Updating the NCC Superstructure

George Williams and James Daane

The General Board of the National Council of Churches at its meeting last month in New York approved a sweeping reorganization of the NCC to go into effect in January. According to council officials, the new bylaws serve both to centralize and coordinate governmental structure and to stress that the council’s authority is derived from its member bodies. They are also said to provide needed organizational flexibility.

Changes include the following:

—The current “confederation of parallel units” (divisions, general departments, and central departments) is regrouped into four divisions: Christian Life and Mission, Christian Education, Overseas Ministries, and Christian Unity.

—Considerable attention was given to the new Division of Christian Life and Mission, which will incorporate the present Division of Christian Life and Work, the Department of Evangelism, the Division of Home Missions, the Department of Worship and the Arts, and the Department of Stewardship and Benevolence.

—Under the heading “Constituent Representation,” a paragraph was added to the bylaws to make it clear that each communion is its own interpreter of the meaning of its membership.

—Membership requirements are spelled out for the first time. The first requirement (which contains the chief theological emphasis) is that, to be eligible, a church body “shall have a basis of association on which the communion exists as a Christian body.”

—Direct voting representation of the communions has been increased from 100 to 216, and a category of thirty-five members of the board nominated from within the council structure has been eliminated.

The list of new bylaws had been prepared two months prior to the meeting, but the board members had not had prior opportunity to read five mimeographed pages of amendments introduced from the floor. This part of the meeting resembled a two-man newscast, with William H. Rhoads of the revision committee taking the board members through the bylaws proper, and Dr. Edwin Tuller, who introduced the amendments for the policy and strategy committee, signing in periodically from a microphone on the floor with late developments.

One or two delegates rose to complain that they did not know the significance of the amendments. During later discussion, another board member noted that in the proposed superstructure the Department of Evangelism would be a commission (a subsidiary unit). Still another suggested that if consolidation was going to go as far as the present plan called for, the council might as well consolidate everything into one division.

In general, however, the bylaws and the amendments were approved with little comment from the floor. The significance of the reorganization had been interpreted earlier by Dr. R. H. Edwin Espy, the general secretary.

In other business, the council approved with little discussion an official “pronouncement” recommending “further experimentation with, and continuing evaluation of, dual school enrollment for classroom instruction.” The plan, also known as “shared time,” would enroll schoolchildren simultaneously in church-related and secular schools. The council’s statement emphasized the benefits of the plan for “those who, for conscience sake, maintain separate schools.”

Some educators look to the plan as a practical approach to the issues accentuated by the Supreme Court rulings on prayer and Bible reading in the schools, though reservations have been expressed about the compartmentalization of the school curriculum into “sacred” and “secular” subjects. Communities in thirty-five states are now trying out some form of dual enrollment.

Also approved at the board meeting was a resolution on “Jewish-Christian Relations” urging further dialogue and stressing that the events surrounding the Crucifixion should not be used to “fasten upon the Jewish people of today responsibilities which belong to our corporate humanity.”

The Division of Home Missions presented a report on the “Delta Ministry,” an antipoverty and social-redevelopment campaign for the Mississippi delta area officially scheduled to begin in September. The “ministry” is to be carried out by the council on a non-discriminatory basis and consequently has already run into some opposition. One aspect questioned in some quarters is the support and aid of the World Council of Churches for the project—already asked for and granted. It is, however, fully endorsed by the General Board. The focal point in each county is to be an indigenous community center for education, training and communication.1One Southern board member rose to plead that the project leaders “coordinate what is done with the local people.… We don’t want a march of professionals into the Delta.” The Rev. Paul R. Madsen, chairman of the sponsoring Division of Home Missions, replied that Mississippians were on the national advisory committee.

The board adopted a resolution calling for a “special emphasis on peace during the triennium 1963–1966.” It also urged that every effort be made to “realize the full potential of the Church Center for the United Nations,” that priority be given the special emphasis, and that adequate funds be made available for the necessary staffing and program.

The Long Hot Summer

Last May a minister from the Midwest went to Canton, Mississippi, to stand by as a “moral presence” during a voter-registration drive. A policeman asked him to identify himself. “I’m with the National Council of Churches,” he said. The policeman reacted with obscene language and roughed up the minister with the butt of a rifle.

This incident, reported last month at the National Council’s General Board meeting, was a kind of overture to the “long hot summer” the NCC Commission on Religion and Race sees ahead. Its policy is nonviolence, but the chairman, Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, believes that tire civil rights movement, in which the commission is wholeheartedly engaged, will bring violence with it, and he is undeterred by its implications.

This summer more than 1,000 students are expected to aid in voter registration in Mississippi. Civil rights groups in the state are doing the recruiting, and the National Council is providing orientation and training. It has also enlisted the aid of lawyers and ministers, who will act in an advisory capacity and serve as a “moral presence” during registration drives.

It would be hard to name a National Council project that has aroused Southern anger as this one has. The Commission on Religion and Race was commended for its work by the General Board this month (Dr. Blake said that he was not aware of any negative votes cast); but many Southerners, among them those who would call themselves moderates on the civil rights issue, regard the voter-recruiting program as an invasion and resent the National Council’s involvement in it and other projects. For example, it was reported at the NCC board meeting this month that some churches were striking from their budget the fund for the council’s Delta Ministry (see “Updating the NCC Superstructure,” p. 33). Some persons wonder why the council is pushing a civil rights program in Mississippi but says nothing about acts of crime and racial violence that have occurred in subways a hundred yards away from its New York headquarters. Dr. Blake says that the council’s activities on behalf of racial justice are pursued in the North just as vigorously as in the South.

The Commission on Religion and Race points out that it did not recruit the students but that it does want to influence the movement for the good. It sponsored a training program for the volunteers to be held during the second half of June at the Western College for Women in Oxford, Ohio. The commission is cooperating with the Council of Federated Organizations (COFO), which coordinates the work of the major civil rights organizations in Mississippi and is recruiting the students for the voter-registration drive.

The General Board reviewed the commission’s first year of operation last month, commended it, and recommended “no change in the mandate.” It suggested that the commission strive for “effective interpretation” to the public and stress the ministry of reconciliation. It also commended the commission’s “thoughtful” approach to the question of obedience to law and encouraged it to “continue study of the issue.”

The wording of the last item gave the barest hint of a question mark. The commission has on occasion acted in violation of various local ordinances in behalf of constitutionally guaranteed civil rights. And the legal question could very well arise again this ssummer, for it was reported that the Mississippi legislature has prepared laws to deal with the registration drives. “People say, ‘Why are you going to stir things up in Mississippi?’ ” said Dr. Blake. “Things are stirred up. We want to make things possibly peaceful, and possibly successful.”

Dealing With Geography

The 294 delegates to the General Synod of the Reformed Church in America, meeting in Buck Hill Falls, Pennsylvania, last month, found that the roughest section of the rocky road to church union was the section within their own borders. Recommendations that had been proposed by a joint committee of the RCA and the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. and had been adopted by the Presbyterian U. S. General Assembly without any discussion precipitated a long and tortuous debate within the General Synod of the 378,000-member RCA.

Although the church sings, “In Christ there is no east or west,” the debate on church union revealed that the Reformed Church in America does have its east and west, at least in the minds of its members, who either constantly affirm it or constantly deny it. Yet on the last full day of its synodical gathering, the RCA inched toward closer association with the so-called Southern Presbyterians. It was a long, tumultuous session, lasting from 9 A.M. until 1 A.M. the next day. The session was marked by theological debate, sharp criticisms, heavy emotionalism, personal confessions of both faith and error, parliamentary snarls, stalling tactics, circumventing motions, and moments of confusion, frustration, and levity. At the call for adjournment, some devout voice cried, “Praise the Lord.”

There were seventeen overtures concerning church union and merger. Three called for a crash program that would move toward speedy union with Southern Presbyterians, and two called for a decision to cease and desist from all church-union conversations. Adjudication of these and the adoption of a theological statement, “The Witness of the Reformed Churches,” elicited a warm debate fired by a sentence in the theological statement that asserted, “We begin with the simple admission that in a real sense we have nothing distinctive to say and we rejoice in this admission.” Intended as an assertion that the RCA is not a sectarian church but one grounded in the universal, catholic, Christian tradition, the sentence challenged delegates to assert the RCA’s distinctiveness, something most delegates found, not in the witness of the church, but in the quality of the piety and service that the tradition nourishes. Only after this matter was clarified to the satisfaction of the delegates did they adopt the eleven recommendations of their joint committee that proposed various united explorative actions with Southern Presbyterians.

The synod also reaffirmed its decision of 1962 “to take steps looking toward merger with the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. and to hold other union possibilities in abeyance.” The last part of this decision was the 1964 synod’s answer to the suggestion of Southern Presbyterians that union discussions be widened to include the United Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. Many delegates expressed fear that union with Southern Presbyterians would soon involve them in possible union with the 3.3 million United Presbyterians.

On that same day—which must have seemed to some delegates “the longest day”—the synod: rejected by a 167–114 vote a proposal that would have permitted women to be ordained to church offices; called for voluntary abstinence from smoking, and for “understanding” toward those caught in the habit; approved a statement that social dancing is good or evil depending upon the participants and the circumstances; reaffirmed an earlier endorsement of integrated housing and encouraged its membership to end racial discrimination and “to maintain active contact with Councils on Human Relationships and similar organizations which are active for this purpose in various local situations”; rejected a floor motion to support the Becker amendment and sent it to a committee for study; and reaffirmed its 1962 decision urging its membership to “stubbornly resist” attempts to remove religion from public schools.

If the ecumenical discussions of the 1964 General Synod of the Reformed Church in America revealed something of the church’s own “east and west,” they also revealed that theological vitality, respect for biblical teaching, and deep spiritual concern are the church’s overriding and unitive characteristics. The oldest church in America with continuous service and worship is made up of descendants of some of the first to set foot on American soil as well as latter-day Dutch emigrants. Under its president, Dr. Verne Oggel of Glen Rock, New Jersey, it revealed that it still has enough theological concern to view ecumenical matters from a theological perspective. It refused to go open throttle down the ecumenical road without some assurance about where the road leads. It isn’t at all sure it wants to go north by going south.

JAMES DAANE

Theology

Near to the Heart of God

Charles W. Koller

Text: O Lord, how long shall I cry, and thou wilt not hear! even cry unto thee of violence, and thou wilt not save!… Thou art of purer eyes than to behold evil, and const not look on iniquity: wherefore lookest thou upon them that deal treacherously, and holdest thy tongue when the wicked devoureth the man that is more righteous than he?… I will stand upon my watch, and set me upon the tower, and will watch to see what he will say unto me.… And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the vision and make it plain.…

—Habakkuk 1:2, 13; 2:1, 2

1. The Book of Habakkuk reveals the deepest gloom in Judah’s long night of apostasy and peril preceding the Babylonian captivity.

The world outlook was grim and threatening. It was a time of mighty upheavals. The great Assyrian empire was disintegrating; Babylon and Egypt were locked in a titanic struggle for world supremacy. Caught between the two was the tiny kingdom of Judah. Israel had been conquered and her people taken captive, and Judah was on the way. It was a time of ruthless conquest, bloody suppression, and merciless tyranny.

The internal outlook of Judah was hardly less grim and threatening. There was widespread wickedness, violence, injustice, and idolatry. The masses were dulled in conscience and calloused by long exposure to danger. Unmoved by the warnings and pleadings of the prophets, they showed the unconcern of a people living complacently on the slopes of a smoldering volcano.

Habakkuk, agonizing over the delinquencies of his own people and the wicked expansionism of pagan empires, and sensing that disaster is in the offing, cries out, “O God, why don’t you do something!”

2. The prophet, in his perplexity and distress, finds the only way out of the dark, the only true refuge, near to the heart of God. Symbolically, he speaks of ascending the water tower and there waiting on God.

Here he sees, through the deep gloom, light-beams from some of the brightest stars of God’s heaven. God was speaking to him as He spoke to one of our missionaries at her lonely outpost during World War II. A night-time bombing raid by enemy airmen was raining death and destruction from the sky. Helpless natives were trembling in the pitiable shelter of their huts. In the midst of panic and horror, the missionary looked up and saw, by the grace of God, the stars above the bombing planes. To her, in that desperate moment, they were the silent sentinels of the eternal, unchanging sovereignty of God, who never forsakes his own and never forgets a promise. Immediately she became quiet within, and her spirit was fortified for that harrowing ordeal.

Habakkuk, from his vantage point near to the heart of God, gains new insights for the warning of the wicked and the encouragement of the righteous.

I. The Woes Of The Wicked

Five times he hears the voice of God in thunderous denunciation.

1. Woe to the aggressor who, with insatiable greed, “increaseth that which is not his” (v. 6). Here the primary reference is to the Babylonian empire, drunk with power, steadily enlarging itself through conquest, irresistible in its advances and seizures. The descending judgment of God falls in the familiar pattern, “They that take the sword shall perish with the sword” (Matt. 26:52). How consistently this has been true the history of kingdoms and empires abundantly demonstrates.

2. Woe to the covetous plunderer, who craftily “sets his nest on high,” to make his spoils secure (v. 9). The primary reference is to the Edomites, who lived among the cliffs in the semi-desert area south of the Dead Sea. From their lofty fastnesses they made raids upon the neighboring lowlands, and they stored their plunder in the almost inaccessible cliffs. To the Edomites, the Lord speaks through the prophet Obadiah: “Though thou exalt thyself as the eagle, and though thou set thy nest among the stars, thence will I bring thee down, saith the Lord” (Obad. 4). The emphasis of Habakkuk is upon the fact that the plunder will not remain hidden. “The stone shall cry out of the wall,” and the beams and timbers shall echo the accusation. Sooner or later every dishonest dollar will avenge itself, as the prophet Ezekiel points out: “They shall cast their silver in the streets, and their gold shall be removed: their silver and their gold shall not be able to deliver them in the day of the wrath of the Lord” (Ezek. 7:19a).

3. Woe to the destroyer who builds upon the destruction of others (v. 12). The judgment is of the Lord, and not of man. “Except the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it” (Ps. 127:1a), whether it be the tower of ancient Babel (Gen. 11:4–9) or the wall of modern Berlin. The Judge himself has been an eye-witness to every crime, every tear, every drop of blood that has been shed. What he said to Cain, the first murderer, he will say again to every mass murderer or individual killer, “Thy brother’s blood crieth unto me from the ground” (Gen. 4:10).

4. Woe to the debaucher “that giveth his neighbor drink” (v. 15). Surely no greater menace threatens the moral and spiritual life of our nation than the rising tide of alcohol that is sweeping across the land. “Drink” has proven itself the archenemy of everything that is essentially Christian and is probably the greatest single destroyer of the souls of men. Recent statistics indicate approximately five million drunkards, both men and women, with all that this means in lives wrecked, homes broken, crimes committed, and souls doomed. And the end is not yet; the frightening increase of drinkers and drunkenness continues. The percentage of drinkers has risen from 33 per cent to 63 per cent in our generation; 50 per cent more men are drinking; 174 per cent more women are drinking; and 74 per cent of all college students are drinking.

Surely no greater outpouring of the wrath of God will take place on the day of judgment than that upon the makers and sellers of alcoholic beverages and upon the false friend “that giveth his neighbor drink,” thus placing the deadly reptile at his neighbor’s bosom.”

One of the saddest aspects of the problem of alcohol is the easy tolerance into which so many otherwise sensible and discerning people have been lulled. Once, the corner saloon was the menace to be feared. Now, with the expenditure of $250 million a year to glamorize social drinking as an element in “gracious living,” the homes are being invaded with this unholy propaganda by every known means of publicity. If all professed Christians became abstainers, with the courage of Daniel of old, this would be a staggering blow to the alcohol traffic and to alcoholism. Drunkards are recruited, not from the ranks of abstainers, but from moderate drinkers.

One of the most devastating arraignments of alcohol is Upton Sinclair’s book, The Cup of Fury. It records the tragic story of seventy-five victims of alcohol whom he has known. All had attained to fame and fortune and were “men of distinction”; but alcohol became their undoing. The book makes clear the wisdom and moral necessity of total abstinence. A comparable book is that of the American Business Men’s Research Foundation entitled, What’s New about Alcohol and Us? Actually, there is nothing new. Alcohol is what it always was and does what it always did, whether served in cocktails or in some other form, whether one drinks alone or in a group. It is the same whether served in the sacred vessels profaned by King Belshazzar centuries ago, or from dainty goblets in some elegant living room, or from an uncorked bottle passing from one dirty mouth to another in the foulest dive in the underworld. “Woe unto him that giveth his neighbor drink!”

5. Woe to the idolator (v. 19). The pagan Assyrians, Babylonians, and Egyptians were not the only idolators. Among Habakkuk’s own people, as in the days of Moses, Joshua, Elijah, and Isaiah, there were those who practiced idolatry. This was not because they knew no better, with their long tradition of godly training, but apparently because it seemed the expedient and sophisticated thing to do. Political considerations and status-seeking are not of modern origin.

It would be pleasant to assume that the pronouncement against idolatry is no longer relevant. We do not worship “the golden image” or “the molten image,” but how often profit, pleasure, prestige, or public opinion are placed ahead of God! And perhaps we are closer to ancient Israel than we realize. We do not bother to fashion an image; we just worship our gold without melting it, and our greenbacks without taking them out of the bank.

The prophet Habakkuk was not left in a spirit of depression. Near to the heart of God he gained new insights into the woes of the wicked; and there were further insights into the blessedness of the righteous.

II. The Comfort Of The Righteous

Three stars of hope never cease to shine in the believer’s firmament.

1. The just shall live by faith (v. 4). His reliance is not upon defensive armaments but upon spiritual defenses and resources from Almighty God. “Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the Lord our God” (Ps. 20:7).

Faith is the life of God in the heart of man. “… Christ in you, the hope of glory” (Col. 1:27). Besides this hope, there is none other. Salvation is not by merit, but by relationship. The household of God is for the children of God. In the Scriptures, the children of God are sharply distinguished from the rest of humanity. To unbelievers Jesus denied the fatherhood of God. “Ye are not of God.… If God were your Father, ye would love me.… Ye are of your father the devil …” (John 8:47, 42, 44). No less clear is that further reference: “the children of God … and the children of the devil” (1 John 3:10). Thus the fatherhood of the devil is no less a scriptural doctrine than the fatherhood of God.

Faith guarantees the survival of the soul through the most perilous night. “… The Lord knoweth them that are his” (2 Tim. 2:19a). “He calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out” (John 10:3b). He identifies his own even in the largest flock; he finds his own even in the darkest night; he reads the fine print of the soul when all the lights are out.

2. The truth shall prevail. “The earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea” (v. 14). Here is an assurance to treasure in the dark days when all the trends and appearances are running to the contrary, as in the days of Habakkuk.

The Satanic zeal with which false religions and philosophies are being propagated fills the thoughtful believer with dismay and seems destined to win the world. With the closing of mission fields, the suppression of the truth, and the persecution of believers in many areas of the world, surely the world does not appear to be in process of being “filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord.” As a matter of fact, the growth of the non-Christian population of the world is so outstripping the growth of the Christian population as to make Christianity, percentagewise, a steadily dwindling minority. Only the long look can sustain the believer’s faith; without it he might well despair.

The destructive teaching of many educational institutions is producing skeptics and agnostics and is threatening to undo the work of our Christian homes and churches. Religion must not be taught; but religion can be undermined, at will. One minister, telling of his own experience in one of our great universities, recalls that he was one of thirty-three candidates for the ministry in the freshman class with which he entered. At graduation, four years later, thirty-one of the group had “lost their call,” and only two went on to seminary training. But “truth crushed to earth will rise again; error, writhing in pain, will die among its friends.”

3. The Lord is in his holy temple (v. 20), with something to say to every listening heart. However dark the night, he is always accessible, ready to bless, responsive to those who seek him. “Here bring your wounded heart, here tell your anguish; earth has no sorrow that heaven cannot heal”—no problem that heaven cannot solve. Habakkuk was not the first, nor the last, to cry out in agony of soul, “Why …? O Lord, how long …?” And he was not the only one to find his answer in the holy temple of his Lord.

The Psalmist Asaph, centuries before, had been grieved and perplexed by the prevalence of evil and the prosperity of the wicked. “It was too painful for me, until I went into the sanctuary of God; then understood I their end.” In the holy quietness of the sanctuary, God spake to his heart; there he saw what he had not seen before. As a result, his spirit was revived, his soul was fortified, and he closes that beautiful Psalm on a high note of grateful praise: “It is good for me to draw near to God …” (Ps. 73:3, 16, 17, 28).

Every believer will find, like Habakkuk and like Asaph, that “it is good to draw near to God.” Private devotions are indispensable; likewise, the family altar; but let not the believer forget that “the Lord is in his holy temple,” with further blessings not otherwise to be attained. It is in the Lord’s house, on the Lord’s Day, with the Lord’s people, that a man is most likely to see himself as he is and to hear the call of God to higher ground. In the Lord’s house we are reminded that our problems, perplexities, and distresses are not unlike those of previous generations. The world outlook is filled with forebodings of disaster; and in the homeland, with sickening monotony, the statistics on all forms of evil are rising from year to year. How long will God forbear? “Take courage,” Habakkuk is saying to the believer. “Draw near to the heart of God, and be assured, the just shall live; the truth shall prevail; and God is ready at this very moment to fortify the believer and to save the lost.”

Near to the heart of God, Habakkuk saw the light.

Coming from the presence of God Habakkuk reflected that light, like Moses, who came from prolonged fellowship with his Lord with such a radiance upon his face that people were actually afraid to come near him (Exod. 34:29, 30). Similarly, the mother of John Wesley had learned the secret of spiritual replenishment near to the heart of God. With her large family of children, there were times when the atmosphere of the household became tense and difficult. At such times she would quietly slip away. When she returned, it was with a serenity and poise that the children did not understand until years later. “They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength” (Isa. 40:31a).

A traveling man brought his wife a little souvenir—a phosphorescent matchbox that was supposed to glow in the dark. When he turned out the light to demonstrate its use, there was not even the faintest glow. Disgustedly, he concluded that he had been cheated. The next day his wife examined the gift more closely and found an inscription in tiny letters, “If you want me to shine in the night, keep me in the sunlight through the day.” She did as directed, and that night after dinner it was a pleasant surprise for her husband when she turned out the light and the matchbox shone with a brilliant glow. Thus only can believers “shine as lights … in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation” (Phil. 2:15).—Chapter 9, “Near to the Heart of God,” from Sermons Preached without Notes, by Charles W. Roller (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1964). Used by permission.

The Minister’s Workshop: The Primacy of Expository Preaching

We announce with regret the retirement of Dr. Andrew W. Blackwood from his responsibility for The Minister’s Workshop, to which he has made such an outstanding contribution. In his place, Dr. Charles W. Koller, president emeritus of Northern Baptist Theological Seminary, will share this department with Dr. Paul S. Rees.

Expository preaching is only one of several types of preaching that have been mightily used and mightily blessed of God. A study of the great sermons in sacred literature reveals so much overlapping among these types as to make strict classification impossible. Nor is it essential for any given sermon to be purely topical or purely textual or purely expository. But in order to be well received, the sermon must have unity, structure, aim, and progression; it must be sustained by biblical authority and intelligently presented. Expository preaching would surely be far more popular than it is if it were more generally well done.

Textual preaching has much to commend it; likewise, topical preaching. No one method should be employed exclusively. But as a prevailing method, for year-round ministering, expository preaching has the greater potential for the blessing and enrichment of both pastor and people.

Expository preaching generally makes use of more scriptural material than textual or topical preaching. Through biblical truth, God gives prompting and direction for Christian living, and expository preaching as a prevailing method is likely to prove more helpful than other methods in developing a people rooted and grounded in the Word of God. Only when the believer has been thoroughly indoctrinated in the Holy Scriptures is he adequately fortified in the hour of temptation and able to say, like Jesus in the wilderness, “It is written” (Matt. 4:4, 7, 10). Too many well-meaning believers are coming to grief in our generation of widespread moral ambiguity because they do not know what is “written.” A perennial emphasis on expository preaching may well be our best answer to the challenge of widespread biblical illiteracy.

In biblical preaching, the minister himself is the first to profit from the riches he discovers. Thus living with the Bible, he is constantly bringing himself and his people under the judgment of the Word of God; and as he extends his range of scriptural truth, this wider coverage makes for a wholesome balance and helps to prevent the disproportionate stressing of certain truths to the neglect of others.

“Problem preaching” and “life situation preaching” are definitely useful and should not be disparaged. But expository preaching, with reasonably broad coverage of the Bible, made alive and relevant to the present age, may help more people by dealing with a wider variety of problems and life situations. Problems that are too delicate to be handled topically may often be handled quite naturally in the course of expository preaching; and thus problems of which the preacher may be unaware may be brought under the light of Scripture.

While there may be a problem in every pew, too much “problem preaching” or “life situation preaching” does not provide the best kind of steady diet. As F. D. White-sell points out, “It tends to make people problem-conscious instead of Bible-conscious and God-conscious.” In a similar vein, W. E. Sangster points out that preaching might become too horizontal, “savoring more of psychology than of religion, more of self-help than of the Bible.” The problem preacher might come to think of people primarily in terms of problems, to the neglect of many areas of truth not so related.

The timeliness that so often is the strength of the “problem” or “life situation” sermon tends to limit its length of life. The expository sermon, on the other hand, may have the advantage of timelessness while lacking nothing from the standpoint of relevance. Along with contemporary application, it carries authority that is often lacking in sermons on contemporary themes with only occasional and perhaps vague references to Scripture.

The resources for expository preaching are inexhaustible. This type demands—and develops—a greater knowledge of Scripture than is necessary for other types. In the same progression, the preacher is challenged by an ever-widening range of possibilities, with endless variety at his disposal. People need and want to hear the Word of God. And the preacher who gives it to them will find his resources growing more abundant with every sermon he prepares.—Adapted from Expository Preaching without Notes, by Charles W. Koller (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Book House, 1962). Used by permission.

Books

Book Briefs: July 3, 1964

A Book That Meets Its Jacket Claims

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Volume I, A—┌, edited by Gerhard Kittel and Gerhard Friedrich, translated by Geoffrey W. Bromiley (Eerdmans, 1964, 793 pp., $18.50), is reviewed by James P. Martin, associate professor of New Testament, Union Theological Seminary in Virginia, Richmond.

In its original German, Kittel’s TDNT has long been a standard and indispensable tool for New Testament studies. Its appearance in a complete and unabridged English translation is a theological event of first importance that should greatly assist American theology to rediscover the Greek New Testament and its eschatological realism in terms of a historical approach to the New Testament and its times. The translation is excellent, which is what we have come to expect from Geoffrey Bromiley. The work has also been carefully proofread. As an example of the printer’s art and as a volume rich in content it is worth every penny of its price.

Twenty-five pages of abbreviations of sources, editions, and works consulted, along with rich documentation in quotations and footnotes, reveal that this is a scholarly production of high order. Greek, Latin, and Hebrew quotations are given in the original. At the same time the value and use of Kittel is not limited to those who want the scholarly apparatus. The English text is also considerable! The book can be read and studied in its own right as a guide to historical biblical theology. Nevertheless, it is not a substitute for the exegetical study of the Greek New Testament but an aid to such study. It is not a direct source for sermons but a tool for understanding the theology of the biblical texts that form the heart and content of the sermon.

This first volume treats approximately four hundred words in articles ranging in length from a few lines to forty or fifty pages. Since words are arranged according to Greek roots, not all words beginning with alpha, beta, and gamma are found here, and conversely, words beginning with other letters are found here if they are formed on roots whose letters commence with alpha, beta, or gamma. Cross references within the body of the book indicate this fact. Thus, for example, apolutrosis (redemption) is not found in this volume but appears in Volume VI under luo (to loose); katallage (reconciliation) is found in this volume because its root is allaso. Kephale gonias (head of the corner) appears under gonia (corner), but huios tou anthropou (Son of Man) appears not under anthropos but under huios (son).

The variety of authors, the long period of time during which the articles first appeared, and the differences in historical outlook and presuppositions among the authors preclude uniformity. But the basic orientation and the wealth of objective findings determine the ultimate worth of the Theological Dictionary. Kittel discusses the history and theology of a word in terms of secular Greek usage (including Hellenistic history of religion), the Old Testament, Rabbinic Judaism, the Septuagint, and the New Testament. Constant discussion of these areas along with Gnosticism and Mystery religions provides an understanding of what the biblical concept is not, as well as the knowledge of what it is. Although some may feel that the “negative” frequently outweighs the “positive” quantitatively, it is necessary to understand that Kittel’s approach is a result of taking seriously the idea of a revelation in history. The materials, for all their diversity, reveal a fundamental methodology that respects the unity of Old and New Testaments, utilizes the concept of a Heilsgeschichte (sometimes strong, sometimes weak) that centers in Jesus Christ, and manifests a respect for biblical realism and Hebraic mentality. One or more of these methodological features may be clearly observed, for example, in such diverse articles as ano, anoteron (above) by Büchsel, gnosis (knowledge) by Bultmann, gala (milk) by Schlier, and apostolos (apostle) by Rengstorf.

The method and theological orientation of Kittel may be best observed, within the compass of a review, by illustrative examples. The article on the verb hamartano (to sin) discusses such matters as Old Testament words (richly detailed), the legal and theological content of the Old Testament concept of sin, sin and guilt, the story of the Fall (Gen. 3), theological nuances of sin in the Septuagint, the concept of sin in Judaism, the linguistic usage and history of hamartano, hamartema, hamartia before and in the New Testament ([1] Synoptic Gospels and Acts; [2] John; [3] Paul; [4] the other New Testament writings). The authorship of this article is particularly mixed. With respect to Paul, it is pointed out that “what Paul has to say about sin is oriented to the relation of God in Christ. Hence it is not an empirical doctrine of sin based on pessimism. It is the judgment of God on man without God as this is ascertained from the revelation of Christ and revealed in full seriousness in the cross of Christ” (p. 308).

On the Adam/Christ typology of the New Testament, Jeremias shows that this is found already in the Marcan account of the temptation. Christ ushers in the paradisial state of the last days when there will be peace between man and beast (Isa. 11:6–8; 65:25). The article on paradise (to appear in Vol. V) elaborates this highly suggestive element of biblical realism. The content of the article on anthropos (man) along with the article on Adam provides necessary correlative material for the term Son of Man (to appear later).

A study of the words associated with the Greek root AG such as hagios (holy). hagiasmos (a sanctifying), hagnizein (to sanctify), is essential if one is to recover the difference between holiness and moralism and thus to capture the nuances and depths of the biblical concept of sanctification. The hagiotes (holiness) of Jesus which strikes terror into the demoniac and forces the revelation of his presence is certainly something different from the morality of Jesus as we customarily think of it in terms of popular religion. As the hagios tou Theou (Holy One of God) Jesus is the Firstborn and Inaugurator of the pneumatic age which will destroy the Kingdom of demons (p. 102). Recognition of Jesus as hagios tou Theou (both by the demon and by Peter in the Johannine account of his confession) involves more than the recognition of the popular Messiah. The material on the Holy Spirit provided in the article on hagios (holy) supplements to a degree the later article on Spirit of God by Schweizer in Volume VI. The noun hagiasmos derives from the verb hagnizein as a nomen actionis. Hence it signifies “sanctifying” rather than sanctification and pertains to a process which has as its presupposition the religious process of atonement (p. 113).

In the article on aletheia (truth) Bultmann writes, commenting on John 4:23. that the addition of aletheia (truth) to the statement concerning worship in Spirit and in truth is an indication that “such worship can take place only as determined by the revelation accomplished in Jesus (4:25 f.), and consequently as determined by the Revealer who is the only Way of access to God (John 1:18; 14:6)” (p. 246). Bultmann’s articles in the Theological Dictionary show little trace of demythologizing since in these articles he is concerned to express historically what the New Testament writers thought, not what we have to think for modern life. It is unfair to Bultmann to argue that he does not know this difference.

Oepke, writing on apocatastasis (restitution, restoration) in the text Acts 3:20, argues that grammatically the relative article cannot be related to chronon (times) but only to panton (all things) and that this means further that panton can only be neuter and not masculine. “This also means that apocatastasis cannot denote the conversion of persons but only the reconstitution or re-establishment of things. These are restored, i.e., brought back to the integrity of creation, while the promise itself is established or fulfilled” (p. 391). These thoughts should be compared with the article on palingenesia (regeneration, pp. 686–89), where Büchsel relates this concept to the Jewish faith in the resurrection of the dead and the renewal of the world.

The illustrative quotations from Greek literature in Bultmann’s article on gnosis (knowledge) are especially full and rich, a feature expected in Bultmann’s work. Bultmann writes that in First Corinthians Paul maintains the uniqueness of genuine Christian knowledge but in so doing appropriates to some extent the vocabulary and approach of the Gnostics. Paul concedes that the Christian, too, has a sophia (wisdom) that makes possible for him a ginoskein (knowing) of the divine plan of salvation, a knowledge that penetrates the deep things of God because it rests on the divinely given Spirit. But the knowledge of the one God, in Paul, is not theoretical speculation, and knowing does not arise from within man but is grounded on God’s knowledge of man. This knowledge of God in his election of grace, and “to be known” by God is thus to be understood in terms of the Old Testament concept of knowing (p. 709). In John, ginoskein (knowing) means acceptance of the divine act of love in Jesus and obedience to its demand. Pisteuein (believing) corresponds to the Old Testament knowing in Johannine usage, while ginoskein (knowing) lies beyond. Yet the objects of both actions are the same (pp. 712, 713).

The article on graphe (writing) includes discussion of the question of Scripture, including the Judaistic view, and the belief of the early Christians regarding Scripture. The discussion of the gramma/pneuma (letter/spirit) dualism with respect to Second Corinthians 3 and Romans 2:27 f. emphasizes the activity of the Spirit as the key to understanding (pp. 765 ff.). Forgiveness (aphesis) as an eschatological event renews the whole man, in whom sin was not just something isolated and occasional but the power that determined his whole being, and can be received only when man affirms God’s judgment on himself, the old man, in the confession of sins and penitence. “There is thus avoided the legal understanding of the thought of forgiveness as a remission of punishment related only to past events; the future is included in eschatological forgiveness” (p. 512). The article on gune (woman) is strongly historical and provides invaluable information for the interpretation of Paul’s attitudes and judgments. This article can be supplemented by the material on gameo (to marry) and gamos (marriage).

Perusal of individual articles will reveal a diversity of emphasis. Some stress grammatical matters, others historical background, and still others theological interpretation. In the case of the Theological Dictionary, the comments on the dust jacket are for once accurate and reliable judgments on the worth of the book.

JAMES P. MARTIN

The Church And Social Issues

Aspects of Christian Social Ethics, by Carl F. H. Henry (Eerdmans, 1964, 190 pp., $3.95), is reviewed by Harold B. Kuhn, professor of philosophy of religion, Asbury Theological Seminary, Wilmore, Kentucky.

The Church is still seeking for guidelines that will indicate to her the scope of her proper task; perhaps her quest is more eager because of the evident failure of education, public legislation, and mass compulsive techniques to cope with the growing complexity of modern life. This well-written volume represents the author’s quest to discover where the priorities lie in the thrust of the Church into the area of social duty.

The opening part treats the major types of strategy for social change in our day, with a view to finding which is most compatible with New Testament Christianity. Dr. Henry identifies the types as: revolution, reform, revaluation, and regeneration. The first of these is self-explanatory. The second is primarily concerned with the inculcation of ethical values by techniques of education or projection. The third implies the immanence of moral ideals in human experience and suggests basically that when the Good is recognized, men will accept it as a guide for action.

The fourth type of strategy, regeneration, begins with the Scriptures as the basic source, not only of moral ideals, but also of information concerning the possible embodiment of these ideals in human character. It is at this point that the author sees the first three approaches as deficient; that is, they lack a perspective by which human life as it is ordinarily lived may be estimated. As a result, their advocates fail to perceive the lack of dynamic for high motivation in the natural man.

The weakness of the first three strategic approaches becomes most apparent when the Church adopts them as programs for action. It goes without saying that the Church cannot compete with violent revolutionary movements for social betterment, and it is to be questioned whether both reform and revaluation may not be applied with more effectiveness by secular agencies. But when the Christian Church neglects the fourth, she denies the points at which her contribution might be unique.

The author finds in the analysis of “The Christian View of Work” a laboratory technique for evaluating much of the social theory of our times. His conclusion is that when man’s life is viewed as being totally “under God,” there appears a possibility for a maximum expression of the implications of regeneration for man’s common life.

The relation of the Christian to social reform and social legislation receives careful attention in this book. Dr. Henry seeks to find a middle course between the extravagant hopes of such men as Rauschenbusch in the limitless possibilities for social improvement by legislation, and the attitude of ascetic aloofness toward public social action that has sometimes been evident in Christian pietism.

The problem is shown to be that of maintaining a proper balance between a self-identification by the Church with prevailing cultural forms and movements, and an indifference to culture. Our author is keenly aware of the implications of cultural aloofness and inactivity upon the part of the Church. A warning is sounded against the identification of any party or any specific piece of legislation with the “Christian position.” In an imperfect world, division of issues is seldom possible upon such a neat basis; and thus the Christian, in participating in political and social action, must always recognize that any social order in the here-and-now will contain many provisional and problematic elements.

The final chapter, entitled “The Nature of God and Social Ideals,” bristles with elements of challenge for hard thought. The cornerstone of the author’s analysis is that “God is sovereign justice as well as sovereign love,” so that the loss of the former premise leads to anxiety about the latter. Our age is quite willing, on the surface, to sacrifice justice to love; but when in practice justice is bypassed, the natural man is perplexed.

The concluding words are pungent: “… theology that obscures the distinction between justice and grace soon sponsors alien views of social ethics; and any social theory that confounds justice and benevolence will work against a true understanding both of the nature of God and of the character of the Gospel.”

This does not mean that the derivation of a social ethic from the Christian Scriptures is a simple matter. Dr. Henry takes second place to none in his awareness of the detailed problems that confront the Christian as he seeks to make decisions in a complex world upon the basis of biblical data. But he is powerfully correct in his thesis that in the Christian Scriptures may be found an unmistakable expression of the necessary spiritual foundations for a just world order.

HAROLD B. KUHN

Counseling The Broken Man

Unfragmented Man: A Study in Pastoral Psychology, by Hans-Joachim Thilo (Augsburg, 1964, 224 pp., $5), is reviewed by Gary R. Collins, clinical psychologist, Portland State College, Portland, Oregon.

“This book purports to be a cautious effort at assessing the questions which exercise our minds as we care for souls in our day.” With this as his goal, Dr. Thilo begins with a discussion of the relation between theology and psychology. He develops his argument by dividing the book into four parts. Part I, “The Man to Whom We Proclaim,” deals with human development from infancy to old age and discusses problems related to sickness. Part II, “Nature and Method of Our Proclamation,” considers counseling, confession, liturgy, and other techniques of soul-care. Parts III and IV, “The Place Where We Proclaim” and “The Time at Which We Proclaim,” discuss how church architecture, the time of day, and the season of the year can all have bearing on a soul-care ministry. The book’s rather unusual title, Unfragmented Man, reflects the idea that “the many resources of the church can be used to lead … [man] from a fragmented condition to wholeness in body, mind, and spirit.”

Scattered throughout this book are some valuable facts, a number of thought-provoking observations, and several sound practical suggestions to aid the pastor in the counseling aspects of his ministry. As an example, the chapter on youth provides an informative discussion of the skepticism that characterizes many adolescents. Dr. Thilo suggests that young people today live in a goal-less vacuum where a waning of parental authority and a breakup of moral standards leave the adolescent with nothing to replace the fairyland fantasies of childhood. It is observed that as children grow older they even skeptically cast off the Word of God, because Bible events and fairy tales have both been called “stories” and children cannot differentiate biblical fact from fairytale fiction. Practical suggestions for dealing with these and other members of the congregation include a plea for good counseling technique and several worthwhile ideas about effective counseling rooms.

Unfortunately, these more enlightening portions of the book are hidden in difficult-to-read prose and somewhat rambling, poorly organized chapters. In spite of his counseling experience and obvious Freudian influence, the author shows a lack of psychological sophistication and a tendency to oversimplify complex personal problems. The chapter on theology and psychology, for example, really deals with theology and medicine, since clinical psychology is mistakenly considered to be inseparable from medicine. It is not until we reach a chapter on the unconscious that mention is even made of such common theology-psychology conflicts as the relation of sin, guilt, and responsibility to mental illness, or the tendency of some theologians to think that all personal problems are basically spiritual.

This book deals with pastoral psychology, but can there be a scriptural or psychological rationale for the suggestion that persons “close to mental illness” should not be allowed to confess sin because, they are “not all capable of recognizing or receiving the gift of forgiveness”? Can we agree with the assertion that since pastoral counseling “must go through the stages of mistrust, affection, love, and hatred between therapist and patient … whoever does not want this … ought not to be a practicing pastor”?

Dr. Thilo’s work presents some interesting and helpful information, but his main concern seems to be the presentation of a psychological rationale for established procedures of liturgy and forms of worship. The rationale is esoteric and not very convincing.

GARY R. COLLINS

The Christian Negro

The Negro Church in America, by E. Franklin Frazier (Schocken Books, 1964, 92 pp., $3.50), and The Story of the National Baptists, by Owen D. Pelt and Ralph Lee Smith (Vantage, 1960, 272 pp., $3.75), are reviewed by Jesse Jai McNeil, lecturer in social ethics and church and community, California Baptist Theological Seminary, Covina, California.

At a time when the integrity of white American Christians is being acutely tested by their demonstrated commitment to a racially inclusive church, the appearance of The Negro Church in America will undoubtedly do much to provide historical perspective, clarify thinking, reveal misconceptions, and sober the expectations of both Negro and white Christians who advocate or resist the racially integrated church.

Many Caucasians fear that Negroes will overrun their churches once an open-membership policy is practiced; that large numbers of Negroes are so anxious to join white American churches that they will not hesitate to turn from their own churches and racial religious heritage. Negroes have other ideas about racially integrated churches. While many already feel at home in white churches and find the religious forms and expressions there more compatible with their own education, tastes, and style of life, the basic concern of most Negroes is that they not be denied membership in any church, whether they take advantage of membership privileges or not. On the other hand, an increasing number of Negroes today are rejecting the Negro church—without a full appreciation of how deeply their racial experience is imbedded in their souls.

With this book Dr. Frazier, who until his death in 1962 was a world-renowned sociologist and authority on the Negro in the United States and the Negro family, has broken some new ground in the area of the Negro’s religion and culture. The book makes a valuable contribution to the sociology of religion in America.

Dr. Frazier attempts to show the singular role of the Negro church in the Negro’s struggle for survival, identity, racial solidarity, stable family life, and racial significance (p. 30). He accomplishes this through a profound and acute historical and structural analysis of Negro life in America, beginning with the days of slavery—a method characteristic of the few but scholarly and significant studies that he wrote.

An instance of the author’s insight is his rejection of the idea that the method of non-violence in the Negro’s struggle for freedom and justice can be credited to the influence of “Gandhism.” He sees in this struggle the expression of the Negro’s racial religious experience (p. 75) and implies that Negroes will not easily free themselves from its influence (p. 70 f.).

While admitting that the growing secularization of the Negro church has lessened its influence among Negroes, Frazier also observes that the Negro church is adjusting to the fact of a secularized life through an attempt to achieve secular relevance. This adjustive process is currently symbolized by the rise and the wide popularity of the gospel singer (p. 74).

Secularized though the Negro church may be, the author contends that it still plays an important though diminishing role in the life of the American Negro.

Anyone interested in the historical roots of the current racial revolution should read The Negro Church in America, and it is also important for students of religion and society. The book is permeated with the authoritativeness that marks all Dr. Frazier’s writings.

Unintentionally, the second book in review here illustrates what Frazier’s research reveals—the influence of the Negro church in the life of the Negro in the United States. The Story of the National Baptists is a popular and well-written history of the National Baptist Convention, U. S. A., Inc. The vision and aspirations of the pioneers of the original National Baptist Convention are recounted. The author goes on to discuss the growing conflicts in Baptist ranks that resulted in a second national Negro Baptist body, the National Baptist Convention, U. S. A., Inc., and to describe the work of this convention’s boards and commissions.

This book, whose story is in some ways seriously fragmented, points up Dr. Frazier’s observation that the Negro church became the one stable institution through which the early Negro could develop his own leadership in religion, business, and group welfare and face the necessity of building his own social and cultural life.

JESSE JAI MCNEIL

Book Briefs

The World Book Encyclopedia Dictionary, 2 volumes (Field Enterprises Educational Corporation, 1963, 2,265 pp., $50.20). Prepared in cooperation with the staff of the World Book Encyclopedia, and geared particularly to the user of that encyclopedia, with graded directions for extending the vocabulary and for writing properly. Beautifully bound, modern syllabication, clear readable print. A fine dictionary for the student.

What Can a Man Do?, by Milton Mayer (University of Chicago, 1964, 310 pp., $5). A brilliant journalist writes with wit and astute observation about many things, including morals and religion.

The Missionary Emphasis of the General Association of Regular Baptist Churches, by William J. Hopewell (Regular Baptist Press, 1963, 153 pp., $2.75).

The Thunder of Bare Feet, by J. Wallace Hamilton (Revell, 1964, 160 pp., $2.95). A clergyman looks at the revolution occuring among the masses and with a sparkling style counters the Communistic with the Christian answer.

The Quest for Catholicity: The Development of High Church Anglicanism, by George Tavard (Herder and Herder, 1964, 227 pp., $5.95). Roman Catholic Tavard’s historical study of “catholicity” in the Anglican church as it developed from the Reformation to the beginning of the present century.

The Living Word, by Stephen F. Olford (Moody, 1963, 58 pp., $1.75). Three evangelical essays on the pre-existent, the creative, and the incarnate Word.

In Praise of Saint Paul, by St. John Chrysostom (Daughters of St. Paul, 1963, 123 pp., $2). Seven sermons on Paul by Chrysostom.

In the Midst of Plenty: The Poor in America, by Ben H. Bagdikian (Beacon Press, 1964, 207 pp., $4.50). A plea for the needy, sick, young, unemployed, and aged in affluent America.

The Art of Illustrating Sermons, by Ian McPherson (Abingdon, 1964, 219 pp., $3.50). A discussion about sermon illustrations that is as practical as you can get.

The Church, by Giovanni Battista Cardinal Montini, now Pope Paul VI (Helicon, 1964, 232 pp., $5.50). Ten essays that declare what the Roman Catholic Church is and what it is not.

Religion and Social Conflict, edited by Robert Lee and Martin E. Marty (Oxford, 1964, 193 pp., $5). Lectures given at the Institute of Ethics and Society at San Francisco Theological Seminary. For students only.

Doubt’s Boundless Sea: Skepticism and Faith in the Renaissance, by Don Cameron Allen (Johns Hopkins, 1964, 272 pp., $5.95). A discussion of atheism by an author who feels—or fears—that atheism is the deep fear of the orthodox Christian believer.

Variations on a Theme, by Winfred E. Garrison (Bethany Press, 1964, 208 pp., $3.50). A kind of high-caliber cracker-barrel musings on many things by a sharp thinker and good writer who will not be remembered for any great fidelity to the Scriptures.

Who Brought the Word (Wycliffe Bible Translators, 1963, 130 pp., $4.95). The Wycliffe Bible Translators’ own story in picture and word of how they are reaching earth’s remote tribes with the Gospel.

Memorial Messages, by R. Earl Allen (Broadman, 1964, 96 pp., $1.95). Sixteen funeral meditations that are more than poetic recitals about flowers.

Ministers of Christ: A Commentary on the Second Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians, by Joh. P. Meyer (Northwestern Publishing House, 1963, 326 pp., $5). A fine commentary by a professor who has served the Wisconsin Lutheran Seminary for forty-three years.

An Introduction to the Apocrypha: Based on the Revised Standard Version, by Bruce M. Metzger (Oxford, 1964, 274 pp., $7). A comprehensive but concise examination of the Apocrypha, their history and their significance.

To Number Our Days: An Autobiographical Memoir, by Pierre van Paassen (Scribners, 1964, 404 pp., $7.50). A famous Dutchman who can’t get all the religion out of his blood looks wide over life and in vigorous language writes what he sees and how he interprets it.

The Open Church: Vatican II, Act II, by Michael Novak (Macmillian, 1964, 370 pp., $6.50). A fascinating report with detailed coverage of the struggle to open up the Roman Catholic Church to the modern world.

Moral Philosophy, by Jacques Maritain (Scribners, 1964, 481 pp., $7.50). Renowned Roman Catholic Maritain turns his years and talent to present and critically evaluate the great moral philosophical systems of the past. A tremendous study for specialists and students.

The Neglected Factor, by Eric Baker (Abingdon, 1963, 112 pp., $2.25). A discussion of the Beatitudes to show that ethics are an integral part of Christian life and thought.

Personalities of the Old Testament, by Ralph G. Turnbull (Baker, 1964, 151 pp., $2.50). Thirteen short sermons in the biblical tradition that will ignite ideas for the pastor’s own sermons. They are also good reading for laymen.

Theology

The Religious Faith of William Cowper

Peter Steese

William Cowper is known to many only as the author of the words of the hymn “Praise for the Fountain Opened,” based on Zechariah 13:1. But he wrote a significant number of hymns and religious poems, and even his secular poetry frequently reveals his personal faith in Christ’s redemptive power. The gentle piety and humanitarianism of his poetry appealed to many readers among the Anglican evangelicals and the Methodists of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. But the quiet warmth of his verse was a marked contrast to the inner turmoil of his life. Obsessed by fears of failure, Cowper suffered a mental breakdown that terminated his preparation for a legal career in London. He was forced to spend the rest of his life in rural retirement.

During the period following his collapse, he was slowly able to gain a sense of inward confidence and hope under the guidance of his Christian physician. In a letter to his cousin, Lady Hesketh, dated July 4, 1765, Cowper describes the peace he experienced after reading the third chapter of Romans:

How naturally does affliction make us Christians! And how impossible it is, when all human help is in vain, and the whole earth too poor and trifling to furnish us with one moment’s peace—how impossible is it then to avoid looking at the Gospel! It gives me some concern, though at the same time it increases my gratitude, to reflect, that a convert made in Bedlam is more likely to be a stumbling-block to others than to advance their faith.

Two main aspects of Cowper’s religious faith are brought out in this quotation. He often felt the peaceful confidence and serenity expressed in the opening two sentences. At other times, however, especially after fits of madness, he was assailed by doubts and fears of being “a stumbling-block,” actually believing he had been cast off by God for committing the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost.

Some critics have felt that Cowper’s strict religious beliefs were the cause of his neuroses; but the happiest years of his life were spent under the influence of his pious friends—the family of the evangelical clergyman, Morely Unwin, with whom he lived, and the fervent converted slave-trader and neighboring clergyman, John Newton. These friends did their best to keep Cowper occupied in order to prevent recurrences of his fits of depression and madness. They encouraged him to write poetry, and this poetry is the best answer to those who blame Cowper’s mental problems on his religious faith. For the poetry gives a clear picture of his religious faith, a picture that is sometimes clouded when one reads the details of his life.

Cowper collaborated with Newton on the Olney Hymns (1779), a collection popular among the Methodists and other Non-conformists. Most of Cowper’s sixty-seven contributions were based upon Bible verses; “Walking with God,” for example, takes its opening line from Genesis 5:24: “And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.” The poet’s periods of religious doubt are reflected in several places, such as stanza two:

Where is the blessedness I knew

When first I saw the Lord?

Where is the soul-refreshing view

Of Jesus and his word?

But the hymn illustrates how Cowper resolves his doubt as he progresses from stanza to stanza until he finally discovers the assurance he seeks:

So shall my walk be close with God,

Calm and serene my frame:

So purer light shall mark the road

That leads me to the Lamb.

His fits of insanity made Cowper realize how much he needed a close relation to the Lord. In a hymn entitled “Dependence” he attacks those who overconfidently boast of their faith:

Beware of Peter’s word,

Nor confidently say,

“I never will deny thee, Lord,”

But, “Grant I never may!”

Cowper had a very real sense of humility and recognized how far his own ways were from those of God. In “Jehovah Our Righteousness” he shatters the bubble of human merit:

Let others in the gaudy dress

Of fancied merit shine;

The Lord shall be my righteousness,

The Lord forever mine.

In writing these hymns, the poet sought the Scriptures for an answer to his religious doubts and mental turmoils. That these lines are forged in the furnace of bitter experience has made them come alive to generations of Christians. Cowper feels he is an unworthy recipient of divine favor and searches for assurance. In “Praise for the Fountain Opened,” Christ’s forgiveness of the crucified repentant thief gives him renewed confidence.

Lord, I believe thou hast prepared

(Unworthy though I be)

For me a blood-bought free reward,

A golden harp for me!

The deep spiritual thirst the poet feels can be compared to that expressed in Psalm 42:1: “As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul after thee, O God.” The same sense of urgency can be seen in “My Soul Thirsteth For God.” The poet demands to be flooded because the plant that represents his spiritual life is dying.

Dear fountain of delight unknown!

No longer sing below the brim;

But overflow and pour me down

A living and life-giving stream!

Partial measures will not suffice; this must be a complete cleansing experience. He asks the fountain to “overflow and pour me down” much as in the hymn “Praise for the Fountain Opened” sinners must be “plunged beneath that flood.” Cleansing streams or fountains are frequently used images in Cowper’s hymns. “The Covenant” describes God’s grace as a flowing stream “to wash … filthiness away, and “Dependence” defines grace as “the living stream” supplied by “the Lord’s unsparing hand.”

The Christian faith of Cowper is expressed in his secular poetry as well as in his religious verse. The poem Conversation contains a paraphrase of Luke’s account of Christ and the two disciples on the road to Emmaus, which is praised as an illustration of good dialogue.

Now theirs was converse, such as it behooves

Man to maintain, and such as God approves:

Their views indeed were indistinct and dim,

But yet successful, being aim’d at him.

Christ and his character their only scope,

Their object, and their subject, and their hope.…

The Task was written during a period of depression after Cowper had complained to a charming friend, Lady Austen, that he had no subject to write about. She suggested he write a poem about the sofa in his parlor, and he used this as an occasion for a long meditative poem in blank verse. In it are many vivid descriptions of landscape and natural scenery that have led literary critics to label Cowper a preromantic poet. However, Cowper is careful to make it very clear that he is no pantheist—God is not in the mountain, tree, or flower. In Book VI he states that “Nature is but the name for an effect/Whose cause is God.” Cowper talks of many subjects, both religious and secular, in The Task. But his own religious position is clearly stated, especially in Book VI, in which he describes the millennial kingdom and inveighs against the false clergy of his generation.

Cowper’s religious poetry illustrates how he frequently was able to find assurance in periods of doubt and anguish through the words of Scripture. Far from being the cause of his neuroses, his faith was a source of refuge and comfort, and the resolution of many fears can be seen in the poetic movement of his hymns. In his secular poetry, Cowper makes it very clear that he feels Christian faith is necessary in every aspect of life. Many of the problems of his generation are attributed to the sycophantic clergy who deny the Godhead and preach Christ as a man. And it is Book III of The Task that contains the most poignant poetical statement of Cowper’s personal religious experience, his own encounter with Christ:

I was a stricken deer, that left the Herd

Long since; with many an arrow deep infixed

My panting side was charged, when I withdrew

To seek a tranquil death in distant shades.

There was I found by one who had Himself

Been hurt by the archers. In his side he bore,

And in his hands and feet, the cruel scars.

With gentle force soliciting the darts,

He drew them forth, and healed, and bade me live.

The Pennsylvania State University

University Park, Pennsylvania

Ideas

The Ground of Freedom

Freedom is a heritage—a priceless one—but where it is not understood, it may be lost. On the Fourth of July the American people ought not only to celebrate their freedom but also to give some thought to its source and nature.

Freedom is the power of self-determination. This power of self-determination is a dimension of the human spirit. Freedom, therefore, is not the absence of authority but a peculiar form of its exercise. A free man is not one who does whatever his whims dictate but one who determines the character and the direction of his life. He governs himself. The Book of Proverbs describes the free man as one who governs his spirit, and it asserts that such a man is better than he who takes a city. A free society is a people that determines the form and the function of its government and of the structures of its social life.

Since freedom is an aspect of the human spirit, no people on the face of the earth is wholly devoid of freedom. So long as men remain in control of their spirits, they are a threat to every form of totalitarian government. Collectivistic governments are aware of this and therefore attempt to control the spirits of men, to determine the form, direction, and goal of their lives.

Americans ought to know and appreciate the singular glory of their tradition of liberty. They should know and remember with excitement that their experiment in creating a free government and a free society was the first such democratic experiment in the whole of human history. The ancient Greeks experimented with democratic city-states, but even this limited experiment in democracy was built on the foundation of slavery. It is actually true that the experiment in liberty that produced the free American society and its free government had never before been attempted by any people anywhere.

National liberty, however, is not free. It is bought with a price and maintained at the cost of continuous vigilance. We are always in danger of having it taken from us, and wars are the price we have sometimes paid to retain it. It is a sobering thought that our free way of life has cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of America’s young men. Even today this price is being paid in Viet Nam. We are free because some men die. Remembering this, a people that is more free than any other people on earth ought to celebrate the Fourth of July thoughtfully and with a measure of sobriety.

The greatest danger to our national freedom, however, is not from the threat that comes from without but from that which arises within. Freedom is that quality of the human spirit that desires to exercise self-determination. The free man wants to take care of himself, make his own decisions, shape his own life, make his own living. Only insofar as he cannot care for himself, his family, his future does he look to his city, his state, his national government for aid. Similarly, he wants his city and his state to rule themselves by their own acts of self-government. To the extent that he surrenders his powers of self-determination to his city, to his state, to his national government, he surrenders his freedom.

An even greater threat to true freedom is that corruption and debilitation of spirit whereby men lose the ability to rule their own spirits. When this happens, men have lost the power to govern themselves. This has come about through human sin, with the result that men have become the victims of their own habits and weaknesses of their lusts and passions; and it constitutes a profound threat to a democratic form of government. Freedom means self-determination, and democratic government is self-government. Democratic governments as free societies can endure only so long as their citizens retain the ability to govern their own spirits. The society that loses self-discipline cannot long retain a form of free self-government. It is of the essence of a democracy that certain areas of life not be covered by laws. When, for example, obscenity in books and movies must be governed by a network of legislation because society has lost the moral power of self-discipline, the democratic society is losing its freedom.

It is at this point that Christianity has made, and must continue to make, its profound contribution to free society. There are forces within and outside the human spirit that bring it into bondage. In biblical thought, these forces making for bondage are sin and its uncontrollable passions. It is the message of Christianity that Jesus Christ alone can set men’s spirits free by delivering them from the power of individual and social sin, and from the ultimate threat of death.

Jesus said, “If the Son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed.” The Christian is the free man in Christ, and he is essentially free within his own spirit—which is the citadel of freedom—even if he lives in external” bondage. Christians in totalitarian societies are essentially free, as Paul was free in a Roman prison and John Bunyan in an English jail. A Christian is free even in a world of sin, as his confession and rejection of sin reveal. He is free even from death, in his liberating assurance of the resurrection and the life eternal. Through justification by faith he is a free man; being justified he is free to live. Because his past is canceled out, he has an authentic future.

Without Christianity, the grand, historic American experiment in democracy would not have been possible. The continuance of democracy in America depends on the degree to which Christianity flourishes in our land. Our liberty as a free society is grounded in religious freedom. As our national hymn asserts, God is the “author of liberty.”

Freedom is a deep and mysterious thing. It belongs to the very essence of the spirit of man. Misused, it turns into bondage. If it is to be understood, it can be understood only in terms of itself. The ground of freedom—by God’s creation and redemption—lies in itself. Freedom, therefore, presupposes itself. In its deepest aspects one cannot obtain it; one can only possess it. To have freedom, one must be free. It is, therefore, a gift from God—one that comes through Christ. For as Paul said, “For freedom did Christ make you free.”

As we celebrate our national freedom, let us think through the depths of the source and nature of our freedom until we see that every form of our freedom is grounded on that freedom which Christ alone can give. Where this is acknowledged, we can sing with confidence, “Long may our land be bright with freedom’s holy light.”

Peril On The Highways

With the approach of July Fourth, Americans need to think beyond the commemoration of battles and heroes. Recent history presses hard upon the national consciousness a form of blood-letting unforeseen in 1776. On Independence Day we celebrate our liberty and remember those who lived and died for it. In the Revolutionary War some 4,435 gave their lives in battle. But in our weekend celebration the number of traffic fatalities alone will come to between 450 and 550, according to the estimate of the National Safety Council. Thus it takes at the present rate only about nine annual celebrations of our independence to incur fatalities equivalent to the number who died in the war itself.

The gruesome irony does not end there. Last Memorial Day weekend 431 persons were killed on the roads. We were commemorating the fighting men who gave their last full measure. And they were many: since 1917, 53,402 in World War I, 291,557 in World War II, and 33,629 in the Korean War. But in 1963 alone 43,600 of our people were killed in motor vehicle accidents. The total number of such accidents reached a staggering 11,500,000. They resulted in 1,600,000 disabling injuries. They cost $7.7 billion. Experience shows that even now we are enlarging these figures for the statistician who will be giving us a report in 1964.

Twenty-five centuries ago the prophet Habakkuk looked out over his land in the last days of Judah and cried unto God about the violence he saw. Today there is ground for believing that centuries hence our own era will be called “The Violent Age.” Some say that our Western civilization is in its death agonies. If it is, surely one of the signs is our callous unconcern for the carnage on our highways. A calamity taking 43,000 lives would go down in history. But we continue to kill tens of thousands on our roads with comparatively little concern.

A great nineteenth-century hymn voices the prayer:

O hear us when we cry to Thee

For those in peril on the sea.

We need now to pray as well for the many more in peril on the road, as automobiles in statistical effect assume the destructive capability of rockets.

Twenty years ago some 9,000 Allied fighting men died at Normandy for the cause of freedom, which was in the balances. For what did last year’s 43,000 traffic fatalities in this nation die? For a faster society? Must this toll be paid for the affluent society? Do we have to watch silently and helplessly? Are we to rationalize highway casualties into a kind of population control, albeit a heartbreaking and bloody one? And this in contrast to great strides in life-saving through the healing arts!

The social gospel has had surprisingly little to say about the problem. Yet we must ask what implications the Gospel itself has in face of this social evil of increasingly stunning proportions. The Bible says that we hold the gift of life as stewards of God, its giver. A recovery of this truth would bring a needed reformation of Christian responsibility for safety on the highways. Christians are concerned, and rightly so, about civil rights. But what of the basic right to live? Life as God’s gift is precious beyond words. One who regards its extinction with apathy dishonors his Creator.

In recent months CHRISTIANITY TODAY has spoken editorially on the stewardship of life in connection with cigarettes and with alcohol. Concern for this kind of stewardship also points as a signpost to the highways. As we said in a previous editorial, special studies have indicated that as many as half the victims of fatal highway accidents had been drinking. One of the nation’s largest insurers of automobiles reports that over 80 per cent of traffic deaths and injuries can be traced directly to violations of rules of the road. Speeding and failure to yield right of way are also major causes.

Fatalism in the face of such a problem of our society as continuing carnage on the highways is a betrayal of the vigorous spirit which built that society. But there are ameliorating solutions. To see them we have but to look. Perhaps we should do well to look at a country like Norway with its strict regulations against drunken drivers. And why not? Has not a drinking driver turned himself into a potential killer, risking the lives of others for his own convenience—as well as risking his own life?

We need stricter traffic laws and stiffer penalties impartially enforced. Our civic leaders should lead in this area, and they should enjoy the enthusiastic support of their communities. The automobile industry should become involved in programs to awaken public conscience about safety and law enforcement. Additional safety devices must be developed. Seat belts alone, universally used, would save more than 5,000 lives annually.

With their God-given stewardship, Christians should be in the vanguard of such endeavors. The major finding of a test of airmen at the University of Colorado School of Medicine is that those who had suffered accidents were consistently less oriented toward religious values than those who had not. One psychiatrist declares that we drive as we live. Another suggests that speeding may be explained as the desire to recapture the delights of infancy, such as being rocked, tossed, or swung. Speed mania, he says, could be a form of belated revolt resulting from certain childhood problems never resolved.

The Christian is under divine mandate not to kill. But more, his is the priceless heritage of the law of love, which commands not only love for God but also love for neighbor equivalent to love for self. The most basic solution to traffic fatalities is changed men. And it is time for Christians to live like the changed men they profess to be. It seems that the acid test of the law of love in this century may well be located behind the steering wheel of a car. What is it about that wheel which seems to scrape off a code of ethics as one slides behind it? What strange alchemy in the driver’s seat transforms a gentleman into an egocentric menace? Does the traffic intersection negate the Pauline injunction: “Be kindly affectioned one to another with brotherly love; in honor preferring one another”?

With traffic in mind, it would be well for Christians periodically to review the biblical teaching about love especially as it relates to the highways. Love is patient at intersections, and not envious of the driver who got through the light while we were left. It does not seek its own right of way, regardless of the other driver who reached the intersection first. It does not behave itself discourteously. It is not easily provoked, but bears even traffic snarls and endures mistakes that the best of drivers make. Even behind the steering wheel … love is kind.

The Kennedy Mementos

The drugstore in our office building sells a night-light for fifty cents. It is an ordinary night-light, about an inch and a half in diameter. What distinguishes it is the picture of John F. Kennedy on its surface. Advertised as an “Eternal Flame,” it will allegedly burn continuously for six years for about three cents per year.

Kennedy mementos are big business, if show windows in Washington are any indication. One person found the following articles on sale (in addition to the many books, magazines, records, and postcards): a demitasse and saucer; an ashtray with a picture of President Kennedy in the middle; a coffee mug; a beer mug; a miniature JFK rocking chair, with and without a figure of the President seated in it; a medallion incorrectly inscribed with the phrase that, in the inaugural speech, ran, “… ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country” (on the medallion, the second “ask” was replaced by “but”). There were salt and pepper shakers, pitchers, plates, plaques, playing cards, busts, and picture puzzles. There was a “key to the city” with a representation of Mr. Kennedy and a “guaranteed thermometer.”

The distressing thing about these mementos is that one has to be reminded of something so inexpressibly sad in such vulgar and essentially loveless fashion. Perhaps the whole trend indicates a basic human inability to find suitable expression for feelings about death, especially when it is the death of someone whose life meant so much. Perhaps the customers at the drugstore counters who reach for these things they can hold in their hands arc really seeking something else: a way to gather up the fragments of a shattered image, or a message, a word of some kind.

In Christ, God has offered men the final word: “Death is swallowed up in victory.”

Theology

The Forgotten Men

L. Nelson Bell

Scattered around the world, wherever our armed forces may be found, are the forgotten men of the Church.

Have you ever prayed for the chaplains in the armed services? Have you thought of them and prayed for them every day?

Few of these men have people in their congregations who pray for them. They work in the outposts of the Church, often forgotten by those bound to them by church ties and at times merely tolerated by those to whom they wish to minister.

The role of the chaplain is a lonely one. In many areas where our men are stationed, wives are not permitted to accompany them. Separated from home and loved ones these men sometimes find loneliness over-whelming.

On many occasions the writer has visited chaplains. He has found them hungry for Christian companionship, and soon the subject of home and dear ones has come up, showing how real their loneliness is.

Chaplains are also in the position of ministering to those who have not called them. Unlike ministers of churches here at home, these men have not been called by their congregations; and it is not easy to build up the relationships that usually exist in a church here.

Again, chaplains often work in most depressing and discouraging conditions. The greater the need of some to whom they have been sent to minister, the less they may find themselves welcomed by these very persons. Furthermore, the more sensitive a chaplain is to low moral and spiritual conditions, the more depressing he may find his situation to be.

Brightening the picture are those few devoted Christian men who back up the chaplain in his work, share in preparations for chapel services, and prove themselves a strong arm the chaplain can depend on in the conduct of his work.

But a chaplain also works under the handicap of military orders. His work may be regarded as merely a routine to be carried out in compliance with fixed procedures, a routine to which little spiritual significance is attached and from which little of value is expected.

One of the duties of a chaplain and an area of great potential value is counseling with men in trouble. There are those who are sorely tempted to go the way of the world, the flesh, and the devil, but who still have a heart-hunger to do what is right. For such men the chaplain is an anchor in a troubled sea.

Many servicemen—some of them just boys away from home for the first time—are desperately lonely. To them the chaplain can bring comfort and strength, not only by giving them friendly counsel but also by enlisting them in activities that will provide an outlet for their energies and will help to ease the ache of a gripping homesickness.

Some of these men have marital problems. Their wives and children are left at home. Some have wives who add to their burdens by sending complaining letters or by giving evidence of restlessness under the enforced separation. Some men fall in love with women in the country where they are serving, and it becomes the duty of the chaplain to counsel and to help in every way possible in order to prevent a step that may bring disaster later on.

Chaplains also have among their “parishioners” some who resent and reject them. Reminders of home and decent living cause some servicemen to resent the presence of the chaplain; he is an unwelcome reminder of a way of life they have rejected.

In many ways the role of the chaplain is affected by the commanding officer under whom he serves. One chaplain we know had tried for months to clean up an area in Japan where sailors were accosted by prostitutes the moment they stepped ashore, but to no avail.

Then a new officer took command. The chaplain told him of the situation, and the officer went to take a look for himself. He immediately called on the local Japanese mayor and told him that until the district was cleaned up, the entire town would be off-limits to the sailors. Within hours the area was cleared of the undesirable element. The chaplain told me that as long as that commanding officer was stationed in the port, the conditions remained greatly improved.

Some chaplains have the deep satisfaction of hearty support from superior officers in their areas. The officers express that support by attending chapel services and by letting it be known that they are Christians and that they consider the chaplain their spiritual adviser.

One chaplain told the writer of his experience when the American army took over Rome during World War II. Sunday morning the commanding general phoned the chaplain to ask where he was going to preach. Everything was in confusion in the city, and there had been no time to designate buildings for use as chapels. Nevertheless, the chaplain found a deserted church. The general arrived with his aide and sat in the front pew, and the chaplain preached a simple sermon on Psalm 91. After the service the general walked back and forth a few minutes, then turned to the chaplain and said, “Chaplain, thank you. That was just what I needed.”

Such encouragement means much; it helps to counteract the discouragement of trying to minister to hundreds who are utterly indifferent to all attempts to reach them.

But there are compensations for those who labor. One chaplain told the writer of a seriously wounded soldier whose condition was known to be hopeless. From the time he was admitted to the base hospital his Christian witness was felt. His simple faith and his clear affirmation of that faith made an indelible impression on both doctors and nurses.

Late one night the chaplain had finished hospital rounds and was weary in body and mind. As he was leaving the hospital, he felt he should go back to speak to this critically ill man. Retracing his steps, he stopped by the bed of the soldier, who was lying flat on the special frame used for spinal injuries. After a word and a prayer for which the man expressed deep appreciation, the chaplain returned to his quarters.

During the night the soldier died, and, in the chaplain’s words, “the entire hospital was shook up” because of the joyous faith of this lad.

Not only did the chaplain write the wife and parents of this man; later, when he returned to the States, he went to see them and told them of the triumphant life and death of their loved one.

Again we ask: Have you been praying for the chaplains? Are not these men, so far as you are concerned, the forgotten men of the Church?

We know of no group of men laboring under more adverse circumstances. These men need the comfort and strength of Christians here in America who pray daily for them. You who read this can see to it that they are no longer forgotten, and that they are held up in prayer before the Throne of Grace and thus strengthened in the One whom they serve.

Eutychus and His Kin: July 3, 1964

THE EIGHT-DAY WEEK

One of the gifts of my life has been a series of great professors, including Patrick Carnegie Simpson, an Australian turned Englishman. Why do I remember his saying twice in class, “The men a generation ago, if you will just study their pictures, had character in their faces. Look at Gladstone, for example. Where would you find a face like that in public life today”? Since I worry about my face every morning in the mirror, this word of Carnegie Simpson’s is never very far from my mind.

Simpson has a book, virtually unknown, called Recollections. His subtitle is, “Sometimes theological and sometimes interesting.” I can’t tell you where to get it, but I am delighted to have it myself. He tells in there of his undergraduate days when he set for himself the task of working meticulously through Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason. What he had in mind was to take notes, write briefs, work out précis, do whatever he had to do to master that one big piece of writing.

How was a man driven to do this? How do we get undergraduates motivated to do the same thing now? Why do our own scholarly resolutions disappear like the morning mist? Most of us believe we don’t have enough time. A brief reading of Arnold Bennett’s How to Live on Twenty-four Hours a Day will beat down that excuse forever.

Maurice Kelley of Princeton University has a study on Milton called This Great Argument: A Study of Milton’s De Doctrina Christiana as a Gloss upon Paradise Lost. Among other things (and this is not a book for reading while you are running) he quotes something of Milton’s purpose in drawing up his own body of Christian doctrine, De Doctrina Christiana. Listen to Milton: “I termed it … advisable to compile for myself by my own labor and study some original treatise which should be always at hand derived solely from the word of God himself and executed with all possible fidelity.…” There’s the sort of thing we all might do “if we only had a little more time.”

EUTYCHUS II

PASTORAL THEOLOGY

The pastoral theology theme of the June 5 issue was excellent. The article, “Once Married … Twice Wed” (by Edith Rees), was so good I read it aloud to my wife. Knowing that Dr. Rees, now with World Vision, travels greatly I expected the statement which came toward the close of the article, “No husband can travel over 2½ million miles by air alone … without a deep concern for a wife at home. Let’s face it, perhaps I am lonely.”

The veracity of this sentence was revealed as we turned a few pages to find Dr. Rees’s article (The Minister’s Workshop) in the same issue beginning, “This is written in India.…”

TYLER JOHNSON

First Presbyterian

Newport, R. I.

Thank you for the article, “A Layman Speaks to the Pulpit.” We need comments from our laymen. But let’s have them from laymen, not a man with a Bachelor of Theology degree, who has been an assistant pastor.…

Speaking of not communicating, if I began talking about “bombastic histrionics, obfuscating illogicality, and oft-strained, dogmatized tradition” in a sermon, as Mr. Samarin did in his article, people in my parish would wonder what I was saying. And I might even wonder myself.

Mr. Samarin’s problem is not his pastor but his position “on the bench.” He no doubt has many years of active, fruitful service in him and needs to be put back on the firing line again.

D. J. BRAKE

Lutheran Church

Houston, Minn.

If there has ever been a time when there has been a famine of the Word of God, it is today.… Too many take a text out of context and make a subject that has no Bible meaning.… [On] August 20 I will be 92.…

W. S. ROSE

Williamsburg. Pa.

Many laymen are like small children. They delight to sample the pie before dinner. No pastor can justify his position with one hearing, nor can any visitor be fair in his judgment of my message without knowing the motive of my sermon. I would suggest that Professor Samarin get away from the bright lights to some humble place of worship and then write again about preachers with a message of salvation that feed the sheep. I stand with these great men of God, highly educated or not, that have remained faithful to the divine call. I’ve always found it a good idea to find the best place to eat. They have a better variety of food.

F. L. HAGLEY

Nazarene Church

Jacksonville, Ill.

Probably a dozen times at least I have read the same criticism in the last forty years.

Why does not Dr. Samarin come up with something new?

I used to drive a horse when a boy. If the horse was thirsty, you could not keep it away from the watering trough. If it was not thirsty you could not force the horse to drink.…

RAYMOND TENNIES

Campbell, N. Y.

In regard to your editorial, “Preachers and Their Making,” which is very pertinent to the times, I want to say I attended Biblical Seminary in New York City some thirty years ago. In all that time there has never been a week in which I was ever at a loss in “finding a message to preach.”

As Dr. Samarin, in the same issue, might express it: thank you for hitting a “home run.”

S. N. CRAMER

Lookout Mountain, Tenn.

Re: “Counseling Unwed Parents,” I wish to endorse Tom Carter’s constructive … approach to this growing problem. Just recently at San Diego Billy Graham stated that sexual immorality was the worst sin there was (I presume worst in its effects upon the persons involved), and yet one could not miss his sharing his Saviour’s compassion and love for the one who had committed this sin. It is not easy to remain on the knife edge between hating the sin and loving the sinner. The minister must strive not to be misunderstood in his words or attitude as either condoning sin or, on the other hand, condemning the sinner so harshly that he shuts the door for repentance and forgiveness.

Christians too long have preached against sin without bearing the burden and sharing the shame with those who commit a specific sin, and especially is this true regarding sexual sins. I have seen those who have matured and come to Christian conversion through their experience in a home for unwed mothers and later establish a happy home. I have also seen those whose very spirit of life has been crushed by the rejection and lack of understanding and forgiveness of church people.…

Certainly every situation will have unique factors that may not make a good maternity home the best solution. Nevertheless this has proved valuable in multitudes of cases.…

To say that we encourage illegitimacy by providing help is as foolish as to say we encourage alcoholism by having a mission on the Bowery.… It is good that half of the unwed mothers come to ministers for counsel, but it should concern us that half feel that the minister is unable or unwilling to be of help.

To emphasize the rehabilitation end in no way denies that much could be done in our churches and homes on the preventive end of this problem. A deep and meaningful commitment to Christ as Saviour and Lord, and the thinking of one’s body as the temple of the Holy Spirit is the best surety that one will not fall before this heartrending sin.… There is no promise in the Bible that our children will never sin, but there is the promise of forgiveness and hope for a new life in Christ.

RICHARD CRABBS

Sycamore Methodist Church

Sycamore, Ohio

POETRY

May I remind the editors of CHRISTIANITY TODAY that the kind of bald polemic expressed in James Wesley Ingles’s poem “The Uncommitted” (May 8 issue) does not constitute or even approximate poetry. The versified theology you are prone to publish each fortnight, of which Mr. Ingles’s poem is an example, is embarrassing.

“The Uncommitted” serves as an excellent example of what a Christian poem is not, and in some ways, of what any kind of poem is not.… It picturesquely refers to the “bright” sun, to “a wrinkled brow,” and to a dogwood leaf which is “red as blood”.…

The imagery is fortuitous, unpatterned, and, in one instance where the uncommitted sees “on the dark sea, too many stars” (assuming stars are generally seen in the sky), incoherent. The uncommitted is “still testing all things” in the last line, but there is no prior indication in the poem that he was engaged in testing anything.…

The Pietà “impresses only as a work of art.” Is it supposed to stimulate a good healthy cry? If it has some specifically Christian function distinct from it being a work of art, then the statue is rather an affront both to Christianity and to art.

The crucial confusion, however, is the inability of the poet to distinguish between the uncommitted and the impenitent. The poem’s title and incipient concern are with “the untrammeled mind” which steers clear of the questions of beauty, good, truth, and, of all things, who the guilty are. A later concern, however, is not with the uncommitted but with the impenitent … with unbowed head and unbent knee.…

DAVID N. HOLKEBOER

Grand Rapids, Mich.

• We thank Mr. Holkeboer for his vigorous dissent from our choice of poems. But we go along with Mr. Ingles, who, to us, seems to state clearly a single theme; is not afraid to say simply that the autumn dogwood leaf is “red as blood” (which it is); knows, with Masefield, that sailors on a dark sea choose one star to steer by, that “a wrinkled brow” symbolizes perplexity, and that an unbowed head is a sign of refusal to worship.

The poem’s consistent theme is that the uncommitted soul, seeing no unmistakable course but testing different ones, wanders through life. The beauties of nature fail to move him to see a creator. After a little sleeplessness and perplexity over what truth is or what evil is, he washes his Pilate hands. Even the agonies of Gethsemane and the Cross—or the despair of Mary over her dead son—fail to move him. So he goes into death uncommitted.

Mr. Ingles is not, we admit, of the school of poets whose words must be startling, whose dogwood leaf explodes into some strange color, and who feel that if a Pietà or a poem “says something” to us instead of just being, it is an affront to art. That rather rules out “The Hound of Heaven” and other poems that affirm.—ED.

NOT ALWAYS WELCOME

Donald Moffett humbles most of us men of the cloth when he suggests (“At the Church Door,” May 8 issue) that we are more concerned about our plan books than about “doing good to all men, as we have opportunity.” But his words have a most unreal ring to them, for he greatly oversimplifies the situation by suggesting that the unconverted are panting for the minister to come and that they will cherish every word he offers when he knocks and says, “Let me in; I’ve come to solve your problems.” Mr. Moffett should know from experience that true pastoral work is hardly that easy, for Christ is still “a stumbling-block to Jews and folly to Gentiles.” And the natural man of today is as undiscerning about spiritual matters as the Corinthians ever were.

Feed the hungry? Clothe the naked? Visit the sick and imprisoned? Welcome the homeless? Of course. But let us not disillusion ourselves (or the neophyte pastors graduating this spring) into thinking that every visit will result in a conversion. Many will, praise God, but others will only bite the hand that feeds them.

MERWIN VAN DOORNIK

Second Reformed

Little Falls, N. J.

ROUND TRIP

If any of your readers in suburban Lanham read your May 8 issue, they’re going to be somewhat surprised and perhaps disappointed that you have moved their exciting Episcopal Church of St. Christopher from their Maryland town to Paradise Valley, California.

Just in case no one has pointed out this error on page 53 of this issue. Thank you, nonetheless, for covering the National Conference on Church Architecture in Dallas.

PHILIP DEEMER

Managing Editor

Protestant Church Buildings and Equipment

New York, N. Y.

• Paradise Valley did have a winner, however, which our story did not list: Hope Lutheran Church.—ED.

THESE MINISTER GRACE

We must not forget that “Christian writing” that does not mention Christ is not Christian.

A poem so fine as “Like as the Hart” (April 10 issue) might have been produced by a Unitarian, a Universalist, a Jew, or almost anybody. But a Christian “cannot but speak” of his own experience with Jesus.…

“Never a word about Jesus” should be our touchstone to determine values or the lack of them for the Christian. Portia Martin … should make Christ definitely known to me …, or her words lack relevance.…

MRS. FRANK J. MARSHALL

Munnsville, N. Y.

• Our spiritual heritage includes Psalm 42 as well as Psalm 22. We do not consider the story of the Prodigal to be Unitarian because it speaks only of the Father. These also minister grace to the hearers.—ED.

One Nation, under God

George W. Long

Among the books in my study are eight or ten commentaries on the Epistle to the Romans. All of them confirm the obvious meaning and force of these words of the Apostle Paul: “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers.… The powers that be are ordained of God” (13:1). Christians are to submit themselves to the civil authorities.

Someone will say, “What if these authorities are ungodly and require things of us that are contrary to the will of God?” The answer is: A ruler could not be much more ungodly than Nero, the supreme head of state at die time Paul wrote these words.

One could indeed point to Peter and John, who were arrested in Jerusalem and commanded no longer to preach in the name of Jesus Christ, whereas Christ had commanded them to preach in his name. This was a direct conflict, and the disciples answered, “Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things … we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:19, 20).

But note carefully: in this case of direct conflict, they could do nothing else but obey God rather than men; yet they did not resist arrest, nor did they rally the disciples to try to overpower the authorities. It is occasionally necessary for a Christian to suffer for doing what is right. In such cases, he should go on and do the thing that God requires and accept punishment if it comes. In this way he is being subject to the civil powers, even though he has put his allegiance to God first.

The occasional, very rare conflicts between the demands of the state and the commands of God must not be allowed to obscure the fact that the powers that be are ordained of God. Paul goes on to say, “Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God.”

One famous commentator writes: “There are indeed always some tumultuous spirits who believe that the kingdom of Christ cannot be sufficiently elevated, unless all earthly powers be abolished, and that they cannot enjoy the liberty given by him except they shake off every yoke of liftman subjection. This error.…” Let me identify the commentator lest it be assumed that this is a newsman speaking of recent lawless activities. His name is John Calvin. Sometimes it is good to go back several hundred years, away from current controversies, to get a view of Scripture that cannot be colored by these present concerns.

The Law Of The Land

In essence, the thirteenth chapter of Romans is telling us that Christians are to obey the law of the land because it actually does, in general, approve what is orderly and disapprove what is wrong. Even the poorest governments do this. Moreover, even a Nero-type government is God’s instrument to enforce lawful conduct. This is a hard pill for some (though not all) to swallow today, but not nearly so hard as it was for the Jews of Paul’s day who were chafing under a Gentile tyranny.

Today we must face the often repeated question, “What is the law of the land?” It is a difficult question, a frighteningly up-to-date one, and one that must be solved. Jesus said, “If a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.” In America we have a kingdom divided against itself, and you and I are squarely in the middle of the clash. One voice says: The Constitution of the United States, with its associated documents, is the law of the land, and the Supreme Court of the United States is its interpreter. Another voice says: The Supreme Court has misinterpreted the Constitution, and the state will abide by what it deems to be a better interpretation of the Constitution.

We citizens are caught in the squeeze. Suppose we, as Christians, want to be subject unto the higher powers. Who are they? To which of the conflicting voices shall we listen? The Bible gives us some help: Paul directs Christians to submit to the supreme Roman officials—those who had the power of the sword and who collected taxes—rather than to the Jewish leaders. Almost everyone agrees that these are times of increasing tension, and that something needs to be done. At the same time, ironically, many people immediately criticize a person who tries to do something or even to say something directly on the subject.

One, Two, Or Fifty?

By saying that America is a kingdom divided against itself and that you and I are caught in the middle, I mean that there is a clash between the concepts of states’ rights and of federal government. Basically, we need to decide whether we are to be “one nation, under God,” or two (if not fifty). We cannot be both. It almost infuriates some of us to hear someone say that, because we want desperately to have the advantages of both; the thought that we cannot is terribly frustrating. Moreover, we hate to look the matter squarely in the face lest the answers that emerge be other than those we want.

I do not say these things to make anyone uncomfortable, or to take advantage of friendship or of freedom of the pulpit. I say these things because I care—because I care about you, about the people of our state and nation, and about the testimony of the Christian Church. I say these things because something needs to be said, solutions need to be sought and found. If what is said does not commend itself to your best knowledge of God’s will and Word, then it can be discarded and other approaches made. Let us at least think.

We need to decide whether we are first of all Americans, or first of all citizens of our individual state; whether in cases of conflict we follow United States law or state law; whether in matters of interpretation we follow Supreme Court rulings, or local rulings, or our own personal opinions; whether those chosen by the people at large to represent Americans represent us, or whether we are going to be an alien part of America, viewing others with suspicion and being looked upon by others as not a part of the whole.

The executive secretary of the General Council of the Presbyterian Church in the U. S., in speaking to a stewardship conference several years ago, pointed out an intriguing and perplexing problem. He said that a man who is trusted in his own town and his own presbytery immediately becomes suspect when he is called to serve on one of the denominational boards or agencies. How true this is. Men who would be beloved pastors of local churches are distrusted when they begin to represent the General Assembly.

The same thing is true in civil affairs. Men who would be highly honored for their work in a local community are viewed with suspicion and often bitterly criticized when they bend the same efforts in the service of the nation. The reason may be that in order to serve a whole nation they cannot be partial to any one section of it and thus do not entirely please anybody.

There is also more than a tendency among some people of our area to view our national leaders as—of all things—our enemies! This, I submit, must be a case of mistaken identity—unless we do not consider ourselves Americans, or unless we presume to declare the rest of the country un-American. For the sake of illustration, what about the nurse’s aid who said of the death of President Kennedy, “He got what was coming to him”? Or the students and—did I hear it wrong?—teachers who cheered when they got the news? Or the college students who grabbed each other and danced with glee? Was there a state legislator who clapped in a public meeting? A repairman said in my home, “I am not surprised that it happened, because there are so many people who hate him.” What kind of twist caused a university student to publish, on the very day of his death, “Every thoughtful American should hate Kennedy”?

People in national offices were chosen by a majority of Americans to be our leaders. If we do not acknowledge them as our leaders, we cut ourselves off from a majority of the American people. We do not need to approve everything they do, any more than the Old Testament prophets approved all their leaders did; but we do need to acknowledge that they are, in fact, our legitimate leaders. We should bend every effort to sway them in the right direction through letters and prayers. But when we cut ourselves off from them, we have a kingdom divided against itself, and we are then forced to decide between state and nation.

We are never helped, however, to see the distinction clearly. No one lines up before us all the advantages of being an entity unto ourselves as over against all the advantages of being a part of the nation. We are led to assume that we can have both. We want the military protection, the federal subsidies, the postal system, the TVA, the social security program, and all the rest; and yet we want to govern ourselves. We are like a dependent son trying to shake off all parental control before he is able or willing to support himself. It is a common problem, very trying in a family but tragic in a nation. Furthermore, the history that is being written day by day is demonstrating to us that such dualism will not work.

Preacher In The Red

It was my first big church wedding. At the rehearsal the evening before, I had noted that the couple appeared to be more than usually nervous, so I had tried to ease their tenseness. “You do not have to worry about a thing. I will keep everything under control. All you need to do tomorrow is follow exactly everything that I do.”

Now the ceremony was nearly over, and nothing had gone amiss. The couple had received communion and were kneeling in front of me for the benediction. As I bowed my head and began to pray, I sensed that something was going wrong. I opened my eyes a bit—and I was stunned. True to my instructions the couple were following my lead. Like swords crossed as a honor walkway, they and I had our arms raised and almost touching, as I stood there pronouncing the benediction in the traditional arm-raised style.—The Rev. HENRY T. MONEY, minister, Hooker Memorial Christian Church, Greenville, North Carolina.

For each accepted report by a minister of the Gospel of an embarrassing moment in his life, CHRISTIANITY TODAY will pay $5 upon publication. Anecdotes must narrate factually a personal experience and must be previously unpublished. Contributions should not exceed 250 words, should be typed double-spaced, and should bear the writer’s name and address. Accepted contributions become the property of CHRISTIANITY TODAY. Address letters to: Preacher in the Red, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, 1014 Washington Building, Washington, D. C. 20005.

I realize that a state has the right to govern itself as long as it does not conflict with the Constitution; but who is to decide whether or not state procedures conflict with the Constitution—the states themselves, or the Supreme Court? It is becoming apparent that what we vaguely refer to as “our Southern way of life” is in some ways incompatible with the “American way of life,” and we are being forced to decide whether to be Americans first or Southerners first.

The disagreement is not on a wide range of things. We are forging ahead industrially, economically, educationally, and in almost every other way along with the rest of the nation. We can keep most aspects of our Southern way of life—the graciousness, the refinement, the genteelness, the friendliness, the personal interest in one another.

About the only thing that is likely to have to go is our separateness. Even here, all that makes us different from other parts of the country is the laws on our books. Separation is largely practiced all over America, but it is not written on the books and it is not supposed to be practiced in public places. The federal government is not actually creating the problem. The problem is just naturally with us as population of the races increases, as intelligence and education increase, and as people, through modern communications media such as television, have their desires whetted. The government stirs the problem and aggravates it, forces us to deal with it, and at the same time makes it hard for us to deal with it; but it does not create the problem.

The thorn that is driving itself into my conscience is a growing conviction that those who want to abolish forced segregation are basically right, just as those who wanted to abolish slavery were basically right, and for just about the same reasons.

To summarize: God requires us to be in subjection to the higher powers, the “powers that be.” It is clear in the thirteenth chapter of Romans that Paul meant the Roman government rather than the subordinate Jewish state or the little Christian community.

As long as we have a conflict between state and nation, we have what Christ called a kingdom divided against itself, which cannot stand. The only feasible solution, if we are to have “one nation, under God,” and not two, or fifty, is to recognize, in cases of conflict, the authority of federal law as federally interpreted. The main area in which we are being pressed to change is that of forced segregation.

May God enable us to move toward peace and cooperation, not toward conflict and violence.

George W. Long is pastor of the First Presbyterian Church of Tupelo, Mississippi. A graduate of Wheaton College (A.B.) and Columbia Theological Seminary (B.D.), he has the Ph.D. degree from the University of Edinburgh and the D.D. from Bellhaven College. He preached this sermon to his people in December, 1963.

The Mission of the Church

J. Howard Pew

Avital question before the United Presbyterian Church is whether or not the church, as a corporate body, should involve herself in economic, social, and political affairs. Many of its leaders, by precept and example, have already given an affirmative answer to this question, and much of their activity is concerned with civil affairs. The church has become involved through pronouncements, through appeals to political pressures, and through lobbies in Washington. Other denominations could be cited as examples, but this article discusses only the situation within the United Presbyterian Church. So far as Presbyterians are concerned, the elders are responsible for the spiritual welfare of the church. The very term “ruling elder” indicates an active role in governing the church.

In the United Presbyterian Church, a manual entitled Consider Your Ministry has been produced to help in governing the church. The second chapter defines the mission of the Church; its thrust is that the Church should be planted “in the middle of life with its everyday decisions.” No one would seriously deny that the individual Christian must relate his Christian convictions to the society of which he is a part in the economic, social, and political life about him. He must live out his Christianity in every phase of life, showing that he is salt and light in an unbelieving world. Nor is the right of the pulpit to speak out according to moral, ethical, and Christian principles in question. But Chapter II declares these things are also the responsibility of the corporate congregation. If the thesis of this chapter is true, then a session should involve the congregation “in the jobs men do to earn a living, in the power structures of the social order, in the decisions of politics, in the relationships of persons with one another as neighbors and members of various groups and clubs” (pp. 18, 19).

A paragraph on page 21 indicates the type of guidance a session should provide for the congregation:

But there are also things that the congregation as a corporate body can do; there are ways for the congregation itself to accept its being sent out into the world. A congregation may provide forums for the exploring of crucial issues, or it may conduct a survey of housing or job opportunities for minority groups, or it may establish an agency to meet the recreational needs of youth. It may deal forthrightly with some corruption of justice or even press for the passage or repeal of some law.

According to this, the session has the responsibility as a session to set up forums for every social, economic, and political issue of the day; to survey the community for housing and job opportunities for minority groups. But it is to do much more since the 1963 General Assembly passed this recommendation:

The 175th General Assembly … alerts the church to other pressing metropolitan problems including methods of metropolitan government, mass transportation, equitable representation in state legislatures, suburban residential segregation, and chronic poverty of segments of our population [Minutes of General Assembly, Part I, p. 326].

This means that sessions must lead their congregations in a study of methods of metropolitan government and inform all cities of the nation what is the best type of metropolitan government. They must study mass transportation and inform, among others, the leaders of the city in which they live how to overcome traffic problems and how best to transport the working population to and from work. They must inform their state capitals as to what is an equitable representation in state legislatures. And they must come up with the solution to such poverty as may exist in certain segments of our population.

Since the congregation speaks as a Christian congregation, the assumption must be made that it knows the mind of Christ concerning metropolitan government, mass transportation, equitable representation, and so on. It must be able to declare to the various governing bodies: “Thus saith the Lord.”

But to continue, sessions must be ready to send out members of the congregation to various cities, here and abroad, so that they can adequately study methods of metropolitan government. The problem of mass transportation has already cost millions of dollars, and still it remains unsolved. Must the church spend more millions, or does church affiliation equip individuals with greater knowledge and competence? Must the congregation engage political experts to help determine equitable representation in federal, state, and local government? And who can estimate the cost of eliminating chronic poverty? These are but a small fraction of the economic, social, and political problems about which the General Assembly, through its Committee of Church and Society, has already issued statements and made pronouncements.

But is this the mission of the Church? Does such a program square with the teachings of Christ, with the Scriptures, with the history and traditions of the Church, with the constitution of the United Presbyterian Church, and with reason and logic?

Caesar’s Kingdom And God’s

Even a superficial reading of Christ’s words reveals that he did not interfere with civil affairs. This disappointed the Pharisees, who were looking for a political messiah. And in order to entangle Jesus in the political and economic situation of their day, they asked him whether it was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar. Jesus gave a classic answer that is timeless for the Church: “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s” (Matt. 22:21). Christ definitely distinguishes between Caesar’s kingdom and God’s. There is a clear distinction between temporal kingdoms and the kingdom of heaven. The jurisdiction of the state and that of the Church differ. Jesus never concerned himself about Caesar’s affairs. Job opportunities, methods of metropolitan government, mass transportation, equitable representation in legislatures are plainly problems for Caesar and not for the Church. And let us not forget that the economic, social, and political problems of Christ’s day were just as serious as they are today, if not more so.

That Jesus refused to involve himself or the Church in economic situations even when they involved justice is borne out by Luke 12:13, 14. One of his followers said, “Master, speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.” The brother was evidently cheating this follower of Christ out of his rightful inheritance. Here Christ had the opportunity to exercise justice and see that there was an equal distribution of wealth. But Christ refused to enter into a sphere that fell outside his divine calling. There are some church committees that feel that one of the functions of the Church is to bring about an equal distribution of wealth which they call justice. Yet Christ said, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36). What right has any court of the Church to cast the Saviour into a political role by involving his Church in civil affairs?

Most church pronouncements have to do with the material welfare of men. Now suppose someone would come and say to the Church: “Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, nor what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on” (Matt. 6:25). One can readily imagine that a committee on social action would vehemently attack him. Yet these were the words of Christ to the Church in the Sermon on the Mount.

The Lordship Of Christ

The modern-day Church justifies her invasion of economic, social, and political spheres on the ground of the Lordship of Christ. Is not Christ the Lord of all life? Then modern theologians, like the Roman Catholic theologians, proceed from the Lordship of Christ to the lordship of the Church over all facets of life. Christ forbids the Church to enter into the sphere of Caesar. If the Church really takes the Lordship of Christ seriously, then she must listen to him as he defines the separate jurisdictions of state and church, as he declares that his kingdom is not of this world, as he maintains that he is not a divider of wealth, as he limits the Church to spiritual weapons. If the Church is not hypocritical in declaring the Lordship of Christ, she must follow both his example and his teachings.

In the Scriptures we find that the apostles followed the same principles as their Lord. They were interested in establishing a spiritual kingdom and refused to become involved in secular affairs. The Apostle Paul declared: “For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost” (Rom. 14:7). The sixth chapter of the Book of Acts describes an incident that arose about the distribution of charity. The apostles said to the Church: “It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables” (v. 3). So they asked for the appointment of seven laymen to handle this business and stated: “But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word” (v. 4). Now if the apostles felt that prayer and preaching were of such supreme importance that they could spare no time for the distribution of charity, what would they say to denominational leaders of our time who seek to solve the problem of metropolitan government and mass transportation? The apostles knew that prayer and preaching the Gospel would bring a thousandfold greater benefit to mankind than even feeding and clothing the poor.

Calvin in commenting on this incident calls attention to the preoccupation of the Roman Catholic Church with secular business. He said: “They entangled themselves in divers businesses, which they were scarce able to overcome, though every one of them had had ten heads.” If denominational leaders are going to solve all the secular problems they have taken upon themselves in this complex society, it would appear that they should be multiheaded.

The whole emphasis of the Book of Acts and of the Epistles is upon the preaching of salvation, the sanctification of believers, and the application of the Gospel in daily life according to the law of love. The apostles did not seek to reform society by external and political means; they used only the persuasive power of the Gospel. It was their conviction that the Gospel, and not legislative acts, would transform society. They did not discuss or become involved in economic, social, and political affairs, even though the society of their day was in a sadder state than ours.

Jesus Christ, the apostles, and the early Church knew that it was very important for the Church to adhere strictly to the Gospel, realizing that, should she become involved in non-ecclesiastical, controversial issues, those who opposed the position she took would question her competence to speak on ecclesiastical subjects.

During the Middle Ages the Church left the Gospel and entered into economic, social, and political spheres. By means of canon law the Church forbade the use of interest, fixed the amount of wages, and attempted to control the price of goods. The result was a period of poverty and stagnation. Society became corrupt because the Church neglected her spiritual weapons. Surely the example of the Middle Ages is sufficient to warn us against the folly of the Church’s interfering in fields outside her God-given jurisdiction.

The Reformation brought the Church back to the preaching of the Gospel. Both Luther and Calvin confined the Church to spiritual functions. One of the first things Calvin did in organizing the new Protestant church in Geneva was to set up two groups: one he called the “Consistory”—this was composed of five ministers and twelve lay elders; the other he called the “Company of Pastors”—this was composed solely of ministers. Concerning the Consistory the constitution stated, “All this is to be done in such a way that the ministers have no civil jurisdiction and wield only the spiritual sword of the Word of God, as St. Paul commands them.” The Consistory (which was the forerunner of what we know as the session) could reprove according to the Word of God. The severest punishment it could mete out was excommunication. It was denied any civil jurisdiction.

The ecclesiastical body, known as the “Company of Pastors,” had in its constitution that the pastor’s duty was “to preach the Word of God, to instruct, to admonish, to exhort and reprove in public and in private, to administer the sacraments, and, with the Consistory, to pronounce the ecclesiastical censures.”

It is commonly thought that Calvin and the ministers of Geneva dominated the civil affairs of that city. That is contrary to the facts, as original records recently discovered and translated prove. Calvin himself wrote: “I know well that the impious everywhere cry out that I aspire with an insatiable passion to political influence, and yet I keep myself so strongly separated from all public affairs, that each day I hear people discoursing upon subjects of which I have not the least knowledge. The government has recourse to my counsels only in grave affairs, when it is irresolute or incapable of deciding by itself” (letter to Zurich in 1555).

According to an eminent Swiss historian, Anedee Roget: “We do not know that the Council ever consulted the Church for any subject in the offing, nor the assembly of ministers, nor the Consistory, a mixed body.” Common sense tells us that the Reformation would never have proceeded from Geneva if the church had occupied herself with the civil affairs of Geneva. It was because the Geneva church concentrated on the Gospel that she came to have such an international influence.

John Knox and the Westminster Divines carried out the same policy and practice. Their belief found expression in the Westminster Confession of Faith, which forms part of the United Presbyterian constitution. Chapter XXXI, Section IV, reads:

Synods and councils are to handle or conclude nothing but that which is ecclesiastical; and are not to intermeddle with civil affairs, which concern the commonwealth, unless by way of humble petition, in cases extraordinary; or by way of advice for satisfaction of conscience, if they be thereunto required by the civil magistrate.

Many of the doctrines of the Westminster Confession were debated for weeks and months, but there was 100 per cent agreement on this section, which passed without debate. The Westminster Divines knew the damage the Roman Catholic Church brought upon Christianity by presuming to “intermeddle with civil affairs” and sought to safeguard the Presbyterian Church from such a proved folly.

Every time the Presbyterian Church as a corporate body becomes involved in economic, social, and political affairs, she transgresses both the word and the spirit of the constitution that elders and ministers sacredly vow to uphold.

Advice From John Witherspoon

When the Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. was formed in Philadelphia in 1789, it adopted the Westminster Confession of Faith with its proviso that there would be no “intermeddl[ing] with civil affairs.” One of the leading spirits in the formation of that church was Dr. John Witherspoon, the only clergyman to sign the Declaration of Independence. He separated his duties as a citizen from those of a minister. In a sermon he stated:

The other direction I would offer upon this subject is, that ministers take care to avoid officiously intermeddling in civil matters. A minister should be separated and set apart for his own work; he should be consecrated to his office.… But it is still more sinful and dangerous, for them to desire or claim direction of such matters as fall within the province of the civil magistrate. When our blessed Saviour says, “My kingdom is not of this world,” he plainly intimates to his disciples that they have no title to intermeddle with state affairs.

From 1789 to 1912 the Presbyterian Church kept out of the civil sphere, except for the slavery question. During this time it had its greatest influence and strength. During the nineteenth century Alexis de Tocqueville made these discerning comments in comparing the effect of religion in America with that in Europe: “There is no country in the whole world in which the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America; and there can be no greater proof of its utility and of its conformity to human nature, than that its influence is most powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth.… They [clergy] keep aloof from parties and from public affairs” (Democracy in America, I, 314, 315). In other words, it was not by interfering in civil affairs and not by political pressures that the Presbyterian Church became such a powerful influence for moral good but by keeping strictly to her spiritual sphere and by employing the persuasive power of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

From the year 1912 we find the beginning of an encroachment into civil affairs by the Presbyterian Church, chiefly through the influence of a united effort on the part of major denominations and centering in the Federal Council of Churches. It is obvious from history that in proportion to her engrossment with economic, social, and political matters, the spiritual and moral influence of the Church waned. The moral corruption and spiritual poverty of our day certainly stem in great measure from the neglect of the Church to carry out her spiritual mission. The social gospel has proved to be ineffective in lifting up the moral standards of our nation.

If the church as a corporate body should follow through with the economic, social, and political programs presented by the United Presbyterian General Assembly’s Committee of Church and Society, she would find herself in opposition to the teachings of Christ and the apostles; she would ignore the lessons of history; she would despise the finest traditions of the Presbyterian Church and violate the constitution its elders and ministers have vowed to uphold.

Surely it is against all reason and logic that the congregation or the Church as a whole should enter into a program that can only prove divisive and weaken the spiritual witness of the Church. The program advocated is divisive. The Church has been known as an institution that proclaims the infallible truth of God, but when she issues pronouncements in fields outside her sphere, this can only bring shame, confusion, and disillusionment.

The great need of today is for the Church to be the Church and to manifest the spiritual power with which God has endowed her. Our people have a spiritual hunger; they desire the Bread of Life, not secular pronouncements. And if the Church proclaims the Bread of Life, she will, as has been proved in the past, so transform society that many of the prevalent social ills will disappear. She will infuse such virtues into society as to elevate all phases of human life. The mission of the Church is to redeem souls by the Gospel of salvation, and only as she redeems individuals will society be redeemed.

J. Howard Pew is a distinguished Christian layman and is active in many evangelical causes. He is the president of the Board of Trustees of the United Presbyterian Foundation and a member of the Board of Directors ofChristianity Today.He also serves as an elder in the Ardmore Presbyterian Church, Ardmore, Pennsylvania.

addApple PodcastsDown ArrowDown ArrowDown Arrowarrow_left_altLeft ArrowLeft ArrowRight ArrowRight ArrowRight Arrowarrow_up_altUp ArrowUp ArrowAvailable at Amazoncaret-downCloseCloseellipseEmailEmailExpandExpandExternalExternalFacebookfacebook-squarefolderGiftGiftGooglegoogleGoogle KeephamburgerInstagraminstagram-squareLinkLinklinkedin-squareListenListenListenChristianity TodayCT Creative Studio Logologo_orgMegaphoneMenuMenupausePinterestPlayPlayPocketPodcastprintremoveRSSRSSSaveSavesaveSearchSearchsearchSpotifyStitcherTelegramTable of ContentsTable of Contentstwitter-squareWhatsAppXYouTubeYouTube