Redundant Redundancies
One of Francis Schaeffer’s contributions to the Church (and there are many) is the phrase “true truth.” When he wants to distinguish between what the world calls truth and the absolute truth of God, he uses that term. You cannot read a Francis Schaeffer book without coming across the term. And you cannot read an Edith Schaeffer book without seeing the phrase another dozen times.
Now I am a fan of Francis Schaeffer. I applaud his contributions. But I abhor the term “true truth.”
To me it highlights a problem among Christians: the problem of being redundant. We use so many redundant redundancies that we are in danger of eliminating or abandoning the meaning of perfectly good words.
Why can’t a Christian be a Christian? Why does he have to be a born-again Christian? Aren’t all Christians born again, according to Scripture? And why does a born-again Christian have to be an evangelical Christian? According to my Funk and Wagnalls, evangelical is an adjective “of, relating to, contained in, or in harmony with the New Testament, especially the Gospels.” That seems to me to be a definition of a Christian if I ever heard one.
And how about charismatic Christians? According to my understanding of spiritual gifts (charisma), all believers have at least one spiritual gift whether we’re evangelical, born-again, or just plain run-of-the-mill Christians. So all of us are charismatics. But now some of us can’t call ourselves charismatics even if we are because the term has been taken away from us by redundant redundanters.
If the trend continues, we’ll find ourselves describing real sin as sin-sin. (Isn’t that a breath freshener … or a federal penitentiary?) An individual person will have a born-again conversion experience, followed by a liquid water baptism at which time he will join a church fellowship and give a tithe of one-tenth.
Redundant redundancies could get so bad that books would double in size and so would CHRISTIANITY TODAY magazine column columns. God Jehovah forbid deny.
EUTYCHUS VII
Issuing Excellence
Thank you for another excellent issue (January 16) of CHRISTIANITY TODAY. Harold O. J. Brown has done an outstanding job saying some things about “The Passivity of American Christendom” which are right on target.… The Supreme Court’s own dissenting members have not hestitated to refer to some of its majority opinions as “tortured interpretation” of the U.S. Constitution. The school-prayer decisions (1962 and 1963), in my opinion, all fall into this category. Brown’s very fine analysis … demonstrates how far afield the Court has drifted from the original intent of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.
FLOYD ROBERTSON
Secretary of Public Affairs
National Association of Evangelicals
Washington, D.C.
On behalf of the Christian Action Council and indeed of all Christians who recognize what the Bible teaches about human life, I want to thank you for the January 16 issue of CHRISTIANITY TODAY. The combination of Dr. Selzer’s article describing an abortion with the lead editorial was very good.
HAROLD O. J. BROWN
Christian Action Council
Washington, D.C.
Music Moves
Apparently my paper presented at the fifth annual meeting of the scholarly Society of Pentecostal Studies failed to communicate to reporter Vinson Synan what was intended. (News, “Shaking Up the Pentecostals,” Jan. 2). While stress was given, as Synan correctly suggests, on the proper evaluation of hymn and song texts, I certainly did not intend to make an appeal, as such, “to develop a greater appreciation for the great old hymns of the church.” In fact, one may find fault with the texts of “old hymns” as often as new songs.… To quote from my paper, “the point is not when the hymn was written, not who wrote it, but what was written.… Is it theologically sound? Is it biblically correct?” Synan’s suggestion that “the Pentecostals and charismatics seem to be moving in opposite directions on the matter of hymnody” strikes me.… as inaccurate both in terms of positions taken at the conference and what is in reality happening in our churches today.
JOSEPH NICHOLSON
Springfield, Mo.
Help In Honduras
Your columns have published two stories over the last few months telling of the relief services of churches and religious groups following the disastrous hurricane in Honduras which occurred in September, 1974. You mentioned the identity and described the contribution of several groups which took part in one of the best cooperative relief efforts which has occurred in recent years.
Unfortunately, some of our people have been disappointed that your coverage gave inadequate mention to the very substantial efforts of The Salvation Army in that disaster. The Salvation Army contribution was one of the largest privately funded efforts of all the relief programs in Honduras following the hurricane. The value of Salvation Army services in that disaster was in excess of $2.5 million, utilizing eighty-one professional Salvation Army people who traveled to Honduras from seven different nations. The official State Department report of the disaster told of 550 tons of canned and packaged food, 213 tons of clothing, tents, and bedding, 3 tons of medical supplies, communications equipment, and a full field hospital transported to Honduras and operated by the Salvation Army.
We understand that in a “wrap-up” story involving the work of very many it is often easy to overlook the significant contribution of some. In behalf of the dedicated volunteers, however, who worked with The Salvation Army in this instance, and who helped to support the cost of it, it will be much appreciated if your columns can make room for just this little bit more.
ERNEST A. MILLER
Major
The Salvation Army
Washington, D.C.
No Negotiation
A number of our people were quite upset about Guy Charles’s reference to homosexuals in the Church of the Nazarene and the inference that our denomination was negotiating with them (“Gay Liberation Confronts the Church,” Sept. 12, 1975). This, of course, has never been the case. While we have not condoned such practices we have endeavored to hold out to those who are participating in homosexual activities the redemptive power of the grace of God.
Our statement on homosexuality is found in Paragraph 704.10 on page 400 of the 1972 Manual of the Church of the Nazarene and is as follows:
We recognize the depth of the perversion that leads to homosexual acts, but affirm the biblical position that such acts are sinful and subject to the wrath of God. We believe the grace of God sufficient to overcome the practice of homosexuality (1 Corinthians 6:9–11). We urge clear preaching and teaching concerning Bible standards of sex morality. We deplore any action or statement that would seem to imply compatibility between Christian morality and the practice of homosexuality.
EUGENE L. STOWE
General Superintendent
Church of the Nazarene Church of the Nazarene International Headquarters
Kansas City, Mo.
On Rings
Thank you for Cheryl Forbes’s exciting, “literary” article on Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings (“Frodo Decides—Or Does He?,” Dec. 19). It is simply fantastic, beautiful, and wonderful.
NAOMI L. HUNT
McLean, Va.
Concluding Correctly
Thank you for the Editor’s perceptive analysis of the Nairobi General Assembly of the World Council of Churches (“Nairobi: Crisis in Credibility,” Jan. 2). While I believe that the judgment rendered on Dr. Robert McAfee Brown was too severe—and certainly one cannot question the basic Christian presuppositions out of which his analysis was made—I, nevertheless, feel that your conclusion in which you point out the seriousness of the socialism-capitalism issue is an accurate one.
WILLIAM F. KEESECKER
Moderator
The United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A.
Wichita, Kans.
ERRATUM
In the letter from David M. Stowe in the January 30 issue, his name was inadvertently misspelled “Stone.”
