebrations in October. According to religious historians, no sovereign has been present at a Church of Scotland General Assembly since 1603.

At Edinburgh—By a majority of 44 to 40, commissioners to the General Assembly of the Free Church of Scotland expressed the denomination’s “dissatisfaction at the attitude of the Royal Family towards the Lord’s Day.” The rebuke was added to the church’s traditional loyal address to Queen Elizabeth II after the message had been read to delegates.

Korean Ecumenism

The election of a Presbyterian minister as the new general secretary of the Korean National Council of Churches last month ended a debate over whether the individual filling the post must belong to a member church of the World Council of Churches.

The new secretary, the Rev. Simeon (Shin Myung) Kang, is a member of the Presbyterian Church in Korea which reluctantly withdrew from the WCC in February in a move to restore peace and unity after an anti-ecumenical minority had split the church. This left the Methodist Church in Korea as the only Korean denomination in the WCC.

It had been argued that since the Korean NCC is a member of the International Missionary Council which is in turn related to the WCC, its executive official must be elected from a WCC-related church. This would have excluded candidates from other churches in the Korean NCC.

The election of the 51-year-old Presbyterian pastor was closely followed by a significant endorsement of the Korean NCC by the Holiness Church which resisted strong pressures to leave the NCC and in a close vote chose to retain its historic ties with the interdenominational council, which represents about 75 per cent of Korea’s Protestants.

S.M.

[See also “Korean Violence” on page 29—ED.]

Campus Expansion

Ground was broken last month for a $1,000,000 library on the campus of Hope College in Holland, Michigan.

The library will be named after G. J. Van Zoeren, retired Holland industrialist and a Hope alumnus who advanced $525,000 toward its construction as a memorial to his late wife.

Scheduled completion date is September, 1961. The new library is part of a $3,000,000 campus development program which will also include a new academic building and an athletic field. Officials are hoping that the expansion will be complete by 1966, when the college marks its 100th anniversary.

Hope, founded by a group of religious immigrants from The Netherlands, is governed by a 56-member board of trustees 50 of whom are chosen by synods of the Reformed Church in America. Two-thirds of its 1311 students this year were members of the Reformed Church in America. The remainder represent 19 other denominations, led by the Christian Reformed Church.

A Study of Freedom

The National Council of Churches is launching a year-long, nationwide “study of religious freedom” among its member communions. It will be conducted by the council’s Department of Religious Liberty under a newly-appointed executive director, the Rev. Dean M. Kelley, former pastor of Crawford Memorial Methodist Church in New York City.

Dr. Roy G. Ross, NCC general secretary, says the study program will place emphasis on local discussion of questions such as: Should Christians be concerned about freedom and how should that concern be expressed? Should there be any religious tests for public office? How does “free speech” affect the broadcasting of derogatory statements about religious groups?

Other questions include: What about the use of tax money for denominational hospitals and schools? How does one arouse a church to witness to its social responsibility? What should be done when a Congressional investigation violates religious and human rights?

The religious freedom inquiry comes on the heels of a year-long “peace program” conducted by the council.

African Documentary

The day following the climax of the capital crusade, “Africa on the Bridge,” had its world premiere in Washington’s National Guard Armory. A feature-length documentary, the new film treats the viewer to a first-hand account of Graham’s 17,000-mile “safari for souls” earlier this year. Photographed in authentic sound and natural color in 17 cities across Africa, it depicts the continent as being in a period of transition—on a bridge—between ancient tribalism and the shining goal of independence from colonial rule.

Following the Washington premiere, “Africa on the Bridge” will be shown in churches throughout the United States and Canada. The film was produced by World Wide Pictures and directed by Dick Ross. Scheduled for October release by World Wide Pictures is “Shadow of the Boomerang,” dramatic film built around Graham’s Australian crusade.

Manchester: How Broad The Way?

When the Billy Graham team first indicated that the evangelist was contemplating a crusade in Manchester, England, next spring, certain church council officials of the area apparently felt that time was ripe for a new deal in evangelism.

Their initial overture came in a letter early this year from Canon Eric Saxon of the Manchester, Salford and District Council of Churches. The Graham team was in Jos, Nigeria, at the time.

“My Council represents the denominations in Manchester and … is a cross section of all churches and opinion in the area,” wrote Saxon. He indicated that many council members are reluctant to commit their churches to a campaign of one particular emphasis, and inquired whether Graham would widen his platform to reflect the views of all supporting churches.

Graham’s representatives replied by outlining the nature and procedures of the evangelist’s mission in previous crusades.

In Nairobi, Kenya, the team received another letter from Saxon. Indicating that the Council of Churches had discussed the proposed crusade at length, he offered the possibility of “official support of the denominations, rather than only of individual clergy and ministers.” The council’s condition was that Graham “share his Campaign with men of great standing in the Church, whose outlook may be a little different but who would bring into the Crusade the Churches they represent. For instance if Father Trevor Huddleston, Dr. George F. MacLeod of the Iona community, and Dr. Donald Soper, and the Bishop of Middleton … could be brought into the Crusade … I am authorized to say that the Council of Churches would give its wholehearted support to the proposed Crusade … by a unanimous resolution of the Council.…”

If not possible, Saxon said, the council feared a serious difference of opinion in Manchester which would make it difficult for Graham to receive an invitation from the churches of the city.

All four of the assistant missioners suggested by Saxon are known to be to the theological left of Graham. MacLeod, for instance, is a Pacifist who majors in social concern; he op posed Graham’s coming to Scotland in 1955 on the floor of the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly.

An inquiry among Manchester churches by Christian businessmen, meanwhile, showed 850 of the first 1,000 responses favorably inclined toward the Graham crusade.

Yet the council of churches, as late as April 1, still insisted that Graham share his pulpit for 20 minutes each night with Huddleston, Soper, MacLeod, or the Bishop of Middleton as a condition of their cooperation. Jerry Beavan, one of Graham’s top aides, then declined the offer.

Subsequently, 600 of the ministers who had responded favorably to an inquiry about a Manchester crusade assembled to hear Beavan and two other team members.

This favorable response was augmented by a resolution adopted unanimously by the Anglican Ministers Evangelical Fellowship to invite Graham to come to Manchester next year.

The council continues to stand aloof, insisting on a “broadened platform” but giving no definitive interpretation other than the use of the missioners indicated. The council minimizes present support of the crusade, saying that the major denominations are as yet uncommitted. But many affirmative replies have come from Anglicans, Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyterians, as well as from Plymouth Brethren and Nazarene groups. The Church of England Newspaper spurred interest in the crusade with a front-page report.

Plans call for formation of a Manchester crusade executive committee in September. The council must then decide whether to support it.

Married Priests

A 54-year-old former Lutheran pastor, married and a father, was ordained a Roman Catholic priest in Copenhagen, Denmark, last month.

Father Olav Roerdam Bonnevie was given special permission from the Holy See to receive “holy orders” while remaining in the married state.

Pastor of a Lutheran parish in North Jutland for 12 years, Bonnevie was received into the Catholic church in 1945. His wife and only daughter were converted two years later.

The permission for ordination parallels several recent cases in Germany. Since World War II, about half dozen married Lutheran ministers are said to have been ordained.

Controversial Prelate

Archbishop Yegishe Derderian, 50-year-old native of Turkey, was elected last month as Patriarch of the Armenian Apostolic (Orthodox) Church. He thus filled a vacancy created by the death of Cyril Israelian in October, 1949.

The new patriarch was elected by a vote of 18 to 5 of the General Assembly of the Brotherhood of St. James, supreme governing body of the patriarchate, in a dramatic climax to one of the most bitter and disturbing chapters in the history of the church whose adherents include nearly 1,000,000 Armenians living in Asia, the Americas, and the Middle East.

His election in Jerusalem came less than a week after he had been forcibly installed as locum tenens of the patriarchate by Jordanian Military Governor Hassan el Khatib, backed by a detachment of army officials and police, despite the fact that he had been expelled from the St. James community three years ago and placed under ecclesiastical interdiction by Catholicos Vazgen I, supreme head of the Church, whose seat is at Etchmiadzin in Soviet Armenia.

Archbishop Derderian had originally been appointed locum tenens at the death of Patriarch Cyril, but was expelled from the brotherhood after being found guilty by the General Assembly on nine counts of “misdemeanors and abuse of office.” He is now reported to have been granted a spiritual pardon.

The Golden Years

Professor and Mrs. Andrew W. Blackwood are marking the 50th anniversary of their marriage by renewing wedding vows in a public service to be held in the Presbyterian Church of Ardmore, Pennsylvania, on July 14. Blackwood is professor emeritus of Princeton Theological Seminary and a well-known authority in homiletics. The Rev. Andrew W. Blackwood, Jr., will conduct the service.

Celebrating their 60th anniversary are Dr. and Mrs. Nathan Wood, beloved for their work with Gordon College and Divinity School and now retired. Gordon’s commencement this spring came on the 50th anniversary of Wood’s arrival at the school. He subsequently served a term as president and his wife as a dean.

People: Words And Events

Elections: As bishops of The Methodist Church, Dr. Fred Garrigus Holloway, president of Drew University; Dr. William Vernon Middleton, general secretary of the Methodist Division of National Missions, Dr. William Ralph Ward, Jr., minister of Mt. Lebanon (Pennsylvania) Methodist Church; and Dr. James K. Mathews, associate general secretary of the Methodist Division of World Missions … as first African president of the Lutheran Church of Christ in the Sudan, the Rev. Akila Todi.

Appointments: As president of Meadville Theological School, the Rev. Malcolm R. Sutherland … as professor of systematic theology at New Brunswick Theological Seminary, Dr. Gerrit T. Vander Lugt … as executive director of the proposed National Presbyterian Center in Washington, D. C., Dr. Ralph Cooper Hutchison.

Resignation: As general secretary of the Methodist Board of World Peace, soon to be integrated into the broader Board of Christian Social Concerns, the Rev. Daniel E. Taylor (to accept the pastorate of the 2,000-member Rose City Park Church in Portland, Oregon).

Quotes: “One of our serious troubles in the Church today is that it has become legitimate to be emotional in anything but religion. The need is for something that will summon one’s whole enthusiasm.”—Dr. John A. Mackay, Presbyterian “elder statesman” to the Cumberland Presbyterian General Assembly.

Billy Graham’s return engagement in Washington deposited a clear-cut challenge upon a community which is aware, perhaps more acutely than any other, of tomorrow’s perils.

His message offered little worldly comfort about the future. He said he has talked with 47 heads of state and that virtually all are privately pessimistic.

“Christ did not come into the world to bring peace, but a sword!” he told some 7,000 military and civilian employees assembled in the park-like inner courtyard of the Pentagon.

In a 20-minute address delivered from a stairway platform framed by two towering magnolias in full bloom, Graham said sin was behind all world strife and, indeed, was the reason for the Pentagon’s (Defense Department’s) very existence. He quoted the Bible, moreover, as predicting no real peace until Christ is enthroned on earth. Tensions would persist, he said, amidst unregeneracy.

The Task

Billy Graham, in an address prepared for delivery this week at a World Council of Churches “Consultation for Evangelists” in Geneva, says his definition of evangelism is one adopted in 1918 by an archbishops’ committee of the Church of England:

“To evangelize is so to present Christ Jesus in the power of the Holy Spirit that men shall come to put their trust in God through Him, to accept Him as their Savior and serve Him as their King in the fellowship of His Church.”

The Geneva consultation is bringing together evangelists from all over the world for “an exchange of views on the evangelistic task of the churches in our time.” Chairman is the Rev. Tom Allan, well-known Scottish evangelist.

Hundreds from the world’s largest office building raised their hands at the close of the noon-hour rally as a token of their commitment to Christ.

Focal point of the eight-day crusade was Griffith Stadium, Washington Senators’ ball park, which provided a seating potential much greater than that of the National Guard Armory, where the evangelist’s campaign in the winter of 1952 was centered.

The larger arena proved a good investment. Every stadium turnout surpassed what the armory could have accommodated (10,000).

The choir of more than 1,000 volunteer voices was divided into two sections: Most sopranos and altos were situated between first and second base. The rest were seated with tenors and bases between second and third.

From a pulpit 12 feet above the playing field came the message, commandingly delivered and highly comprehendible.

Graham’s sermon themes: “The Answer to the Present World Dilemma,” “What’s Wrong With the World?,” “The Handwriting on the Wall,” “Problems of the Home,” “A Challenge for Youth,” “The Wickedest Man That Ever Lived,” “The Foolishness of God,” and, at the closing Sunday service on June 26, “The End of the World.”

An unusually sobering aspect of the crusade was the disclosure by Graham one evening that he had talked with the late Congressman Douglas H. Elliott only three days before his death.

“I want tickets for every night next week,” Graham quoted Elliott as having said at a pre-crusade breakfast for members of the House.

Elliott’s body was found at his summer cabin near Chambersburg, Pennsylvania, on the day the crusade opened in Washington. A coroner ruled that he died of “carbon monoxide poisoning self-administered.” Elliott has been in office less than two months.

At the outset of the crusade an air of indifference was noticeable despite wide church support. Newspapers gave a minimum of attention and radio and television stations virtually none. Committee meeting attendance was poor for such important planning phases as counseling and follow-up. Budgetary problems loomed large. Reserved seat requests were disappointing.

Once the crusade began, however, enthusiasm snowballed. At the heart of the zeal was a nucleus of dedicated lay Christians who had worked and prayed for weeks for those climactic moments at each service when inquirers streamed onto the infield by the hundreds.

The great spirit of Christian fellowship which became identified with the crusade was demonstrated remarkably one evening when it started to drizzle soon after the service began. Song leader Cliff Barrows gave choir members the option of waiting it out or seeking shelter in the stands.

“Stay here,” they chorused.

They stayed and the rain stopped until after they had sung their number.

Pre-Crusade Contacts

Groundwork for the national capital crusade included a series of important, specialized-audience meetings in addition to counsellor training classes, prayer meetings, and planning sessions. Billy Graham declared that he considered his pre-crusade engagements in Washington as important, in a sense, as the public meetings themselves. For a full week before the stadium meetings began he was addressing assemblages in his honor.

A black tie dinner in the Mayflower Hotel drew several hundred key Defense Department personnel hosted by Secretary of the Army Wilber M. Brucker and Judge Boyd Leedom, chairman of the National Labor Relations Board and head of the crusade executive committee. Another in the Statler Hilton attracted administration officials as well as civic leaders. A luncheon in the Mayflower packed out the ballroom as Washington area service clubs joined hands to welcome the evangelist. His biggest reception came at the Sheraton Park late in the week when he spoke to 3,000 delegates gathered for the 67th annual convention of the General Federation of Women’s Clubs.

At the Capitol, Graham addressed prayer groups of both chambers at special arranged meetings in the old Supreme Court room. More than 100 members of the House turned out for a special breakfast session and more than 50 senators attended a luncheon the same day (including Lyndon B. Johnson, Everett M. Dirksen, Theodore Green, George A. Smathers, and Frank Carlson).

Graham seized every opportunity to warn his hearers of the plight of the undedicated. His was a call to patriotism as well as to spiritual regeneration (he embarrassed several hundred luncheon guests June 14 by asking how many of them remembered it was Flag Day).

“We seem to be unaware that there is a meaning and purpose to life beyond the immediate problem of survival,” Graham told the military leaders. “I do not believe that the human race will end up ‘on the beach.’ The Bible teaches me otherwise. Yet I am equally convinced that unless we heed the warning, unless we bring Americans back to awareness of God’s moral laws, unless the spiritual fibre of character is put back into the structure of our nation, we are headed for national disaster.”

Protestant Panorama

• An 11-program summer series of the “Lutheran Hour” will be devoted to Christian viewpoints on key election year topics. The program, sponsored by the Lutheran Laymen’s League, is carried by the NBC and Mutual networks and by independent stations around the world.

• Eva Anita Johansson, 18-year-old sister of former heavyweight champion Ingemar Johansson, is enrolled in the liberal arts curriculum of Concordia Collegiate Institute for the fall term. Concordia is a Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod school in Bronxville, New York.

• Some 150,000 Sunday School pupils from 450 Protestant churches participated in the 131st annual parade of the Brooklyn (New York) Sunday School Union last month. Governor and Mrs. Nelson A. Rockefeller were among honored guests in the reviewing stand. The parade drew an estimated 1,500,000 spectators.

• A 31-year-old Alsatian minister was fatally injured last month when he and three other Europeans were attacked by African terrorists in Douala, Cameroun. The Rev. Bernard Kopp had recently been named director of the Theological Seminary of the Evangelical Church of Cameroun.

• The Church of Sweden plans to manufacture prefabricated church buildings, complete with bell towers, to be set up in summer resort areas.

• Michael Markogamvrakis, evangelist of the Greek Free Evangelical Church, is appealing a five months imprisonment sentence imposed on charges of proselytising among Greek Orthodox people.

• The East Asian Christian Conference plans to produce a hymn book of Asian tunes for use by international church gatherings.

• Taylor University plans to relocate its Upland, Indiana, campus on a yet-to-be-determined site. The 67-year-old school will remain somewhere in Indiana, according to an announcement from trustees, and will seek to retain traditional Methodist ties.

• More than 1,000 youth are participating in ecumenical work camps in 31 countries this summer. The camps are sponsored by the youth department of the World Council of Churches.

• The Lutheran Church of Norway plans to place women theological graduates into a number of newly-created parish responsibilities. The women, legally eligible for ordination, will be given duties in visitation, Sunday School and youth work, and in Bible study groups.

• The Rev. J. Wesley Neal, newly-appointed executive director for the Methodist Agricultural Aids Foundation, has as his first task the establishment of a technical training school in the Congo. Neal has been pastor of the First Methodist Church in Chatsworth, California.

• The first English-speaking Lutheran church in Durban, South Africa, marked its first anniversary by dedicating a new chapel. The church was established with the aid of the Lutheran World Federation.

• The World Presbyterian Alliance is sending a “fraternal delegate” to Cuba to confer with church leaders on religious liberty under the government of Premier Fidel Castro.

• The Massachusetts Council of Churches is sponsoring the distribution of Christian literature to 1,500 migrant workers in the Connecticut Valley area this summer.

• Nineteen missionaries were commissioned for overseas service last month by the United Presbyterian Commission on Ecumenical Mission and Relations at a chapel service in New York’s Interchurch Center. Most of the 19 will serve as “fraternal workers” under independent national churches.

• The South Georgia Methodist Conference dedicated a $250,000 building in honor of Bishop Arthur J. Moore last month. The two-story structure, located at Epworth-by-the-Sea, Methodist conference center at St. Simons Island, Georgia, houses offices, guest rooms, and a library.

Vanderbilt Compromise

The Vanderbilt University administration reached a compromise with dissident faculty members in its Divinity School last month.

Eleven professors who had resigned in protest of a Negro student’s dismissal were given the chance to reconsider in the light of an offer made to the student, the Rev. James M. Lawson.

Lawson, expelled for his “commitment to an active program of civil disobedience” in connection with sit-in demonstrations, may apply for a Vanderbilt bachelor of divinity degree either by taking written examinations or by transferring credits he is expected to earn at Boston University School of Theology this summer.

Ten faculty resignations were subsequently withdrawn (the eleventh professor had already accepted a position elsewhere). Dean J. Robert Nelson’s resignation will become officially effective August 31, although he has already been relieved of duties.

Freedom and Tenure

A norm for academic freedom and tenure in seminaries was established at the 22nd biennial meeting of the American Association of Theological Schools, held last month in Richmond, Virginia.

During the meeting, it was announced that Asbury Theological Seminary in Wilmore, Kentucky, had again been granted full accreditation. Asbury was an associate member of the AATS for the past five years.

While not intended as a criterion for accreditation, the newly-established norm is expected to influence seminary administrations in resolving faculty disputes. It came in the form of a report from the AATS Commission on Research and Counsel, which delegates approved virtually intact.

In spelling out principles of academic freedom, the report declares that “the theological teacher and his students have the inquiry for truth central to their vocation and they are free to pursue this inquiry.”

But the report also states that “an institution which has a confessional or doctrinal standard may expect that its faculty subscribe to that standard and the requirement for such subscription should be mutually understood at the time of their affiliation with the institution.”

“The question of a faculty member’s adherence to the standard may be opened according to specified procedures.”

A professor may be dismissed, the report says, if he fails to live up to his contract with the school. Doctrinal variance is understood to be a legitimate ground for dismissal if subscription to a doctrinal standard is required at appointment.

More than 250 delegates were on hand for the AATS meeting and associated related assemblies (a member seminary of the AATS may send as many delegates as it wishes, but only one can vote), held on the campus of Union Theological Seminary.

The report on academic freedom and tenure gained special interest through recent faculty-administration differences at Vanderbilt University Divinity School. It has been in preparation for many months, long before the Vanderbilt controversy began.

The report asserts that “after the expiration of a probationary period of appointment, teachers should have appointments on indefinite tenure” and that “such appointments should be terminated only for adequate cause and only after fulfillment of clearly stated procedures for hearing and judgment.”

The Vanderbilt situation did not come up for discussion, and AATS officials have not yet indicated whether they will investigate. Such an inquiry could assume the nature of an earlier investigation conducted at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, Louisville, Kentucky, after 13 professors were fired in an administrative dispute during the spring of 1958. Southern’s accreditation was in jeopardy for a time following the dismissals.

Dr. J. Robert Nelson, outgoing dean of the Vanderbilt seminary, was among the delegates to the Richmond meeting. Delegate opinion leaned in his favor.

In other action, membership fees were raised by 60 per cent and Dr. James A. Jones, president of Union Theological Seminary in Richmond, was elected president.

Also approved was a report from the Commission on Research and Counsel which explored “institutional procedures with respect to faculty resignations, leaves and retirements.”

“A sabbatical leave should be provided for each member of the faculty who is on indefinite tenure at least after each six years of service in a school,” the report said.

“The minimum length of such leave with full salary should be one quarter or semester plus a summer; but where a longer leave seems desirable salary adjustments should be arrived at through conference.”

The Security Treaty

Japanese Christians have been among the most outspoken critics of their country’s Security Treaty with the United States.

The National Council of Churches in Japan took a neutral stand, but many influential individuals in the Kyodan (United Church of Christ in Japan) firmly opposed ratification of the treaty. They were supported by public declarations from such organizations as the YMCA, the WCTU, and the Christian Society for Peace. Several other organizations were formed especially to rally Christians against ratification. Fifteen professors of the International Christian University published a letter protesting the Diet’s handling of the treaty.

State Aiding Church?

A second round of fellowships in religion were announced last month by the U. S. Office of Education. Because of protests against last year’s grants, made under provisions of the National Defense Education Act of 1958, the government did not include new awards to seminaries. Instead, annual stipends of nearly $5,000 per student will be channelled into 20 doctorate programs in religion at such schools as Claremont (California) College, originally Congregational Christian but now independent; Brown University, founded by Baptists but also independent now; Dropsie College for Hebrew and Cognate Learning, Jewish institution in Philadelphia; the Eastman School of Music at the University of Rochester (New York); and New York University.

Spiritual Shallowness

The shallowness of American spiritual life was cited in a discussion by 50 students from 40 countries attending an international assembly in Williamsburg, Virginia, last month.

Dr. Harvie Branscomb, chancellor of Vanderbilt University and speaker for the occasion, agreed with most of the students’ conclusions.

A Korean student asked whether “the excessive sexual exposition and display” in the United States has not hampered American spiritual life.

The sexual reputation of Americans is such, she said, that “when a Korean girl goes back home after living in the United States she finds it difficult to get married.”

“People no longer trust her,” she added.

In addition, four priests, two brothers, and four nuns won grants for doctorate studies at various Catholic and non-Catholic schools around the country.

Last year, Union Theological Seminary of New York and Emory University of Atlanta received similar three-year grants, made under Title Four of the defense act and designed to assist students in securing doctorates for college teaching careers. The federal aid program has been widely criticized on grounds that it provides direct government subsidy for sectarian purposes and that it thereby violates the constitutional principle of Church-State separation. Under the law, students selected by the schools to receive the fellowships can draw up to $2,500 annually while the schools themselves are awarded as much as $2,500 per student provided they can establish that their faculty is being strengthened and their curriculum expanded by virtue of the subsidy.

All priests and nuns selected under this year’s program will pursue secular studies. The others seek degrees in such areas as theology, sacred music, history of religion, and biblical archeology.

The Title Four program, unlike other sections of the act, does not concentrate on science, mathematics, and languages, but includes fellowships in the humanities, ranging from folklore at the University of Indiana to medieval literature at St. Louis University. Some opponents of the federal aid program are seeking a way to test its constitutionality in court.

A Catholic Bloc

If the Democratic National Convention fails to nominate Senator John F. Kennedy for president, Catholics may take revenge by voting against the party as a bloc, according to the retiring Democratic National Chairman, Paul Butler.

Butler, who feels that Kennedy’s nomination is a “cinch,” told the National Press Club last month that many Catholics would either vote Republican or not vote at all if they felt that Kennedy was denied the nomination because of his religion.

“Other Catholics, like myself, would vote anyway for the Democratic nominee, whoever he might be,” Butler added.

Protestants and Other Americans United promptly asked Kennedy to repudiate Butler’s “threat” of bloc voting and appealed to the Fair Campaign Practices Committee to condemn his statement.

“Yes, but will they last?” The question, concerning converts won in mass evangelism, is disturbingly familiar to any active supporter of Graham crusades.

As throngs moved down the aisles at Griffith Stadium in response to the evangelist’s invitation, the question forced itself upon observers and pushed its way into newspapers, as it has so often in the past.

Eternity was impinging upon time; decisions of infinite moment were being made. But still the question came. Sometimes it was asked sympathetically, exposing sincere anxiety or honest doubt. At times it was put in cold terms of abstract fact or intellectual curiosity. Then again it was aired cynically, as a mocking echo to claims made for the crusade. “Do they really last?”

For some, the historic waves of mass evangelism constitute emotional movements which trouble society—inflicting guilt complexes upon the unwary—burning themselves out and later rising phoenix-like from their ashes to loose another cycle of attrition. Ask such a one the meaning of personal decisions for Christ made in evangelistic campaigns, and he may reply with further questions: “Are these not psychic phenomena whose explanation is obscured in a twilight zone of irrational fantasy? Are they not as dancing chimeras in a shadowland of the aberrant? Is not religious experience, after all, an ineffable matter. And therefore is not the evangelistic effort to press it into a mold—is this not more futile than a search for the Holy Grail? Of course, a vast rally may kindle a flash of light, but it will surely vanish in the morning mists … or later.”

Granted is the impossibility of fully explaining or totally comprehending a man’s meeting with his God in a restored fellowship through Jesus Christ. But that this renders evangelism impossible is quite another thesis, as is the implication that the results of the crusade would be as ephemeral as they were elusive.

These issues had been faced by those who served as counselors in the Washington crusade, along with others who sang in the choir, ushered, and opened homes for prayer meetings. Their number alone—several thousands—constituted a patent answer. Like most Americans, they were busy folk, and they had not sacrificed the many hours for a search after a will-o’-the-wisp. For the great majority of them had already met the Master, and this experience was now basic to all others in their lives.

For the sincere questioner, some food for thought was supplied by a Th.M. thesis examining results of Billy Graham’s four-week Greater Louisville (Kentucky) Crusade, held in the fall of 1956. Submitted to Southern Baptist Theological Seminary by the Rev. George P. Bowers, now a military chaplain in Washington, the dissertation provides an account of the crusade counseling and follow-up program. In evaluating the program. Bowers had recourse to official crusade records. To supplement these, he conducted, with the aid of three interviewers, a survey of 100 “inquirers” (those responding to Graham’s public invitation) chosen at random.

Crusade records revealed that 78 per cent of the inquirers were said to be attending church. Sixty-six per cent were called professing Christians, and figures indicated a net average increase in church membership of from two to six members for each participating church.

Bowers’ own survey showed the Christology of the great majority of inquirers to be orthodox, as reflected in their belief in Christ’s Deity, Virgin Birth, Resurrection, and Second Coming.

But he points more than once to disappointing statistics on follow-up. Crusade records showed that of 7,909 inquirers referred to pastors, only 52 per cent of them were actually contacted. Of the 100 persons sampled by Bowers. 47 were contacted after making decisions, though only 22 by pastors and 16 by counselors who had spoken with them in the inquiry room. The crusade program had called for each inquirer to be contacted twice, once by pastor and once by counselor.

Bowers suggests the Graham organization aid ministers by setting up workshops to give guidance in pastoral care and counseling of inquirers. He also advises establishment of a follow-up office staffed by full-time Graham personnel for at least two or three months after a crusade, to encourage and supplement pastoral follow-up.

Inclined to agree with a plan of this sort, in light of past ministerial failures, is Dr. Robert O. Ferm, visiting professor and lecturer of Houghton (New York) College. But as one who has personally interviewed some 10,000 Graham converts in the United States, Europe, and Asia, and thus would seem to be the premier authority on crusade results. Ferm is unimpressed with many of Bowers’ findings based on a survey of but 100 persons. Bowers himself was careful to stress that his Louisville findings do not necessarily reflect results of Graham crusades held in other cities, noting such variables as extent of ministerial support and follow-up participation.

Ferm points out that Louisville is the home of two evangelical theological seminaries, Southern Baptist seminary being the world’s second largest. Thus Louisville with extensive exposure to evangelism stands in stark contrast to a city such as London.

Or take New York. Executive Director Dan Potter of the city’s Protestant Council reported that a check among 59 churches of the council revealed that 44 per cent of the inquirers referred were not church members. In contrast to Louisville’s 22 per cent, Dr. Ferm states that the figure usually hovers around 50 per cent.

Moreover, says Ferm, converts among church members are not to be discounted. “Church leaders are reminding us that there are hosts of unconverted church members on the rolls.” Billy Graham has enjoyed marked success in bringing many of these to a decision for Christ.

On the other hand, some churches in the New York area reported attendance gains of 40 per cent and more. In Nashville, two churches reported that more than 90 per cent of the inquirers assigned to them had become baptized members.

Billy Graham had warned New Yorkers that the crusade there would not be felt for at least three years. Dr. Ferm cautions against checking; results too soon after a crusade. He delayed his trip through Asia in Graham’s wake until more than two years had elapsed. Interviewing those who had come out of Hinduism, Buddhism, and Confucianism, he was able to report that comparatively few had returned to their old way of life. Another survey in New York City indicated that 95 per cent of those who signed cards adhered to their original decision. Bowers’ study indicates that the response of the vast majority of inquirers seemed to represent an unusual, sincere action. He discounts curiosity and emotional pressure.

But there remains the problem of follow-up. While the San Francisco crusade reported 90 per cent of its inquirers contacted, New York could claim only 33 per cent. Efforts are continually being made to tighten up the program at this point. Heading the crusade counselor training program in Washington was dedicated Baptist layman Dan Piatt, a Graham team member. Soberly acknowledging the awesome responsibilities of caring for those newly born into the kingdom, Piatt spoke of the constant development and evolution of the program. Indeed, certain of Bowers’ criticisms and suggestions no longer apply. Qualifications for crusade counselors had been raised. A new series of Bible study materials, considered by team members of strategic importance for future crusades, was being released and Washington counselors were the first to be assigned a home study course along with Piatt’s classes. His lectures were augmented by a new illustrative film strip.

Some 2000 persons took the counseling course, followed by a personal interview of each trainee who actually applied to become a counselor. Personal testimony of Christian experience and previous soul winning was requested. More than 900 made the grade. Each was required to give post-crusade reports on the spiritual progress of inquirers assigned them. New forms were provided both counselors and inquirers to take notes on their ministers’ sermons. Piatt urged the ministers to contact inquirers assigned them within 72 hours and when impossible, to have an able substitute do it.

Bowers had spoken highly of Graham’s pioneering attempt to personalize mass evangelism and the remarkable degree of self-criticism and examination manifest in the Graham team. He also spoke of the lack of specific criticism by ministers of Graham’s counseling and follow-up program and drew from this an indication that the local churches share the weaknesses of the team, but to a greater extent. Graham told the Washington ministers that the counseling program was the most important of all crusade activities. But among some ministers was a feeling that the city’s pressure of events decreed little time for lingering over a bygone crusade. Such an attitude suggested that some local churches were pioneering in a field in which they should have been expert—training of personal witnesses for year-round service. If lasting results will seem meager to certain churches, it will not do simply to carp at the Graham team—in very large measure the results were squarely up to the ministers and their laymen.

The population of the United States, which according to government estimates was 179,250,000 at the beginning of 1960, is expected easily to reach 250,000,000 by 2000 A.D. if growth continues by present trends. Although hardly an “explosion,” as is taking place in Asia, this expected increase poses some serious problems for the Church. It is being studied with great care by the minister-sociologist experts who guide denominational strategy in the field of church extension.

The population scientists are uncovering some astonishing facts. Of the 10 most populous cities in the United States, only one (Los Angeles) will share this expected growth; the rest will remain stationary or even diminish in size. Rural areas likewise will show scant gains. Where then will all the people live? Statisticians make it clear: they will live in the suburbs.

The suburbs today form the growing edge of America. Around the edges of Denver, for example, the population has more than doubled in the past eight years. Similar gains are reported on the fringes of west coast cities (notably San Diego), as well as Detroit, Fort Worth, Baltimore, and Washington. In the Pacific states and in New England, suburbanites now outnumber city dwellers by a considerable margin.

Our purpose at the moment is not to investigate the manifold causes of the exurbanite movement, but to see what the churches are doing about it. The answer, so far as we can learn, is simple: they are moving out too. Hundreds if not thousands of American pastors today have appointed long-range planning committees for one primary purpose: to study ways of moving the church to a suburban location, adjoining a spacious parking lot, where a new, modern structure will attract young families and where the Gospel can be preached amid the blessings of gracious American living.

Denominational leaders are keenly aware of the vacuums left by this exodus, and are devoting time, prayer, pains, and money to the problem of the “inner city churches.” Meanwhile the movement of people from the country to the metropolitan area is continuing to impoverish the rural churches, and “town and country” conferences are being held the year round all over the nation to bolster the flagging zeal of rural pastors and people. In both cases the outlook is discouraging and the operation is at best an effort to hold the line for a dignified and orderly retreat.

The inner city churches, by and large, are ill-prepared to meet the needs of changing neighborhoods. They are often unwilling to adopt unfamiliar evangelistic methods such as would appeal to the newcomers, and the newcomers are just as unwilling to join what seems to them to be cold and rather snobbish houses of worship. Experiments in parish visiting, in multiple church ministries, in settlement-house programs aimed particularly at the needs of youth and the senior citizenry, are all under way in the old downtown churches. Some have been spectacularly successful in attracting numbers and in contributing significance to rather drab urban living. Yet when one asks if these churches are really bringing the people of the inner city into a life commitment to Jesus Christ and integrating them into the church membership, he is apt to be disappointed. Far from being markedly evangelistic, many inner-city church programs are vocally anti-evangelistic.

The situation in the country churches is equally serious. Most small rural churches labor under an inferiority complex. They feel that the denominational leaders do not appreciate or understand their problems. Furthermore, they are apt to be overwhelmed by the advice and the handouts that come their way. Most of the “planning” is over their heads because it implies that the rural minister has nothing else to do or that he has a keen, well-paid staff to do his bidding. Nothing really seems to work; and in spite of the hand-wringing at headquarters, the rural church buildings get older and the congregations grow smaller and fewer.

Meanwhile the denominational leaders, as expected, devote their major strategy to the mushrooming suburbs. They establish liaison with the large contractors in new developments; they make funds available where the income level is high enough to justify it; and they count on a benevolence return that will pay back the denominational investment many times. The key to this return is the minister who is specially chosen by the denominational executive with certain qualities in view: good health, attractive appearance, the ability to get people to work together, and a cooperative attitude toward the denomination. Within such a framework a minister is free to preach whatever message he chooses to suburbia, and to make his own adjustments to the mores of his flock.

The real significance of the population drift for the churches will appear in our August 1 issue. CHRISTIANITY TODAY will publish a World Missionary Index describing Protestantism’s statistical predicament in the world today. It will be seen that Christian churches and missions on five continents still look to the United States and Canada as the source of the Church’s power and leadership. That power and that leadership are located in suburbia. Yet one wonders whether suburbia is as interested in the spread of the Gospel on five continents as in providing its churches with foam-rubber seat cushions, “eternal” swinging lights, and Church “School” sandpiles. There is at times a grim, almost savage purposefulness in the way suburbia seems to twist and knead the Christian message until it “fits” the mold of conventional living. Thus a hospitable cocktail proved the standard welcome offered by church people to one young pastor as he called in a suburban area to organize a new congregation. But were that pastor to insist that the Church School curriculum incorporate teaching about hell and Satan, his feet would never be allowed to cross the threshold of the new manse.

The question is: how, under God, can the Gospel be brought to life in the American churches? What human agencies can be harnessed in the service of revival that will give to the Church the thrust and drive she so desperately needs? In place of the present attrition of Christian world resources now going on, what can crystallize the wills of clergy and laity and turn the Church of Jesus Christ into an evangelistic warhead? And the answer is: the Kingdom of God cometh not by the mimeograph, nor the multilith, nor the Wollensak, nor the denominational program. It comes by the spoken invitation to receive Jesus Christ. “Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.”

The call today in suburbia, in the rural churches and in the inner city, is for the clear, unadulterated preaching of the truth as it is in Christ. The Word of God can and must be preached with imagination. If the inner city is filled with Puerto Ricans, the pulpits of the inner city churches could well be made available for Puerto Rican evangelists. As for the suburban churches, they ought to be exposed to a steady stream of Christian men and women, ordained and unordained, from every country under heaven. Perhaps they will succeed in stabbing the suburban church awake, or at least in keeping her from going into a country-club stupor. These “foreign” Christians, missionaries to our shores in the apostolic sense, would have the mandate to show that the Gospel of Jesus Christ makes essentially the same claims everywhere, wins converts in essentially the same way everywhere, and exacts the same Christ-like obedience everywhere—including suburbia.

U.S. PRESTIGE SAGS IN JAPAN, A CONFUSED NATION

“America took away our Emperor as our god, and we have nothing in which to believe.” So spoke a Japanese student recently.

A wise occupational administration had indeed set itself to deliver Japan from its feudal and pagan deification of the emperor.

But the Christian Church never adequately filled the resulting vacuum with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Where General MacArthur had asked for thousands of missionaries, only hundreds went. Many of these settled in the Tokyo area, setting up divisive sects and compromising the opportunity for a vigorous witness to the saving power of Christ. Hindered by lack of man power, inadequate funds and limited vision, the Christian thrust caused hardly a ripple on the national consciousness of Japan. Nation-wide propagation of the Gospel was not aggressively ventured by radio and television and it remained for Dr. Bob Pierce’s Osaka Crusade to demonstrate that mass evangelism holds high potential even in Japan.

The Church has no direct responsibility for the political debacle now in process, although Christianity alone supplies the virtues which enable democracy to function well. Now that mob violence has triumphed over political procedures, the role of Japan as a bulwark of freedom in the Far East may crumble at an alarming rate. When restless students and left-wing labor unions are skillfully guided by subversive forces, an indifferent public may turn the nation to a position of neutralism advantageous to communism and particularly to Red China. Many missionaries took the pacifist side.

For the disappointed political leaders of the West, this apparent debacle carries a deep lesson. Too long have modern statesmen thought that peace may be willed by man, legislated by world assemblies, and guaranteed by military assistance pacts, forgetful that enduring peace is conferred on God’s terms.

The Church needs to bolster her efforts in Japan, not with personnel and financial support alone, but by united prayer for that meager but valiant minority of Christians within the nation. Under the good hand of God they may yet prove the nucleus of stable government. God is still sovereign. Of him we are told: “The king’s heart is in the hand of the Hard, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will” (Prov. 21:1).

POLITICAL ANXIETIES RISE AS PARTY CONVENTIONS APPROACH

Sobered by international trouble, and shadowed by domestic unrest, Democrats will gather July 11 in Los Angeles, and Republicans July 25 in Chicago, to name presidential candidates for the Fall election campaign.

However divergent their past traditions, the major United States parties now are less dissimilar in practice than ever. Pressured to support the Big Government complex of enlarging Federal intervention and activity, their differences often dwindle to “less” Republican and “more” Democratic leeway for “the spenders.” While the Eisenhower administration brought needed dignity to the White House, it scarcely reversed New Deal trends. Its government welfare program perpetuated many policies weakening a free enterprise economy, even if it determinedly preserved “established proportions.” Supported by the academic community, by the labor lobby, even on occasion by big business, this Big Government complex has been confronted less conscientiously in the United States than has the socialist drift in Germany and welfare statism in Britain.

Christians will view the approaching political conventions with deep-seated anxieties and welcome every evidence of sincere political dedication. A multitude of voters, sufficient to hold the balance of power in any national contest, will search party commitments with a careful eye on basic concerns such as:

1. The distinctive American heritage of limited Federal power.

2. The historic tradition of separation of Church and State.

3. The position on welfare spending, inordinate power of labor leaders, business monopolies and injustices, and the expansion of the Big Government complex generally at the expense of voluntarism and free enterprise.

4. The attitude toward the staggering national debt, and toward the erosion of the dollar by inflation.

5. A conscientious and courageous plank on human rights that neither condones civil injustices nor promotes social upheaval through revolutionary legislative compulsion.

6. A stern international policy that in the face of communism supports the principal basis of membership in the United Nations, and commitment to a just and lasting peace by foreign alliances whose prime bond is a mutual dedication to righteousness, truth, and freedom.

7. The party nominee should be a symbol of personal maturity and moral integrity in the White House. So highly ought he to regard the presidency that the nation reaches for the man (rather than the man for the office). Any intimation that the office can be attained by inordinate ambition or excessive use of personal funds should be rebuked. In a world whose powerful systems increasingly dwarf the dignity of the human person, the nominee must tower as the image of America’s tradition of political and religious freedom.

THE ART OF SOUL WINNING: LET THE CHURCH BE THE CHURCH

Recently a meeting was held in a downtown church of a major American city. Although it drew men and women from churches all over the city, no one talked about church unity or ecumenicity. Present were people from differing racial backgrounds, but no one boasted about integration. The meeting was called to train laymen, lay women, and pastors in the art of winning individuals to Jesus Christ.

For an hour and three-quarters these believers were given a respite from the self-congratulation and musical entertainment (high and low) that make up such an astonishingly large part of what we call worship. It was like coming out of a room full of stupefying incense into the heavenly breath of God’s fresh air. One almost caught the sense of being in a church in New Testament times: with Timothy in Thessalonica, or Philip in Samaria, or Paul in Corinth. There was a subdued excitement about the meeting, as in a team squad before an important game, or better, as in an encampment where men are preparing for battle.

None of the trappings that seem so indispensable today were apparent. A “coffee hour” was not needed to generate fellowship because there was already fellowship in the Spirit; one could detect it from the way the learners chorused the Scriptures. No organ was crashing in the background, and, as for robed choirs, many church singers had passed up rehearsal to come for a lesson in the finest of the fine arts known to man—the art of soul winning. The speaker did not wring his hands about the sin of disunity because there was no disunity. Nor was there fear of competition; not a person switched church membership as a result of the meeting. Many of the props and clichés of modern church life were conspicuously absent. But each worshiper present had a Bible, a notebook and pencil; and most remarkable, each seemed to leave with an eager desire to return the next week for another session.

To witness such an event in the twentieth century American Church forces a reflection upon the nature and purpose of the holy, apostolic church of Jesus Christ. What is the Church? What was her original intention in the mind of Christ? How is the Church fulfilling that intention today? In the labyrinth of national and international associations, graded lessons, corporate trusts, academic “relatedness,” ecclesiastical communiques-from-headquarters, Wednesday evening group-dynamics, Bach festivals, psycho-religious clinics, dances sacred and secular, “chancelitis” and conventions on church architecture, just what is the Church up to?

The peril that faces the Church most acutely is not the invasion of the world of culture (which is a perennial problem) but the temptation of the Church to become an end in herself, rather than the means to God as the chief end of life. The gorgeous buildings we are raising beckon with open doors and seem to say, “Inside is the way, the truth and the life.” That is, inside are fun and fellowship, great music and chicken pie, proper playmates and bean plants. (And across the street at St. Aloysius’ they add with some pride, inside also are prizes and beer.)

Granted that we are not living as simply as people did in first-century Asia Minor, and that in the growing complexity of society it is natural for the Church to strengthen her witness by broadening her base. Our point, however, is that the Church is not and never was intended to be the locus of the Christian life; rather, she is the motivator of the Christian life. The Roger Williams room, Witherspoon Hall, or Asbury Annex, or whatever the church social hall be named, is not the racetrack upon which we complete our threescore and ten laps; it is rather the filling station and repair garage.

The need for our day, then, in John A. Mackay’s great phrase, is to “let the church be the church.” Let her point the way to God; let her close with Satan on the problems of human life and character which the Scripture tells us are the Church’s business. All of those problems, upon analysis, fall into two classes: getting men to Jesus and keeping them there. For every minister who has the courage to tackle it, there is a fulltime job awaiting him in the raising and training of a battalion of Christian workers who will get out in the highways and hedges and win people to the kingdom of God; and further, to give Christian people the spiritual nurture by which they can learn how to live together in a way pleasing to their Heavenly Father.

That is the Church’s business. Nothing else matters.

When a church decides really to be a church, her social conscience does not go numb. She becomes instead the living application of the prophetic voice of Scripture. Instead of telling the world how to solve its problems, the Church shows the world how God’s plan works by solving her own problems. Then when the day comes when the world turns to the Church and listens, it will not wonder whether it is hearing the voice of Karl Marx, or its own voice, or merely the braying of wild asses; for what it will hear will be the clear and living Word of God, spoken by men who are “rooted and grounded in love”—the love of Christ that passes knowledge.

The nearer we draw to God, the nearer we draw to each other. Problems of social adjustment work toward solution; coldness and divisiveness are melted by the flaming tongues of the spirit of God; missionary budgets are assured because every member is now being trained as a missionary. Not only so, but the Church of Jesus Christ becomes a great fortress and bastion of free man in a free society. Not, mind you, that she set out to be so; but when the Church seeks the kingdom of God, instead of seeking to be the kingdom of God, then blessing upon blessing is added. When she decides to be true to her original charter and downgrades her own importance to the glory of God-decreases that he might increase—then men will turn gratefully to the Church for fuel with which to run the race of life, and run it victoriously for Christ, without having to buy up the service station or spend their lives in it.

DON’T HIDE THE GOSPEL

The Gospel message is the most wonderful thing in all the world, for at its center is Jesus Christ, crucified, dead, and risen—man’s only hope.

How important it is that the Gospel be not hidden by, of all people, its friends, for such a thing can and does frequently happen.

The Gospel is hidden by inconsistent lives. Why should the pagans about us believe in or desire a Gospel that does not transform the life of a believer? Why should one become a Christian if it amounts to no more than church attendance on Sunday while the rest of the week he may live like any other man of the world?

Christians in early Rome were surrounded by a paganism hardly more blatant than that of twentieth century America. Paul pleaded with them: “Don’t let the world around you squeeze you into its own mold.”

What if every Christian in America were to heed this warning today? One result would be a freeing of the Gospel from the handicap of those who in matters of purity of life, honesty in business, truthfulness in word, and attitudes toward others are little removed from the a abominable standards that Satan has set for the world.

The Gospel can be hidden also by a cold orthodoxy which accepts the letter of the truth but ignores the spirit of all divine revelation.

The spirit of the Inquisition continues today in the hearts of some who take a smug satisfaction in “believing” the doctrines of Christianity while neglecting to exhibit the transforming effect that the evangelical faith has on personal life and attitudes.

How often we hide the Gospel because of a twentieth century pharisaism that merits our Lord’s rebuke as fully as it did in the days of his flesh.

Nothing hides the Gospel more than lovelessness. Christianity and Christian love should be synonymous, for they center in the One who is altogether lovely and loving.

But how often is the glory of the Gospel hidden by bitterness, malice, carping criticism, gossip, or even hatred on the part of Christians for other Christians! It is one of the scandals of the Church today that many Christians lack even the elemental graces of courtesy and consideration for the feelings of others.

Nothing would do more to unmask the wonder of redemption and show forth the fruits of the Holy Spirit than a renewal of the spirit of love which characterized the early Christians and distinguished them from other men.

To many people the Gospel has been hidden because of crippling presuppositions. Rejecting its clearly stated truths in favor of theories that rationalize them away, many theologians have caused a different gospel to emerge, and the good news of man’s redemption from the guilt and penalty of sin has been replaced by concepts of God which reject his holiness and justice and admit only his love and mercy. There then comes into view a blurred image of God, a deformed caricature of him who in all of his attributes is perfection and beauty.

Further, we can hide the Gospel by depicting God in terms that we choose for him and not as he has revealed himself. There are people who reject the idea of eternal punishment because it conflicts with their concept of God. In so doing, of course, they attack, sometimes zealously, the trustworthiness, honesty, or understanding of the Old and New Testament writers.

The Gospel can also be hidden by man’s cleverness. Paul knew the danger: To the Corinthian Christians he wrote: “And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God.… And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power.”

Why so much concern, so much repudiation of attempts to be clever? “That your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God.”

Cleverness hides the Gospel because it is the clever one who is magnified, not the message.

The Gospel can also be hidden by enigmas which “darkeneth counsel by words without knowledge,” or by theological phrases such as “totally other,” “the existential moment,” “Christ-myth,” and so forth, which convey exactly nothing to a man needing salvation.

The Apostle Paul, writing to his spiritual son, Timothy, warns of this danger: “O Timothy, guard most carefully your divine commission. Avoid the godless mixture of contradictory notions which is falsely known as ‘knowledge’—some having followed it and lost their faith” (1 Tim. 6:20, 21—Phillips).

There is always the danger of hiding the Gospel behind good causes or by theological or other hobbies. Secondary or peripheral phases of Christianity, when stressed out of proper place, may become walls shutting out the true gospel message.

The Gospel is always hidden when the Person and Work of the Lord Jesus Christ are downgraded, when the universality and effect of sin are minimized, or the potential goodness and achievements of man are magnified.

Our Lord’s essential and unique deity is the foundation of the Gospel. He is the eternal Son of God who became incarnate in the flesh, and there is no Gospel of redemption without firm acknowledgement of this.

Because of who he is, we cannot help but view with awe what he did. Paul declares the meaning of the Gopsel: “… that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures.”

Woe to us, then, if we hide the Gospel or substitute for it something more palatable to the human ego or agreeable to sophisticated reason. It is not for man to question or alter that which God has ordained, and the way of salvation is stated so clearly in the Scriptures that a little child can understand and believe.

The need for the Gospel is hidden when the sinfulness of man is minimized. Sin is rarely the topic of some preaching today. There are explanations for the human dilemma which fit in more perfectly with psychological research. It is more pleasant, for example, to regard drunkenness as a disease than as sin; sex obsession as a psychiatric rather than spiritual problem; dishonesty as a “confusion of values” rather than stealing. Once we fail to appreciate that sin is an offense to a holy God, the implications of the Gospel become hidden in the miasma of human excuses.

Finally, we hide the Gospel when we magnify the potential goodness of man. That there is good within all men is the mark of divine creation, but the image has been marred and while the will to be and do good may lead to self-reformation, only the Gospel leads to redemption and regeneration.

L. NELSON BELL

SPENDING VACATION

A life may be lived

And labor endured

In dreamy anticipation

Of days at the shore,

Of seafood galore,

And waves of cool relaxation.

A life may be lived

And labor endured,

But vacations can only be spent!

In concrete car courts

And motels of sorts,

These swarms of tourists unending

Are spending vacation

For their relaxation

Are spending, spending, and spending.

A life may be lived

And labor endured,

But vacations can only be spent!

For planes and for cabs,

For restaurant tabs,

Or cruising smoothly by ship,

Each stop on the way

Has an invoice to pay—

In full, including the tip.

A life may be lived

And labor endured,

But vacations can only be spent!

To help with the thrills

Of running up bills,

The hosts and merchants en route

Have found a device

To soften the price

And flatter tourists to boot;

As life may be lived

And labor is paid,

So vacations may often be charged!

To get in the swing

Of this sort of thing,

Just plan a bigger vacation

And go where you would,

Your credit is good—

Installments shrink through inflation.

Your life may be hard

But get a white card—

Then what a charge from vacation!

The moral is clear

But why add it here?

(That fun—and—sun invitation

Just cannot be spumed.)

Yet he is twice burned

Whose shirt is lost on vacation!

EUTYCHUS

UNMOVED BY THE TURKS

The Church will welcome any constructive ideas the Young Turks or anyone else may have. However, for a suggestion to have value, its advocates must learn to base it on sounder reasoning than most of that outlined in your article of May 23rd as being the reasoning of the Young Turks.

Just one example: It is an absurdity to speak of “the surgically sharp honesty” and “candid revelation of truth” by Camus’ hero (in The Fall), when he claims to have given up deliberately some good values in life to become an alcoholic, as a protest against virtues which he had used for selfish ends. Two strong counter-thoughts immediately occur: 1) he did not have to use the virtues selfishly but could have used them properly; and 2) anyone who has worked with alcoholics, and with other persons caught in the meshes of various evils because of their own self-centeredness and selfishness, has heard similar statements over and over. They are the day-by-day supports, fashioned by such persons, to rationalize their wrong conduct, and to try to shrug the blame off to the Church or to society at large.

HAROLD N. MACMURRAY

Chaplain

The Methodist Church Home

Cornwall, Pa.

BOGUS DEGREES

Would it not be well to add to your “The Scandal of Bogus Degrees” (May 9 issue) the insane and wholesale throwing around of honorary degrees without careful scrutiny as to why such should be given at all.… A doctor’s degree should mean some exceptional attainment in scholarship, authorship or some distinct service given.

G. R. MCKEAN

Wolfville, Nova Scotia

We all realize the dangers of down-grading the ministry by turning to “diploma-mills” for degrees.… However, time and time again there seems to be good reason for calling the earned Bachelor of Divinity degree the “equivalent of a doctor’s degree.” Three years of graduate work, after achieving a Bachelor of Arts or Science degree, does seem to warrant more than a Bachelor degree. Many local church leaders, and certainly many parishioners, … respect a clergyman who has a Doctor of Divinity degree (not knowing how he got it) but consider the Bachelor of Divinity degree as somewhat the equivalent of school-teaching ability and Bachelor of Arts or Science degrees (with even less salary remuneration). Cannot something be done to give the divinity degree its proper recognition?

IRVIN R. LINDEMUTH

Birmingham Congregational Church

Pittsburgh, Pa.

Much of the discrimination that is now practised in the matter of honorary degrees would be eliminated if a minister, having a diploma from a bona fide institution of theology together with an honorable record of service over a period of twenty years would automatically be awarded the degree of Doctor of Divinity.

PERRY VAN DYKE

Newark, N. J.

If the United States Office of Education wishes to do some cleaning up, it would be well to begin with the state universities, which are giving doctorates to men for work done by ghost writers, and have been doing so for at least a generation.

JOHN C. ROBERTS

First Evangelical United Brethren

New Castle, Ind.

It seems that Mr. Flemming has listed every organization he could find who grants a degree as a “degree mill” which is defrauding the public whether the organization is guilty or not. Some of those listed have been out of existence more than five years and he states that these have been investigated; then how can they have been investigated if they no longer exist?… From all appearances Mr. Flemming is anxious to have his name before the public in headlines whether they are true or not. His attempt last fall when he released the articles that “eating cranberries causes cancer” is a sample of this. His charge was proven false but Ocean Spray Cranberry almost went bankrupt.

GEORGE J. BARTH

First Methodist

Christoval, Tex.

Perhaps CHRISTIANITY TODAY would like a story of what happened at Chillicothe, Missouri, where Belin University operated until three years ago. Let me recap it quickly: 18 foreign students brought over with the promise of scholarships—cold, hungry, and broke. Several could not speak a sentence in English. Many were excellent students from fine families. These students had to be placed in other colleges and universities; some could not because of lack of secondary education. Imagine 18 foreign students in the dead of winter … no money, school broke, food gone, many could not speak English, no [way] … to get home.

HAROLD F. REISCH

New Cambria, Mo.

Would it not be a powerful testimony to the cause of evangelical Christianity if these “degree mills” would refund the fees of tuition and registration and if the recipients of “counterfeit degrees” would return their sheepskins to be burned in the bonfire of spiritual integrity and Christian ethics?

R. M. BAERG

Dean

Mennonite Brethren Biblical Seminary

Fresno, Calif.

I for one have deeply resented this blot on the ministerial office.… I only hope that the publication of the list of the “degree mills” will not put ideas into the heads of more men who may have been wondering how these degrees might be gotten!

HARRY J. KREIDER

St. James Lutheran Church

New York, N. Y.

THE WHOLE COUNSEL OF GOD

Your editorial on the need of a Christian university (May 9 issue) pointed to a very great deficiency in contemporary Christian education in an area of life which evangelicals have all but surrendered to the liberals and in their surrender have virtually confessed that there are areas of life over which Christ does not have dominion and to which the whole counsel of God does not apply. May evangelicals rally to the cause and bring forth a great center of Christian learning and scholarship to speak to the confusion of our day.

C. GREGG SINGER

Catawba College

Salisbury, N. C.

If your analysis is correct, what is needed is not so much a Christian university in an American sense, but rather a concentration upon some type of a graduate centre for evangelical study-research and above all, co-ordination. This might be patterned something after several of the colleges of Oxford and Cambridge which deal only with graduate work and coordination or perhaps the Institute for Advanced Studies at Princeton. If the resources on the Christian level of all the colleges, seminaries and individual evangelical scholars could be co-ordinated, encouraged and facilitated, the influence of such a centre would spread far beyond its own confines. In addition, it would also be taking advantage of the intellectual integrity, experience and equipment of the great universities of America, infiltrating them with evangelical men and principles looking forward to the time when the Lord might so prosper evangelicals that they would again take leading positions in our world.

CHARLES TROUTMAN

General Secretary

Inter-Varsity Fellowship of Evangelical Unions (Austral.)

Sydney, N.S.W., Australia

A Christian University on the eastern seaboard is an exciting prospect. Follow the comprehensive evangelical dedication of CHRISTIANITY TODAY and it will be on the road to success. Keep us informed as anything develops.

ARTHUR MAYBELL

Philadelphia, Pa.

RIGHTFUL UPGRADING

Thank you for the excellent description of the recent General Conference of The Methodist Church (May 23 issue).… While Dr. Farrell described with accuracy and understanding the dilemmas that faced our Methodist legislators …, he [left] the impression that per capita giving in 1959 was “58.8 cents.”

Methodists have little reason for pride in comparative statistics of denominational giving. It can therefore be understood why any downgrading beyond the true facts, even a possible misplaced decimal point, is painful. The General Minutes for 1959 (pp. 656–7) show that 9,815,460 members of The Methodist Church in the U. S. gave that year for all purposes $512,164,658. Dividing the total giving by the number of members the 1959 per capita gift would seem to have been … $52.18.

RALPH STOODY

General Secretary and Director

Commission on Public Relations and Methodist Information

New York, N. Y.

GOSPEL AND POSITIVISM

I think we cannot lightly dismiss logical positivism as merely a passing fad or fancy. It is certainly a fad for some, as indeed also even the gospel of our Lord is with others. We must concede with Dr. Gordon Clark (May 9 issue) that “the technical nature of logical positivist publications makes brief discussion difficult and misleading.” However there is a definite need for a Christian apologia in logical positivist terms, using their methodologies. Weird as it may seem, I have discovered in a semi-rural parish more than one man—graduates of our state institutions of higher learning—who have had sufficient contact with logical positivism to resist the Gospel in its terms, and even more who, while ignorant of the names Mach, Korzybski, Carnap or Feigl, have somewhere assimilated a naive version of their views.

Logical positivism tends to conflict, I believe, more with our interpretation of the Scripture than with the Scripture itself.… ‘Operationalism’ and the insistence on ‘sensory observation’ are the great stumbling blocks to any liaison between thoroughly committed logical positivists and thoroughly committed Christians. Perhaps they are chimeras set up by men who are—before logic—committed to irreligion. If one is willing to peer behind the forbidding façade one finds a refined, if imperfect, instrument, of epistemological validation, which—if conscientiously applied to theology—might prove a vehicle of definition and communication superior to Aristotelian modes. For example, the symbolic treatment of ‘classes,’ which is one expression of ‘operationalism,’ certainly surpasses the Greek manipulation of ‘predicates.’ The God of the Bible, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is not treated in his book as ‘being,’ as a ‘predicate,’ but as a God who is known by his acts. The Scripture is the record of his acts of creation and redemption. Furthermore, the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation, which have remained paradoxical in their traditional creedal forms, fit—without loss of mystery—into categories of symbolic logic, once the domain of theology is opened, once the prejudiced proscription is dropped. Are we not dealing with an outstanding example of ‘mutual inclusion’ when we confess “one Lord Jesus Christ … being of one substance with the Father?” Are we not dealing with a striking example of a ‘unit class’ and with distinctions of extension and intension when we speak of Jesus Christ as “truly God and truly man?” It has been more than three centuries since we have attempted to restate the Gospel unequivocally, with scientific precision, in terms of the philosophy of the day, beginning squarely upon the Scriptures themselves.

The greater hurdle is, of course, the demand for verification of data by sensory observation. Yet here again we begin with a nonessential prejudgment. ‘Sensory’ connotes to most of us ‘visual’ and to a lesser degree ‘auditory’ but neglecting the other avenues between the mind and the outside world. ‘Sensory’ seems to exclude ‘revelation’ and ‘the witness of the Spirit.’ Are these not, however, broadly also ‘sensory?’ Is not our devotional reading and searching of the Scriptures an exercise whereby we develop our immediate perception of their Author? Logical positivists say No, positively, categorically, without the reserve in which they otherwise pride themselves. But the fellowship of the church is a collective witness that such knowledge is attainable; and if bold in the faith we should assert with Paul its potential universality (Romans 2:12–16; Acts 17:23).

Logical positivism, especially in the forms of General Semantics and Dyanetics, is a fad. But because it does insulate men’s minds from a vast—and we believe the most vital—area of human experience and knowledge we owe it to Him who gave us the great commission, if not to them, to treat their views with the same seriousness with which they treat them. As Paul approached the Jews as Jews and the Greeks as Greeks, let some of us approach the logical positivists as at least logically positive Christians.

ROBERT N. YETTER

First Presbyterian Churches

Susquehanna and New Milford, Pa.

INTRODUCING MRS. LEWIS

In the April 25 issue, I was startled by what Clyde S. Kilby … had to say in his review of The World’s Last Night by C. S. Lewis. He says, “After a good man laid his hands on her and prayed, she was completely healed. I have no proof but I feel quite confident this was Mrs. Lewis herself.”

Just who is meant by “Mrs. Lewis”? Bachelor Lewis, as I understand it, had a mother who died when he was young.… Is Mr. Kilby giving us an unsophisticated book review?

GEORGE E. CONDIT

Central Falls, R. I.

Letters about C. S. Lewis as persistent bachelor are interesting.… He was married to Joy Davidman three or four years ago. (Somebody has remarked that he finally found the “Joy” he had so long sought!) She was an American and partly Jewish. Her Christian testimony is the first one in a book by David Wesley Soper called These Found the Way, published by Westminster Press, 1951.… The reason I knew of Mrs. Lewis’ illness is owing to a personal letter from C. S. Lewis three years ago when I was going to Europe and asked him if he intended to be lecturing in the neighborhood of London, for if so, I wanted my group to go and hear him. He wrote me that he did not plan a lecture at the time of our visit to London but that he and Mrs. Lewis would be glad to have us visit them provided they were well. Both were having some physical difficulties at the time. In another letter he told me that it appeared Mrs. Lewis had been miraculously healed, and that letter was the basis of my remark in the book review.

… I have carefully read all of the Lewis books as they have appeared.… I have reviewed them, usually, for some periodical during the last six or eight years.… [As to Surprised by Joy,] I read the British edition before one appeared in this country, and reviewed the book over four years ago for the New York Herald Tribune.… Part of The World’s Last Night has been copyrighted in the name of Helen Joy Lewis.

CLYDE S. KILBY

Wheaton College

Wheaton, Ill.

JEFFERSON ON FREEDOM

You report that the Methodist social action board is against “right to work” (Editorials, Apr. 25 issue). They must be deeply confused to countenance the forced payment of dues to a private organization whose leaders are, at best, well intentioned but fallible humans.

In the statute for religious freedom, Thomas Jefferson said: “That to compel a man to furnish contributions of money for the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.”

Compulsory church support differs not one iota from compulsory union support. Both employ government power (the “union shop” is recognized by law and enforced by government) to compel support of ideological objectives of a private organization.

Does the Methodist Board of Social and Economic Relations advocate a “church tax” on all those who benefit from the work of the church?

MARION R. MOBLEY

Delegate to 1960 Methodist General Conference

South Carolina Conference

Florence, S. C.

SUNDAY FOOTBALL

There are several reasons why I play ball on the Lord’s day (Editorials, Apr. 11 issue). The last two reasons I give will be my main ones.

1. Of the Ten Commandments only nine of these are stressed in the New Testament. Keeping the Sabbath Day holy is not one of these. As you know Sunday is the Lord’s day, and as a Christian I am serving the Lord, not the Sabbath. 2. In Colossians 3:1 as Christians we are on risen ground or resurrected ground.… 3. In Galations 5:1 Christ set us free from the bondage. 4. Romans 7:1–4 says that the Law of Moses has no more claim on a Christian. Christ took care of that. 5. Colossians 2:16, 17 can be claimed by all Christians. 6. In Hebrews 8:8 we find the Eighth Covenant. I stand on this one. 7. I feel that playing football is God’s will for me. 8. As you know we are lead by the Holy Spirit.

I cannot answer why the colleges and universities and professional people do or do not do certain things about which you wrote. I do know this, that if they are not Christians it doesn’t matter what they do on the subject, because they can do no worse than not accepting Christ.

To conclude, I do not play ball on the Lord’s day to glorify myself, my team, college, to take any credit or to become a millionaire. I do play ball to glorify the Lord and to get opportunities to tell people about Christ and His claims. Also, I am not taking advantage of my name in the world or in any layman’s job. I am now working in two churches and am planning to go to seminary this coming January.…

DONALD DEE SHINNICK

Baltimore Colts,

Baltimore, Md.

• Comments a former professional baseball player: “Does the keeping of the Sabbath have its roots in the Jewish law or rather in God’s economy as revealed in Gen. 2:2, 3? Are not Sunday commercial sports a part of the revolt against Christianity and the Church? Those enmeshed in it seem to me to have compromised their testimony. But each Christian stands before his own Lord. In my contract it was specified that I did not have to travel or play on Sunday.”

—ED.

TOOL FOR EUTYCHUS

Herewith I present Eutychus with a common pin which he may use as a spare in case of need. In “Key to Ecclesian” (May 23 issue) he acquitted himself so nobly that I made up my mind he should never lack a tool wherewith to pierce windbaggishness. Oh, how the fundamental concepts are overlaid these days by innumerable strata of stultifying verbosity!

J. PAUL SAUDER

Elkridge, Md.

ADENAUER DEFENDED

My attention was called, as both a Lutheran minister and a Member of Congress, to a letter to the editor which was printed in your issue of January 18, 1960. The letter, headed “Adenauer’s Religion,” dealt with Chancellor Adenauer’s handling of church-state matters in West Germany and purported to show that his government showed favoritism to the Roman Catholic Church as compared to the Lutheran Church on the ground that “Adenauer’s intention is to make Germany a Catholic State.” … I asked our Department of State to comment on the contents of the letter. Enclosed is a copy of the Department’s reply to me.…

You will note that within the restraints imposed by diplomatic necessity, as indicated in the letter from Assistant Secretary of State Macomber, it is apparent that our government officials who are in a position to be familiar with these matters do not agree with either the arguments advanced or the conclusions reached by the writer of the letter you printed.

WALTER H. MOELLER

10th District, Ohio

Congress of the United States

House of Representatives

Washington, D. C.

Dear Mr. Moeller:

I am sure you appreciate … that the Department is most reluctant to make comments which might be construed as official statements of United States Government policy on matters so clearly domestic in nature as are questions of church-state relations. This is particularly true when, as in this case, the foreign country concerned is a trusted ally of the United States. With this cautionary thought in mind, I address myself to the … points raised in your letter.

It is difficult to imagine how the positions of the Federal Republic of Germany and the United States on the subject of German reunification could be closer together than they are. There have been repeated statements in recent years that clearly show the identity of the aims of the two Governments in this regard.… In the view of the United States Government, also stated repeatedly, the real reason for delay in progress toward German reunification has been and remains Soviet reluctance to permit the establishment of a German state based on a free expression of the desires of all the German people.

With regard to your question about the representation of West Berlin in the German Bundestag, your understanding that there are some legal limitations is correct. You will recall that following the Nazi defeat in 1945, Germany was occupied by the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union and France. Under the Four Power Agreements reached at Potsdam the four Commanders-in-Chief exercised supreme authority in their occupation zones, and sitting as the Allied Control Council, acted jointly by unanimous decision on questions affecting Germany as a whole. However, Soviet intransigence precluded effective operation of the quadripartite Allied control mechanism and development of a unified German administration. Therefore, the Western Allies participated jointly in a series of moves from 1948 to 1955 which have led to the unification of West German areas under their control, the formation of the Federal Republic of Germany (1949) and the return to the Federal Republic of sovereignty on May 5, 1955, under the terms of the Paris Treaties. Now only matters dealing with Berlin and Germany as a whole still remain under Western Allied control. These reservations in the Paris Treaties were made with the consent of the Germans to maintain the Western position vis-à-vis the Soviet Union even though, in practice, these reserved matters are handled in close consultation with the German Federal Government.

Moderating the effects of isolation on Berlin has been a major Allied and German responsibility, presenting problems as difficult as safeguarding the city from the Communists. There are two aspects: a) reducing the effects of the technical legal separation of Berlin from the Federal Republic and b) overcoming the psychological and economic problems of Berlin’s physical separation from West Germany and the loss of normal contact with the surrounding area.

To reduce the psychological and practical effects of the necessary legal separation, close relations and responsibilities have been developed between the Governments of West Berlin and the Federal Republic. For example, representatives of the city are full participants in the West German parliament, though as non-voting members; appropriate West German laws are adopted and administered by the Berlin city government; some West German agencies, such as the Supreme Administrative Court, have their permanent seats in West Berlin; and the Mayor of West Berlin has had a term as President of the Bundesrat, the upper house of parliament. In addition, the Allies carefully consult with the Governments of the Federal Republic and Berlin on foreign policy questions involving reunification and Berlin’s status.

With reference to the financial support accorded churches, church schools, and other church establishments in the Federal Republic, it should be borne in mind that under the German Constitution or Basic Law, competence in these areas is distributed among the several German states or Laender, as opposed to being under direct responsibility of the Government of the Federal Republic. If there is any discrimination between the various parts of the country, it must result from the exercise of differing options at state or local level and not from actions taken by the Federal Government. Certainly, the Department knows of no special privileges that have been granted with respect to the sending of funds abroad by any religious organizations. Since 1958, the German currency has been freely exchangeable and convertible and the restrictions that existed prior to 1958 reflected the financial problems of the period of German economic recovery rather than any effort to inhibit the activity of religious groups.

Lastly with respect to the question in the final paragraph of your letter regarding charges and implications suggesting that Chancellor Adenauer has used his official position to advance the interests of the Roman Catholic Church, it should be noted that both the Christian Democratic Union and the Christian Social Union, which constitute the principal governing parties under the Chancellor’s leadership, include a great many prominent Protestant as well as Roman Catholic leaders. It might also be of interest to you to know that the present Adenauer cabinet is evenly divided between Protestants and Catholics and that the President of the Bundestag, the lower house of the German parliament, Dr. Eugen Gerstenmaier, is a prominent Protestant churchman.

In three national elections since the establishment of the Federal Republic, those of 1949, 1953 and 1957, Chancellor Adenauer has received an ever larger share of the total national vote. It seems beyond the bounds of probability that this would have occurred had there existed in the public mind any belief that the Chancellor was misusing his official position to give a preferred position to any one religious group in the German community.…

WILLIAM B. MACOMBER, JR.

Assistant Secretary

Department of State

Washington, D. C.