Change In The Air!
Reading your July 16 articles on gender issues [“Adam & Eve in America,” by Jack and Judith Balswick; “Life After Eden,” by Mary Stewart Van Leeuwen] convinces me this is an exciting time to be a woman in the Christian community. Change is in the air. Women are speaking out about our frustration at being treated like second-class citizens in the community of God. I predict that by the time my seven-year-old daughter reaches maturity, arguments for subordination of women will be as embarrassingly out of place as arguments for the separation of the races.
Lois Leader
Phoenix, Ariz.
The Balswicks use culture as a dirty word, but, in fact, Jesus transforms (heathen) culture; the traditional American culture to which the authors exhibit (not-so) subtle negative bias is solidly built on Christ. The Balswicks say one “must not” live in “simple adherence to traditional definition” of “Christian womanhood and manhood,” but in fact the “traditional definition” is sound; hence, “simple adherence” is both trustworthy and pious.
D. Porta
Sacramento, Calif.
The article by Van Leeuwen is a classic example of why Paul wrote in 1 Timothy, “But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet” (NASB). She apparently didn’t read those verses or the balance of the Scriptures and understand them fully, in depth. It is reasonable to assume she is taking a few verses of Scripture and attempting to build a doctrine from them, ignoring the balance and intent of His Word.
It is interesting to note that the results of your survey point to the lack of proper indoctrination of the correct understanding of God’s Word to men and women of today. They clearly show how much inroad Satan has made, and the lack of proper leadership of today’s pastors or shepherds.
Jon C. Randall
Camden, Ark.
As a deeply committed Christian woman, I was very encouraged by Van Leeuwen’s article. It presented the male-female controversy in a decidedly interesting, rational, and Christian manner that bears further study. I have often struggled with the conflicting demands and emotions elicited from both our American and our Christian cultures. Consequently, I have experienced both praise and punishment from each as I daily wrestle with the formation of a truly Christ-centered consciousness regarding gender roles and identity. And while I found the results of the Roper survey distressing—but not surprising—I deeply appreciate the inclusion of this article by the editors.
Donna Lee
Dallas, Tex.
An Evil Cover?
The picture of Adam and Eve in the nude being driven out of the garden of Eden was hardly authentic, for God did not send them out naked; he clothed them with coats of skin. The picture [July 16 cover] is offensive to decency, but it reveals the quality of CT: It is powerless and spineless.
John Renno
Danville, Pa.
Literalism Run Amok
You’ve done it again: CT gets better and better. Rich Buhler’s “Scientists Discover Hell in Siberia” [July 16] just caps the stack. Perhaps the Lord allows such hoaxes to force his people to reconsider some of their biblical literalism and discover the true nature of hell.
Donald Cassidy
Premium, Ky.
How to tell gentle-hearted Christians that their cause is completely unfounded without discouraging them remains beyond my abilities. Please tell Rich Buhler how much I appreciated his article; I plan to have it ready the next time someone brings me a cause to espouse.
Rev. Fred Faughn
Scriptural Evangelical Lutheran Church
Cape Girardeau, Mo.
I only hope your article gets as much “Xerox” mileage as the Madalyn Murray O’Hare opposition petition drives.
Rev. Rodney R. Caldwell
Freeport Church of the Brethren
Freeport, Ill.
Plight-of-the-Month Club
Perhaps you’ve noticed that as the years have gone by, the causes have been coming faster and faster. It used to be you could take a few months to move from awareness to action; now it’s a few days. Someone in Sunday school asks us to pray about pornography in the community, and the next thing you know, a petition is passed around and a protest rally is planned for next Tuesday. By Wednesday prayer meeting, we’re targeting evolution at the high school.
The campaigns are coming so quickly, my head is spinning with issues: nuclear proliferation, famine in Ethiopia, the hostage crisis, the farm debacle, missing children, AIDS, the homeless, the war on drugs, women’s rights, gay rights, dog rights, cat rights, rabbit rights, and Latin rites. The media’s favorite game show seems to be Wheel of Misfortune.
Last week I was all set to demonstrate on behalf of the homeless, when I learned that our community was now demonstrating against the homeless. And though I hate to admit it, I still worry about missing children. That was five causes ago.
It’s about time sombody blew the whistle on this “what’s hot, what’s not” approach to social concerns. Every genuine problem deserves a full and meaningful life of at least a week. Maybe longer. So I hereby announce yet another campaign: the Cause Cause. It will demand sufficient and lasting attention for each societal dilemma. When you sign my petition, you will commit yourself to just one cause per month. After all, even plights have rights.
EUTYCHUS
Vast Differences
In response to the article “Why Can’t We Work Together?” by William Bently Ball [July 16], I agree that in the political and social arenas, Roman Catholics and evangelicals should work together for the common good, and that disrespect, name calling, and uninformed distrust ought to be abandoned by both sides. However, it seems to me that some of what Ball calls “negative perceptions” are the theological differences that are, in fact, irreconcilable. It is naïve to overlook these; I believe a knowledgeable evangelical would have great difficulty feeling “a spiritual at-homeness” in any Catholic church.
When I attend Roman Catholic weddings and baptisms I am not spiritually at home. I am not at home with prayers to saints. I am not at home calling a baby a “believer,” or the Mass a “sacrifice.” I am not at home with worship given directly to what I do not believe is the body of Christ, but a piece of bread. And it is obvious that the Roman Catholic church is not comfortable with me, either, or perhaps it would let me participate in the Lord’s Supper. I agree these things should not stand in the way of common goals and respect for one another. However, respect is not unity. It is obvious that in many ways, no matter how much we wish it were not so, the church of Rome and evangelical Christians are vastly different.
Dana S. Celich
Wexford, Pa.
I’m unsure what underlies Dr. Ball’s critical comments on my somewhat cautious stance on evangelical-Catholic cobelligerency. Effective cobelligerency, I still think, can’t be promoted by a primarily negative public agenda, or by a coalition of diverse special-interest groups each bent on promoting its own ends. My point regarding single issues is clearly not that an ideal agenda should exclude all specifics. Emphasis on the sanctity of the family, for example, may be better focused on a cluster of values than simply on an exceptionless antiabortion agenda. The family is jeopardized today by much else that sheer antiabortion does not address.
The notion of the “common good,” moreover, is not self-explicating: John Calvin, Adolf Hitler, and John Cardinal O’Connor would espouse notably different options. I don’t think orthodox evangelicals, who reject papal authority and sacramental salvation and for good reason balk at natural theology as well, should buy into tenuous natural-law theory as the mark-up price of political cooperation. For all that, orthodox Catholics and orthodox evangelicals had better stand together where their values overlap. Not to do so may enable a society that sheds and shreds its values to engulf us both, while we wholly forfeit our witness to a better way.
Carl F. H. Henry
Arlington, Va.
SPEAKING OUT
Why Have We Betrayed Robin?
In 1974, at the age of 14, Robin George was recruited by the International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). During the next two years, leaders of the organization kept her whereabouts concealed from her parents, while denying her adequate food, medical treatment, and sleep.
Soon after her ordeal was over, Robin’s father died of a heart attack, which was doubtless related to the stress of trying to locate and free his daughter. Robin and her mother brought suit against the Krishna organization in 1977, alleging false imprisonment, brainwashing, emotional distress, and the wrongful death of Robin’s father. After delays, the landmark case went to trial in 1983, ending in a multimillion-dollar award for punitive damages.
ISKCON has appealed the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, which as of this writing has yet to decide whether to hear the case. Several Christian organizations, such as the National Association of Evangelicals (NAE), the National Council of Churches (NCC), and the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America, have filed a brief with the Supreme Court claiming that the punitive damages awarded in the case are “clearly destructive of free exercise of religion.”
As a sociologist of religion who has spent nearly two decades researching and writing about cults and new religions, I have followed this case from its inception, kept track of Robin George, and continue to be concerned. Five years after leaving the Krishnas, Robin became a Christian, and she and her husband are active in an evangelical church. They feel betrayed by the action of these Christian groups.
While I strongly support the concern for religious freedom expressed in the brief, I believe that these groups’ filing of an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief was misguided. While they stressed that their brief should not be viewed as support for the doctrines and practices of the Hare Krishnas, their action is at best confusing. At worst, it compromises our witness. I believe they have given indirect aid and comfort to enemies of the gospel. Controversial new religions will interpret such legal moves as support for their attempts to gain legitimacy.
This was the case a few years ago when church groups filed a similar brief in connection with the Reverend Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church. Moon’s followers used the issue of religious freedom (in a case involving tax charges) to marshal sympathy from the mainstream religious community. They prominently quoted Jerry Falwell, Tim LaHaye, and other religious leaders in their publications to convey the impression that Christians were on their side.
In the ISKCON case, the Christian groups behind the brief argue that religious freedom may not survive “the crushing blow of punitive damages,” and that any confiscation of Krishna assets would be “truly destructive” of the Hare Krishna religion. But what about the destructive impact on Robin George from her cultic experience and the premature loss of her father? Can any dollar amount compensate for such tragedy?
And is the threat to religious liberty as grave as some evangelicals would have us believe? I am convinced that the awarding of punitive damages is not so much an attack on religious freedom as it is a reasonable response to illegal and unethical practices that are common to certain “cults,” but not at all characteristic of the mainstream denominations that belong to the NAE and the NCC.
Instead of expending effort and concern over the imposition of punitive damages in cases involving extremist religious groups, these organizations would better serve their constituencies by informing and warning people about the potential for spiritual, psychological, and even physical harm found in such groups.
By Ronald Enroth, professor of sociology at Westmont College, Santa Barbara, California.
Speaking Out offers responsible Christians a forum for their views on contemporary issues. It does not necessarily reflect the views of CHRISTIANITY TODAY.
So the friendly Roman Catholic lawyer wants to work with us evangelicals. Well, he can start by completing two tasks. First, have the law in Venezuela changed to allow Baptists to conduct evangelistic activities since the Venezuelan Supreme Court has ruled that the Roman Catholic church is the only “recognized organism” entitled to carry out religious activities in that country. Second, he can have changed the Constitution of Peru–1979 under which the Catholic church is exempt from taxes that Protestant leaders must pay.
Charles D. Willis, M.D.
Fresno, Calif.
Out With The Old!
I am thankful that I renewed my subscription to CT in time to receive the July 16 issue with Daniel Reid’s article on Paul, “The Misunderstood Apostle.” Although some scholars will continue to disagree in their exegesis, these new and helpful interpretations of Paul “before Luther” are a challenge for all of us to discard old sermons, lecture notes, and commentaries that predate the contributions that Sanders and others have made since 1977.
Arthur G. Patzia
Fuller Theological Seminary
Menlo Park, Calif.
Witnessing To Truth
“The Shoemaker’s Dream,” by George Brushaber [From the Senior Editors, July 16], spoke to what seems to be the ineffectiveness of many Christian denominations today. I have ceased to wonder why Jesus, when he was selecting his disciples, didn’t go up to the Temple School of Theology in Jerusalem and recruit 12 of their brightest. He chose working men whose experience had already taught them to recognize the truth when they encountered it. After all, that’s what he came to witness to!
Edward H. Lane, Jr.
Blacksburg, Va.
Beyond Christian Principles
In Sen. Mark Hatfield’s proposal [“An Agenda for Global Reconciliation,” CT Institute, June 18], there seems to be a glaring omission: the living person of Christ himself. Can sinful man do what Senator Hatfield suggests? Can we be as forgiving as we should be for true reconciliation without having been personally touched by the forgiveness of Jesus Christ? Would we have the power and wisdom needed for the courage, imagination, and leadership Hatfield suggests if we have not been captured and captivated by the resurrected Jesus?
The solution to the world’s problems will not be found just in Christian principles but in a living person, the Lord Jesus Christ, who not only will do great things in the future but is powerfully active even today changing lives.
Rev. Wm. G. Brouwers
Christian Reformed Church
Wisconsin Rapids, Wis.
Would it not be more fitting for governments to focus on the resolution of conflict—a political goal—rather than reconciliation—a spiritual goal—which implies an element that almost by definition is the exclusive province of the church?
Brian F. O’Connell
National Association of Evangelicals
Washington, D.C.
A Great Cover
Just a brief note to say “Wow!” “Supurb!” “Clever!” “Insightful!” about the cover of the June 18 issue. What a way to translate Isaiah 2:4 (and Micah 4:3), to make it relevant to the here and now. Ken Westphal sat up nights on this cover, and it was worth it as far as I’m concerned!
Margaret O’Connell
The Christophers
New York, N.Y.
Good Things, Bad Usage
Howard Snyder asks “why anyone should drink [alcohol] in the first place” [“Demon Rum on the Run,” June 18]. The simplest answer for Christians is the example of our Founder: Jesus not only drank wine, but also made it in large quantities as his first miracle.
It is the abuse, not the use, of wine that the Bible condemns. (Notwithstanding well-intentioned professors, that is what the Scriptures actually teach.) There are all manner of good things that can be used for destructive purposes: money, food, power, sex. And many are the victims when good things are abused. We like to blame our woes on external factors like circumstances and things and systems. Jesus identifies the problem as being the wickedness of the human heart.
Arthur J. Enns
Vernon, B.C., Canada
That beverages of fermentation are a gift of God, wholesome and beneficent in their proper enjoyment, is evidenced by the fact that Jesus drank them. He initiated and concluded his earthly ministry with them. It is the shame of the Corinthians that they got drunk at Communion.
James L. Koch
Lakewood, Colo.
Snyder’s argument against alcohol is not as sound as he thinks. Though our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, it is impossible for anything we drink to desecrate them. Christ taught that “there is nothing outside a man which by going into him can defile him.” Hopefully, Snyder means to repudiate only the abuse of alcohol as sinful. But considering his blanket condemnation of alcohol consumption, it is difficult to be so charitable.
William H. Huston
Miami, Fla.
Too Earthly Minded
Bravo to J. I. Packer for “Why I Like My Pie in the Sky” [June 18]. One problem with the church in our age is that we’re so earthly minded we’re no heavenly good—the opposite of what we’ve been accused of in the past. I believe that the more heavenly minded we are, the more earthly good we will be (and do). I’m trying to preach on the subject often.
Rev. Timothy W. Berkley
Christian Life Fellowship
Mayville, Wis.
