Eutychus II bids adieu
Ave Atque Vale
This is a kind of announcement—that this is the last round for Eutychus II. I have it on the authority of Shakespeare that parting is sweet sorrow, and in this day of the worship of paradox “sweet sorrow” just shows how timely Shakespeare is.
They say (and “they say” is probably a greater authority than Shakespeare) that if you have a pain somewhere, a worse one will cover it. In other words, if you really hurt, just think up another hurt and you can forget the first one—if, of course, you can handle the second one. So I have my double hurt. This announcement assures an end, but the more severe hurt is that now all is revealed. As I cease and desist in the writing of this column, I am really hurt by the pain and shame of knowing that so many people will now know who was responsible for all this. I made a couple of bad slips, particularly in athletics, that gave me away to former students. Other people thought they recognized my style. That was nice, because not everybody would agree that I have style. Well, some days were worse than others, but I always managed to hit the deadline.
That reminds me of the story of the little Irish boy whose father took him to market the day they sold the cow. The father had let it be known to the family that he wanted to sell the cow for $75 but would take $50. Imagine the father’s chagrin to hear his boy telling a prospective customer, “My father wants $75 but he’ll take $50.” “If you would keep your mouth shut,” said his father, “people wouldn’t know how stupid you are.” While the father was away doing something else, another man came and asked the price of the cow, and the boy clammed up. The man said, “You’re too stupid to be left in charge of a cow,” as he walked away. When the father came back, the boy was in tears. “I kept my mouth shut,” he said, “but they found out how stupid I am anyway.”
ADDISON H. LEITCH
Relief For Weary Eyes
I found your recent articles on journalism and religion (Crisis in Communication Issue, Oct. 14) a sight for the weary eyes of any religion editor on a newspaper. Although I do not necessarily agree with the theological stance of your magazine, I nevertheless found the articles to be well written, provocative, and enlightening. It is a joy to see some prophetic stance being taken in what must be considered at times a wasteland.
JOHN C. MORGAN
Religion Editor
The Journal
Lorain, Ohio
Thank you for your excellent issue.… One aspect particularly missing in this appraisal of communications trends is the fact that the Christian college campus has no serious program in Christian communications. I had hoped that your magazine with its excellent research know-how would have done some kind of analysis into this area.…
Evangelical Literature Overseas and Evangelical Press Association are joining in a project called EPIC (Evangelical Press in Colleges) to seriously do something about getting Christian communications into the curriculum of our Christian colleges.
JAMES L. JOHNSON
Executive Secretary
Evangelical Literature Overseas
Wheaton, Ill.
Heartiest congratulations on your tenth-anniversary issue. It is indeed outstanding.
HOWARD A. KUHNLE
St. Paul’s Lutheran
Richmondville, N. Y.
Regrettably the issue lacked balance by failing to include an article on advertising, potentially one of the most promising yet actually one of the least developed forms of religious communication.
JAMES W. CARTY, JR.
Chairman
Communications Concentration
Bethany College
Bethany, W. Va.
One form of communication which was not mentioned, and yet is stronger and better than all other forms of communication, is the communication of the Holy Spirit with people.
HENRY W. LAMPE
Springfield, Mo.
I’ll offer two comments. Mr. Cassels hit the nail on the head in the panel discussion when he said, “I think people are deluged with so many communications from so many voices clamoring for their attention that they are rapidly losing the ability to hear or respond to any of them”.… Dr. Mason’s statement, “Today I think [Jesus] would use TV,” is all wet. He would have no more access to the great communications media than some of his faithful spokesmen today.
HAROLD FOX
Malta, Mont.
Bibliographic Bigotry Revisited
In the September 30 issue, Mr. Harvey Arnold, my successor as librarian of the University of Chicago Divinity School, asked me “publicly for some clarification” of my claim that his library “made a very poor showing in the field of biblical eschatology.” He wonders what subject heading I could have checked and claims that “we have every major, critical, scholarly, substantial work in that field—in all languages.”
In my original article (Aug. 19 issue) I gave a specific citation to the published study embodying my evaluation of Chicago’s biblical eschatology materials (American Theological Library Association Proceedings, XVI [1962], 94, 95); had he consulted this paper, he would have received his answer: I checked Library of Congress categories BT 819–90. But just in case my earlier research did not accurately reflect the current situation, Mr. Joel Samuels, our Trinity librarian, rechecked Chicago’s holdings against Wilbur Smith’s standard, selective Preliminary Bibliography for the Study of Biblical Prophecy (this time a complete author check was made), and the dismal results were these: Chicago has only 120 of the 220 Smith items, and in the specific area of monographic works on biblical prophecy, Chicago has only 16 Smith items (6 per cent of Smith’s list). Though it hardly seems possible, there is not a single publication by Lewis Sperry Chafer in the University of Chicago’s Divinity School Library! Since Smith’s Bibliography contains only the indispensable works in the field, these results are not insignificant.
By the by, Mr. Arnold would elicit more confidence in his acquisition policies vis-à-vis orthodox theological literature if he would get the names straight: it is the Evangelical Theological Society Bulletin, not Proceedings.
JOHN WARWICK MONTGOMERY
Professor and Chairman
Division of Church History
Trinity Evangelical Divinity School
Deerfield. Ill.
Looking Over The Overseers
If the ordained contributors among Eutychus’s Kin are representative of those whom we might hope “the Holy Spirit has made overseers, to feed the church of God …,” the prospect for us laymen is indeed a dismal one.
KENNETH W. LINSLEY
Lt. Colonel, USAF
APO, New York
Setting The Record Straight
In all fairness to Faith Church and for the benefiit of your readers, the latter surely should be made aware of some grave inaccuracies and misleading implications in the news article entitled, “Church Beats EUB in Court” (News, Sept. 16 issue).
The EUB Discipline does not say “that under trust provisions the denomination owns the property,” as the report stated. The article did not make clear that the judge unequivocally announced that the property belonged to the congregation and declared, “There is no fraud on the part of the defendants.”
Nor was it clearly pointed out that the denomination did the suing. The congregation merely sought to defend their property rights after having twice officially endeavored to negotiate an amicable property arrangement before withdrawing in order to forestall such unchristian litigation and shameful waste of the Lord’s money (not to mention the time and anxieties involved). Both times and once again during the court case, the EUB officials bitterly rejected the Faith Church’s overtures.
The judge’s decision was not as naïve as the denominational representatives would have the church world believe through this report. Nor was the pulpit “embattled,” as stated. Only once did about fifteen of the denomination’s officials come into a Sunday morning service and ask to present Rev. Lang as pastor of the non-existing Faith EUB Church. To avert disruption of a worship service, the officers of the congregation allowed the presentation, but went on with their service. Otherwise the church has prospered in the peaceful proclamation of the Word.…
PAUL M. ALLEMAN
Denver, Col.
High And Dry
I won’t cancel my subscription to CHRISTIANITY TODAY, but I would suggest that writer Robert L. Cleath (News, Oct. 14 issue) read Genesis 8:11 before he does any more reviewing of the biblical movie, The Bible … in the Beginning. Olive leaf, Mr. Cleath!
GEORGE GIPPLE, JR.
Whittier, Calif.
• The dove that old Noah let fly
Came back with a leaf bye and bye.
But the bird’s little twig
Was olive, not fig,
And the writer was caught high and dry.—ED.
Poem Treasure
I was very much blessed by that perfect treasure of a poem entitled, “Sonnet of the Midget Crosses” (Sept. 16 issue), by Wilma W. Burton.
DOROTHY E. BECKER
Schenectady, N.Y.
More On Evolution
In “The Creation of Matter, Life, and Man” (Insert, Sept. 16), Dr. Leitch writes as though the creationist view and science cannot be reconciled. Eminent scientists do believe this is possible. In fact, they believe that the available evidence is more in harmony with the creationist viewpoint than it is with the evolutionist viewpoint. Please note carefully the enclosed letter from Dr. John J. Grebe. Similar letters from other eminent scientists can be furnished if you desire them.
M. F. GABLER
Longview, Tex.
He has forgotten, or never seen, the fact which Christians should be aware of when discussing creation and evolution; that is, that death, so vital a part of the theory of evolution (e.g., death is basic to the survival-of-the-fittest concept), is not mentioned at all until after the fall of Adam and Eve.
WILLIAM L. SCURRAH
Minneapolis, Minn.
Dr. Leitch has employed fallacious reasoning, extremely selective “scientific facts” from which he deduces very dubious inferences.
EDWARD C. BOWLEN
Church in the Wildwood
Shingletown, Cal.
Clergy Salaries
You are to be commended for the news article “The Problem of the Underpaid Pastor” (Sept. 30 issue).…
Since the figures and the facts for the Church of God do not match the Church of God, Cleveland, Tennessee, may I assume that these are Church of God, Anderson, Indiana, figures?
HOLLIS L. GREEN
Public Relations Director
Church of God
Cleveland, Tenn.
• You may.—ED.
Startling Statement
I was quite startled recently when I stumbled upon an item in CHRISTIANITY TODAY, referring to the University of Colorado. In “The Drift on the College Campus” (Sept. 30 issue) appears the statement, “At the University of Colorado, 4,000 students—approximately one-third of the student body—sought psychiatric help in 1965.”
This statement is not only seriously in error but is also subject to gross misinterpretation.… The director of the University Health Service has told me that the actual number was 690. This is about 4.5 per cent, … the “norm” for state universities.…
I do recall that in my annual report on the activities of the Counseling Service, [4,000] is about the number reported as having availed themselves of these services. Some of these, of course, were prompted by emotional and other personal reasons, but very many more were for academic and vocational consultation.…
J. B. SCHOOLLAND
Dir. of Counseling
Prof. of Psychology, Emeritus
University of Colorado
Boulder, Colo.
