The WCC Commission on World Mission and Evangelism
Arthur F. Glasser, dean of Fuller Theological Seminary’s School of World Mission, furnished CHRISTIANITY TODAY with his assessment of the WCC Commission on World Mission and Evangelism that met in Melbourne, Australia, in May.
Melbourne, the second largest city in Australia, has joined Mexico City (1963) and Bangkok (1972) in the ongoing sequence of the World Council of Churches’ efforts to integrate our Lord’s Great Commission into the life and ministry of its churches—295 separate communions that make up its membership (in 85 countries). The two-week CWME conference was heralded as a commemoration of the 1910 World Missionary Conference in Edinburgh that launched the modern ecumenical movement. Edinburgh 1910 was convened by representatives of missionary societies burdened to carry to completion their worldwide task. “The immediate occupation of all unoccupied fields” was their rallying theme. Indeed, at the opening meeting the then archbishop of Canterbury sounded the keynote: “It is my single thought—that the place of missions in the life of the church must be the central place, and none other.” Through mutual acceptance and cooperative effort, the world could be evangelized.
Now, 70 years later, more than 500 delegates from WCC member churches along with fraternal representatives, advisers, and observers gathered in Melbourne to reflect on the still unfinished task. What made Melbourne 1980 unique in ecumenical gatherings was its large number of orthodox clergy and laity (around 150) from all strands of world orthodoxy. The Catholics were also present in strength: the Vatican Secretariat for the Promotion of Christian Unity sent a 21-member delegation. Inevitably then, Protestants—churchmen, theologians, WCC officials, women, youth, and minority peoples—did not dominate. I was disappointed that the great majority of participants were drawn from established churches; relatively few came from Western or Third World missionary societies. This meant a vital perspective was lacking in most of the discussion on world mission that followed. Under the able leadership of CWME’s director, Emilio Castro, a Uruguayan Methodist minister, the conference took the measure of the eighties and tackled its heavy agenda with considerable vigor.
The agenda was built around the prayer: “Your Kingdom Come.” In session after session, by music, recitation, and corporate intercession, this sustained cry for the coming of the kingdom heightened the seriousness with which the delegates undertook their assignments. It constantly evoked their gratitude to God for those evidences of the kingdom already present in society and affirmed their confidence that the kingdom in all its fullness will climax human history—in God’s time and in God’s way. I thought this emphasis on prayer to be singularly suited to such a gathering at this juncture in world history. It enabled us to keep things in perspective as speaker after speaker addressed plenary sessions and as discussion followed discussion in the section and subsection meetings.
This emphasis on prayer for the kingdom was reinforced by much Bible study. All were assigned to small groups (25, using four separate languages). We met nine separate times (1½ hours each) and reflected on those portions in the Gospel of Matthew that enforced, deepened, and illuminated the missiological and personal dimensions of the Lord’s Prayer. Imagine the privilege that was mine, coming as I do from a denomination that eschews ecumenical contact! I was part of a group of 20 men and women whose exploration of Matthew was directed by Professor Krister Stendahl, the New Testament scholar of Harvard Divinity School. His Lutheran distinctives were enriched by the contributions of bishops (Anglican, Coptic, and Hungarian), an Australian deaconness, a Spanish Roman Catholic theologian, several German scholars, theologians from Costa Rica and Brazil, women clergy from Australia and Sri Lanka, a Presbyterian from New Zealand, Methodists from the Caribbean and Fiji, and a youth leader from South Africa. I was reminded of Saint Paul’s injunction to receive all whom Christ has manifestly received, and listen rather than talk (Rom. 15:5–7). The insights of my new brothers and sisters excited me. Familiar passages took on new meaning; I was never so impressed with the impoverishment Christians bring upon themselves by resisting ecumenical dialogue in our day. How subbiblical is the view that to confine oneself to having monologues with one’s own kind is somehow pleasing to God.
These protracted Bible discussions with their demanding interaction created a climate of mutual respect and grateful interdependence. All of which pressed this large gathering of virtual strangers to put away their “passport speeches” and open themselves to the possibility of new insights on the four basic themes selected as most appropriate to mission reflection for the eighties.
It is impossible for anyone to give a balanced report of all that transpired in the sections and subsections as serious minds grappled with these far-reaching themes: “Good News for the Poor.” “The Kingdom of God and Human Struggles.” “The Church Witnesses to the Kingdom.” and “The Crucified Christ Challenges Human Power.” In time the findings of the separate groups were integrated into a comprehensive whole by a series of exhaustive and exhausting plenary sessions. It was only then that one began to see that Melbourne’s overriding theme had been keynoted by Professor Ernst Käsemann, retired Tübingen New Testament scholar, in a plenary address. Käsemann is regarded in Germany as a theological maverick, having in recent years drawn away from his radical Bultmannian rootage. A few years ago (May 1977) his daughter Elizabeth was cruelly tortured, then shot by Argentine police, who regarded her as politically subversive (she was pursuing graduate study in their country). This tragedy doubtless colored Käsemann’s reflections on “The Eschatological Royal Reign of God.”
Käsemann called for three distinct responses to Jesus’ inauguration of the kingdom of God: (1) preach the gospel to every creature: “we must confront the whole world with the gospel to the advantage and favor of every single creature”; (2) make the church worthy of the banqueting table of Jesus through “active participation in the struggle of God against the idols of our day”; and (3) resist all temptations to noninvolvement in the struggle against “rich societies” with their “unstoppable lust of possession” and their unrestrained use of their scientific and technological capacities to “defend their privileges and make whole continents pay for this with their blood.” He added: “For too long the old churches have been in league with the powerful, and have supported themselves on a bourgeois middle class, while yet neglecting or even despising the cries of the damned in our world. God’s royal rule today proclaims in the words of Psalm 12:5: ‘Because the poor are despoiled, because the needy groan, I will now arise, says the Lord; I will bring help to him who yearns thereafter.’ ” And Käsemann closed with the question: “Will we too arise and set out with this Lord?”
This challenge evoked sustained applause. “The West sponsors world injustice”—this indictment meant that the Third World and its liberation theology would dominate the conference. And it did. The gospel is “good news to the poor, but bad news to the rich.” This thesis was heard again and again throughout those two weeks.
Gravitating Delegates
While three of the four sections were caught up in intense debate largely dominated by Latin American Christians. I was seeking to trace the discussions in the section devoted to the church’s confession of the kingdom. At first, it almost seemed as if the conference would fall apart as the delegates divided and gravitated to the sections that appealed to them. In response to my inquiry, an Indian said. “I’ve only come here because of my burden for the poor and their liberation. Nothing else interests me.” Evangelicals—there were many and they were not manipulated—were more concerned about verbal witness and they substantially influenced the final document on this theme with solid words about preaching reconciliation through Christ, calling for repentance, faith, and conversion, and underscoring the importance of the new birth. The orthodox also came into their own at Melbourne. They sought to reverse Bangkok (1972) with its failure to stress “the reality of salvation as hope beyond death, as life in God.” This section also stressed the centrality and missionary implications of the Eucharist in a way that excited evangelicals. Not a few wondered why its importance had eluded them for so long.
Of course, it is easy to find flaws in the final documents. Some of my evangelical brethren showed themselves almost too adept at pointing out imprecision in theological statements and imbalance in handling complex issues. In many ways, I sympathized with their concerns. But I am also convinced that most evangelicals at Melbourne felt Bruce Nicholls of the World Evangelical Fellowship was right when he said at a private gathering: “We evangelicals must realize that the crisis issue of the eighties will be the growing gap between the rich and the poor. We belong to a world weary of words, weary with materialism, consumerism, and guilt, weary of evangelical disunity and pettiness. People everywhere are saying: ‘We’ve had enough token endorsement of human rights; put your lives where your mouths are.’ ”
But Melbourne 1980 was a disappointment in many ways. Its agenda was designed more for a conference on “church and society” than on the worldwide missionary task. Its debates reminded one of other assemblies of the World Council of Churches (such as Uppsala 1968, and Nairobi 1975). The focus was on the churches that already exist, not on those millions of people hopelessly and helplessly—at this late hour in the history of the church—beyond the reach of a meaningful Christian witness.
As a result, we heard virtually nothing about the peoples of Asia and Africa. I heard nothing of the Christian encounter with non-Christian religions. Nothing of Islam, of Hinduism, of Buddhism, little of secularism, of spiritism, of the ominous proliferation of cults in our day. Did anyone underscore the urgency of taking the gospel to those who have never heard? When confronted with our document on Christian witness the Armenian archbishop of Jerusalem exclaimed: “But this means I must go out onto the streets of Jerusalem, call Jews and Muslims together and preach to them. I’ve no intention of doing this. When I get back home I’m going to tell my people to be better Christians.” And he concluded with the enigmatic question, “Was the WCC formed to make more churches?” One thought of Acts 2 and the church that filled all Jerusalem with its teaching (Acts 5:28).
Finally, mission societies were not mentioned, and no alternative solutions were suggested for reaching the more than two billion people to whom Jesus Christ is still a stranger. We rightly spent much time seeking to face the plight of the poor in the Third World. Yet we heard virtually nothing of the charismatic movement, which has won to Christ a far higher percentage of these poor than most other churches combined. And I only heard one reference to the striking fact that the churches among these poor have organized several hundred mission agencies and have more than 3,000 of their own taking the gospel across the frontiers of faith into cultures and among peoples where Christ is not known.
Five minutes before the last press conference ended I asked for the floor and unburdened myself: “Mr. Moderator, in our day all over the world we are meeting young people who feel God is calling them to the missionary vocation. They come to us for counsel. What has Melbourne 1980 specifically to say to them? What direction can it give them?” And the reply? “Here at Melbourne we have not considered this matter.”
And therein lies the tragedy. But this also points up the absolute importance of the Lausanne follow-up Consultation on World Evangelization drawing evangelicals from all over the world to Pattaya, Thailand, this month. They will discuss ways and means to evangelize the forgotten peoples—the hidden peoples that have yet to hear the gospel. And their rubric wonderfully supplements Melbourne’s sustained cry for the coming of the kingdom. It is: “How Shall They Hear?”
China
The Bell Clan Takes a Sentimental Journey
When Ruth Bell Graham, wife of the evangelist, visited her old home in Qing Jiang (Tsing Kian), China, signs reading “welcome” greeted her from the front of the building. Guided by a charming Chinese gentleman assigned to them as guests of the People’s Republic of China, Mrs. Graham, her sisters Rosa Bell Montgomery and Virginia Bell Somerville, and her brother Clayton Bell, toured the land of their childhood.
The group visited their home town and eight other cities where they met with a number of Chinese dignitaries, including the wife of Sun Yat-sen. The trip was not an attempt to pave the way for a future Graham crusade: it was purely a “sentimental journey,” Clayton Bell said.
In her home town. Mrs. Graham spoke to the students of the school she had attended as a girl. They also visited the hospital and other buildings erected by her father. Nelson Bell, for 25 years a missionary to China with the Presbyterian Church in the U.S. Most of the buildings were intact, though currently used for quite different purposes. The Bells also visited friends they had known before they left China in 1941. One of these friends, Miriam, told them: “The seed your father planted is still bearing fruit. Most of the older Christians are dead, but their children are carrying on.”
Miriam’s words appeared to be true, if attendance at several of the churches in Shanghai was any indication. The 6:30 A.M. service at Mo’en Church (formerly Moore Memorial Methodist Church) was packed with some 1,200 to 1,300 people. “We were told that people began lining up for church service as early as three in the morning.” Mrs. Graham said. “We were able to get in only because they saved a few seats for foreign visitors each Sunday.”
Two more equally crowded services followed the 6:30 service at Mo’en; at 9 A.M. the Bells visited Pure Heart Church, also filled with worshipers. They heard simple, forceful exposition of biblical passages at both churches.
Mrs. Graham met and was able to talk extensively not only with representatives of the small house churches that have sprung up all over China, but also with representatives of the “Three-Self Movement” that has the sanction of the Communist government. The latter uniformly saw no inconsistency between full patriotic loyalty to the government and their Christian profession, and seemed unaware of any infringements of their right to believe and practice a biblical faith. They told Mrs. Graham the government will make 120,000 Bibles available by October 1, 1980, although the method of distribution is unclear. Some believe they will be sold to all who sign their name and address and tell when they were converted.
On her return from China, Mrs. Graham requested prayer for the church there, and prayer “that the people of China may come to see that Christianity is not a Western religion. Pray that they may realize the Bible is … as old as their written language.”
Clayton Bell drew two conclusions from their trip: “At this point we do not believe that the Chinese government is open to missionaries from any other country, particularly the West. But the other side is that the church in China has sufficient strength to propagate itself, and it is doing that.” Some estimates indicate that the church in China today is much larger than it was in 1951 when the last foreign missionaries were forced to leave.
Deaths
Zionism Loses a Staunch Evangelical Supporter
Jerusalem Mayor Teddy Kollek and Israel’s ambassador-at-large Shauel Ramati each delivered eulogies. Several Jewish religious leaders also attended the funeral; an Orthodox rabbi—the first time ever inside a Christian church—wept openly.
The service last month in Jerusalem’s Saint Andrews Church of Scotland would have been high tribute for a departed Jewish leader. But these and other Israeli political, civic, and religious officials had gathered to honor a Gentile—and a Christian—G. Douglas Young. Their respect reaffirmed Young’s reputation as a champion of the Zionist cause; among evangelical Christians, the former dean of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School probably was the best known supporter for the state of Israel.
Young, 71, died of a heart attack May 21 in his Jerusalem home. He was buried on Mount Zion in a cemetery next to the American Institute of Holy Land Studies, which he founded and served as president from 1958 to 1978. His contact with students continued afterwards, when the American Zionist Federation sponsored him last year as a theologian in residence at several U.S. evangelical seminaries to encourage evangelical-Jewish dialogue.
Prior to his death. Young, the son of Canadian Presbyterian missionaries in Korea, had devoted most of his time to Bridges for Peace. He started the Minneapolis-based organization two years ago with the goal of bettering understanding between Israel and the U.S. and between Christians and Jews. It published Young’s 15,000-circulation, monthly newsletter, “A Dispatch from Jerusalem,” in which he endeavored to give Christians the Israeli side of events there and throughout the Middle East.
Young had entered fully into the Israeli scene. He promoted tours to Israel, and the nation’s tourism department frequently booked him for speaking engagements. He was a member of Jerusalem’s city-planning commission and Rotary Club, and on the international board of an Orthodox Jewish hospital. Some Christians criticized Young as having lost his objectivity in the process, and for pro-Israel views not fully representative of those of the evangelical community. However, Young stuck to his views. His interest in Israel perhaps was explained in an interview last fall. He deplored his silence during the Nazi Holocaust, and said, “The dangers to Jewish survival are as great today as they were in the 1930s. I don’t intend to be silent this time.”
Scotland
Some Jolts for the Kirk’s Leaders and Traditions
When the archbishop of Canterbury visited the Church of Scotland general assembly in Edinburgh last month, he encountered the mandatory group of Protestant demonstrators. These supporters of Pastor Jack Glass, a formidable warrior who finds even Ian Paisley’s brand of fundamentalism defective, left Archbishop Robert Runcie in no doubt about his treachery and Romanizing.
Denying that the ecumenical climate was cold and calling for an end to old rivalries, Runcie identified the real enemies as “loss of nerve in the gospel, narrow vision, closed minds, and cheap shortcuts to the kingdom.”
The assembly approved a plan for ecumenical parishes in Scotland, but only after most of the 1,400 commissioners had left for the night. The decision infuriated a national newspaper, which saw therein an undermining of the eldership, depriving congregations of the right to choose their own ministers, eroding the status of the national Kirk, and raising again the spectre of episcopacy.
Another departure from tradition was the appointment of an assembly council. This will oversee seven new boards, which will supersede the existing 47 committees that run the Kirk. Here, too, some chose to see a conspiracy against democracy, but it was pointed out that the council will be a standing committee of the general assembly.
A further radical change was the setting up of an auxiliary ministry to help meet the manpower shortage in the Kirk. Those recruited would be ordained, part-time, and unpaid. Drastic ills call for drastic remedies. The Church of Scotland, with some 970,000 members, is down about 300,000 from the 1963 figure, with average per capita weekly giving a dismal 90¢.
The establishment was taken by surprise when a young Perthshire minister presented a motion urging Scottish soccer clubs “through integrated team selection, publicly to prove that sectarianism has no place in Scottish sport.” Obviously prompted by violence at a recent cup final between two Glasgow teams—the Rangers (who will not employ a Catholic), supported by Protestant fans, and the Celtics, supported by Irish-Catholic fans—the motion passed by a large majority.
But what stung officials most was the house’s unpredictable reaction when it came to the matter of nuclear warfare, a debate which has become a set piece in modern assemblies. Paul Sewell of Stirling, holding that all the arguments were well known and that this year time should be spent on other topics, proposed that the assembly merely proceed to vote on the committee’s innocuous verdict. The assembly agreed to do so, whereupon 164 commissioners took up the time that could have been saved by coming forward to record their formal dissent.
The Kirk decided to call a halt to talks with Roman Catholics on mixed marriages, which have lasted for years, but gotten nowhere. The Roman Catholic hierarchy in Scotland (still one of the most conservative in Europe) expects its members to promise, the assembly was told, “to do everything in his or her power to have children baptized and brought up, not simply as Christians, but as Roman Catholics.”
J. D. DOUGLAS
World Scene
Anglican Archbishop Robert Runcie scored points with Orthodox Christians during his April enthronement. He saw to it that the “filioque” clause was omitted from the recitation of the Nicene Creed. The clause denotes that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son as well as from the Father. Its insertion into the creed by Western churches was a factor in the East-West split in Christendom. A member of an earlier Anglican-Orthodox theological dialogue, Runcie concluded that the “filioque” clause should be excluded, on canonical as well as on some theological grounds.
Poland’s Roman Catholics have won significant concessions from the country’s Communist government. Two hundred drafted seminarians have been released from military service, some 6,000 priests working in church administration have become eligible for state social security provisions, and the new Polish edition of the Vatican newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, is being allowed unhampered distribution.
Churches in Hungary are experiencing a modest building boom, according to European Baptist sources. The report indicated that 57 churches in one denominational grouping had building projects under way. “Nothing like this had happened for decades.” the believers wrote.
Conciliatory statements by Zambian President Kenneth D. Kaunda last month signalled an improvement in relations between his ruling United National Independence Party and the church, strained since last October. At that time Protestant and Catholic leaders issued a statement attacking Zambia’s drift toward the “scientific socialism” of Marx and Lenin. The UNIP said the churches were unduly alarmed and were carrying on “a baseless campaign,” but also muted its vociferous campaign for adoption of “scientific socialism.” Speaking at a Catholic celebration, Kaunda said his party and the church were really “one.” since both pursued the same objective: “to improve man’s spiritual and material well-being.”
Fire leveled two-thirds of a refugee camp in northern Thailand last month, displacing more than 7,800 of its 12,000 population. Five were killed and 40 injured in the blaze, believed to have been started accidentally. The Christian and Missionary Alliance and World Relief Corporation provided replacement relief supplies valued at $10,000 to the once-again uprooted refugees in the Nam Yao (Nan) camp.
The Presbyterian Church of Taiwan has made another move in defiance of the Republic of China government. At its General Synod it decided to seek readmission to the World Council of Churches; it withdrew from the ecumenical organization 10 years ago under pressure from the Chiang Kai-shek regime. The WCC has backed the Presbyterian hierarchy in championing a separatist movement by Taiwanese elements of the island’s population. This support took a more serious turn last December when C. M. Kao, general secretary of the church, harbored a key fugitive wanted for instigating a riot in the city of Kao-hsiung. Presbyterian lay sources indicate that only a minority of the membership support the dissident stance of their leadership.
The Anglican Church of New Zealand narrowly rejected a plan for unification of ministries with Presbyterians, Methodists, Congregationalists, and the Churches of Christ at its General Synod last month. It also elected as primate Paul Reeves, 48, its youngest and first part-Maori archbishop.
Deaths
James Ralph Mutchmor, 87, colorful former moderator (1962–1964) of the United Church of Canada and secretary for 24 years of its board of evangelism and social services; Canada’s most quoted clergyman in his time, he fought against alcohol, obscenity, and gambling—and what he called the trend to “eat, drink, and play bingo”; May 17 in Toronto, after suffering a stroke.
Henry Knox Sherrill, 89, an Episcopalian ecumenist who became the first president (in 1950) of the newly established National Council of Churches; a former copresident of the World Council of Churches, as well as the presiding bishop of his denomination from 1946 to 1958; May 11 in his home at Boxford, Massachusetts, of a heart attack.
