Strange Bedfellows?

The Concept of Holiness, by O. R. Jones (Macmillan, 1962, 200 pp., $3.75), is reviewed by James Barr, Professor of Old Testament Literature, Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton, New Jersey.

It is likely that this interesting work will be followed by many others as the theological interest in modern “linguistic” philosophy develops. Jones discusses the idea of holiness by starting from general and non-technical linguistic usage. Thus he tries to “place” holiness in its logical situation, and when this is done we see its relation to such other realities as power, personality, wholeness, and “the perfect vision.” On the one hand Jones writes with an eye to those whose thought has been formed by the new philosophical methods. On the other he cites and uses a variety of theologians, mainly those of the earlier twentieth century like Oman, Otto, and Farmer, and he makes much use of descriptions of biblical thought by modern biblical theologians.

In a very short review one can only raise some questions. (a) Does Jones avoid some of the misuses of linguistic evidence, e.g. in arguments from etymology, which have been so common? (b) Is it not necessary to see that part of this material must belong to linguistics and cannot meaningfully be called a “logic”? (c) I am not so sure that the author is working through “everyday use” (p. 13) as he himself thinks, or that we should do so, or that modern linguistic philosophy in fact does so. (d) Does he do enough to face and meet the feeling, which many theologians of recent trends may well have, that Christians just do not think this way about holiness, and that he is thus using to expound and justify it a system of ideas with which it will not fit? Or, in other words, can approaches like Jones’s hope to be successfully persuasive within the Church without more explicit confrontation with established positions like the Barthian?

Personally, my chief discomfort about this book is a sense of some incongruity, when the theological world of Oman, Otto, Inge, and Farmer, and the philosophical world of Ayer and Ryle, is found to lie so closely together in one argument with biblical word studies based on Hebrew and Greek, and with the accounts of biblical thought based upon them. Such accounts have in modern thought been used mainly for their incompatibility with that theological and philosophical world. It will take some readjustment to make them fit together again. Attempts to make such a readjustment in the present theological world will have to face realistically the extent of the probable opposition. On the other side, however, it should be realized that work like this by Dr. Jones is performing a real apologetic task, the benefits of which are often too gladly accepted by those who deny the need for them. The kind of discussion which he, with some others, has started will occupy a good deal more of the stage for the next decade or two.

The Hebrew and Greek words unfortunately contain many misprints.

JAMES BARR

Setting The Sights

Christian Faith and its Cultural Expression, by George Gordh (Prentice-Hall, 1962, 354 pp., $7.35), is reviewed by Nicholas Wolterstorff, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Calvin College, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

In this book Gordh conceives of historic Christianity as a total faith having the following three aspects: “It is a vision of the world and its meaning, of man and his significance. It is a set of attitudes toward nature and self, toward others as individuals and in groups. Faith is also a set of expressions in worship and art, in literature and action, in association and thought. All of these together form the wholeness which is historical Christianity.” The discussion thus has as its three main parts “The Vision,” “The Attitudes,” and “The Expressions.” The first part consists, in the main, of a presentation of the basic theology of Christianity. The second part contains a discussion of typical Christian attitudes toward nature, toward the self, toward other individuals, and toward groups. In the third part we have a discussion of Christianity as expressed in worship, the fine arts, literature, thought, and so on.

Gordh presents his material in the form of a textbook designed for introductory courses in the Christian faith, whether the students in such courses be Christians desiring to have a more systematic knowledge of their faith, or non-Christians desiring to know what Christianity is. At the end of each chapter there are suggestions for further reading, as well as questions for discussion.

I found the first section of this book, “The Vision,” vastly more interesting and competent than the latter two sections. Much of the latter two sections is poorly focused. Sometimes this displays itself in the choice of formulations which are clearly inadequate to the thought. For example, Gordh defines private worship as the moment of the realization of faith, though at the same time he makes clear that faith has been realized all along, before the individual ever engaged in worship. Sometimes it displays itself in sentences which, so far as I can see, cannot be construed at all; for example, “The significance of worship in the realization is that, in it, the human being says ‘Thou’ to God the redeemer.” Sometimes it displays itself in contradiction, as, when speaking of corporate worship, he says that this is “the celebration of all of God’s acts,” though later on the same page he says that celebration is at best only one part of corporate worship.

I think Gordh has set himself various aims which almost inevitably make for a tedious book; that the first part is seldom tedious is a tribute to him. For one thing, this is an introductory book, and he construes this as demanding that it cover many topics generally, rather than a few in detail. Thus the book has a great deal of scope, but for this, the heavy price is paid of an abundance of truisms and generalities. For example, he raises the question of the possibility of an art which is Christian, yet neither liturgical nor religious in the usual sense. Whether or not there is such an art, and how we could recognize it, are certainly challenging questions, but Gordh has no time to discuss them.

Secondly, the author apparently intends for the most part to give a summary of the views of others and not to present and defend his own. Further, he wants to present the common core of what others have said about faith; if there is disagreement on a crucial point, he simply points out what the disagreement is and lets it go at that, or raises the matter in one of the discussion questions. Rarely are reasons given for the divergent views. Thus the issues which have really gripped Christians in their discussions with each other are played down.

Now I think that these aims—that of presenting a general introduction to the Christian faith, and that of presenting the common core of traditional and contemporary discussions of faith without probing controversial points—are by no means indefensible. Furthermore, given these aims, this is perhaps as good a book as could be written. Certainly Gordh’s broad vision of the Christian faith is admirable. But anyone wondering whether to use this book in teaching will first have to clarify his convictions concerning education. Calvin’s Institutes were also intended as an introduction to the Christian faith.

NICHOLAS WOLTERSTORFF

From Myth To History

Kerygma and History, A Symposium on the Theology of Rudolf Bultmann, selected, translated, and edited by Carl E. Braaten and Roy A. Harrisville (Abingdon, 1962, 235 pp., $5), is reviewed by James P. Martin, Associate Professor of New Testament, Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, Richmond, Virginia.

This book focuses on the shift from myth to history which has taken place in the discussion surrounding Bultmann. It represents a voice, or better, a symposium of voices, speaking out of the heritage and context of Lutheran theology. This is as it should be because Bultmann himself is a Lutheran and cannot be correctly understood or challenged except within the Lutheran structure of thought. Yet with the exception of Braaten’s introductory essay and the concluding essay by Harrisville, all of the contributions in this book are translations from continental scholars. The result is thorough and solid discussion which throws into contrast that superficiality and fad approach which too often prevail in American discussion. We frequently fail to penetrate to the depths or to be aware of the full implications of a theological position because of the relative ignorance of the history of doctrine and biblical interpretation which persists in American theological education.

We are given in this book a series of essays by continental systematic theologians and New Testament scholars (Nils Dahl teaches in Oslo, and Regin Prenter teaches in Aarhus, Denmark; the rest are German). Although there is some reduplication, particularly in surveys of Bultmann’s own program, the essays approach the questions of kerygma and history from mutually supporting perspectives. As a result this book will prove helpful to both the expert and the beginner in this field. For those unacquainted with the complexities of the questions, it seems to this reviewer that they would be oriented best if they read first Nils Dahl’s essay on “The Problem of the Historical Jesus” and then turned to Günther Bornkamm’s essay on “Myth and Gospel.” From here they could read the essays in the order presented.

The systematic theologians stress the essential relation of kerygma and history in terms of the history of doctrine, and the place of the Church rather than a modern world view as the proper source of heuristic principles. The New Testament scholars discuss the familiar questions about the historicity of the New Testament materials and the proper methods of establishing historical fact. The title of the book accurately indicates the nerve center of all the discussion. All agree that the New Testament provides both kerygma and history. But no one succeeds in uniting these two concepts into one synthetic concept. We are left, it seems, with something like the problem of the relation of the two natures of Christ. As far as history in the New Testament is concerned, it appears that scholarship is still operating with the hermeneutics of the Enlightenment, existentialist historicity notwithstanding. Perhaps this “modern man” who is of such great concern to Bultmann and his followers is “modern” in an extended sense; that is, his intellectual roots are not truly in modern physics but in an obsolescent rationalism which permeates the substructure of his thought. On the other hand, it is clearly recognized by these scholars that the foundation of faith is not critical historical science (which is always an effort to conquer history and never be conquered by it) but believing personal response to the Christ proclaimed in the Gospel. This book indicates what it means to “walk by faith,” confessing at the same time that the object of faith is One whose historical manifestation to the world is datable. Christianity is a historical religion, not only in the sense that it obviously has its own history (like other religions), but also in the sense that the past historical life of its Lord reveals the meaning and goal of all history and not merely the individual’s historicity. Anyone who is able to take his Christianity as meat, not milk, will profit greatly from this book.

JAMES P. MARTIN

Reading for Perspective

CHRISTIANITY TODAY’S REVIEW EDITORS CALL ATTENTION TO THESE NEW TITLES:

★ On the Love of God, by John McIntyre (Harper, $4). An unusually valuable and provocative discussion of the meaning of God’s love; the kind of writing which at once is a theology and a personal confession of faith.

★ A Study of Communism, by J. Edgar Hoover (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, $3.95). FBI Director describes the origins, appeal, power structure, and world expansion of Communism and how to meet its challenge to freedom.

★ Historical Atlas of Religion in America, by Edwin Scott Gaustad (Harper & Row, $8.95). A brilliant blend of fact and illustration tells the colorful story of three centuries of religion in America.

Call To Social Action

Saints and Society, by Earle E. Cairns (Moody, 1960, 192 pp., $3.25), is reviewed by Henry Stob, Professor of Ethics, Calvin Theological Seminary, Grand Rapids, Michigan.

Professor Cairns, who is Chairman of the Department of History and Political Science at Wheaton College in Illinois, has written a good book. The book is chiefly concerned to set forth the social impact of the eighteenth-century English Revivals, but the historical survey is rounded out by a constructive account of how evangelicals can make Christianity socially meaningful in the twentieth century.

The author provides a setting for evangelical reform by depicting the state of affairs in England during the period 1648–1789. He then discloses the sources of this reform in the Wesleyan Revival and in the Evangelical Revival centered in Clapham Commons and at Cambridge. Thereafter an account is given of the role played by English evangelicals in the abolition of slavery, in prison reform, and in bettering the lot of the working man. The work of leaders like Wilberforce and Shaftesbury is highlighted, but the considerable contribution of Christians like Clarkson, Macauley, Buxton, Howard, and many others is recorded. An analysis is then given of the spirit in which these earlier evangelicals undertook their social tasks, and the book closes with an appeal to contemporary Christians to work for social improvement in the same spirit. Guidelines for such action, drawn from the historical survey and from the Scriptures, are provided also.

This reader found the historical sections enlightening and calculated to impress upon the mind the power of the Gospel to structurate society when servants of the Lord really try to give a social and political dimension to Christian compassion and concern. When the author at the close recommends that contemporary Christians meet their political, economic, and social responsibilities, he does so in a soundly biblical way and with practical good sense.

This reviewer is happy to recommend the book. Written in a simple style and unencumbered by technicalities, it is adapted to Everyman, and when taken in hand is bound to remind evangelicals of their obligation to relate biblical faith and ethics to the problems of society.

HENRY STOB

French Catholics

Catholicism and Crisis in Modern France, by William Bosworth (Princeton University Press, 1962, 407 pp., $8.50), is reviewed by J. D. Douglas, British Editorial Director, CHRISTIANITY TODAY.

What would be the temporal impact of 40 million French Roman Catholics united in one great cause? Why is such a union unlikely? What is Catholicism’s real effect on French social and political life? These are some of the questions which Dr. Bosworth, teacher of political science at Hunter College, sets out to answer in this volume on French Catholic groups at the threshold of the Fifth Republic.

He shows the steady decline in votes cast for Catholic political parties (3.4 million in 1889, 0.8 in 1914), tells how a revolutionary new school law in 1959 ordered state-payment of teachers in most Catholic schools, and includes a useful section on Vatican policy-making which may make the thoughtful reader wonder about the source and accuracy of the inside information. Sometimes the uncritical quotation of Catholic pronouncements begs questions. “No Catholic,” we are told, “is permitted to consider a Papal document out of date because the circumstances that fostered it have changed.” This is shaky ground: what about the notorious Unam Sanctam bull of Boniface VIII, or the Syllabus Errorum of Pius IX?

There is an informative chapter on Catholic Action, and a particularly comprehensive one on the Catholic press, illustrating its range over widely differing aspects of community life and the hierarchical control exercised lest “Catholic editors or publishers … lack the required humility.” The church, having learned its lesson, says the author, “does not want to meddle in partisan politics”; but a few lines later he points out the hierarchy’s right to “comment” on political questions, without suggesting that for many of the faithful such comment has the force of a directive. Dr. Bosworth’s quotation from Msgr. Ancel on page 82, which states that the church has not intervened in the Algerian crisis, should be read in conjunction with his later references on pages 208 ff., and with the equally well-documented but startlingly different approach of Edmond Paris in The Vatican against Europe.

Dr. Bosworth finds the Catholic Church’s social doctrine incapable of precise definition—not surprisingly, for here surely is an area almost entirely neglected by popes till Leo XIII’s day 80 years ago. In such an exhaustive work as this, it is inexplicable that the Dreyfus affair, with its widespread impact on church and state relations, should be dismissed in a mere five lines.

Sometimes it is difficult to know whether the writer is paraphrasing Catholic views or expressing his own. The reader who reaches the last page by the legitimate route will readily acknowledge this to be no shoddy or incomplete work. Even the bibliography at the end supplies also most useful notes on authors and books listed. The book is very much a specialist’s project which makes heavy reading, and the reviewer found the undoubtedly erudite approach altogether too clinical, and with as much human warmth as the multiplication table.

J. D. DOUGLAS

A Vital Matter

The King of the Earth, by Erich Sauer (Eerdmans, 1962, 256 pp., $3.95; Paternoster, 16s.), is reviewed by Stephen S. Short, Evangelist, Weston-super-Mare, England.

Erich Sauer, the “Biblical Theologian” of the Wiedenest Bible School in West Germany, is well-known to Christian readers both in his own country and throughout the English-speaking world by such books as The Dawn of World Redemption and The Triumph of the Crucified. The present volume, published in German in 1958, has been translated by Michael Bolister. The subtitle of the work is “The Nobility of Man according to the Bible and Science”—a vital matter, particularly in view of the bestiality to which nations and individuals have descended during the two world wars of this century. The author, as the blurb on the dust jacket rightly asserts, “demonstrates the high purpose of God in and for man, the diabolical powers that encompassed his ruin, the renewal of that original purpose of God in and through the Second Adam, and the practical realization of man’s high calling through the redeeming and regenerating grace of God in Christ.” In an interesting and well-informed concluding section, the biblical account of creation is compared with the discoveries of modern science.

STEPHEN S. SHORT

Essays Of Merit

Vox Evangelica, Biblical and Historical Essays, edited by Ralph P. Martin for the London Bible College (Epworth Press, 1962, 75 pp., 6s), is reviewed by R. E. Nixon, Tutor at Cranmer Hall, Durham, England.

Here is a most diverse and interesting volume which does credit to the staff of L.B.C. First we have a good general survey of “The Greek and Roman Background of the New Testament” by C. Carey Oakley. There follows a short but suggestive note by Leslie C. Allen on “Isaiah 53:11 and Its Echoes” where the possible translation of the Hebrew term “by his submission” is shown to illuminate Daniel 12:4 and Romans 5:19. The editor has an important, up-to-date survey of “The Composition of I Peter in Recent Study” in which he exposes some of the ingenious nonsense which has been written lately on this theme. But his conclusion that “I Peter stands as a genuine letter but as including two baptismal homilies, one delivered before and the other after the rite,” may not command general assent.

Few conservative scholars are so well read as Donald Guthrie, who takes us with his normal judiciousness over the field of pseudepigraphy. He shows that many lightly made statements upon this subject just will not do. Finally we are edified (and possibly entertained) by Harold H. Rowdon’s comparison of the J. N. Darby-B. W. Newton quarrel in nineteenth-century Brethren circles with that between Cyril and Nestorius in the fifth century.

This is altogether a worthy volume. We look forward to more such from this source in the future.

R. E. NIXON

Book Briefs

Theology and the Scientific Study of Religion (Lutheran Studies Series, Vol. II), by Paul L. Holmer (T. S. Denison, 1962, 238 pp., $4.95). This book argues that there is a scientific language of religion which does not, as some think, displace the passionate, confident, unhesitating language of faith.

The Realities of Faith, by Bernard E. Meland (Oxford, 1962, 368 pp., $6.50). The author finds commonality between Christianity and non-Christian religions in man’s createdness; each man and religion is thus related to the depth of God’s being with the result that no one revelation is definitive, and revelation and creation are, in the author’s view, at bottom the same thing.

The Bible and Archaeology, by J. A. Thompson (Eerdmans, 1962, 468 pp., $5.95). Formerly appeared as Pathway Books: Archaeology and the Old Testament (1957), Archaeology and the Pre-Christian Centuries (1958), and Archaeology and the New Testament (1960). Now with added maps, photographs, and new information.

William Penn’s “Holy Experiment,” by Edwin B. Bronner (Columbia University Press, 1962, 306 pp., $6). The story of religious toleration and the utopian attempt of Pennsylvania to establish through its “holy experiment” a colony which would be an example to mankind.

Genesis and Evolution, by M. R. DeHaan (Zondervan, 1962, 152 pp., $2.50). The well-known radio preacher contends against evolution and finds the lessons of conversion, separation, spiritual reproduction, and the like in the Genesis creation story.

A Guide to Biblical Preaching, by Chalmer E. Faw (Broadman, 1962, 198 pp., $3.50). A substantial and practical discussion and guide on how to actually preach the Bible. The book oozes enthusiasm and challenge.

Jefferson on Religion in Public Education, by Robert M. Healey (Yale University Press, 1962, 294 pp., $6.50). Written in the context of the current controversy over religion in public education, here is the first book on the thought of the man who gave it so much attention: Thomas Jefferson.

The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Early Church, by Lucetta Mowry (University of Chicago Press, 1962, 260 pp., $6.95). A study of the theme of redemption in the Qumran community and in the early Christian church.

Martin Luther: Hero of Faith, by Frederick Nohl (Concordia, 1962, 151 pp., $2.75). A brief, simple, and highly readable presentation of the life of Luther from boy to professor.

Beginning the Old Testament, by Erik Routley (Muhlenberg, 1962, 159 pp., $2.50). On the basis of composite authorship of the Pentateuch and an admitted uncertainty as to “what actually happened,” the author interprets the historical beginnings of the Old Testament.

Existentialism and Religious Liberalism, by John F. Hayward (Beacon Press, 1962, 131 pp., $3.95). A religious liberal faces the question of whether religious liberalism can survive existentialism’s assault upon its doctrine of man and emerge with a positive content in which it can still believe.

Oxford Bible Atlas, edited by Herbert G. May (Oxford, 1962, 144 pp., $4.95). An up-to-date and authoritative reference work; combines fine cartography and map printing with knowledge of the most recent archaeological discoveries. Poor binding.

The Epistles to the Galatians and the Ephesians, by Andrew W. Blackwood, Jr., and The Epistles to Timothy and Titus, by Paul F. Barackman (Baker, 1962, 211 and 155 pp., $3.50 and $2.95). Two more volumes in Baker’s Proclaiming the New Testament series. Not so much commentaries as comments calculated to aid Bible readers and preachers.

SUITABLE COMPROMISE—Judy Rae Bushong, Ohio teen-ager whose concept of modesty caused her expulsion from school, was back in classes. Judy attracted international attention by refusing to wear the short-legged gym suit prescribed by school officials. Compromise settlement provides that her gym suit can be extra long.

PROTESTANT PANORAMA—United Church of Christ President Ben Mohr Herbster calls for systematic rehabilitation program for ministers who crack emotionally under strain of their work. Although only “a very small minority” of United Church ministers suffer severe psychological difficulties, says Herbster, “these men need help … desperately.”

Lutheran Church in America’s Board of Theological Education is considering a plan to increase seminary training from three to four years. LCA’s ten seminaries have been asked to make specific suggestions for an added curriculum.

A General Synod for the five Dutch Reformed churches in South Africa was officially constituted last month, culminating plans that had been discussed for more than 100 years. The General Synod will enable the five churches to present a united front, said Religious News Service, while preserving individual identities.

The Triennial Conference of the Baptist Union of Australia voted against affiliating with the World Council of Churches. Victoria was the only one of six state unions to recommend affiliation with the WCC. A majority of the state unions also voted against membership in the Australian Council of Churches.

New developments in Lutheran Scandinavia’s controversial issue of women in the ministry have lost much of their power to arouse intense debate, according to National Lutheran Council News Bureau. Press and people took little note, the bureau said, when a Swedish bishop ordained a pastor’s wife and a Norwegian bishop appointed a retired clergyman to minister periodically to dissenting members of a parish served by a woman.

Two more Protestant church bodies were accepted as members of the National Association of Evangelicals by its Board of Administration, bringing the total NAE constituency to 40 groups. New member denominations are the Evangelical Congregational Church with about 30,000 members and the Pilgrim Holiness Church with some 32,700.

Latin America Mission reports that its year-long “evangelism-in-depth” campaign in Guatemala has already produced an estimated 10,000 conversions to Christ. United evangelistic campaigns have been held in 33 Guatemalan cities.

At least 80 Christian natives are said to have been killed and another 76 injured in a five-day pillage and burning of about 80 small villages by pagan tribesmen in remote western New Guinea. Word of the outbreak came from the Rev. Charles Craig, field secretary of the Australian Baptist Mission, who said the victims did not include any missionaries. He reported that two chiefs led about 1,000 tribesmen in the attack which stemmed from fear of loss of power and prestige due to the mission’s growth.

DEPOSITIONS—The Rev. Edwin E. West, involved in a dispute with Episcopal Bishop James A. Pike, was deposed from the ministry at his own request so he could serve as minister of the schismatic Orthodox Anglican Church of the Redeemer in Palo Alto, California. The church withdrew from the Protestant Episcopal denomination, charging Pike with doctrinal error.

Dr. N. Burnett Magruder was discharged as executive director of the Louisville Area Council of Churches after the council’s executive board voted 21 to 7, with 8 abstentions, in favor of the move. Magruder, a member of the John Birch Society, said Protestantism was vigorous enough to accommodate conflicting points of view and observed, “I am sorry that this principle was not affirmed.”

Dr. Henry J. Stokes, Jr., who as pastor of First Baptist Church of Macon, Georgia, preached against segregation, will leave his pulpit January 1 following a request from the congregation’s Board of Deacons that he resign. He said he was asked to leave because “my preaching, particularly as it regarded justice to minority race groups, did not set well with some in the church.”

PERSONALIA—The Rev. John P. Donnelly. editor of the official newspaper of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Spokane, Washington, was named director of the Bureau of Information of the National Catholic Welfare Conference.

Dr. Robert E. Davis was named executive director of the American Baptist Division of Christian Higher Education.

MISCELLANY—Pacific Garden Mission, world’s most famous rescue mission on Chicago’s Skid Row, marks its 85th anniversary this month with a rally in the new International Ballroom of the Conrad Hilton Hotel.

The Evangelical Free Church of America dedicated a new $400,000 headquarters building in Minneapolis last month.

Northern Baptist Theological Seminary campus in Chicago is being purchased for a Baptist home for the aged. The seminary is moving to a new campus in suburban Lombard next summer.

A statement adopted at the Oxford Conference of Evangelical Churchmen said intercommunion among Anglicans and the free churches should not depend upon whether the free churches accept the Church of England’s traditional form of episcopal ministry.

Protestant churches in Greece appealed to Prime Minister Constantine Karamanlis against action by local authorities in attempting to confiscate property belonging to a Protestant community in Katerini. A near-riot occurred when police tried to seal off the property.

Emergency aid for earthquake victims in Iran is being supplied by the World Council of Churches, Church World Service of the National Council of Churches, World Vision, and Seventh-day Adventist Welfare Services. In addition, Francis Cardinal Spellman, Roman Catholic Archbishop of New York, presented $10,000 for earthquake relief to the Iranian U.N. ambassador.

WORTH QUOTING—“Any church is going to be useless and irrelevant unless there shall be in it the gospel’s clear and unmistakable call, the Spirit’s witness. People are hungry for that.”—Methodist Bishop Nolan B. Harmon.

“Although scores of Canadians conduct research in the breeding and care of poultry and livestock, there does not appear to be one full-time research person in Canada compiling data on marriage and its problems.”—From a committee report of the United Church of Canada General Council.

“I am a very lucky fellow and I certainly thank God for a second opportunity. You don’t often get another chance to prove yourself, in baseball or in life.”—Ralph Terry, who pitched the New York Yankees to victory in the deciding game of the 1962 World Series, recalling his loss of the seventh game of the 1960 series.

“Some say [God is] a little man with a long beard. I don’t believe that. I can’t believe he’s a small person. He must be BIG. I think of him as a sort of power—a big power.”—Teen-aged actress Hayley Mills, in interview with Youth magazine of United Church of Christ.

Deaths

ARCHBISHOP ATHENAGORAS CAVADAS, 78, Exarch of the Greek Orthodox Church in Western and Central Europe and a former president of the World Council of Churches; in London.

DR. THORVALD B. MADSEN, 74, retired vice-president of Trinity College and Theological Seminary; in Chicago.

BISHOP ARNE FJELLBU, 71, who played a key role in the resistance movement by Norwegian Christians during the World War II Nazi occupation; in Trondheim, Norway.

DR. CHARLES S. DETWEILER, 84, retired American Baptist missionary who had devoted 50 years of leadership to mission work in Latin America; in Denver.

DR. CLYDE JOHNSTONE KENNEDY, 55, president of Shelton College and former president of the International Council of Christian Churches; in Collingswood, New Jersey.

While the blockade of Cuba exploded into world headlines last week, Evangelist Billy Graham was conducting the most successful crusade of his South American tour.

There were no anti-American demonstrations in Buenos Aires as in other Latin American cities, but extra police were stationed at the arena.

Dr. Graham answered questions on a telecast beamed to 60 per cent of the Argentine population and into neighboring Uruguay. Ratings in the city indicated that 46 per cent of television viewers at that hour were watching Graham.

Luna Park had capacity crowds of 20,000 each night of the crusade. Recorded decisions for Christ totaled 1,661 after four meetings. Observers promptly heralded the crusade as “the largest Protestant event” in the history of the city.

Thirty thousand heard Dr. Graham preach at Buenos Aires’ Luna Park at the opening rally. Police estimated that they had turned 5,000 persons away for lack of seating. The closing rally was scheduled on the city’s main football stadium grounds.

In a press interview preceding his final series of rallies, Graham told newsmen: “I find a great spiritual hunger in this country. People are deeply interested in religion.” He said his purpose in Argentina was “to bring people face to face with God,” rather than “to convert them to any one religion.” “I want them to come to Christ, whatever their religion,” he stressed. “After they have made their decision, I cannot direct which church they go to. That is up to them.”

The evangelist’s eight-day series of rallies in Buenos Aires was financed by local Protestant churches, which also provided a 1,000-voice choir. It climaxed a month-long evangelism tour of the southern portion of the Latin American continent. Rallies were held in six cities.

A full report on the impact of the Graham Crusade by News Editor Kucharsky, now in Latin America, will appear in the November 23 issue, with photographic coverage.

Earlier in the tour, Graham drew capacity crowds in the 60,000-seat Pacaembu Stadium at São Paulo, Brazil, at two meetings which closed a six-day campaign there.

On the last night at São Paulo, the huge throng sat out a drenching rainstorm. Meanwhile, a voodoo society which had engaged a dance hall adjacent to the stadium for a demonstration folded its gear and joined the Graham crowd.

The evangelist’s itinerary also took him to Asunción, Paraguay; Cordoba, Argentina; Rosario, Argentina; and Montevideo, Uruguay. In each city he was assisted by associate evangelists on his team who held up to a week of nightly meetings prior to his arrival.

In Asunción, Graham ran into a virtual boycott by mass media. Of 20 correspondents invited to a pre-crusade press conference, only one attended. Asunción’s newspapers carried no pictures, reports, or comment on the meetings, although paid advertisements of the crusade meetings were published. The evangelist said it was the first time in his career, after visits to 80 countries, that the local press had ignored him.

One report said that the media boycott had prompted a reprimand of the press by Paraguay’s President Alfredo Stroessner.

The crusade in Asunción, including eight services conducted by the Rev. Joseph Blinco, a member of the evangelist’s team drew an aggregate of 40,000. Some 800 persons were reported to have made decisions for Christ.

The Graham team made two trips to South America this year. The first, in January and February, was conducted in Venezuela, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Chile. Team officials said more than 250,000 persons attended 57 meetings, with 9,228 recording decisions for Christ.

NEWS / A fortnightly report of developments in religion

WCC CRITICAL OF U.S. ACTION IN CUBA

Although most religious commentators praised President Kennedy’s action in the Cuban crisis, officers of the World Council of Churches expressed “grave concern and regret” over announcement of a “quarantine” against shipments of offensive military weapons. Dr. Franklin Clark Fry of New York, chairman of the 100-member policy-making Central Committee, Dr. Ernest A. Payne of London, general secretary of the Baptist Union of Great Britain and Ireland, and Dr. W. A. Visser ’t Hooft of Geneva, criticized the United States for taking “unilateral military action” against another government.

The WCC statement critical of the United States was delivered to the eleven members of the United Nations Security Council. It was accompanied by a message from Dr. O. Frederick Nolde, director of the ecumenical movement’s Commission of the Churches on International Affairs, noting that “the United States has military bases on foreign soil closer to the U.S.S.R. than Cuba is to the United States,” and stating that military reprisal is justified “only if Cuba becomes a military threat” and even then should be ventured only under the United Nations charter.

Evangelist Billy Graham, in the midst of his South American crusade, expressed “full support” of President Kennedy’s action to bar the shipment of armaments into the Soviet-supported island. He called for prayers that President Kennedy might have wisdom in handling the grave crisis. “I did not come to Argentina,” he said, “to talk politics. I do not come to represent the United States government. I represent the Kingdom of God and I want a light to spark in Argentina that will become a flame to illumine the whole people.” He added that “the United Nations is not the hope of the world—Jesus Christ is.” But he suggested also that the U.N. call its delegates to prayer.

In its first convention, The American Lutheran Church seriously debated withdrawing from the World Council, and adopted the following resolution:

“Whereas a release by the World Council of Churches speaks out against the action of the government of the United States and the Cuban crisis, be it.

“Resolved that The American Lutheran Church inform the officers of the Central Committee of the WCC and its general secretary, the press, and President Kennedy that we disagree with the statement.…” (For news coverage of TALC convention, see page 35.)

Sidelights On St. Peter’S

A Vatican Council surprise came when two Russian Orthodox observers appeared belatedly. Regarded in some quarters as a triumph of diplomacy for the indefatigable Msgr. Willebrands, it met with obvious disapproval from the Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras of Istanbul. The real fireworks, however, came from Archbishop Chrysostom of Athens, who said the Russian decision was “a body blow” to Orthodox unity, and saw in it the machinations of the Kremlin—a conclusion promptly repudiated by the Moscow Patriarchate. Nevertheless the idea persists that this is a maneuver to destroy both Istanbul and Rome. Having humiliated Athenagoras, whose influence the Moscow Patriarchate hopes to supplement in the Middle East, this theory adds, Moscow will soon humiliate Pope John also by finding some pretext for withdrawing in feigned indignation from the Vatican Council. The two Moscow observers are thought to have hinted at this in saying that they would remain at the council until recalled by superiors.

Comment by Italian Protestants (numbering about 100,000) was made at a meeting for observers and official guests organized by the Federal Council of Evangelical Churches. Its Waldensian chairman, Dr. Ermanno Rostan, pointed out that in 1948 the state had declared all religions equal before the law, but that this did not necessarily mean in practice a perfect equality on the juridical and moral plane. Welcoming the beginning of a new era in Protestant-Roman Catholic relations, Dr. Rostan continued: “But I do not wish to hide from you that courtesy visits to the Pope have not been approved by some Italian Protestants because, in spite of the intentions of those who make them, they have had the effect, in Italian public opinion, of homage to a primacy which we cannot recognize.” He made particular reference to the visit of the former Archbishop of Canterbury. Whatever the changed relationships, Dr. Rostan concluded, the truth of one church must not take the place of the truth of the Word of God.

J. D. D.

Talc Disowns Wcc Statement On Cuba

Four days after the First General Convention of The American Lutheran Church decided by 647–307 vote to remain within the World Council of Churches, it issued a resolution disowning the WCC’s criticism of the United States government’s action in the Cuban crisis. Although the assembly’s chairman, Dr. Fredrik A. Schiotz, suggested that no action he taken, the church by overwhelming vote adopted a resolution of Dr. Rudy Skogerboe to notify the press, the officers of the WCC, and President Kennedy that it disagreed with the WCC’s criticism of the President’s action, and reaffirmed its own earlier resolution of presidential support.

On Monday the convention had halted activities to listen in solemn silence to the President’s Cuba message, piped into Bruce Hall in Milwaukee Auditorium. Special prayer was offered and a resolution of support sent to the President.

Milwaukee’s lovely autumn weather, broken only by cold rains, chilling winds, and a touch of snow from darkening skies, hosted the 1,000 delegates to the convention. The ALC is the product of the 1960 merger of the old American Lutheran Church (German), the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Norwegian), and the United Evangelical Lutheran Church (Danish).

Early in its sessions The ALC, by unanimous rising vote, welcomed into membership the Lutheran Free Church. The 90,253 members of the Free Church enlarged ALC membership to 2,455,000. The Free Church had engaged in the ground floor negotiations in 1948 to form The ALC, but was forced to withdraw by member churches’ rejection of the merger proposals. After two referendums failed, a 1961 referendum resulted in 32 votes more than the required three-fourths majority. Dr. John M. Stensvaag, Lutheran Free Church president, told the convention: “For us, the way has been long, and in some respects full of anguish.… I must confess that we almost despaired at times.… That is why this is such a day of joy.”

One of the principal issues before the convention was a “review” of its 1960 decision to join the World Council. Dr. Schiotz strongly endorsed continuation of membership. He denied that Russian Orthodox presence in the WCC means that the council is now under the control or influence of the Russian government. “Nothing could be farther from the truth,” he said.

An entire afternoon was devoted to the “review.” In an atmosphere of noticeable tension, debate was spirited, yet controlled and decorous. Dr. E. C. Fendt of the Evangelical Lutheran Seminary at Columbus, Ohio, gave an impassioned address to retain WCC affiliation. With equal passion and force, Dr. Herman A. Preus of Luther Seminary, St. Paul, Minnesota, urged withdrawal.

Withdrawal would be sectarian and contrary to traditional Lutheranism, argued Dr. Fendt, who pressed the obligation to join the confession of the World Council and to converse on things that divide the churches. Dr. Preus urged that The ACL would better remain true to its religious tradition by withdrawing from a council which “has lost the concept of heresy and calls false doctrine a difference of opinion—yours as good as mine.” It is a “real question” he asserted, whether Lutherans are not closer to the Roman Catholic Church than to those affiliated with the World Council.

After a dozen ministers and laymen spoke to each side of the issue, a ballot decision revealed a 2 to 1 desire to remain in the WCC.

Later many delegates felt strongly that had the “review” occurred after, instead of before, the WCC’s expressed “concern and regret” over Kennedy’s Cuban action, the decision would have been different.

Dr. Theodore F. Nickel, Vice-President of the Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod, brought the greetings of his church to the convention. He expressed hope that Lutherans will get to know each other better so that “we may confess that which is represented by the name Lutheran.” Declaring that “absolute” unity in doctrine and practice “has its roots in heresy,” he asserted that the founders of their church demanded only “fundamental unity,” one committed “to the Gospel in all of its facets and to the Scriptures in all their parts and in all their words as … centered in Christ and as … meant to be the only infallible norm for faith and life.” Nickel saw “evidence all about us” of a “new and genuine concern” for such unity.

The convention by unanimous vote approved a proposal to form a new cooperative agency which will replace the National Lutheran Council. The significance of the new agency lies in its provision of avenues of theological approach to the Missouri Synod and possible future merger.

A spirited two-hour debate arose over policy regarding acceptance of Federal aid for such projects as colleges, hospitals, nursing homes, and homes for the aged. While the policy of The ALC is congregational, permitting each institution to make its own decision regarding acceptance of Federal funds, the 55-member Joint Council of the church sought the adoption of a “guideline” statement. No issue received more complete floor analysis. A floor attempt to ban Federal grants while permitting loans was decisively defeated. In the end the convention adopted its Joint Council’s statement of policy. The policy was described as a mugwump statement, “a mugwump being a critter which sits on the fence with its head on one side and its wump on the other.” The statement realistically recognized that some church projects do receive such aid, but also warned that acceptance of Federal aid carries the dangers of funds being cut off, government restrictions, and the temptation to compromise the purpose of the institutions, and would condition one’s position on the whole matter of Federal aid to religious institutions and church-state relationships.

Criticism was directed against a jazzing-up of the church’s liturgy, and particularly against the Youth Activity Department’s Luther League theme manual, Called To Be Human, alleged by some delegates to contain statements about the doctrine of man that are highly dubious. By a vote of 609 to 137 the convention decided to make a “careful, objective investigation” to determine whether “any teachings contrary to God’s Word [are] contained in these publications.”

Delegates were informed by the Board of Theological Education that both seminary and pre-seminary enrollments are down. The Rev. Albert Heidmann urged the convention that “interest in the ministry must begin on the family and parish level.” Among The ALC’s 5,000 congregations are 186 pulpit vacancies.

A total budget of about $45,000,000 was adopted for the years 1963 and 1964. (The convention meets biennially.) Almost $5,000,000 of this sum will be devoted each year to the Boards of American and World Missions. Dr. William H. Nies of Detroit, chairman of the Board of American Missions, told of the sharply rising cost of mission efforts. He asserted that “it costs about $100,000 to establish a new congregation.”

Dr. Norman A. Mentor of Detroit was re-elected vice-president of The ALC.

Dr. Schiotz, The ALC president, chaired the church’s first convention with the surefootedness that comes with experience plus ability, and with apparent justice for all.

J. D.

Cbmc: Champions Of Man-To-Man Evangelism

A visitor stepping into the red-carpeted office of an Eastern business executive is apt to be asked, discreetly but unashamedly:

“My brother, have you ever made the most important decision in life?”

If the executive is unsatisfied that his visitor has had a regeneration experience, he is likely to pull a curtain cord seen by his Christian office help, who immediately take to prayer for the visitor’s conversion.

In Miami last month, this variety of businessmen marked a quarter of a century of organized life. From all indications at its twenty-fifth anniversary convention, the Christian Business Men’s Committee International was ready to claim title as the world’s largest and most active evangelical lay organization.

“The basic drive of CBMC is salvation,” said keynoter Andrew W. Hughes¹Named by CBMCI directors as chairman to succeed Hughes was George D. Armerding, West Coast manager of the Mojonnier Brothers Company, Lafayette, California., retiring CBMCI chairman and comptroller of Rheem water-heater manufacturers. “Man-to-man witnessing, introducing men, women, boys and girls to the Lord Jesus Christ.”

Appropriately enough, the five-day convention proved an ideal opportunity for intense personal evangelism by the 600 CBMCI delegates and the 500 wives who came along. See-bee-em-see-ers fanned out into Miami’s palm-lined streets and parks distributing thousands of tracts and testaments and collaring passers-by to press the claims of Christ. Dozens of conversions were reported, among them a leading banker.

The convention program itself was largely evangelistic and devotional, and was dominated by recitation of personal testimonies. One participant told of pummeling his wife with beer bottles in his unregenerate days, another confessed to unfaithfulness, and still another asked permission to apologize from the platform for talking too long the day before.

CBMCI is a loosely-knit but tightly operated movement. Virtually all power is vested in a 15-member board of directors which meets twice a year. The international convention, which has authority to enact legislation, ordinarily prefers to leave the law-making to the directors (this year’s business was dispensed with in 42 minutes). The five directors who retire each year constitute a nominating committee for their successors, and there is an unwritten rule that two of these successors must have served before. A veteran CBMC’er says he cannot recall a director ever having been nominated from the floor, although opportunity for such nomination is given. A director cannot serve successive terms.

The well-oiled machinery at the top notwithstanding, local Christian Business Men’s Committee groups are answerable to no one after they have subscribed officially to the international movement’s nine-point statement of faith. They sponsor breakfasts, luncheons, dinners, retreats, radio programs, newspaper advertisements, and servicemen’s centers—all geared to present opportunities for Gospel witness. Some committees have even ventured into mass evangelism.

A charge often leveled at CBMC is that it is anti-church. In rebuttal, a poll was taken which showed that 100 per cent of committee members were active church members as well; 67 per cent were teachers, officers, or superintendents; 76 per cent attended prayer meetings; and 63 per cent were church officers.

Laymen have an advantage over clergy in Christian witnessing, according to R. G. LeTourneau, magnate of earth-moving machinery whose name is the most familiar among CMBC figures.

A key observer of the CBMC movement, Lieutenant General William K. Harrison, now retired, has said: “Unless there is to be a professional monopoly in witnessing for Christ, there seems to be no good reason why the layman, redeemed of the Lord, should not say so.”

Local Christian businessmen’s fellowships date back to 1930, but the CBMCI movement was not formally constituted until 1938, at a conference in Chicago. There are now some 550 local committees in 35 countries with a total of 15,000 members. The largest committee, in Pusan, Korea, has about 500 members. The international committee itself is a relatively small organization with a budget of some $160,000 a year. Its Chicago office employs an executive secretary, a director of publications, and five women helpers. Revenue is raised from dues assessed local committees.

Perhaps the thorniest of issues which have faced CBMCI is the clause in its statement of faith requiring belief in the premillennial return of Christ. Proposals to eliminate such a qualification have come before CBMCI directors repeatedly but have been defeated each time, even though some who are closest to the CBMCI leadership have campaigned for a change.

Even more significant is the issue suggested by retiring chairman Hughes:

“So often we are prone to concentrate on salvation that by virtue of the overemphasis we relegate God’s instruction regarding our Christian walk to a minor position.”

Hughes, one-time hockey pro, went on to list five rules of conduct for CBMC’ers: resist, escape, make no deals, love thy brother, and establish leadership.

But the problem goes deeper.

Exposition of the Gospel’s broader relevance in everyday life, including a Christian view of economic concerns, is largely avoided.

Part of the explanation may be that many CBMC’ers are relatively new Christians—or at least they have been converted in adult life. The dozens of personal testimonies voiced at the Miami convention indicated an almost invariable pattern: Brought up in a denominational church, where he attended Sunday school and other services regularly, the individual somehow never heard of the necessity of a personal commitment to Christ until his grown years—and then it was from a fellow layman. With regeneration he gains a great zeal to win others, a zeal exercised through the medium of CBMC activities.

Typical of this zeal is a Florida chiropractor who ordered all phones off the hook each morning at 8:30 while he and his staff meditate and pray. In Ohio, the owner of a chicken- and egg-processing plant called for a half-hour respite each afternoon for the same reason. Not as typical were the two CBMC leaders who asked for and received permission to conduct a Sunday morning service aboard a commercial aircraft in flight.

CBMC’ers come from all walks of business and professional life and represent virtually every principal denomination and religious affiliation. In CBMC terminology, a businessman is anyone who is not a minister, missionary, or other full-time Christian worker.

What has CBMC to show for its approach? Post-war growth on the edge of the general evangelical resurgence has leveled off, and Executive Secretary T. E. McCully reported that CBMC lost as many members as it gained during the past year. Some of this loss is due to relocation in cities lacking a local committee. Over the long haul, however, the picture is different. Director of Publications David R. Enlow, in his newly released book, Men Aflame, estimates that more than five million persons have been influenced toward a practical faith.

Church And State

The President’s annual proclamation calling for a day of prayer came out as usual this year, and some observers immediately raised the question whether it is a constitutional practice in view of the Supreme Court decision of last June 25 barring governmentally composed prayers.

The 1962 proclamation did not give Americans much time to prepare for a day of prayer. The proclamation set aside October 17 for the observance, but the date was not known until the White House issued the proclamation on October 11. In taking the action, President Kennedy implemented an act of Congress of 1952 requiring him to set aside a day of prayer annually. It is up to him to set the specific date, and the only restriction is that it not be a Sunday.

Kennedy urged Americans to “nurture our youth and give them the needed faith in God.”

“On this day,” he said, “let us all pray, each following the practices of his own faith.”

“Let us pray for our Nation and for other nations of the world,” the President declared. “May we especially ask God’s blessings upon our homes, that this central unit of society may nurture our youth and give them the needed faith in God, in our Nation, and in their future.”

Kennedy also asked for prayers for the world, “that this generation may experience the fruits of peace and may know the real meaning of brotherhood under God.”

Meanwhile, at the U. S. Supreme Court, appeals were filed asking the justices to declare baccalaureate services unconstitutional in public schools if conducted in the form of Protestant worship services.

The court was also asked to bar as unconstitutional the following practices of a school district: (1) the questioning of a teacher on whether he believes in God or attends religious worship as part of the examination of his fitness as a public school teacher; and (2) the taking of a census to determine the religious affiliation of public school pupils.

These issues—along with a new challenge to the practice of Bible reading and recitation of prayer in classrooms—are raised in an appeal from the decision of the Florida State Supreme Court in two cases involving public schools of Dade County (Miami).

The appeals were filed by Leo Pfeffer, general counsel for the American Jewish Congress, on behalf of four complainants who are parents of children in Dade County schools.

Earlier the court agreed to give a hearing in this session to appeals from Pennsylvania and Maryland which involve the practice of Bible reading and recitation of the Lord’s Prayer.

Another development in the church-state field last month was a statement by Anthony J. Celebrezze, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare, in which he said that he will campaign for Federal aid to public schools but added that he could see no constitutional method to provide such aid to church-related schools.

The Roman Catholic cabinet member said he was convinced, after study, that “aid to private elementary and high schools is unconstitutional.”

The Supreme Court, he said, “has made that clear, and we have no alternative but to follow its rulings.”

Celebrezze pointed out that the Supreme Court had not ruled out aid to private and church-related institutions of higher education. He asserted that there are many precedents for such assistance.

What Is Public Service?

The Federal Communications Commission is ordering radio station licensees to stop counting time given for free “spot announcements” of special church services, bazaars, socials, and other activities as part of their time devoted to “religious programs” in preparing required logs of broadcast service.

The FCC said that program log analyses submitted in connection with periodic license renewals and other matters could count such announcements as general “public service.”

Purpose of the program log analysis is to determine what kind of programs a station is broadcasting and how well it is fulfilling the proposed schedule it files when seeking a license, the FCC said.

Barabbas

Barabbas is a compound of the spectacular and the spiritual, with both ingredients in large amount. It will receive high praise and blasting criticism from both religious and dramatic critics. In view of the character of most religious films, this is a kind of tribute.

Although the scriptural record does not give Barabbas a single line of script and describes him only as a condemned thief, it does record that Barabbas broke dramatically into the trial of Jesus under Pontius Pilate as the man who, through the crucifixion of Jesus, was saved from a similar fate. In the high dramatic-religious possibilities of this event, Pär Lagerkvist saw more than enough warrant to write his Nobel Prize-winning imaginative account of how Barabbas lived with the knowledge that he was alive because another died, and Dino De Laurentiis also saw enough to create another huge cinema spectacular whose action sequence explodes like a chain display of exploding fireworks. It was enough, too, to provide Anthony Quinn with a powerful role which he plays superbly and to the hilt.

So exclusively is Christopher Fry’s script devoted to the violent external life of Barabbas and to his internal confusion, conflict, and disturbance at the memory of living through the death of another, that the roles of Pontius Pilate (Arthur Kennedy), Peter (Harry Andrews), and Rachel (Silvana Mangano), though well played, hardly achieve secondary status.

Barabbas differs from most current religious spectaculars by the almost complete absence of sex and romance and by its degree of spiritual sensitivity and perception of the meaning of the death of Christ for the life of another. Whether it does more than gingerly probe this meaning, or actually enters into the Kingdom of its truth, is doubtless a debate that will continue unresolved.

Judgment of the religious quality of the film will depend in large part on the nature of the religious commitment of the critic or viewer. They who reduce Christianity to a mere “love of neighbor” will doubtless classify Barabbas as a mere clod, too dull to understand the imperative of love. Yet spiritual and physical clod that he undoubtedly is, he is not so much clod as not to vaguely sense and be deeply disturbed by the central Christian affirmation that he lived because another died for him. Although the discovery that he cannot die, which he makes during the 20 years spent in a sulphur mine, is no doubt perverted by pride, this violent man living in an age of cruelty is more surprised and troubled by this tenet of the Christian faith than by the mere moral imperative of neighbor love. Yet the subtle employment throughout the story of the symbols of life and death, light and darkness, in spite of all their ambiguity, does not conceal the fact that Barabbas’ conflict is more of a probing action than an entrance into the Kingdom. He is mentally confused and disturbed, but never troubled by conscience. Twice he chides God for not making things plainer, but never does he cry for forgiveness.

Barabbas receives his freedom, yet returns to his former bandit-life; he sees light but is blinded by it; he receives his life, yet loses it on a cross for his bungling and erroneous way of bringing on the Kingdom.

The story begins with the release of Barabbas from prison by the decision of the people and the legal action of Pilate that made Barabbas the people’s choice and Christ the people’s reprobate. Emerging from his prison darkness, he is blinded by the light of day and that of Jesus and returns to his former life and to his Rachel, only to be disturbed in the midst of his pleasures by her commitment to Christ and the darkness of the Cross which at that moment covers the land. The sixth-hour darkness disturbs and draws him—but not for long. Soon he is again arrested for murder and thievery and sunk for 20 years into a sulphur mine where, again in the dark, he outlives experiences that should have killed him three times over, and he comes to the belief that he cannot the because, as he says, Jesus died his death. As a gladiator in Rome he dramatically seems to prove his point. Though a second-rate gladiator, he outlives the opposition and is awarded his freedom by the Emperor.

Declaring now that God will not find him failing this time, he helps burn the city of Rome, only to be informed by the Christians that his “Christian” effort to purge the world that the Kingdom might come was an error, one for which he later dies on a cross. As the darkness of death closes in, he recalls the earlier “darkness of the sixth hour” and hands himself over to God.

Because of the ambiguous character of the biblical symbols of light and darkness and of life and death, and particularly because of the subtle, ambiguous purposes to which they are set in the story of Barabbas, one could easily interpret his darkness and death at his end as the dawn of spiritual life and insight, were it not for the total absence of any struggle of conscience. Barabbas is always confused, but never repentant. All this suggests that the intent of the film is to present not a conversion but a tortured picture of the ambiguous struggle of men, ancient and modern, tossed endlessly between faith and doubt, freedom and fate, and meaning and purposelessness, and finally strangled by the ambiguities.

As a living parable of the significance of the death of Christ, Barabbas the man has tremendous religious-dramatic possibilities. Lagerkvist’s treatment is less than adequate from a Christian perspective but, to date, it is far and away the best.

Barabbas is for those who like their religious movies big and spectacular, and with such content as invites a later mulling over to discover nuances of symbolic meaning and subtle religious implications.

J. D.

Integrating Psychology

The Christian church is faced with the enormous need for Christian counseling services which are not being provided at present by the ministry itself. Recognizing this need, Fuller Theological Seminary is exploring the possibility of enlarging its own ministry by inaugurating an ancillary School of Christian Psychology.

As now envisioned, the school would offer the Ph.D. degree subsequent to collegiate and seminary training of the candidates. The school intends to meet requirements laid down by the various states for certification and also those of the American Psychological Association. A substantial 15-year grant has been promised, and foundations are now being approached to secure the additional funds needed before the school can be opened. Officials estimate the school probably will begin functioning in 1964.

The design for the school includes a plan which would provide for the integration of psychology with the Christian faith in an orthodox theological setting. It is recognized that the Gospel of Christ is relevant to the whole man and that many Christian people suffer from mental conditions which can be helped by a therapy employing the principles of the biblical faith and the clinical skills of psychology. Opposed to the Freudian orientation of much of today’s counseling and psychiatric theory, the school hopes to bring mental healing back to the Church where it belongs and where the Gospel can be the foundation on which treatment is based.

H. L.

A ‘Promising’ Plan

The Archbishop of Canterbury says that conversations between the Anglican church in England and the British Methodist church looking toward possible union are coming along “very promisingly.”

“We are working toward a plan,” said Dr. Arthur M. Ramsey during a visit to the United States last month, “where Methodists in England will accept the episcopacy and will integrate with us, and yet maintain many of their own particular customs.”

The episcopacy—commonly held to be historic succession of bishops from the Apostles—has been a roadblock in union talks between Anglicans and many other Protestant bodies.

Ramsey said the Anglican church is also having “exploratory” talks with the British Presbyterian church.

“My own particular effort has been with Eastern Orthodoxy,” he said. The Anglican primate has visited Ecumenical Patriarch Athenagoras, supreme leader of Eastern Orthodoxy, in Istanbul, and the Russian Orthodox Church’s Moscow Patriarchate, as well as the Greek Orthodox primate in Athens.

Services For Suicides

Church services and burial in consecrated ground for suicides were recommended in a report approved by both the Upper and Lower Houses of the Convocation of Canterbury last month.

While suicide remains sinful, the report said, persons who kill themselves because of incurable diseases or because they face rape or torture as spies should merit no moral condemnation. Neither should the “altruistic” giving of one’s life be regarded as suicide, it declared.

“We see no reasons,” the Anglican Joint Committee on Suicide said in its report, “why the body of a suicide should not be brought into the church for a service, nor do we see any reason why it should not be buried in consecrated ground.”

To avoid judgment by clergy on whether the suicide was a sinful act, the report suggested a revision of the Anglican burial service, with two key phrases eliminated. These are: “forasmuch as it hath pleased Almighty God of His great mercy to take unto Himself the soul of our dear brother here departed,” and “in sure and certain hope of resurrection.”

Before the recommendations become practice they must be approved by the Church Assembly and Parliament.

How much voice should the national (or “receiving”) church have in the affairs of overseas missionaries working in its midst? Do changing conditions indicate a change in the missionary task?

To examine these and other important questions of motive and strategy, the Board of World Missions of the Presbyterian Church in the United States (Southern) called a unique consultation. The week-long meeting (October 13–19) was unique in that participants were not chosen by the board: national churches abroad sent delegates they had selected; missionaries representing the board’s work in nine countries were elected by fellow missionaries in their fields; other boards and agencies of the denomination sent delegates of their choosing.

In addition a host of outside experts were called in. Other churches and organizations with which the board has relations were invited to send non-voting correspondents. Specialists in particular areas of missionary activity were invited as non-voting consultants. About 70 of these visitors were given the privilege of debate.

Voting in the deliberations were some 120 delegates: the board and its key staff personnel, missionaries, nationals, and members of the Presbyterian Church in the United States, who represented other boards, agencies, and organizations.

Wide Range of Debate

The diversity of opinion represented by participants led to sharp debate in many sessions. The conferees came from a variety of situations. In Mexico the Presbyterian mission is involved in proceedings to set up a consultative committee of all missions and the Mexican Presbyterians which will handle all strategy decisions. Independence in the Congo has brought many problems to the young church on the largest Presbyterian mission field. In Iraq and Ecuador the Presbyterians work through a united mission. Divisions within the Korean church and revolution in that nation have posed problems there. Political uncertainty, runaway inflation, and a vigorous daughter church were factors in Brazil. In Japan the mission is involved in much institutional work and is cooperating with both the Reformed and United churches. Portugal is a cooperative venture with other Presbyterian bodies. Taiwan is a field where the board began work only after its personnel were forced out of mainland China.

Issues of the debate were sharpened in platform addresses. Dr. T. Watson Street, new executive secretary of the board, led off with a review of the current situation. Next was Dr. John A. Mackay, retired Princeton Seminary president and former chairman of the International Missionary Council. He was followed by Bishop Lesslie Newbigin, director of the World Council of Churches’ new Division of World Mission and Evangelism, who recalled experiences in the church of South India and decried the presence of a mission as a unit on some fields.

After the first session of the five study committees, an address on what the man in the pew expects of world missions was delivered by Dr. Harold John Ockenga of Boston’s Park Street Church. Speaking on “teamwork” the next day was Dr. Jose Borges dos Santos, Jr., veteran leader of Brazilian Presbyterians. Miss Esther Cummings of the Biblical Seminary gave an address on the spiritual qualifications of the missionary.

Delegates heard from a varied group of correspondents and consultants. Foreign missions board personnel of the Assemblies of God and the United Church of Christ (and of several other denominations) were there. The National Council of Churches (with which the board works) sent a contingent, and one staff member of the Evangelical Foreign Missions Association (with which the board does not work) came. No independent faith missions were invited to send representatives.

Questions under consideration were primarily concerned with the respective roles of the missionary, the field mission, the board, the sending church, and the national church. The question of a theological basis ran through all the discussions.

Answers and Generalities

Four days of debate brought some general answers for the board. Some were general enough to be praised for their ambiguity.

At the final session, while the committee on theological issues was still at work, the delegates “re-affirmed” the missionary declaration of the first (1861) General Assembly of the denomination. That statement defined the missionary task as obedience to the Great Commission and declared that a proper conception of its “vast magnitude and grandeur is the only thing which, in connection with the love of Christ, can ever arouse her (the Church’s) energies and develop her resources.…”

When the committee came in, its report was adopted with only minor amendment. A key section says of Jesus Christ: “There is no other king; there is no other hope; there is no other life. Without Him man perishes.” The statement continues: “Thus we who hope in the Lord Jesus alone for salvation stand under the inescapable imperative to carry the Gospel to all those who do not know Him as Saviour and Lord.” The statement also calls for acts of repentance and rededication by the Church for its failure to bear faithful witness.

Ignoring ‘Practical Universalism’

A key question in the agenda was: “What are the theological convictions which undergird missionary outreach? How can the Presbyterian Church in the United States strengthen these convictions and meet the challenge of ‘practical universalism’?” Committees struggled with this until the last minute of the consultation.

There was no specific mention of “practical universalism” or suggestion about meeting its challenge in the general answer to the theological statement.

Hammered out after long debate was the answer to the crucial question on the role of the mission—the organized unit of missionaries on a particular field. No particular cooperative plan or form of “integration” was recommended. Rather, the consultation decided “that the structure of relationship of missionaries to a national Church should be worked out by that national Church in consultation with the Presbyterian Church in the U. S.”

Other Considerations

Another statement in the report on the mission says of cooperation: “The national Church has immediate responsibility for the evangelization of her own people, and so the national Church should have primary responsibility in the definition of freedom and initiative for the sending Church.” The report also suggests that mission and national church should feel free to propose to each other any change in the status quo that either feels necessary. Another proposal suggests mission consultation with the national church before the start of any new project.

Financial considerations were a subject from time to time in the debates. It was recommended that aid to daughter churches should be given in such a way as to stimulate the development of stewardship but that after funds are given there should be no more control over them by the sending church.

On the subject of missionary salaries, nationals generally supported higher pay but pointed to the danger of displays of comparative wealth (such as having many servants) by the missionary.

Missionary giving in the home church ($4.59 per capita last year) prompted the consultation to observe: “It is our conviction that only a deepening of the home Church’s devotion to her Lord will ever produce the outpouring of gifts so desperately needed for her witness around the world.”

Facing the Future

Unique and diverse in composition as it was, the consultation gave vent to many long-smoldering discussions. Because “the air was cleared,” many missionary leaders of the Presbyterian Church in the United States saw the meeting as the beginning of a new advance in the denomination’s work.

One Brazilian delegate expressed what was considered to be the opinion of all the nationals when he said on the floor: “This consultation was (taken on) your initiative, and we love you for it.” A Mexican suggested: “Now our Church can listen to you, and I hope your Church will speak to us in a very frank way.”

One consultation recommendation asks the board to “clarify its channels of communications” with churches abroad, but a proposal to reorganize in a manner similar to The United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America’s Commission on Ecumenical Mission and Relations, was defeated.

How will the board and the home church deal with national churches in the future? One board member put it this way: “The day of unilateral decisions is over.”

No action of the consultation is binding, however. The board called it to ask only for advice on the work of its more than 500 missionaries in nine countries. It heard much.

ARTHUR H. MATTHEWS

Rare indeed is the Christian who does not consciously, or unconsciously, harbor the feeling that in some measure he is earning his own salvation and therefore deserves to be saved.

Innate human pride is such that we love to think of ourselves as good, so that every act of worship, kindness, or favor to others is apt to give us an inner satisfaction and a sense of self-righteousness which, we should know, God utterly detests.

One of the signs of true spiritual maturity is a growing realization of the grace of God. More than four centuries ago, on seeing criminals being led out to execution, John Bradford exclaimed: “But for the grace of God there goes John Bradford.” Today, when we see the wages of sin on every hand we should remember that but for God’s grace we too would face death and judgment.

Salvation through grace is the very heart of the Gospel message. The fact that eternal life cannot be merited should cause us to ponder the mystery of our own redemption—an act of God’s sovereign mercy whereby the redemptive act of his Son becomes operative in our lives through faith, and faith alone.

The Apostle Paul, speaking of the sovereignty of God’s acts of mercy and election, says: “O the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways!” (Rom. 11:33).

Nothing is more calculated to bring us to our knees in worship and thanksgiving than a realization that all which we have is undeserved. Speaking of Abraham’s faith Paul also says: “That is why it depends on faith, in order that the promise may rest on grace and be guaranteed to all his descendants—not only to the adherents of the law but also to those who share the faith of Abraham, for he is the father of us all” (Rom. 4:16, RSV).

But grace is not to be trifled with. To presume on the love and grace of God is to trifle with that which may turn and rend us. The Apostle Paul poses this question, and Phillips in his translation of Paul’s words says: “Now what is our response to be? Shall we sin to our heart’s content and see how far we can exploit the grace of God? What a ghastly thought!” (Rom. 6:1, 2a). And yet we have known people who, taking the premise that we are “not under the law but under grace,” have seemed to feel they were therefore free to sin. “Ghastly”? Yes, and utterly perverse.

Grace has been spoken of as the free and eternal love and favor of God, which is the spring and source of all the benefits which we receive from him. As a young man we remember hearing an old minister praying, “All that we have except sin comes as a blessing from Thee.” How well this fits in with the gracious affirmation of Romans 8:28, “And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose.”

Accustomed as we are to the idea of merit and payments, therefore, it always comes as an overwhelming shock when we first realize that forgiveness of sin and eternal life are gifts of God’s grace and never earned or merited. Those who have tasted deeply of this truth can never be the same. “Just as I am, without one plea, but that thy blood was shed for me,” takes on an eternal significance, and pride is humbled in the face of God’s redeeming love. Nowhere more than here do we see the sovereignty of God. Why has he been so kind to me? Why has he made it possible for me to stand in his holy presence without a sense of guilt? The answer is, of course, in the atoning work of his Son, through whom his grace becomes operative and magnified.

This combination of love—the gift of his Son and grace which is that love in action—reflects for all to see that the divine calling demands humble acceptance on our part. That pride so often suggests another way shows the blindness and perverseness of the unregenerate heart.

But grace is more than saving in its nature; it is also sustaining.

All of us live confronted with a multiplicity of problems and difficulties, physical, material, and emotional. How often do we experience, or see others experiencing, the deep and trying vicissitudes of life. The Apostle Paul plumbed the depths of such experiences only to have God tell him, “My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness” (2 Cor. 12:9b, RSV). Here we have demonstrated once for all that God’s grace not only saves us but continues as the controlling and sustaining force in our lives as Christians.

Grace also has its fruits. From it proceed those evidences of the indwelling Christ which commend to others the faith we profess. Nowhere more than in the interpersonal relationships should grace be shown. People irritate us—God’s grace in our hearts will enable us to react in love and not in anger. Problems arise for which we have no immediate solution—the grace of God enables us to look beyond to the One who has the solution. Sorrows come—the grace of God enables us to look through our tears to the One who will some day wipe away every tear. The daily routine gets us down and we groan under its monotony and its burden—but God’s grace enables us to rise above this and to sense his presence and love.

Grace is spoken of as a fair ornament in Proverbs 4:9—“She [wisdom] shall give to thine head an ornament of grace: a crown of glory shall she deliver to thee.” How often we have seen this demonstrated in the lives of others, and how pleasant to see! “Graciousness” is one of the loveliest words in all of the English language, and one of the nicest attributes by which one may be described. Where affected it is hypocrisy, but where genuine it is a reflection of God’s glory in a work of his new creation.

The grace of God is shown in the perfection of his creation, marred only by the sinfulness of man. “Where every prospect pleases, and only man is vile,” is far more than the poetic expression of a hymn. All around us we see evidences of the loving provision of God’s grace. Little wonder that the Bible concludes its revelation to man with the crowning act of all the ages: “The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen” (Rev. 22:21, AV).

Living in the dispensation of grace, surrounded by its evidence on every hand, offered its perfection in the person and work of the Son of God, we, individual Christians and the Church in her corporate witness, should at all times proclaim that the grace of God is God’s offer of forgiveness and freedom from the penalty of sin to all who will accept it. The Gospel is as complicated and as simple as Paul’s words to Titus: “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men” (2:11).

Gift Catalog

Pastor Peterson is sometimes a little bizarre. He has never brought a dog into his pulpit, but then he has never had a dog. He did once pull a lily out of Mrs. Husted’s pulpit floral arrangement to illustrate a glory greater than the Easter finery of his flock. Last Sunday he waved a colorful Christmas gift catalog as he introduced his sermon. Then he proceeded to read some of the gift descriptions—unusual gifts for people who have everything. For $2,495 you could send a two-man submarine to a deserving nephew. It is a 15-foot fiberglass craft with two speeds forward. On a more limited budget, you could buy the boss two solid silver tacks bearing his initials for $1.98. Very few of America’s executives have this equipment. For your secretary there is the world’s largest eraser, about half a pound of pink rubber in one king-sized chunk, bearing the inscription, “I never make big misteaks.”

I began to grow uneasy. There was no doubt that the catalog he had was one that I had received last month. Would he go on to describe such novelties as “nudie” ice cubes, bourbon toothpaste, and “instant sex” spray, the strictly imaginary aphrodisiac?

Happily, he concluded his introduction with a final allusion to primitive paintings which can be obtained on commission from a chimpanzee artist for only $9.98, complete with engraved metal plaque and documentary photos of Pablo the chimp at work in his studio.

I felt relieved but dubious. What could the good pastor say now to retrieve the congregation’s imagination from Pablo and pink rubber?

He declared that he had a gift catalog for a Laodicean church, a rich church that lacked nothing. For suburban Christians who have everything the pastor presented the catalog of the gifts of the Spirit in Galatians 5:22—love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, meekness, self-control.…

I suppose the attention of some Laodiceans wandered. Silver thumbtacks are more curious if not more rare than Christian meekness. But without full-color photography the pastor presented a glowing picture of the gifts of the Spirit for Christians who have everything, but are wretched, poor, blind, and naked.

Several young people told the pastor later that they wanted such spiritual gifts, and only one woman asked to see the first gift catalog.

To Educators, A Challenge

I am in accord with Harold N. Englund’s challenging “Writing Is a Ministry” (Sept. 28 issue), but the basic problem still lies unsolved. Where can a concerned student find training in such areas? What evangelical college or seminary offers advanced programs in biblical, theological, historical, and practical studies, and in addition offers literature, journalism, politics, economics, international affairs, or sociology? I know a few with meager offerings along this line, but their existence is only a constant reminder of the pathetic neglect of this type of training within evangelical Christendom. You have challenged editors, foundations and ministers: how about doing the same to college and seminary boards and faculties?

Azusa Friends Church

Azusa, Calif.

I was specially delighted with the section subtitled “Thoroughness and Accuracy.”

From 40 years experience in the newspaper business I know well that one of the major criticisms leveled at both clergymen and writers on religion … is that they are not careful to insure that their “facts” are adequate and accurate. Rightly or wrongly, the discovery of such inadequacy or inaccuracy tends to discredit the conclusions based on these alleged “facts.”

… I am not one of those who hold the belief that the (secular) press for the most part is opposed to Christianity.… I recognize, however, that many newspaper writers tend to distrust certain religious leaders—as they distrust certain politicians, labor leaders, business executives and promoters—and the distrust is usually based on some personal experience.

The Apostle Paul counseled the first-century Christians to “provide things honest in the sight of all men”.…

Crusade News Bureau

Minneapolis, Minn.

Bureau Chief

In surveying religious magazines, I feel that they are not so open to working journalists (which is what I am), or craftsmen plus, as they are to clergymen and professors or teachers. Some even resort to ghost writers.

What we need are more Holy Ghost writers.…

San Marino, Calif.

You Can Please Some …

The August 31 issue was even richer than usual. Of special interest to me were your very discerning article on “The Second Coming—Millennial Views,” Dr. Addison Leitch’s extremely penetrating and pithy report of his European trip, and Dr. R. G. Tuttle’s unusual summary presentation of the “Ten Essential Life Principles.”

Excellent also, as always, were your book reviews. They are a real boon to us busy pastors, who are generally hard-put to decide what to read in our all-too-brief study hours.…

Webster Presbyterian Church

Webster, Tex.

The few times I have had an opportunity to browse through your periodical … I was greatly impressed with its sincerity and broad-mindedness.

However, the article by Addison H. Leitch was just about the most narrow, the most prejudiced bit of reporting that I have read in a long time.

Christianity has indeed a long way to go as long as articles such as this one keep getting published.

Havertown, Pa.

Re the article by William R. Arnett entitled “The Second Coming—Millennial Views”: according to Ironside (Historical Sketch of the Brethren Movement, p. 23) this teaching [of the “secret rapture”] was originated at a Powerscourt Conference by John M. Darby, one of the founders of the Plymouth Brethren, and marked a sharp break with historic premillennialism. The full teaching involves futurism and the “gap theory” which began with the Counter-Reformation views of the Spanish Jesuit Ribera, published about 1590. For about 240 years, Protestantism rejected such views altogether, until they were apparently picked up and actively promoted by Darby. They have had a place in the evangelical wing of Protestantism only since about 1832. Now we have the amazing paradox of evangelicals actively promoting what was originally a Counter-Reformation interpretation by a Roman Catholic Jesuit.

Carmel Valley, Calif.

Thank you for the superb article on the Second Coming. Arnett is to be commended for his concise review of the doctrine, with the millennial views which relate to it. The article is biblically and creedally interested, clearly and sanely presented, evangelistic, and fair to the various evangelical theories—it being enough that he simply listed the denial views.…

The one minor matter which I somewhat question … is that in the New Testament “it is mentioned” [the Second Coming] approximately “eight times as much as Christ’s first coming.” Some 318 verses, it is stated, are on the Second Coming. One-eighth of this would make about forty verses on the first coming.

But, in spite of this, I consider it to be by far the finest brief treatment I have read on Christ’s return.

Associate Professor of Theology

Nazarene Theological Seminary

Kansas City, Mo.

The Keswick Movement

Too bad Britain’s J. D. Douglas’ prejudice toward the God-raised-up Keswick movement and message (News, Aug. 31 issue) should be allowed by CHRISTIANITY TODAY to so distort the truth. I trust my fellow subscribers … know that this 87-year-old work is heartily endorsed by Dr. Wilbur M. Smith, Dr. Alan Red-path, Dr. Stephen Barabas, and the late Dr. Barnhouse, together with thousands across the years who have been released from the bondage of self and sin into the liberty and victory of the Spirit-filled life. Keswick in England, Canada, and the United States has had a profound influence for righteousness in the Christian Church. Please refer your readers to these volumes on it: Keswick’s Authentic Voice (Zondervan); So Great Salvation and The Message of Keswick (Marshall, Morgan and Scott).

North Presbyterian

Pittsburgh, Pa.

You can always tell how entirely sanctified some people are by marking their reaction to any criticism of Keswick.

Manchester, England

I would like to say that it is hardly a correct description of England’s grand Keswick Convention.…

My first impression of the meetings in the great tent was the conscious presence of God.… I once heard the saintly Bishop Moule preach in St. John’s Episcopal Church one Sunday morning and the congregation was spellbound, not with oratory, but they were listening to a message from God. To use the common phrase, you could have heard a pin drop. Keswick was then and still is, in my opinion, composed of the very finest and sanest Christian people from every part of the British Isles.

Watertown, N. Y.

• Careful reading of the Keswick report will disclose only two criticisms of the movement: (1) the myth of a unique “Keswick message” as such, a point made in a quotation from remarks of a chaplain; (2) the predilection for intensively devotional hymns to the exclusion of other hymns.—ED.

Sda And Wcc

I note what the writer has to say about the Seventh-day Adventists remaining outside of the World Council of Churches (News, Aug. 31 issue), and it is very true, but there are many other denominations which do not unite with the WCC. However, we do have membership on one of their special committees.…

There is one way in which we do try to cooperate with other church groups that is not understood by many. I refer to the fact that our ministers are encouraged to and do join local ministerial association groups and work with them. This is encouraged by an occasional suggestion from the editor of our magazine Ministry, and I believe this is as it should be. Although I am now retired, for many years during my active ministry I not only tried to work with and cooperate with local ministerial associations, but had the honor of serving as chairman in some instances, and as secretary in other localities.…

Arlington, Calif.

Macedonian Call

The last sentence in the second paragraph of the first column (p. 16) in the article … entitled “The Missionary Situation in Europe” (July 20 issue), needs correcting. This sentence reads: “But in response the churches of North America sent only about 50 missionaries to Europe before World War II.” … The records of the Eastern European Mission show that we supported a total of 56 American missionaries in Europe between 1927, when this mission was founded, and 1939, when World War II began.… The total number of American missionaries ministering in Europe in prewar days likely was about 125.

President

Eastern European Mission

Pasadena, Calif.

The Pastor’S Sunday

Thank you for your timely editorial in the July 6 issue, “Sunday Union Meetings Pose Dilemma For Protestant Workers.” I cannot help but wonder if some of our Protestant denominations do what is just right in this regard when they set up meetings on Sunday afternoons and evenings making it impossible for pastors … to get back into their pulpits for the evening services.

Editor

The Sunday Guardian

Newark, N. J.

Prince Of Preachers

Dr. Andrew W. Blackwood in his article “Expository Preaching: Preparing for a Year of Pulpit Joy” (June 8 issue) states, inter alia, “Spurgeon’s Autobiography (four large volumes) shows that he toiled over his sermons, and that he spent a full day or more every week perfecting the form of the message that went into print.”

It should be pointed out, of course, that the time spent on preparing the message for the press followed the preaching of the sermon.… (After delivery the selected sermons were set up in type from the shorthand reporter’s notes and only then submitted to him … for necessary amendment.) Spurgeon urged his students to write out their sermons from time to time in order to cultivate orderly habits, and made it quite clear that he derived from the correcting of his sermons for the press the same benefit that writing out sermons prior to delivery would accrue to them.

He “toiled over his sermons” to the extent that he had frequent difficulty in selecting his text or topic. Once that had been given to him the rest was easy.

On page 207 of the first volume of the Autobiography he says, “I am always sure to have the most happy day when I get a good text in the morning from my Master. When I have had to preach two or three sermons in a day, I have asked Him for the morning subject, and preached from it; and I have asked Him for the afternoon’s topic or the evening’s portion, and preached from it, after meditation on it for my own soul’s comfort,—not in the professional style of a regular sermon-maker, but feasting upon it myself. Such simple food has done the people far more good than if I had been a week in manufacturing a sermon, for it has come warm from the heart just after it had been received into my soul; and therefore it has been well spoken, because well known, well tasted, and well felt.”

On page 42 of the third volume of the same work will be found the following: “I … very seldom know, twenty-four hours beforehand, the subject of any sermon I am going to preach. I have never been able to acquire the habit of elaborate preparation. I usually begin my sermonizing for the Sabbath-day on Saturday evening. I cannot think long upon any one subject; and I always feel that, if I do not see through it quickly, I shall not be likely to see through it at all, so I give it up and try another.”

I think Spurgeon conveyed to his students in his famous Lectures a very graphic idea of his secret as a sermon-maker. “If a man would speak without any immediate study, he must usually study much.” His mind was so saturated with Scripture and with illuminating thoughts thereon, that his sermons came relatively easily.

The modern preacher cannot do better than study Spurgeon’s methods. He should bear in mind, however, that Spurgeon had an abnormally sensitive mind and retentive memory; that he could skim his eyes over a page of a book and then repeat the content almost word-for-word without a mistake; that he died at a comparatively early ago from a mysterious complaint, which, as he himself says, was called “ ‘gout’ for want of a better word,” and that this disease affected his head.

There will never be another Spurgeon, but, happily, Spurgeon’s God is still the inspiration of the true servant of the Lord today, able and willing to speak through frail mortals the Word of Life.

Kenilworth, Cape Province, S. Africa

In Massachusetts

In “A Layman and His Faith” (June 22 issue) the statement is made: “At no time have the major evangelical denominations recognized these churches (Universalist-Unitarian) as a part of the Protestant tradition, nor has either of them been admitted to membership in cooperative church groups.”

I think that in Massachusetts you will find that Dr. Dana McLean Greeley was president of the Massachusetts Council of Churches. Also you will find that the Universalist-Unitarian churches are admitted to full membership in their State Council of Churches—as they are in several local councils.…

First Congregational Church

Adams, Mass.

A Different Incarnation

The Rev. T. Paul Verghese, news associate secretary of the WCC, in his references to what he considers to be the tyrannical disruptive force of being called a Com-symp, borders, in my opinion, upon blasphemy when he calls Christ “the master fellow-traveller.” If Communism were only another economic or political system his statement might go unchallenged, but since it is the incarnation of atheistic materialism at its worst, Mr. Verghese reflects no credit on God’s Son, himself, or the WCC.

Cobden, Ont.

A Case Of Identity

Re “The Pastor and the Psychopath” by Stuart Bergsma (June 8 issue): It appears to me that Mr. Bergsma has … brought under the aegis of evangelical Christianity one of the most pernicious doctrines of so-called liberalism, i.e., that we must look upon the abominable, the fornicators, the drunkards, etc., more as sick persons than as sinners.…

Staten Island, N. Y.

Call For Poetic Seer

Upon reading of the death of America’s rebel-troubadour of conventional punctuation, e. e. cummings, I began to survey, at random, the poetic scene in 20th-century America. With the passing of Cummings, America lost again another potential seer into the unseen world of spiritual realities. No one would dispute his poetic talent, but few Americans, especially among the bourgeois, will reread his verses for a better glimpse into the spiritual world. Cummings, a New England recluse, had small concern for the Scriptures, and he shut the door of his Joy Farm paradise to all but a select few. The son of a minister, Cummings drew from the external world around him for his source of inspiration. His own fertile imagination was his well of memory. He will be remembered as a prophet of stylistic rebellion and a champion [against] social abuses, but not as a seer who set before the American people the mind of God.

In the world of literary scholarship, it is disturbing to me to find so few who seek poetic inspiration in the Scriptures. The famous Miltonic call for the aid of the Holy Spirit—instead of invoking the pagan muses—is all too lacking among the men of letters. Has the source of all truth in inspiration gone dry, or have poets forgotten how to obtain divine guidance? Poets, representing the American intelligentsia, have, for the most part, continued to look inward and not upward for poetic inspiration and subject matter. The early Romantics of the 19th century looked outward to nature, and became obsessed with the beauty of creation. But 20th-century American poets (Robert Frost is the last of the Romantics)—especially the “literary” ones—have dwelt upon their own personal conflict, and from this media of highly individualized and introspective research have produced verse which has for its subject matter the turmoil of man’s struggling spirit (often with touches of perversion) apart from God’s grace. The tools of poetry (rhyme and meter) have been dissolved into a rugged, often unintelligible, prosaic verse which dies the moment after it is voiced. Is this to be American verse in the 20th century?

A poet is first of all a seer or prophet, and he has the noble task of picturing in meaningful language the acute needs of his people. A poet stands between God and man as a sensitive interpreter of the inner reality of things both sacred and profane. Cummings pictured for us clearly the profane, i. e., the social issues in America, and can be praised for his perception into the dry boredom of conventions without purpose. He pointed with acid satire to the false gods of materialism and status-seeking before which America bows, but he offered no predictions of hope, nor did he suggest an upward look for salvation. What of America’s spiritual needs?

We need in America today a poet with the literary talent of C. S. Lewis who can reveal and penetrate spiritual truth. We need a poet who can touch the American heart, and make it bleed with the blood of repentance. A poet who can heal the sin-sick with the cleansing flow from Calvary.

I ask for a poetic seer who will become a rebel for the sake of the Gospel, and who will find his inspiration in the Scriptures under the Holy Spirit’s direction. Who will pray with the Psalmist: “Let the words of my mouth, and the meditations of my heart be acceptable in thy sight, O Lord, my strength, and my redeemer.”

Georgetown, Mass.

The purpose of evangelistic preaching is to bring the listener face to face with the Son of God that by the Holy Spirit he may accept Jesus Christ as his Lord and Saviour. It pleased God, the Bible tells us, to redeem sinful man “through the foolishness of preaching” (or, perhaps more accurately, “through the folly of what we preach”). The Greek word kerygma, or “preaching,” indicates speaking to the unsaved. New Testament preaching, then, was unmistakably evangelistic.

Almost every soul-winning movement in church history that has commended itself to later times started in a local church. And the instrumentality was usually of the simplest. In eighteenth-century England, for example, revival came through the evangelistic preaching of men like Grimshaw, Romaine, Rowlands, Berridge, and Venn. Were a similar awakening to happen in England again, or anywhere else for that matter, it would come undoubtedly under evangelistic preaching, the same sword with which Paul so mightily assaulted the pagan world 1900 years ago. What was this kind of preaching?

The Man

The answer to this question begins with the preacher. Evangelistic preachers are men whose hearts are full of Scripture, full of Christ, full of deep awareness of the sinfulness of sin; of the value of a soul; of the need for repentance and faith; of the happiness of holy living; and of the importance of the world to come.

The great apostle of Wales, Daniel Rowlands, was such a man, although when he was ordained he was ignorant of the gospel of Christ. After Sunday morning services he was as ready as anyone to indulge himself for the rest of the day in sports and entertainment. After his conversion, however, he preached with conviction, spoke and lived like one who had discovered that sin, death, judgment, heaven, and hell are stark realities. It is no surprise that sinners were awakened and aroused by his changed preaching. In a remote section of Wales, Daniel Rowlands preached for 48 years—sometimes to crowds of 2000—with continuously fruitful results.

We can mention only a few of the qualities that mark the evangelistic preacher. He is a humble man, deeply aware of his own sinfulness and need of God’s grace. He is a diligent man, continually growing through reading, meditation, and study. He is a praying man, who pours out his heart before God for the salvation of those around him. He is a concerned man, burdened for the people and their eternal spiritual welfare. Above all, he is God’s man, one in whom Christ is clearly seen in word and deed.

The Message

God’s man has a primary message, the message of the Gospel. Redemption is clearly understood in his own mind, truly experienced in his own heart, and plainly presented to his people. Every sermon in his preaching makes prominent the Lord Jesus Christ. His atonement and saving grace, His greatness and righteousness, His kindness, patience, and example permeate and color every sermon. Never can the evangelistic preacher say too much about his Master nor commend him too often to his hearers. The words of St. Bernard are fitting in this regard. “Yesterday,” he said, “I preached myself, and the scholars came up and praised me. Today, I preached Christ and the sinners came up and thanked me.” Christ-honoring sermons are sealed by the Holy Spirit with his blessing.

For 21 years William Grimshaw ministered at Haworth. Concerning his work there he said, “I preach the Gospel—glad tidings of salvation to penitent sinners, and a chapter expounded every Lord’s Day evening. I visit my parish in 12 places monthly, convening six, eight, or ten families in a place allowing people of the neighborhood that please to attend the exhortation. This I purpose to make my constant business in my parish so long as I live.” Wherever he went this man of God took his Master with him, and spoke plainly to people about their souls. As a result, previously unconcerned multitudes began to think about spiritual things. Year after year the Holy Spirit used Grimshaw’s sermons to convict and to convert.

In 1749, John Berridge began his six-year ministry at Staplefort. Here he took great pains to impress his parishioners with the importance of sanctification. He preached simply but appealingly. He was diligent, too, as a pastor. Yet his ministry seemed without fruit. Why? He himself says he was ignorant of the Gospel. He had no message of salvation by grace, Christ crucified, or the necessity of conversion. Christianity was for Berridge like a solar system without a sun. One morning while meditating on Scripture, these words came to mind: “Cease from thine own works, only believe.” At once he gained spiritual sight and insight. He says of his former ministry: “I preached up sanctification by the works of the law very earnestly for six years in Stapleford and never brought one soul to Christ. I did the same at Everton for two years, without any success at all. But as soon as I preached Jesus Christ, and faith in His blood, then believers were added to the church continually.”

“Evangelical but not evangelistic? It is a lie. No man is evangelical without being evangelistic. A man tells me that he is evangelical, that he believes in the ruin of man and the redemption provided by Christ and yet is not evangelistic. Then he is the worst traitor in the camp of Christ.…”

John Bunyan gives this testimony concerning his message: “In my preaching of the Word I noticed that the Lord led me to begin where His word begins—with sinners; that is, to condemn all flesh and to state is clearly that the curse of God is upon all men as they come into the world, because of sin. Then I try to show everyone the wonderful Jesus Christ in all His offices, relationships, and benefits to the world and try to point out and condemn and remove all false supports on which the world leans and by which it perishes. After doing this God led me into something of the mystery of the union of Christ, so I showed them that too.”

In simple terms, the Gospel message is this: First, God’s love for man. “God so loved the world.” “God commendeth his love toward us.” Love seeks unity with the loved one. Second, man’s estrangement from God because of sin. “All we like sheep have gone astray.” We are “aliens,” “strangers,” “without God—without Christ—without hope in this world.” Third, God’s provision of reconciliation to himself through the person and work of Jesus Christ. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself.” We are “made nigh by the blood of Christ.” Fourth, the new life in the family of God. “All things are become new.” This the Gospel we are called to preach. No other will do. The inscription on the great bell in St. Paul’s Cathedral, London, could well be every minister’s motto: Vae mihi si non evangelisavero, that is, “Woe to me, if I preach not the Gospel.”

The Method

Among the most important things in the method of evangelistic preaching are clarity and simplicity of presentation. Andrew W. Blackwood, in commenting on the preaching of Spurgeon, called it “steeped in simplicity. That is why it attracted the sinner and the blessed saint.” The first qualification of a good sermon is intelligibility. Simplicity, therefore, is vital to its content. On the other hand, a ponderous and philosophical presentation may be an obstacle to comprehension. Augustine once said, “A wooden key is not so beautiful as a golden one, but if it can open the door when the golden one cannot, it is far more useful.” Luther added, “No one can be a good preacher to the people who is not willing to preach in a manner that seems childish and coarse to some.” D. L. Moody knew the power of simplicity, too. The warp of every message was from the Book, the woof from the lives of ordinary men and women. It was William Grimshaw who wrote to John Newton: “If they do not understand me, I cannot hope to do them good; and when I think of the uncertainty of life, that, perhaps it may be the last opportunity, I know not how to be explicit enough.” Plain statement with fervor and love, simple ideas, forceful illustrations, direct appeals to heart and conscience are the elements of effective method in evangelistic preaching.

This is no brief for trite commonplaces, however, or for bald platitudes, and hackneyed phrases. The effective preacher studies diligently, and spares no time in the preparation of sermons. Out of his great reservoir of knowledge, however, his presentation, like that of Jesus, must be reduced to vivid and pictorial terms.

Romaine, an Oxford graduate, gave seven years to produce a scholarly four-volume edition of the Hebrew concordance and lexicon of Marcus de Calasio. His preaching for 45 years in London, however, was known for simplicity, clarity, and forcefulness. Such preaching spurred the eighteenth-century revival in England.

A second necessary component in evangelistic preaching is fervency. The prophet said, “As soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth children.” The man in the pulpit must be earnestly preaching, not for the salvation of the sermon, but for the salvation of the sinner. Used of God for the spiritual awakening of that day, the eighteenth-century preacher preached with fire, earnestness, and conviction. Today’s minister needs the same persuasion that his message is true, that it is of eternal importance to his hearers. With Whitefield the evangelistic preacher needs to pray, “Lord, give me a warm heart!”

Evangelistic preaching is from the heart to reach the heart. John Bunyan wrote in his Call to the Ministry, “And after I have preached, my heart has been full of concern … and I have often cried out from my heart, oh, that those who have heard me speak today will but see as I do what sin, death, hell and the curse of God really are, and that they might understand the grace and love and mercy of God, that it is through Christ to men.… And I often told the Lord that if I were killed before their eyes and it would be a means to awaken them and confirm them in the truth, I would gladly have that done.”

The third characteristic of an evangelistic sermon is its appeal for decision. Evangelistic preaching is personal. The preacher says in effect, “I have a word of God for you which you must do something about.” Evangelistic preaching is a forthright call for a verdict. It does not minimize the sinner’s involvement. “He who, so to speak, believeth not, shall, as it were, be damned,” has no place in evangelistic preaching.

Paul’s preaching certainly included an appeal for decision. After clearly and plainly stating the Gospel as recorded in 2 Corinthians 5, for example, he says, “Now then we are ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ’s stead, be ye reconciled to God.”

Dr. G. Campbell Morgan said this: “I am not sure that the condition of the church might not be expressed in a phrase I once heard … from … one who called himself a Christian. Said he, when raising protest against evangelistic work, with a very evident assumption of superiority and self-complacency, ‘You know, I am thoroughly evangelical but not evangelistic.’ Evangelical but not evangelistic? It is a lie. No man is evangelical without being evangelistic. A man tells me that he is evangelical, that he believes in the ruin of man and the redemption provided by Christ and yet is not evangelistic. Then he is the worst traitor in the camp of Christ.”

While evangelistic preaching involves a man, a message, and a method, it is essentially the work of the Holy Spirit. He it is who empowers the evangelistic preacher, applies the Word, and wins the heart of the sinner. It is all of God and all for his glory.

END

In an article entitled “What Ministers Think of Mergers” (CHRISTIANITY TODAY, November 24, 1961), Dr. Harold Lindsell mentions that probably 90 per cent of the laymen do not favor merger. If, as one of Dr. Lindsell’s correspondents suggested, “most of those who disapprove of merger simply need to be educated in favor of merger,” then my layman’s views may be of interest in evaluating the magnitude of the educational task ahead.

My three brushes with church unity have been on a local church level, on the presbytery level, and on a national level.

In a little New England town I was once a deacon in a small Congregational church which attempted a joint relationship with a neighboring small Universalist church. Both congregations were anemic, and the arrangement was a desperate attempt to ward off possible extinction.

Every service seemed to emphasize the difference between the Unitarian and Trinitarian concepts, even though as individuals we did not feel like fighting over the matter. Difficulties involving such things as the Doxology, the Apostles’ Creed, and contributions to missions finally whipped us. After about one year the relationship was dissolved.

The minor wounds of severance finally healed, leaving only slightly visible scars, and each congregation went its separate way feeling a vague disappointment and frustration. In one sense we did not have strong disruptive convictions. We could find no way to solve our problems.

More recently I joined in an attempt to unite three minimum-sized presbyteries in the same United Presbyterian synod to form a single, more potent organization. After going through all the steps required by church laws, the proposal was accepted by two presbyteries but rejected by the third, and the idea was abandoned. To be sure, the proposed unified body did not represent perfection, and there was room for honest doubt, especially concerning the geographical spread of our combined territory.

However, after mature deliberation, I am convinced that the proposed merger failed because some of us lived in the hills and some of us lived in the valleys. Our differences were that infinitesimal. Apparently the comic strips do not exaggerate the differences between the hillfolks and the flatlanders.

On the national level I was a commissioner to the 1958 General Assembly which joined the United Presbyterian Church of North America with the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. From my present worm’s-eye view I cannot evaluate the four-year-old merger of these two Presbyterian denominations. It seems to me that demands on the local church for money have increased.

In my somewhat limited experience with these three instances of church merger, it has been human and not spiritual difficulties which have been hardest to overcome. I am convinced that human and not spiritual difficulties would be of utmost significance in an extensive merger. I am also convinced that most of the basic reasons for extensive merger are of human and not spiritual origin, and I am not going to be easily bluffed out of my position.

The ecumenical type of thinking is certainly not limited to churches. Where there exist several women’s clubs there will be a Council of Clubs; where there exist a number of technical societies there will be an Engineering Council; where there are labor unions there will be an AFL-CIO.

As Dr. Lindsell succinctly states, “Our age cherishes bigness and monolithicity. This fact is true in business and is becoming increasingly true in religion.”

Corporations merge for a number of reasons: to gain added capital; to gain improved sales outlets; to improve the raw material situation; to decrease competition; to acquire outstanding personnel; to extend production to a more economical level; or to gain patent rights to a new process. Sometimes merger is based solely on the whims of an ambitious individual who would rather run a gigantic railroad than run merely a big railroad.

I strongly suspect that in church mergers there is an ecclesiastical equivalent of every one of the above business reasons plus a few more. Before my denomination becomes the Studebaker-Packard or NYC-Pennsy of the religious world, I want to see a very thorough “report to the stockholders” describing the benefits to be derived.

That church merger should be considered a problem of human origin rather than one of divine origin is important to establish because, even in those churches where the laymen are on equal terms organizationally with the clergy, the laymen will automatically defer to the latter in matters involving divine interpretation.

In reading three different versions of John 17, I find no reasons why I should condone extrapolating that passage into a million dollar boondoggle.

Junketing is not limited to Congressmen. Almost everyone likes to attend conferences and conventions, address his fellow men, and be in turn addressed. He may be a scientist, service clubber, labor delegate, clergyman, or layman. While the urge may be idealistic, it is strictly human. The more abstruse the subjects on the agenda, the greater the variety of attendees, the vaguer the speeches, the hazier the proposals, and the more committees appointed.

Dr. Eugene Carson Blake’s proposed merger contains enough basic difficulties to keep high churchmen jet-speeding from conference to conference for the next five decades. I resent being urged to tithe, then having my benevolence money go for such a purpose.

The Size Of The Flock

Do we really need church union?

Let us wander somewhat afield and consider migratory birds on their annual autumnal pilgrimage. Each flock will have its own flyways and favorite feeding grounds. The older birds will guide the younger birds. Each bird, however, must make the flight himself. He cannot be supported physically by his fellows. The principal requirements to reach the destination are sufficient individual strength on the part of the birds and a true sense of guidance on the part of the leader. The size of the flock is relatively unimportant.

In fact, too large a flock might prove to be a handicap because many of the feeding grounds would be too small. The joining of flocks with different flyway patterns to form a super-flock would undoubtedly be accompanied by much wasted energy and time-consuming confusion as the birds circle and circle, trying to choose a leader and a flight plan. If the birds can arrive safely in small groups, each with its own group habits and flyway patterns, is this not sufficient?

To me Christians are somewhat like the migratory birds, with churches and denominations providing the functions of the groups and flocks. If a denomination does no more than provide meeting places for Christians with similar like and dislike patterns, it has sufficient excuse for being. If the multiplicity of denominations confuses the African aborigine, we owe him no apology.

We who scoff at the infallibility of the pope are expected to accept the doings of our own hierarchy without question. But what choice of actions has the individual Protestant layman who is unenthusiastic about church merger? Here are four possibilities:

1. Open defiance coupled with action outside the church organization. Such action would be counter to church law and as such would be unethical and repugnant to the responsible layman.

2. Open defiance coupled with action inside the church organization. This should be considered only by the naïve. Several denominational governing bodies have already given encouragement to church merger. These bodies can be so effectively manipulated by the hierarchy that any opposition move originating in the grass roots would get nowhere.

3. An organized economic boycott. This is unpromising. It is bound to be sticky, gaining organized support in a congregation for cutting benevolences to some specific level which will permit some favored denominational actions to take place but effectively prevent unwanted ones, such as church merger, from being effected.

4. A restriction of activities to the scope of the local church. This is about the only semi-honorable course left to the layman who disagrees with merger. Certainly neither the local individual church nor its pastor should be penalized for external merger manipulations. A renewed and detailed interest in the local church would leave our denominations with strong foundations no matter how merger winds might blow.

Perhaps, while studying the requirements of big church government, our attention will be inadvertently distracted to the important needs of the local church—the forgotten element in modern Protestantism.

Subway Riders

Empty eyes of city dwellers empty of dreams

And the light shineth

Restless hands of hasty success

Silent lips clamped over unspoken words

in darkness

Unloving neighbors of short duration

hurled through the city in clanking darkness

and the darkness comprehended it not.

GERTRUDE C. SCHWEBELL

The decision of the United States Supreme Court disallowing the New York Regents’ prayer aroused furor in many parts of the country. Another possibly equally perturbing decision is still pending—that concerning the constitutionality of Bible reading in Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Florida public schools. To understand these situations one must understand the changes that have been penetrating the religious life of our nation.

No one questions that our nation, by and large, was founded and established by men of deep religious faith and conviction. Mostly of British background and also of German, French, Dutch, and Swedish heritage, the early settlers were, in the main, of Protestant persuasion. Congregational-Presbyterianism prevailed in New England, and Anglicanism predominated in the South. While some of the middle colonies professed and practiced religious toleration, or even religious freedom, they were the exception.

Our founding fathers considered the relationship of man to his maker a fundamental part of their philosophy of life and believed that human rights were derived from this relationship. They recognized also the fact of their Christian heritage. But they knew history well enough to recognize the dangers of an established religion and saw the necessity of encouraging the free practice of religion in a free society. Accordingly, they wrote this safeguard into the First Amendment to the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the exercise thereof.” By these words they rejected the idea of an established religion and guaranteed personal religious freedom.

They had no intention, however, of thereby encouraging a spirit of anti-religion. As Norman Cousins indicates, “It is significant that most of the founding fathers grew up in a strong religious atmosphere; many had Calvinist family backgrounds. In reacting against it, they did not react against basic religious ideas, or what they considered to be the spiritual nature of man. Most certainly they did not turn against God, or lose their respect for religious belief. Indeed it was their very concern for the conditions under which free religious belief was possible that caused them to invest so much of their thought and energy into the cause of human rights” (In God We Trust, p. 9).

While most of the men who authored our documents of freedom affiliated themselves with Protestant denominations as professing Christians and were influenced by eighteenth-century enlightenment, they nevertheless believed in religious freedom. They were well aware of the discrimination and persecution that followed whenever the colonies superimposed an established religion upon their people. Such evil they were determined to prevent. So they underwrote religious freedom, not to do away with the practice of religion but rather to insure it for everyone. They knew that religion as a whole would be destroyed if each group, in affirming the truth of its own faith, practiced intolerance and bigotry.

Despite this provision by the founding fathers for practicing differences of religious conviction, the nation shared a common bond of unity. As the various colonies ceased to exist legally as independent religiously established units and became a nation, the people of America recognized the fact of a common heritage. This common heritage was not only Christian and Protestant, but Protestant Christianity of Calvinistic orientation. For many years this special kind of faith characterized the American people as a whole. This faith was unique in its ability both to influence the new nation and to adapt itself to a changing environment without sacrificing any of its peculiar genius.

In the early days of American history the chief center of community life and culture was the Church, specifically the Protestant Church. It was the one institution that united people into a cohesive unit. While there were many denominations and sects, they shared a common belief in God, in Jesus Christ, and in the Bible as divinely authoritative. Protestantism also incorporated a healthy individualism that stimulated the nation’s growth. American Protestantism had no ecclesiastical dependence upon churches in Europe. Men were free to preach the Gospel, and even to establish new churches on the growing frontiers of American life. As the newer states matured from their pioneer status, their churches, which were Protestant, effectively influenced the shaping of community life.

The revival services that characterized American Protestantism aided the growth and impact of the Church. Whole communities were changed as thousands of people came under the influence of the Gospel message. In both the East and the West the number of those who professed Protestant Christianity continued to rise. There was virtually no competition. Roman Catholicism was but a small, almost negligible factor in the life and culture of those times. Its adherents were few; in 1787 there may have been 35,000 (Kenneth Scott Latourette, The Great Century, Vol. IV, p. 230) in a total population of about 3,900,000 (in the census of 1790 the total population was 3,929,214), or less than one per cent. Thus while the founding fathers espoused and provided for a pluralistic society, American culture for decades was predominantly Reformed-Protestant in perspective.

During this period in our national life no one seriously challenged the fact that religion (and by religion we mean Protestantism) was an integral part of the American scene. Public education, for example, knew nothing about excluding the major premises of the Christian faith from its pedagogy. Religion, in fact, was the mother of education in America. During the colonial period, the primary schools were conducted in close alliance with the churches. And until the turn of the present century, secondary education, especially in the newer areas of settlement, was provided largely in academies operated under religious auspices and taught by ministers. Most of our colleges and universities, including such revered institutions as Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Chicago, Kentucky, and Vanderbilt, were established by churchmen. The ministry of teaching has been a major contribution of Christianity to American culture (Ronald B. Osborn, The Spirit of American Christianity, pp. 33 f.). Schools were free to teach the Beatitudes or other Scripture passages in entirety. Classes could begin with prayers invoked in the name of Christ. The Bible could be taught and read, and hymns could be sung. Christian holy days, such as Christmas and Easter, could be observed accordingly. The culture of America was predominantly, even profoundly, Christian in the Protestant tradition. No one seriously challenged either this devotion to religious heritage, or the doctrine of religious freedom laid down by our founding fathers.

This situation, however, underwent gradual change. Before 1820 (200 years after our Pilgrim fathers) there were no more than 20,000 immigrants a year, and these were mostly Protestants. Between 1820 and 1860, however, about 5,000,000 immigrants entered the United States, and since then over 35,000,000 have come to our shores. Among these later immigrants were many Roman Catholics and Jews who brought with them—and this is no condemnation, but merely a statement of fact—ideas and cultures that differed extensively from those of the early settlers and founders of our nation.

In the 1820s and especially after the potato famine of 1846 in Ireland, the Irish came to America in great numbers. For the first time in American history our population had a sizable representation of Roman Catholics. Toward the end of the century most immigrants came from southern and eastern Europe and introduced new ethnic groups into our society. While most of these people were Roman Catholic, they incorporated also two sizable new elements, namely, the Eastern Orthodox and the Jewish. America was becoming less Protestant and less Puritan in spirit. We were becoming a more complex and pluralistic society.

Being new, and at first often of lower economic and social status, these new minority groups found it profitable and advantageous to adhere to our predominantly Protestant culture. This was the only way they could progress. There was still no danger to our Protestant heritage, however, and even as late as 1927 foreign observers like André Siegfried could speak of Protestantism as the United States’ only national religion. Someone else observed, however, that “they [the immigrants] still saw the more ancient stamp on our culture rather than the immediate dynamics of the situation.”

The Yearbook of American Churches for 1962 reported that the United States now has 63,688,835 Protestants, 42,104,900 Roman Catholics, 5,367,000 Jews, and 2,698,663 Eastern Orthodox. The Roman church, that for over a century was a relatively insignificant minority, is today a sizable group in our country. The Roman church has increased markedly in number, wealth, and prestige. Its members, by and large, are loyal to their church in active membership and support, while many Protestants, on the other hand, are Protestant merely in name.

Furthermore, America’s new culture is becoming urban centered, and the large cities which dominate this new culture are becoming, or have become, largely Roman Catholic. Cities like Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Cleveland, and Chicago, are all concentrations of Roman Catholic population, and increasingly control the political life of our nation. For the first time in our nation’s history we have a Roman Catholic president, whose election, moreover, was largely carried by the city vote. The majority leaders of both the House and the Senate are Roman Catholic, a situation that 50, or even 30 years ago would have been quite improbable in American life. Whether this change is good or bad is not the issue. The point is that something new has appeared on the American scene, and Protestants must increasingly learn to live with this fact. The Roman church is now a powerful political force in the life of the nation. Its effort to get Federal aid for parochial schools has made many Protestant leaders fearful of this increased power. The doctrine of the separation of church and state has accordingly become a live issue that 50 or 100 years ago, when Protestantism had no competitors on the American scene, was nonexistent, or relatively unimportant.

Likewise Jewish culture has assumed an increasingly important part in American life. For one thing, Hitler’s persecution stirred the Jewish people everywhere to a renewed religious-cultural consciousness that, among other things, brought into being the new state of Israel. The establishment of this national Jewish state has had the active support of thousands of Jews in America. In this resurgence of religious-cultural consciousness, the Jewish people are investing vast sums to educate their youth in the Jewish religion, a revival of Judaism that is being felt in America, too. At inter-faith gatherings here, our Protestant Christian heritage must frequently be adjusted to avoid offending the Jewish faith. Bible readings, for example, must be selected from the Old Testament, and prayer must not be offered in Jesus’ name. And we are pressured to have an open Sabbath in deference to the Jews, who observe Saturday rather than Sunday.

These facts reveal the pluralistic state of our society, for which our founding fathers provided, but with which we have not had to cope seriously until the present time. This development, of course, comes at the expense of Protestantism, which through the years had enjoyed a preferred religious position in America. Whether this status was good or bad is another question. The fact is that Protestantism seemed unaware of what was happening. No longer is old-line American Protestantism in a position to guide the spiritual life of the nation as before. We have reached the place in our national life where many of our theories must be adapted to the practical outworkings of life. To do this is a new experience for us both as Protestants and as Americans and is part of the tension now operative in our approach to the problem of separation of church and state.

Secularism is another element in American life that cannot be overlooked. Many persons either do not believe in God at all, or have so diluted any concept of him as to make him virtually nonexistent. Many young people are being reared in a new kind of faith that makes God quite irrelevant to life. Because of this changing status of religious life in America there has come increased pressure to define what we mean by the separation of church and state, and by religious freedom. For the first time since its founding as a nation, America is being brought face to face seriously with the demands of a pluralistic society.

In a 1952 decision of the Supreme Court, Justice William O. Douglas said, “We are a religious people and our institutions presuppose a Supreme Being.” These words contrast tellingly with the words of Justice Sutherland in an earlier decision of 1931 which refers to us as “a Christian people.” In the 21-year interval between 1931 and 1952 we moved from designation as “Christian” to simply “religious” people. It is doubtful whether we can ever again recapture the former identity. It is conceivable that in the not too distant future we shall even drop the term “religious” in reference to ourselves. If religious faith is to prevail in our pluralistic society, it must center increasingly around the life of our churches. Perhaps this is as it should be. Louis Cassels, United Press religion correspondent, concluded a recent column titled “A Look Past the Prayer Decision” by saying:

The Supreme Court ruling means that Protestant parents must now face up to reality. And the reality is that the average Protestant child is not receiving much religious education. Even if he attends Sunday School faithfully he gets only about 25 hours of solid instruction a year.

Some Protestants have reacted to the ruling by denouncing the Supreme Court and talking about a constitutional amendment to permit the public school religious exercises which parents have found so comforting.

Others, however, are already looking beyond this kind of emotional response to see what constructive steps the Protestant churches can take to provide children with the kind of religious-oriented educational experience which is now quite obviously ruled out of the public schools.

One thing is obvious. Recognizing what has taken place in the American scene, we must go on to meet further challenges that will confront us as we try to define what our founding fathers meant by the separation of church and state.

Preacher in the Red

NO RETURN ADDRESS NECESSARY

I was a minister of one of England’s great old Methodist churches, a splendid edifice dating back to Wesley’s time. Extensive renovation and restoration had been done and I invited an earlier famous and beloved pastor to share in the dedication services.

Seated by his side on the platform I said to him enthusiastically: “Beautiful isn’t it? You see how we have done out the front of the gallery in simple white and gold, replacing that hideous multi-colored blotch of a frieze—that gaudy, tasteless, inartistic abomination unto the Lord. Do you remember it?”

“Yes I do,” he replied. “I put it there twenty years ago.”—THE REV. T. L. BARLOW WESTERDALE, “Camelot,” 12, Cheriton Road, Winchester, England.