Humanism’S Bad For Brides
In a curious sort of way I found encouragement in hearing of a note received recently by a neighboring pastor. “Would you please cancel our wedding,” it ran, “as we have now decided to get married by a J. P. for religious reasons.” Those youngsters may not have heard of William Temple, but they were unconsciously following the advice he once gave to an unbaptized couple seeking a special license for a church wedding. “It would surely be a terrible mistake.” said the archbishop, “to start your married life with a piece of solemn insincerity.”
It is equally oddly heartening to discover that humanists too are human, with human problems. One of their magazines not long ago carried the following epistle: “I have tried to educate my seven children according to Humanist beliefs. I taught them the usual things, such as: to have respect for life, to accept evolution and not creation as the basic doctrine for an understanding of the universe, etc.” That parent then went on to tell of the precautions to avoid any attempted religious indoctrination at school (perhaps appreciating the truth of C. S. Lewis’ dictum: “A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading”).
Then came the crunch. I let the distraught mother speak for herself: “But now the eldest daughter wants to get married.… She wants her wedding to be a big occasion with a proper ceremony and many guests. A five-minute civil ceremony is out of the question. As far as I know there are no Humanist churches in our city, or are there? Can anybody help?”
This poignant situation illustrates, of course, the folly of forcing non-religion down a child’s throat. That mother obviously sees that an orthodox church wedding, to use a memorable phrase carried once by this journal, would be the thin end of the Scarlet Woman. Let her child once get within sound of “Because” or “The Voice That Breathed” and years of brainwashing would have gone for nothing.
But all is not lost for any mother worth her humanistic salt and discriminating in her choice of church. New hope comes from the Letters column of Time magazine (Jan. 19). Writing from Knoxville, Tennessee, one who staunchly proclaims himself “Reverend” has this to say: “For most of the people with whom I work, and for myself, God is an obsolete, discarded piece of baggage belonging to man’s past. But our humanity most certainly is not.”
This leaves me with a problem of conscience, for that mother and that pastor might strike some rapport. Should I aim a blow against solemn insincerity by putting them in touch with each other?
EUTYCHUS IV
Assessing Sex Education
I much appreciated “Sex, SIECUS, and the Schools” (Jan. 30). It is the most rational and down-to-earth appraisal of this most controversial subject I have read. The mere mention of the word “SIECUS” often has the effect of waving a red flag, and people seem to have lost their ability to sit back and calmly assess the situation. The result has been to exaggerate and overstate the basis for objections to SIECUS.
CARL R. EGGERS
Holy Cross Lutheran Church
Seattle, Wash.
Since I was one of those who severely criticized your earlier article on sex education, may I now express my general approval of “Sex, SIECUS, and the Schools.”
As an evangelical minister with a constant interest in the social problems of our society, I was amazed at the vitriolic assault by the press on those who are fighting not against sex education but against sex education without moral training and spiritual values.… Until SIECUS and its companion organizations are eliminated, sex education will remain suspect.
(The Rev.) STANLEY M. ANDREWS
Executive Secretary
Maryland Citizens’ Committee for Decency and Morality
Rockville, Md.
I commend your three suggestions which conclude your plea. In the interests of accuracy, I would like to make the following observations:
Albert Ellis is not and never has been officially connected with SIECUS, nor has he ever spoken at any meeting under its auspices. (Billy James Hargis put his picture beside Mary Calderone’s on the cover of his publication “The SIECUS Story” in one of the most flagrant misrepresentations I have ever seen.) To link an extreme sexual hedonist like Ellis with SIECUS is like linking the most fanatical anti-Semite with CHRISTIANITY TODAY just because he uses some Scripture quotations.…
Your statement that something is amiss because of the turnover in membership fails to take into account that SIECUS terms on the board are for three years and after a second term a person cannot succeed himself. This policy of rotation, plus the inevitable mobility of job changes that have forced some folks to resign, makes for the change.…
You are quite correct in reporting that SIECUS has been blamed by many people for association with Sexology magazine.… The few SIECUS board members who are consultants to Sexology certainly cannot outvote the more than forty other board members.
It must be kept in mind that SIECUS is not an ecclesiastical organization. It is a voluntary health agency. It cannot insist on scriptural standards for all of its work. Rather, it is a professional resource which many denominations have found useful.…
Many evangelicals will find themselves in accord with the Interfaith Statement on Sex Education adopted by the United States Catholic Congress, the Synagogue Council of America, and the National Council of Churches.… Your threefold plan of action seems precisely in accord with the threefold emphasis of the Interfaith Statement.
WILLIAM H. GENNÉ
Coordinator, Family Ministries
National Council of Churches
New York, N.Y.
You fail to mention the one alternative that would answer the problem and that is for Christian parents to support and send their children to schools where Christ is recognized as Lord of all of life!
PAUL VAN ZANTEN
Lynden, Wash.
I would hesitate to say that the organization of the Church has not assumed its responsibility in the area of sex education. It has been my experience that the organization is hindered in its attempts at Christian sex education by an outspoken minority of the church members who feel that sex is not to be considered within the confines of the church building. Then there are those who feel that the subject is so controversial that we should avoid it altogether—even though our young people cannot.
VICTOR C. GLAVACH, JR.
Director of Christian Education
The First Presbyterian Church
Rome, Ga.
In California we have had terrific problems with “over zealous” instructors using questionable methods and materials to the degree that our State Department of Education investigated many districts and came up with confirmation of what had been regarded by the sex-education proponents as rumor.
Consequently, State Senator John Schmitz introduced Senate Bill No. 413, which prohibits mandatory attendance and allows a parent to notify the district that his child is not to attend the classes if the parent so chooses. Also, it allows parents to examine all the materials to be used in the course. In addition, violations of this law become grounds for revocation or suspension of a teacher’s credential.
This law has done much to clarify and clear up our situation in California.
ROBERT E. BADHAM
Assemblyman
California Legislature
Sacramento, Calif.
Remembering Hromadka
As a former student of the late Professor Josef Hromádka, I read with great sorrow of his death (Jan. 30). My sorrow is caused, not because he had gone to be with his Lord, but because Czechoslovakia and the world have lost a voice which witnessed for Christ.
I shall never forget Dr. Hromádka. He was a genuine Christian. One of the impressions he made upon me was that he was a man whom I could trust. I shall always remember him saying, in answer to a question, that he would appear at Communist meetings, if invited, and preach Christ. (This was in a bull session just before he returned to his native land.) I have no reason to believe that he ever changed his mind. He was a committed Christian. Christ was his Lord, not an economic system.
WALTER G. HARDS
St. David’s Church
Baltimore, Md.
Adventist Allusions
Thank you for three generally fair and largely factual allusions to Seventh-day Adventists in your January 30 issue.
With the elections of the General Conference quadrennial session looming in June, I hope that George E. Vandeman will not be penalized for being listed by you as “director” of the General Conference (Letters). I have never believed him to be a presidency-seeker in the past! He is director of the effective television program, “It Is Written.”
David Kucharsky’s allusion to “no sign of a thaw” (“The Attraction of Adventism,” News) in the relations between the Seventh-day Adventists and “orthodox evangelicals” is a significant one. Without doubt our attitudes have sometimes built barriers rather than bridges, but we must contend that our patterns of conduct are not legalistically motivated, but rather are the fruitage of our faith in the all-sufficient atonement for sinners on the cross.…
The implication that Adventist doctrines were drawn up by Ellen White and the possible implication that she was the sole or chief founder of the church is at least an over-simplification, and at most an inaccurate impression. This is not to deny the significant role played by what Adventists regard as the inspired counsel of Ellen White during the formative years of the church. But it would be unfair to leave the impression that these doctrines had little or no relationship to the Scriptures. Adventists have widely been known as people of the Book—and rightly so.
GORDON M. HYDE
General Field Secretary
The Seventh-day Adventist Church
Washington, D. C.
Acknowledging Christians
I don’t know where your reporter Antoni Gronowicz obtained the information for “Poland’s Protestants” (News, Jan. 30). But he overlooked or omitted any mention of the churches of Christ in Poland. These autonomous congregations of Christians who attempt to restore the New Testament Church have existed for many years, and continue to grow.
LINDSAY A. BLEDSOE
Niceville Christian Church
Valparaiso, Fla.
Clucking Romance
Thank you for raising the problem in your January 16 issue of the need for evangelical witness in TV and other media. No viable solutions were put forth in either your editorial or the lead article, however.
Your editorial raised one of the key issues: “Must there be entertainment on every channel every night?” The answer is, No, it must not be so, but yes, it will be so.
Perhaps the time has come for us to stop clucking at mammon’s ills on the one hand and stop trying to romance a “church”-media marriage on the other.
Let’s move into all media—as they are!
PAUL I. MCCLENDON
Chairman, Speech Department
Oral Roberts University
Tulsa, Okla.
The editorial is excellent. The article is refreshingly positive but shows inadequate knowledge of the field of religious broadcasting as it really exists today. Generalities are nice, but specifics—that’s tough.
BEN ARMSTRONG
Executive Secretary
National Religious Broadcasters
Madison, N. J.
Valid Rabble-Rousing?
Dr. Nash’s review of Dr. Van Til’s book A Christian Theory of Knowledge (Jan. 16) had conflicting effects on me. Being an ardent admirer of the great apologist, I found myself wanting to dismiss Dr. Nash as just another reactionary of the autonomous-minded rabble! However, I think he—along with Gordon Clark—has raised valid objections that Dr. Van Til must attempt to answer. Here’s hoping he succeeds.
STAN HUNTLEY
Clear Springs Baptist Church
Louin, Miss.
Back To Foot-In-Mouth
Your “slipped disc” cartoon (Jan. 16) has a “slipped sign” as well! Chiropody is that branch of medicine which treats the human foot, not back. Rather, chiropractors treat the human back.
I might also point out that most states have now changed the term chiropody to podiatry. (P.S. I am a former chiropodist.)
KENNETH DENEKE
St. Paul’s Evangelical Lutheran Church
Columbia, Pa.
Counting Seminaries
The news report on “Seminary Enrollment” (Jan. 16) lends itself to some misconception.
While your editorializing is careful, … the general import is that non-AATS seminaries have increased more than AATS seminaries from 1968 to 1969.
This comparison, made between non-AATS conservative theological schools and AATS schools as a whole, certainly doesn’t say that non-AATS schools grow faster because they are non-AATS schools. Some AATS schools have shown a greater increase this year than some of these non-AATS schools.
How about the method of reporting? The figures given in your chart of non-AATS seminaries is most likely a nose count.
While the AATS figures include registrants on differing bases, they are controlled reports, and it is very likely that some of the persons included in the non-AATS seminary reports would not be recognized by the AATS as legitimate enrollees.
Other elements like differing entrance requirements would make the comparison very questionable, so the thrust of the article would be inaccurate and invidious.
EARL S. KALLAND
Dean
Conservative Baptist Theological Seminary
Denver, Colo.
I … was simply curious as to whether you had restricted the list to those who had specialized in the B.D. or Master of Divinity degree. I recognize that our enrollment in that field is rather small, and consequently might not have been regarded as particularly significant. I can say that our enrollment went up this year from 87 to 113 in the Graduate School.
MERRILL C. TENNEY
Dean, Graduate School
Wheaton College
Wheaton, Ill.
